Study

Effect of human pressure on population size structures of the endangered ferruginean limpet: toward future management measures

  • Published source details Espinosa F., Rivera-Ingraham G.A., Fa D. & García-Gómez J.C. (2009) Effect of human pressure on population size structures of the endangered ferruginean limpet: toward future management measures. Journal of Coastal Research, 25, 857-863.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Manage or restrict harvesting of species on intertidal artificial structures

Action Link
Biodiversity of Marine Artificial Structures
  1. Manage or restrict harvesting of species on intertidal artificial structures

    A replicated, site comparison study in 2006 on six intertidal breakwaters in ports and on open coastline in the Gibraltar Strait, Gibraltar and the Alboran Sea, Spain (Espinosa et al. 2009) found that breakwaters with restricted human access supported similar densities of ribbed Mediterranean limpets Patella ferruginea but with larger average size and more balanced sex ratios, compared with unrestricted breakwaters. Limpet density was similar on breakwaters with restricted access (0–7 limpets/m) and those without (3–7/m) (data not statistically tested). On average, limpets were larger on breakwaters with restricted access (4–7 cm) than without (3–4 cm) in seven of nine comparisons, but were similar in two comparisons (both 4 cm). Limpet sex ratio on restricted breakwaters ranged from 2: 1 (males: females) to 18: 1, while the ratio on unrestricted breakwaters ranged from 41: 1 to 117: 1 (data not statistically tested). Harvesting species on breakwaters was restricted by restricting site access. Three breakwaters were in private or military areas with restricted access and surveillance (timing and other details not reported) while three had no access restrictions. Limpet harvesting was technically forbidden at all sites due to its protected species status. Limpets on breakwaters were counted, measured and sexed during low tide during June–August 2006.

    (Summarised by: Ally Evans)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust