Abstract
Human presence at intertidal areas could impact coastal biodiversity, including migratory waterbird species and the ecosystem services they provide. Assessing this impact is therefore essential to develop management measures compatible with migratory processes and associated biodiversity. Here, we assess the effects of human presence on the foraging opportunities of Hudsonian godwits (Limosa haemastica, a trans-hemispheric migratory shorebird) during their non-breeding season on Chiloé Island, southern Chile. We compared bird density and time spent foraging in two similar bays with contrasting disturbance levels: human presence (mostly seaweed harvesters accompanied by dogs) was on average 0.9±0.4 people per 10 ha in the disturbed bay, whereas it was negligible (95% days absent) in the non-disturbed bay. Although overall abundances were similar between bays, godwit density was higher in the non-disturbed bay throughout the low tide period. Both days after the start of the non-breeding season and tidal height significantly affected godwit density, with different effects in either bay. Time spent foraging was significantly higher in the non-disturbed bay (86.5±1.1%) than in the disturbed one (81.3±1.4%). As expected, godwit density significantly decreased with the number of people and accompanying dogs in the disturbed bay. Our results indicate that even a low density of people and dogs can significantly reduce the foraging opportunities of shorebirds. These constraints, coupled with additional flushing costs, may negatively affect godwits’ pre-migratory fattening. Hence, as a first step we suggest limiting human presence within bays on Chiloé to 1 person per 10 ha and banning the presence of accompanying dogs in sensitive conservation areas.
Highlights
Around 30% of coastal wetlands have been lost as a result of recent human activity [1], this may be underestimated given the ongoing degradation of large coastal areas in ‘developing countries’ [2]
Human exploitation of intertidal resources has become highly intensive in many coastal areas around the world [4]
Human activities can reduce the overall available area for wildlife via disturbances [8]. These practices are a potential source of conflict between commercial and conservation interests [9]. Such traditional activities are an important source of income for livelihoods, probably learned from ancestors and belonging to the human and natural heritage of coastal areas [10], and overall have a lower impact [11] than mechanical ones [12]
Summary
Around 30% of coastal wetlands have been lost as a result of recent human activity [1], this may be underestimated given the ongoing degradation of large coastal areas in ‘developing countries’ [2]. Human activities can reduce the overall available area for wildlife via disturbances [8]. These practices are a potential source of conflict between commercial and conservation interests [9]. Such traditional activities are an important source of income for livelihoods, probably learned from ancestors and belonging to the human and natural heritage of coastal areas [10], and overall have a lower impact [11] than mechanical (modern) ones [12]. Assessing the impact of traditional activities at coastal areas is essential to develop adaptive management measures that make them compatible with wetland biodiversity (from benthic invertebrates to waterbirds), and the ecosystem services they provide [13]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
