Recreationists' perceived obstruction of field and shrub layer vegetation

Urban Forestry and Urban Greening

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 47-53

  Roovers, Pieter ^a   Dumont, Barbara ^a   Gulinck, Hubert ^a   Hermy, Martin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Recreation management; Vegetation perception; Visitor repulsion

Indexed keywords

AMENITY; NATURAL BARRIER; NATURAL RESOURCE; RECREATIONAL MANAGEMENT; VEGETATION STRUCTURE;

EID: 33749614728     PISSN: 16188667     EISSN: 16108167     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2005.09.001     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Bayfield N.G., and Bathe G.H. Experimental closure of footpaths in a woodland national nature reserve in Scotland. Biological Conservation 22 (1982) 229-237
2. Bright J.A. Hiker impact on herbaceous vegetation along trails in an evergreen woodland of Central Texas. Biological Conservation 36 (1986) 53-69
3. Brown P.J., and Haas G.E. Wilderness recreation experiences: the Rawah case. Journal of Leisure Research 12 (1980) 229-241
4. Buhyoff G.J., Hull R.B., Lien J.N., and Cordell H.K. Prediction of scenic quality for southern pine stands. Forest Science 32 (1986) 769-778
5. Casaer, J., 2003. Analysing roe deer habitat selection; methodological problems and possible solutions. Ph.D. Thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium.
6. Cordell, H.K., Lewis, B., McDonald, B.L., 1995. Long-term outdoor recreation participation trends. In: Thompson, J., Gardner, B., Lime, D.W., Sames, W.M. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Outdoor Recreation Tourism Trends Symposium and the 1995 National Recreation Resource Planning Conference, University of Minnesota. pp. 35-38.
7. Daniel T.C., and Vining J. Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality. In: Altman I., and Wohlwill J. (Eds). Behaviour and the Landscape Quality (1983), Plenum Press, New York 39-84
8. Gallet S., and Rozé F. Long-term effects of trampling on Atlantic heathland in Brittany (France): resilience and tolerance in relation to season and meteorological conditions. Biological Conservation 103 (2002) 267-275
9. Guthery F.S., Doerr T.B., and Taylor M.A. Use of a profile board in sand shinnery oak communities. Journal of Range Management 34 2 (1981) 157-158
10. Hammitt W.E., and Cole D.N. Wildland Recreation: Ecology and Management. second ed (1998), Wiley, New York
11. Hancock K. Recreation preference: its relation to user behavior. Journal of Forestry 71 (1973) 336-337
12. Haukos D.A., Sun H.Z., Wester D.B., and Smith L.M. Sample size, power, and analytical considerations for vertical structure data from profile boards in wetland vegetation. Wetlands 18 (1998) 203-215
13. Ikeda H., and Okutomi K. Effects of species interactions on community organization along a trampling gradient. Journal of Vegetation Science 3 (1992) 217-222
14. Kaplan R., and Kaplan S. The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective (1989), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
15. Kaplan R., and Talbot J.F. Ethnicity and preference for natural settings: a review of recent findings. Landscape and Urban Planning 15 (1988) 107-117
16. Lamb R.J., and Purcell A.T. Perception of naturalness in landscape and its relationship to vegetation structure. Landscape and Urban Planning 19 (1990) 333-352
17. Lehvävirta S. Structural elements as barriers against wear in urban woodlands. Urban Ecosystems 3 (1999) 45-56
18. Leung Y.F., and Marion J.L. Trail degradation as influenced by environmental factors: a state-of-the-knowledge review. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 51 (1996) 130-136
19. Liddle M.J. Recreation Ecology (1997), Chapman & Hall, London
20. Littlemore J., and Barker S. The ecological response of forest ground flora and soils to experimental trampling in British urban woodlands. Urban Ecosystems 5 (2001) 257-276
21. Manning R. Studies in Outdoor Recreation (1999), Oregon State University Press, Corvallis
22. Nelson T., Johnson T., Strong M., and Rudakewich G. Perception of tree canopy. Journal of Environmental Psychology 21 (2001) 315-324
23. Roovers P., Hermy M., and Gulinck H. Visitor profile, perceptions and expectations in forests from a gradient of increasing urbanisation in central Belgium. Landscape and Urban Planning 59 (2002) 129-145
24. Roovers P., Verheyen K., Hermy M., and Gulinck H. Experimental trampling and vegetation recovery in some forest and heathland communities. Applied Vegetation Science 7 (2004) 111-118
25. Ruddell E.J., Gramann J.H., Rudis V.A., and Westphal J.M. The psychological utility of visual penetration in near-view forest scenic-beauty models. Environment and Behavior 21 (1989) 393-412
26. Rudis V.A. Screenometer: a device for sampling vegetative screening in forested areas. Canadian Journal of Forest Reasearch 15 (1985) 996-999
27. Rudis V.A., Gramann J.H., Ruddell E.J., and Westphal J.M. Forest inventory and management-based visual preference models of southern pine stands. Forest Science 34 (1988) 846-863
28. Schreyer R., Lime D.W., and Williams D.R. Characterizing the influence of past experience on recreation behavior. Journal of Leisure Research 16 (1984) 34-51
29. Smith J.H.G., and Matthews J.R. Environmental tolerances and visitor preferences for some forest recreation habitats in British Colombia. Forestry Chronicle 48 (1972) 133-137
30. SPSS. SPSS 11.0 (2001), SPSS Inc., Chicago
31. Symmonds M.C., Hammitt W.E., and Quisenberry V.L. Managing recreational trail environments for mountain bike user preference. Environmental Management 25 (2000) 549-564
32. Tversky B., and Hemenway K. Categories of environmental scenes. Cognitive Psychology 15 (1983) 121-149
33. Ulrich R.S. Human responses to vegetation and landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 13 (1986) 29-44
34. Ulrich R.S. Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes. In: Kellert S.R., and Wilson D.C. (Eds). The Biophilia Hypotheses (1993), Island Press, Washington, DC 73-137