Management strategies to mitigate the impacts of climate change on sea turtle’s terrestrial reproductive phase

Climate change poses a serious threat to sea turtles (Cheloniidae) as their terrestrial reproductive phase is only successful within a limited range of environmental and physical conditions. These conditions are likely to become less optimal as climate change progresses. To date, management and conservation of sea turtles has focused almost entirely on non-climatic stressors, due at least in part to practitioners not knowing what strategies to take and the feasibility and risks of potential strategies. To aid the management of sea turtles in a changing environment, we identified management strategies via a focus workshop and surveys to mitigate the impacts of climate change to the terrestrial reproductive phase of sea turtles. The effectiveness, ecological risks and potential social and logistical constraints associated with implementing each of the identified management strategies is discussed. Twenty management strategies were identified; strategies varied from habitat protection to more active and direct manipulation of nests and the nesting environment. Based on our results, we suggest a three-pronged approach to sea turtle conservation in light of climate change, where managers and researchers should: 1) enhance sea turtle resilience to climate change by mitigating other threats; 2) prioritise implementing the ‘no regret’ and ‘reversible’ management strategies identified here; and 3) fill the knowledge gaps identified to aid the trial and implementation of the potential strategies identified here. By combining these three approaches our collective toolkit of sea turtle management strategies will expand, giving us an array of viable approaches to implement as climate change impacts become more extreme.     

Chemical extraction methods to assess bioavailable arsenic in soil and solid media

Soil ingestion by children is an important pathway in assessing public health risks associated with exposure to arsenic-contaminated soils. Soil chemical methods are available to extract various pools of soil arsenic, but their ability to measure bioavailable arsenic from soil ingestion is unknown. Arsenic extracted by five commonly used soil extractants was compared with bioavailable arsenic measured in vivo by immature swine (Sus scrofa) dosing trials. Fifteen contaminated soils that contained 233 to 17 500 mg kg(-1) arsenic were studied. Soil extractants were selected to dissolve surficially adsorbed and/or readily soluble arsenic (water, 1 M sodium acetate, 0.1 M Na2HPO4/0.1 M NaH2PO4) and arsenic in Fe and Mn oxide minerals (hydroxylamine hydrochloride, ammonium oxalate). The mean percent of total arsenic extracted was: ammonium oxalate (53.6%) > or = hydroxylamine hydrochloride (51.7%) > phosphate (10.5%), acetate (7.16%) > water (0.15%). The strongest relationship between arsenic determined by soil chemical extraction and in vivo bioavailable arsenic was found for hydroxylamine hydrochloride extractant (r = 0.88, significant at the 0.01 probability level). Comparison of the amount of arsenic extracted by soil methods with bioavailable arsenic showed the following trend: ammonium oxalate, hydroxylamine hydrochloride > in vivo > phosphate, acetate > water. The amount of arsenic dissolved in the stomach (potentially bioavailable) is between surficially adsorbed (extracted by phosphate or acetate) and surficially adsorbed + nonsurficial forms in Fe and Mn oxides (extracted by hydroxylamine hydrochloride or ammonium oxalate). Soil extraction methods that dissolve some of the amorphous Fe, such as hydroxylamine hydrochloride, can be designed to provide closer estimates of bioavailable arsenic.     

Comparing the impacts of hiking, skiing and horse riding on trail and vegetation in different types of forest

Nature-based tourism in protected areas has increased and diversified dramatically during the last decades. Different recreational activities have a range of impacts on natural environments. This paper reports results from a comparison of the impacts of hiking, cross-country skiing and horse riding on trail characteristics and vegetation in northern Finland. Widths and depths of existing trails, and vegetation on trails and in the neighbouring forests were monitored in two research sites during 2001 and 2002. Trail characteristics and vegetation were clearly related to the recreational activity, research site and forest type. Horse trails were as deep as hiking trails, even though the annual number of users was 150-fold higher on the hiking trails. Simultaneously, cross-country skiing had the least effect on trails due to the protective snow cover during winter. Hiking trail plots had little or no vegetation cover, horse riding trail plots had lower vegetation cover than forest plots, while skiing had no impact on total vegetation cover. On the other hand, on horse riding trails there were more forbs and grasses, many of which did not grow naturally in the forest. These species that were limited to riding trails may change the structure of adjacent plant communities in the long run. Therefore, the type of activities undertaken and the sensitivity of habitats to these activities should be a major consideration in the planning and management of nature-based tourism. Establishment of artificial structures, such as stairs, duckboards and trail cover, or complete closure of the site, may be the only way to protect the most sensitive or deteriorated sites.