Dynamics of Coastal Land Use over the Last Century in Estonia

Abstract

Like the Baltic Sea region in general, the Estonian coastal land use has historically been rather intensive. The situation changed dramatically during the 20 th century. At the end of WWII, the coastal zone of Estonia was declared a border zone of the Soviet Union, leading to restrictions on settlement and socio-economic activity. The most severe restrictions were established on the islands exposed to the Baltic Sea proper. The traditional coastal land use was curtailed, while locations with less strict regimes on the mainland maintained their population and some traditional activity for the following decades. After regaining independence, the Estonian coast has become a popular recreation area, which has affected the coastal land use and land cover pattern once again. Changes in coastal land use over the 20 th century have led to a simplification of the landscape, which is associated with a decrease in biodiversity. Halting the loss of biodiversity is an issue of both local and global concern, and is one of the main strategic goals of environmental policy of the European Union. This article focuses on land use changes during the 20 th century in two study areas with similar natural structure but with different human impact over the second half of the century -Kõruse, NW Saaremaa Island and Tõstamaa, SW mainland Estonia. The results suggest that regardless of the reason for mismanagement, the changes at both sites are similar: overgrowth of former grasslands by shrubland or reed beds, a decrease in species richness and overall simplification of the landscape.

Full text

1769
Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 64, 2011
Journal of Coastal Research SI 64 pg - pg ICS2011 (Proceedings) Poland ISSN 0749-0208
Dynamics of Coastal Land Use over the Last Century in Estonia
K. Antso†, V. Palginõmm‡, R. Szava-Kovats∞ and A. Kont§
†Estonian Environment
Information Centre,
Mustamäe tee 33, Tallinn
10616, Estonia
Kait.Antso@keskkonnainfo.ee
‡Ministry of the Environment,
Narva mnt 7a, Tallinn 15172,
Estonia
valdeko.palginomm@envir.ee
∞Institute of Ecology and Earth
Sciences, Department of Botany,
University of Tartu, Lai 40,
Tartu 51005, Estonia
robszav@ut.ee
§Institute of Ecology, Tallinn
University, Uus-Sadama 5,
Tallinn 10120, Estonia
are@tlu.ee
ABSTRACT
Antso, K., Palginõmm, V., Szava-Kovats, R. and Kont A., 2011. Dynamics of Coastal Land Use over the Last
Century in Estonia. Journal of Coastal Research, SI 64 (Proceedings of the 11th International Coastal
Symposium),  – . Szczecin, Poland, ISBN 0749-0208
Like the Baltic Sea region in general, the Estonian coastal land use has historically been rather intensive. The
situation changed dramatically during the 20th century. At the end of WWII, the coastal zone of Estonia was
declared a border zone of the Soviet Union, leading to restrictions on settlement and socio-economic activity.
The most severe restrictions were established on the islands exposed to the Baltic Sea proper. The traditional
coastal land use was curtailed, while locations with less strict regimes on the mainland maintained their
population and some traditional activity for the following decades. After regaining independence, the Estonian
coast has become a popular recreation area, which has affected the coastal land use and land cover pattern once
again. Changes in coastal land use over the 20th century have led to a simplification of the landscape, which is
associated with a decrease in biodiversity. Halting the loss of biodiversity is an issue of both local and global
concern, and is one of the main strategic goals of environmental policy of the European Union. This article
focuses on land use changes during the 20th century in two study areas with similar natural structure but with
different human impact over the second half of the century - Kõruse, NW Saaremaa Island and Tõstamaa, SW
mainland Estonia. The results suggest that regardless of the reason for mismanagement, the changes at both sites
are similar: overgrowth of former grasslands by shrubland or reed beds, a decrease in species richness and
overall simplification of the landscape.
ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS: coastal land use, coastal landscape, biodiversity, semi-natural plant
communities, Baltic Sea
INTRODUCTION
The main geomorphic features of the Estonian coast are derived
from pre-glacial topography, the last glaciation and the post-
glacial tectonic land uplift, currently occurring with a mean
velocity of 2 mm a year (Vallner et al., 1988). The entire coast of
Estonia has been regressive for the last 5,000-6,000 years. On the
background of the retreating sea, the coast is geologically young
but due to the diverse lithological composition of the sediments
and strongly dissected relief, the coast is extremely varied.
