Urban Ecosystems

, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp 257–276 | Cite as

The ecological response of forest ground flora and soils to experimental trampling in British urban woodlands

  • James Littlemore
  • Susan Barker


The ecological impact of recreation in woodlands and forests is now a subject of considerable world-wide interest. However, there are few studies examining the effects of recreation on woodland vegetation and soils in Britain. This paper quantifies the impact of controlled experimental trampling on three different woodland ground flora stands in lowland urban fringe W10 Quercus robur—Pteridium aquilinum—Rubus fruticosus woodlands (Rodwell, J.S. (1991) British Plant Communities I: Woodland and Scrub. Cambridge University Press) near Coventry, West Midlands.

Relationships of plant cover, plant height and soil compaction with trampling in homogeneous stands of Hyacinthoides non-scripta (bluebell), Pteridium aquilinum (bracken) and Rubus fruticosus agg. (bramble) were curvi-linear, suggesting that rates of damage were most rapid at the initial stages of trampling. By virtue of its rosette growth form, the most resistant stand type was the Hyacinthoides stand. Least resistant was the Pteridium stand, but both the Pteridium and the Rubus stands were able to recover well from heavy levels of trampling by the following year. The ability of ground flora to tolerate impacts was more a function of an ability to recover from trampling, rather than to resist. Trampling had the most profound impact on the ability of Hyacinthoides non-scripta to produce seeds, and even two years after the cessation of impact, samples that had received one season of 500 passes had still not produced any seed bearing scapes.

The carrying capacity of woodlands in terms of visitor numbers was lower than previously thought, with only 35 people permitted in stands dominated by Hyacinthoides, rising to 450 and 500 people in woodlands dominated by Rubus and Pteridium stands respectively. Models summarising these ecological changes are provided, along with applied recommendations to help manage urban sites with recreation and conservation in mind.

recreation woodlands trampling visitor carrying capacity 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barker, S. and Littlemore, J. (1997) Alarm bells for bluebells. Tree News. Spring edition.Google Scholar
  2. Bayfield, N.G. and Bathe, G.M. (1982) Experimental closure of footpaths in a woodland National Nature Reserve in Scotland. Biological Conservation 22, 229-237.Google Scholar
  3. Beard, G.R. (1984) Soils in Warwickshire. V. Sheets SP 27 and 37 (Coventry South). Soil Survey Record No. 81, Harpenden.Google Scholar
  4. Blackman, G.E. and Rutter, A.J. (1954) Biological flora of the British Isles—Endymion non-scriptus. Journal of Ecology 42, 629-638.Google Scholar
  5. Cole, D.N. (1985) Recreational trampling effects on six habitat types in Western Montana. USDA Forest Service Intermountain Research Station Paper, No. 350, 1-43.Google Scholar
  6. Cole, D.N. (1988) Disturbance and recovery of trampled montane grasslands and forests in Montana. USDA Forest Service Intermountain Research Station Paper, No. 389, 1-37.Google Scholar
  7. Cole, D.N. (1993) Trampling effects on mountain vegetation in Washington, Colorado, New Hampshire and North Carolina. USDA Forest Service Intermountain Research Station Paper, No. 464.Google Scholar
  8. Cole, D.N. (1995) Experimental trampling of vegetation. I. Relationship between trampling intensity and vegetation response. Journal of Applied Ecology 32, 203-214.Google Scholar
  9. Cole, D.N. and Bayfield, N.G. (1993) Recreational trampling of vegetation: standard experimental procedures. Biological Conservation 63, 209-215.Google Scholar
  10. Cole, D.N. and Trull, S.J. (1992) Quantifying vegetation response to recreational disturbance in the North Cascade Mountains. NW Science 66, 229-236.Google Scholar
  11. Countryside Commission. (1999) Countryside Recreation—Enjoying the Living Countryside. CCP 554.Google Scholar
  12. DETR. (1998) Access to the Open Countryside in England and Wales. Consultation paper. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions.Google Scholar
  13. Douglas, E.A. (1989) An assessment of the impact of the November Classic Badge Event 1988 on the New Forest. An independent report for the British Ecological Society, The Sports Council, The British Orienteering Federation and Southampton Orienteering Club.Google Scholar
  14. Forestry Commission. (1999) Forestry Commission Facts and Figures 1998–1999. Forestry Commission Booklet.Google Scholar
  15. Grabham, P.W. and Packham, J.R. (1983) A comparative study of the bluebell Hyacinthoides non-scripta (L.) in two different woodland situations in the West Midlands. Biological Conservation 26, 105-126.Google Scholar
  16. Grime, P.J., Hodgson, J.G. and Hunt, R. (1988) Comparative Plant Ecology. Unwin Hyman, London.Google Scholar
  17. Hearn, K. (1981) Management of western oakwoods for nature conservation, in Research and Planning for Nature Conservation and Amenity in Woodlands.Google Scholar
  18. Kardell, L. (1974) Damage to the vegetation caused by orienteering. Research Notes 4, Stockholm Royal College of Forestry, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  19. Kirby, P. (1992) Habitat Management for Invertebrates: a Practical Handbook. RSPB.Google Scholar
  20. Knight, G.H. (1964) Some factors affecting the distribution of Endymion non-scriptus in some Warwickshire woodlands. Journal of Ecology 52, 405-421.Google Scholar
  21. Kuss, F.R. (1986) A review of the major factors influencing plant responses to recreation impacts. Environmental Management 10(5), 637-650.Google Scholar
  22. Liddle, M.J. (1975) A selective review of the ecological impacts of human trampling on natural ecosystems. Biological Conservation 7, 17-36.Google Scholar
  23. Liddle, M.J. (1997) Recreation Ecology. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Littlemore, J. (1998) The Ecological Impact of Recreation in British Temperate Woodlands. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Warwick.Google Scholar
  25. Littlemore, J. (2001) Resolving conflicts between recreation and conservation in Britain's urban woodlands—a management guide. Quarterly Journal of Forestry 95(2), 129-136.Google Scholar
  26. National Centre for Social Research. (1999) Leisure Day Visits. Report of the 1998 UK Day Visits Survey. NCSR, London.Google Scholar
  27. Page, C.N. (1982) The Ferns of Britain and Ireland. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Peace, T.R. and Gilmour, J.S.L. (1949) The effect of picking on the flowering of bluebell, Scilla non-scripta. New Phytologist 48, 115-117.Google Scholar
  29. Rodwell, J.S. (ed.) (1991) British Plant Communities I: Woodland and Scrub. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Weaver, T. and Dale, D. (1978) Trampling effects of hikers, motorcycles and horses in meadows and forests. Journal of Applied Ecology 15, 451-457.Google Scholar
  31. Wisdom, K.S.F. (1988) Wildwoods—paintball adventure games in ancient semi-natural woodlands. M.Sc. Thesis, University College, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • James Littlemore
    • 1
  • Susan Barker
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Land & EnvironmentMoulton CollegeMoulton
  2. 2.Science & Environment Group, Institute of EducationUniversity of WarwickCoventry

Personalised recommendations