Page 112 - A bird’s-eye view of recreation - Rogier Pouwels

A bird's-eye view of recreation
Woodlark
(Intercept)
Area
ProjectBMP
Pr o j e c t De f e n s e
Soil_poorsand
Soil_s hif ts and
Treedens3
Buffer150
Heathland
Ntreespeckm
Woodtyp2
Woodtyp4
Noise
Pressure1
Estimate
-1.14783
0.00362
0.68473
0.61088
0.00772
0.00680
0.02117
0.01603
0.00684
-0.11418
0.02391
0.01300
-0.12852
-0.00001
Std. Err.
0.49731
0.00025
0.12080
0.22636
0.00218
0.00197
0.00414
0.00360
0.00439
0.02679
0.00600
0.00404
0.03746
0.00000
z value
-2.31
14.42
5.67
2.7
3.55
3.46
5.11
4.46
1.56
-4.26
3.98
3.22
-3.43
-4.41
p value
0.02099
0.00000
0.00000
0.00696
0.00039
0.00054
0.00000
0.00001
0.11881
0.00002
0.00007
0.00129
0.00060
0.00001
1
2
3
4
5 6
Impact on population = -28%
Population is below target
Figure 3. Different ways of presenting data on the conflict between outdoor recreation and bird conservation, based on results from Chapter 5. From top to bottom: 1) original data in monitoring plots for breeding birds; 2) breeding densities of Woodlark against visitor densities based on the statistic model, including uncertainty; 3) parameters from the statistical model; 4) spatial output showing differences in population density across the Veluwe; 5) overall assessment of the Woodlark population in the Veluwe; 6) overall assessment of the conservation target for Woodlark in the Veluwe. In the example I assume that options 5 and 6 represent the values conservation stakeholders find important. The different ways of presenting this information also differ in their credibility, salience and legitimacy for site managers and stakeholders (Fig. 4).
110