Transition to different shore types over a short distance is among
the most characteristic features of the contemporary coast (Orviku,
1974). The main value of the Estonian coastal landscape is its high
geomorphic diversity – high geomorphic diversity is the basis for
high biological diversity (Burnett et al., 1998; Nichols et al.,
1998). At the same time, the young and naturally diverse coastal
landscape is very sensitive to human impact, and deserves special
attention in land use planning and wise management of the coastal
zone. The term landscape in this study is defined as scenery
encompassing both natural and anthropogenic components.
The first settlement on the Estonian coast appeared in the late
Stone Age. The human impact has been the key factor in the
formation of some contemporary coastal plant communities such
as seashore and alvar grasslands for thousands of years (Poska,
2001). Agricultural land use with individual fields and pastures
has been historically characteristic of the Estonian coast (Ratas et
al., 2010). These fields have migrated towards the retreating sea
over centuries. Arable land was usually located on older beach
formations with moderately moist soils and conditions favorable
for cultivation, whereas grasslands were traditionally situated on
lower areas, which are often flooded by seawater.
The Estonian seashores were densely populated until WWII.
Soviet occupation began at the end of the war in 1945 and
continued for nearly half a century. The coast of Estonia was
ordained a border zone of the Soviet Union. Different degrees of
restrictions were established in the border zone depending on
location. On the mainland east of the west Estonian archipelago,
the restrictions were not as stringent as on the islands exposed to
the Baltic Sea proper. Strict limits were established on sea-borne
navigation and even movement on land. Local people on small
islands and in many villages of larger islands were deported from
their homes. Because coastal land use has been strongly
influenced by both natural and socio-economic conditions, the
most substantial changes in socio-economic conditions during the
20th century are well reflected in the dynamics of the coastal
landscape.
The extensive changes on the Estonian coast during the last
century (Ratas and Puurman, 1995; Mander and Palang, 1999;
Palginõmm et al., 2007), have given impetus to study the
landscape dynamics in more detail. One method to describe and
analyze the dynamics of landscapes is to examine changes in land
cover pattern, primarily in vegetation over distinct time intervals.
Landscape changes are reflected most readily and rapidly by
Journal of Coastal Research SI 64 1769 - 1773 ICS2011 (Proceedings) Poland ISSN 0749-0208

1770
Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 64, 2011
1
Estonian Coastal Land Use
changes in vegetation. These changes can be monitored by
comparing maps and aerial photographs of different age. The
spatial data from the maps and aerial photographs should be
integrated with accurate natural, historical and cultural
background information in order to identify the driving forces
affecting landscape dynamics and to better understand the
processes affecting changes in land cover (Bürgi et al., 2004).
Knowledge of landscape dynamics is particularly important for
spatial planning and management.
This study focuses on land cover changes in two study areas in
Estonia with similar natural settings: Kõruse, NW Saaremaa
Island and Tõstamaa, SW mainland Estonia during the 20th
century (Fig. 1a,b,c,d). Both areas — as in many other European
countries — experienced intensive anthropogenic influence before
WWII. The situation changed dramatically after the war. The
Kõruse study site was incorporated in a zone with very severe
border restrictions; the local population was relocated from the
villages and the traditional land use was interrupted for the
following half-century. The Tõstamaa area witnessed a milder
border zone regime; maintained its inhabitants, although economic
activity was also strongly curtailed, the inhabitants experienced no
forced relocation.
METHODS
To identify landscape changes in the Tõstamaa and Kõruse
study sites, maps of land cover pattern were compiled using
several maps and aerial photographs from different times of the
20th century. The analysis of land cover changes was based on
three main sources: 1) Russian 1 verst (1,067 km) maps from the
beginning of the century at 1: 42,000 scale; 2) orthophotos and
maps at 1: 10,000 scale from the middle of the century and; 3) the
digital Estonian Basic Map at 1: 10,000 scale from the beginning
of the 21st century.
MapInfo software was used to compile the land cover maps and
analyze land cover changes. To obtain digital spatial data, the
printed maps were scanned and correlated to the existing
coordination system. The compiled digital maps were then
vectorized, and the information from the printed maps related to
the vectorized mapping units. To achieve the maximum possible
comparability of the information from different maps and
orthophotos, a uniform classification of land cover types was
established. The data processing was carried out on the compiled
digital vector maps.
The following land cover units were distinguished on the maps
of the study sites: arable land, woodland, reed beds, grassland with
shrubs, shrubland, grassland (including current pastures and
fallows), sparsely vegetated area and homesteads (including
buildings, yards, gardens). Former lagoons in the Kõruse study
site now completely disconnected from the sea were distinguished.
