Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBallantyne, Mark
dc.contributor.authorTreby, Donna Louise
dc.contributor.authorQuarmby, Joseph
dc.contributor.authorPickering, Catherine Marina
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-22T01:27:11Z
dc.date.available2019-01-22T01:27:11Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.issn0067-1924
dc.identifier.doi10.1071/BT15239
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/99810
dc.description.abstractTourism and recreation are popular in natural areas but can damage plant communities, including those of high conservation value in protected areas. This includes impacts from recreational trails, but what type of trail has the most impact and why? We compared the impacts of five different trails (narrow, intermediate and wide bare earth trails, intermediate gravel trails and wide tarmac trails) on the endangered grey box grassy-woodland (Eucalyptus microcarpa (Maiden) Maiden) in Belair National Park near Adelaide in South Australia. First, the extent, width and area of recreational trails in the remnant woodland were mapped. Then, vegetation parameters were recorded in quadrats at three distances from the edge of trails in the woodland, with 10 replicate sites per trail type and single quadrats at 10 control sites (i.e. total 60 sites, 160 quadrats). All trails resulted in vegetation loss on the trail surface and along the edges of the trails, as well as changes in vegetation composition, including reductions in shrubs and bulbs close to the trail. The most common types of trail were bare earth trails with an average width of 2.5 m (50% of trails) which resulted in the greatest soil loss (>88 000 m3) and vegetation loss (33 899 m2 or 3.4 ha) in the 167 ha woodland remnant overall. Wider (5.4 m) hardened tarmac trails, however, were associated with low species richness, high cover of exotic grasses and few herbs, shrubs and bulbs compared with vegetation away from trails and closer to other trails. Therefore a mixed approach to the provision of trails may be most appropriate, with hardened trails used in areas of highest use, but in some circumstances leaving trails unhardened may be more appropriate where they are likely to remain narrow and where there is less likely to be erosion and/or safety issues.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherCSIRO
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom246
dc.relation.ispartofpageto259
dc.relation.ispartofissue3
dc.relation.ispartofjournalAustralian Journal of Botany
dc.relation.ispartofvolume64
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPlant Biology not elsewhere classified
dc.subject.fieldofresearchMicrobiology
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPlant Biology
dc.subject.fieldofresearchEcology
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode060799
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode0605
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode0607
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode0602
dc.titleComparing the impacts of different types of recreational trails on grey box grassy-woodland vegetation: Lessons for conservation and management
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articles
dc.description.versionPost-print
gro.facultyGriffith Sciences, Environmental Futures Research Institute
gro.rights.copyright© 2016 CSIRO. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the definitive, published version.
gro.hasfulltextFull Text
gro.griffith.authorBallantyne, Mark
gro.griffith.authorPickering, Catherine M.
gro.griffith.authorTreby, Donna L.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record