Shoreline development and degradation of coastal fish reproduction habitats
- 642 Downloads
Coastal development has severely affected habitats and biodiversity during the last century, but quantitative estimates of the impacts are usually lacking. We utilize predictive habitat modeling and mapping of human pressures to estimate the cumulative long-term effects of coastal development in relation to fish habitats. Based on aerial photographs since the 1960s, shoreline development rates were estimated in the Stockholm archipelago in the Baltic Sea. By combining shoreline development rates with spatial predictions of fish reproduction habitats, we estimated annual habitat degradation rates for three of the most common coastal fish species, northern pike (Esox lucius), Eurasian perch (Perca fluviatilis) and roach (Rutilus rutilus). The results showed that shoreline constructions were concentrated to the reproduction habitats of these species. The estimated degradation rates, where a degraded habitat was defined as having ≥3 constructions per 100 m shoreline, were on average 0.5 % of available habitats per year and about 1 % in areas close to larger population centers. Approximately 40 % of available habitats were already degraded in 2005. These results provide an example of how many small construction projects over time may have a vast impact on coastal fish populations.
KeywordsCoastal zone management Essential fish habitat Habitat loss Human impact Species distribution modeling
We are grateful to the Stockholm County Administrative Board for mapping shoreline constructions and making the data available and to J. Hansen and L. Kautsky for comments on the manuscript. The study was initiated under the BSR INTERREG IIIB funded Neighbourhood Programme BALANCE, and performed within the project PREHAB (Spatial prediction of benthic habitats in the Baltic Sea), financially supported from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013) under Grant Agreement No. 217246 made with the joint Baltic Sea research and development programme. The writing of this manuscript was in part funded by the Stockholm University Baltic Sea Centre, through the Granholm foundation, by the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management through the project PLAN FISH and by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency through the project VALUES. The constructive comments of two anonymous reviewers are acknowledged.
- Al-Hamdani, Z., and J. Reker. ed. 2007. Towards marine landscapes in the Baltic Sea. BALANCE Interim Report no. 10, Copenhagen, Denmark, 118 pp. Retrieved 10 December, 2008, from http://www.balance-eu.org/.
- Anonymous. 2004. Strandexploatering i Stockholms län (Physical exploitation of coastal areas in the County of Stockholm—an analysis of the shorelines of Lake Mälaren and the Baltic Sea). Stockholm County Administrative Board, Report 2004:05, Stockholm, Sweden, 32 pp (in Swedish, English summary).Google Scholar
- Airoldi, L., and M.W. Beck. 2007. Loss, status and trends for coastal marine habitats of Europe. Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual Review 45: 345–405.Google Scholar
- Bučas, M., U. Bergström, A.L. Downie, G. Sundblad, M. Gullström, M. von Numers, A. Siaulys, and M. Lindegarth. 2013. Empirical modelling of benthic species distribution, abundance, and diversity in the Baltic Sea: Evaluating the scope for predictive mapping using different modelling approaches. ICES Journal of Marine Science 70: 1233–1243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- HELCOM. 2013. Red List of Baltic Sea underwater biotopes, habitats and biotope complexes. Baltic Sea Environmental Proceedings No. 138.Google Scholar
- Jordan, S.J., L.M. Smith, and J.A. Nestlerode. 2008. Cumulative effects of coastal habitat alterations on fishery resources: Toward prediction at regional scales. Ecology and Society 14: 16.Google Scholar
- Kindström, M., and G. Aneer. 2007. What is happening to our shores? BALANCE Interim Report no. 26, Copenhagen, Denmark, 28 pp. Retrieved from http://balance-eu.org.
- Lindegarth, M., U. Bergström, J. Mattila, S. Olenin, M. Ollikainen, A. L. Downie, G. Sundblad, M. Bučas, et al. 2014. PREHAB: Testing the potential for predictive modeling and mapping and extending its use as a tool for evaluating management scenarios and economic valuation in the Baltic Sea. AMBIO 43: 82–93.Google Scholar
- Sandström, A., B.K. Eriksson, P. Karås, M. Isæus, and H. Schreiber. 2005. Boating and navigation activities influence the recruitment of fish in a Baltic Sea archipelago area. AMBIO 34: 125–130.Google Scholar
- SFS. 2009. The Swedish Environmental Code. Ds 2000:61. http://www.regeringen.se/sb/d/574/a/22847.
- Sweitzer, J., S. Langaas, and C. Folke. 1996. Land use and population density in the Baltic Sea drainage basin: A GIS database. AMBIO 25: 191–198.Google Scholar
- Söderqvist, T., H. Eggert, B. Olsson, and Å. Soutukorva. 2005. Economic valuation for sustainable development in the Swedish coastal zone. AMBIO 34: 169–175.Google Scholar
- Törnqvist, O., and A. Engdahl. 2010. Kartering och analys av fysiska påverkansfaktorer i marin miljö. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, Report 6376, Stockholm, Sweden, 79 pp (in Swedish, English summary).Google Scholar