Time-series of changes in land cover during the 20th century were
composed for both study sites. Archive documents and other
written sources were used to analyze the impact of socio-
economic and historical factors on the land cover changes. In
addition, maps at 1: 50,000 scale from the 1930s and the1980s
were also analyzed.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Land cover changes in Tõstamaa study site
The Tõstamaa study site (4.45 km2
in area) is located on
Tõstamaa Peninsula, SW Estonia (Fig. 1c). The area features a
coastline strongly indented by peninsulas and bays, and low-lying
(<10 m a.s.l.) flat plains with beach ridges, and is temporarily
inundated by seawater. The area emerged during the Limnea Stage
of the Baltic Sea. The bedrock consisting of limestone and
dolomite is covered by a relatively thin layer of till, marine and
shore sediment. The soil cover consists primarily of calcareous
gleyic and gleyed soils.
Agricultural land use has been historically inherent in the study
site (Fig. 2). At the start of the 20th
century the land cover
consisted mainly of grassland (41%), grassland with shrubs (29%)
and arable land (26%). A notable change in the land cover pattern
in Tõstamaa is evident on the map published in 1950, in which
grassland with shrubs is the dominant unit (38%). This increase
was largely at the expense of grasslands, whereas the area of
arable land changed little (23%). Also noteworthy is an increase in
the area of woodland (9%) over the same period given that
woodlands comprise only 1% of the study site at the beginning of
the 20th century. Another striking phenomenon is the expansion of
reed beds in the eastern part of the study site in an area of formerly
Figure 1. a) Location of Estonia in the Baltic Sea region. b) Location of study sites. c) Tõstamaa study site. d) Kõruse study site.

1771
2
Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 64, 2011
Antso et al.
seashore grassland.
The traditional open landscape of fields and grassland was
replaced by woodland, shrubland and grassland with shrubs by the
start of the 21st century. The share of woodland increased
tremendously (35%), whereas the area of grassland with shrubs
changed little (34%). Both the area of grassland (14%) and arable
land (4%) decreased.
The main changes in the land cover of the Tõstamaa study site
over the last century are a decrease in the area of grassland and
cultivated land and an increase of the share of woodland,
shrubland and grassland with shrubs. The dominant open
landscape (total 66%) at the first half of the 20th century now sees
77% of the area covered by woodland, shrubland and grassland
with shrubs and only 17% by open (arable land and grassland)
landscape.
The time-series of changes in land cover in Tõstamaa during the
20th century show the following successions: grassland →
grassland with shrubs → shrubland and grassland → grassland
with shrubs → woodland comprising 38% of all the changes in the
land cover pattern (Table 1). The remainder of the changes is less
significant and may simply reflect imprecision in analysis or in the
original maps.
Land cover changes in Kõruse study site
The Kõruse study site (5.59 km2) is located on Tagamõisa
Peninsula, Saaremaa Island, western Estonia (Fig. 1d). This area is
approximately the same age as Tõstamaa, emerging by tectonic
land uplift during the Limnea Stage of the Baltic Sea. The former
lagoons, now coastal lakes (stagnant waters) make the landscape
more diverse. As in Tõstamaa, the bedrock consists of calcareous
rocks and is overlain a thin layer of till, marine and shore
sediment. The area is flat and low (<14 m a.s.l.). Regosols,
calcareous rendzinas and gleyic soils are characteristic of the
study site.
At the beginning of the 20th century, arable land (38%) and
open grassland (23%) were the dominant land cover in the Kõruse
study site. Shrubland (18%) and grasslands with shrubs (15%)
were almost equally abundant (Fig. 3). The densely populated
coastal area lacked woodland, the land was largely crop fields or
pastures.
By the middle of the 20th century, the land cover structure at
Kõruse had changed markedly. The severe restrictions emplaced
in a Soviet led to a disruption of traditional land use and
abandonment of arable land. Crop fields rapidly converted to
fallows. The share of grassland increased abruptly almost
doubling (41%) in area within half a century. Shrubland increased
to about 25%, while had arable land decreased about six fold. The
first woodland stands emerged in the western part of the study site.
The significant changes in the land cover pattern in the Kõruse
study site have continued since the middle of the 1950s. The
grasslands of the 1950s have been largely replaced by shrubland
(34%) and woodland (27%) by the beginning of the 21st century.
Grasslands currently comprise only 4% of the territory. Grassland
with shrubs has also decreased to 10% of the area of the study site,
while the share of arable land has increased (14%).
