SANCOR Newsletter Issue #170: June 2002
Sandy beach ecology:
Infant or Orphan?
At the beginning of 2002 the government has thrown the spotlight on beaches and beach use in this country. All beaches have been closed to the use of 4x4’s unless you were in possession of a special permit. Most people have an opinion on the matter, either pro- or anti-beach driving, and in many instances it depends on which side of the steering wheel you are sitting on. Either way the decision has been controversial. The aim of this article, however, is not to argue the pro’s and con’s of the beach ban but rather the place of sandy beach ecology on our coastal management agenda.
At the end of my PhD, I received the SANCOR student travel award (for 2001), which enabled me to attend the third international sandy beach workshop held in Florence, Italy. It was fantastic! Five days of interested people talking about the one thing that they have in common. The topic of the conference was:Beaches – What Future? This title had a dual intention; Firstly, why does it seem like beaches all over the world are not getting as much attention as it should; and secondly, what future remains for these systems with the current human pressures? (I am not advocating that the beach ban is good, merely raising the question as to whether we understand why it was put in place?)
The work that I presented in Italy had two main thrusts. On the one hand my research suggested a testable hypothesis as to why the species diversity is higher on fine-grained, flat beaches as opposed to the poor faunas on coarse grained, steep beaches.
On the other hand, I suggested that biological interactions (such as interspecific competition) is taking place on beaches, and in such a way that it influences the levels that animals occupy on the shore. Imagine…rocky shore ecology was at this point more that 50 years ago.
The interesting point is that I gave my talk about biological interactions (i.e. competition among three species of isopods) on the fourth day of the conference. By then at least two other beach experts have presented their ‘stuff’ and the only logical explanation for the particular outcomes of their studies were…biological interactions. But since it is ‘common knowledge’ that biological interactions are not important on sandy beaches, they could not suggest it. As a novice I did not have a reputation to protect so I was free to make the suggestion. And I had evidence to support my statements (at least in part). A strange thing happened at this point of the conference. The young scientists there took the presentation in stride, but the older experts were ‘stirred’. They could see the repercussions and possibilities in their own work. This was the highlight of the conference for me! (I must add that the seven-course meal in Castello De Verrazano, situated in the wine lands of the Tuscany, also left quite an impression).
The next day, another young South African scientist made an equally great impression on the audience, if not bigger. Dr. Dave Schoeman (from University of Port Elizabeth) suggested that our sampling strategies up to now were but to say the least – suspect. He gave evidence of the flaws in the current system, and then a few guidelines (although reluctantly) how we can improve sampling techniques and the conclusions we draw from it. So, back to the drawing board it was! However, two young scientists caused ripples in the current sandy beach paradigm.
Apart from the lessons that I have learned, or the contributions that I made, I have been confronted with a few other issues since the end of my studies. Three of these issues I would like to raise here:
Number one: Why is it that beach ecologists are still fighting with basics like sampling strategies and the possibility of across shore zonation patterns and the rules governing it? Admittedly, there are no commercially important or endangered species occupying beaches on a permanent basis – at least not in South Africa. And the science is not much older than 50 years. But we have never had more than two scientists working on this problem in South Africa for the last three decades. At the same time, it is probably one of the marine systems that receives the most visitors per year (at least per square meter), and that must sustain the highest impact in terms of trampling, digging and all sorts of other disturbances. So why does it receive so little qualified attention?
Number two: Are young scientist or people new to a particular field most likely to make ‘revolutionary’breakthroughs? If so, can this be true for marine ecology? When one looks at the road physics and particularly quantum physics took, most of the guys like Einstein, De Broglie or Heisenberg were 40 or younger when they received their Nobel Prizes. This was not the age where they received a steady job after they had a long enough list of publications and have proved themselves. I know it is not entirely that simple, but it can be. Where are the young geniuses of our field?
Number three: We need an audience. With‘we’ I imply both beach ecologists and young scientists. If beach ecology received the attention it should have, I would have been able to give you a scientifically backed answer whether the beach ban is appropriate or not (for conserving intertidal fauna). Furthermore, the response that I as a young, potentially up-coming scientist got from a non-beach marine guru was ‘that you youngsters still have to learn what we have already forgotten’. My reply should have been that ‘I will (and have) generated new ideas and will learn new things that he never will!’
My thanks go the Marine Biology Research Institute (University of Cape Town) that funded my PhD, and SANCOR and the Marine Biology Research Institute that made it possible for me to visit Italy.
Dr. Ronel Nel.
Sandy Beach Ecologist