As in Tõstamaa, the main trends of land cover changes in
Kõruse have been the transition of abundant grassland and arable
land at the beginning of the 20th century to shrubland and
woodland by the end of the century. Both study sites have
witnessed the disappearance of the so-called open landscape in the
coastal zone. The cumulative area of grassland and arable land has
decreased from 61% at the beginning of the century to 17% by the
end of the century. Woodland, shrubland and grassland with
shrubs currently comprise 71% of the Kõruse study site.
The time-series of land cover changes in Kõruse likewise
exhibit a clear reduction in open landscape in the coastal zone
(Table 2). The main trend in the dynamics of the land cover
Figure 2. Land cover changes in Tõstamaa study site during 1900-
2000.
Table 1: Most notable land cover changes in Tõstamaa study
site during the 20th century
Land cover change %
grassland → grassland with shrubs → shrubland 20
grassland → grassland with shrubs → woodland 18
arable land → grassland → grassland with shrubs 6
grassland → sparsely vegetated area → grassland
with shrubs 4
arable land → grassland with shrubs → grassland 4
grassland → grassland with shrubs → grassland 3
arable land → grassland with shrubs → woodland 3
grassland with shrubs → arable land → woodland 3
grassland → arable land → grassland with shrubs 3
grassland with shrubs → grassland → grassland
with shrubs 3
Figure 3. Land cover changes in Kõruse study site during 1900-
2000.
2
Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 64, 2011
Antso et al.
seashore grassland.
The traditional open landscape of fields and grassland was
replaced by woodland, shrubland and grassland with shrubs by the
start of the 21st century. The share of woodland increased
tremendously (35%), whereas the area of grassland with shrubs
changed little (34%). Both the area of grassland (14%) and arable
land (4%) decreased.
The main changes in the land cover of the Tõstamaa study site
over the last century are a decrease in the area of grassland and
cultivated land and an increase of the share of woodland,
shrubland and grassland with shrubs. The dominant open
landscape (total 66%) at the first half of the 20th century now sees
77% of the area covered by woodland, shrubland and grassland
with shrubs and only 17% by open (arable land and grassland)
landscape.
The time-series of changes in land cover in Tõstamaa during the
20th century show the following successions: grassland →
grassland with shrubs → shrubland and grassland → grassland
with shrubs → woodland comprising 38% of all the changes in the
land cover pattern (Table 1). The remainder of the changes is less
significant and may simply reflect imprecision in analysis or in the
original maps.
Land cover changes in Kõruse study site
The Kõruse study site (5.59 km2) is located on Tagamõisa
Peninsula, Saaremaa Island, western Estonia (Fig. 1d). This area is
approximately the same age as Tõstamaa, emerging by tectonic
land uplift during the Limnea Stage of the Baltic Sea. The former
lagoons, now coastal lakes (stagnant waters) make the landscape
more diverse. As in Tõstamaa, the bedrock consists of calcareous
rocks and is overlain a thin layer of till, marine and shore
sediment. The area is flat and low (<14 m a.s.l.). Regosols,
calcareous rendzinas and gleyic soils are characteristic of the
study site.
At the beginning of the 20th century, arable land (38%) and
open grassland (23%) were the dominant land cover in the Kõruse
study site. Shrubland (18%) and grasslands with shrubs (15%)
were almost equally abundant (Fig. 3). The densely populated
coastal area lacked woodland, the land was largely crop fields or
pastures.
By the middle of the 20th century, the land cover structure at
Kõruse had changed markedly. The severe restrictions emplaced
in a Soviet led to a disruption of traditional land use and
abandonment of arable land. Crop fields rapidly converted to
fallows. The share of grassland increased abruptly almost
doubling (41%) in area within half a century. Shrubland increased
to about 25%, while had arable land decreased about six fold. The
first woodland stands emerged in the western part of the study site.
The significant changes in the land cover pattern in the Kõruse
study site have continued since the middle of the 1950s. The
grasslands of the 1950s have been largely replaced by shrubland
(34%) and woodland (27%) by the beginning of the 21st century.
Grasslands currently comprise only 4% of the territory. Grassland
with shrubs has also decreased to 10% of the area of the study site,
while the share of arable land has increased (14%).
As in Tõstamaa, the main trends of land cover changes in
Kõruse have been the transition of abundant grassland and arable
land at the beginning of the 20th century to shrubland and
woodland by the end of the century. Both study sites have
witnessed the disappearance of the so-called open landscape in the
coastal zone. The cumulative area of grassland and arable land has
decreased from 61% at the beginning of the century to 17% by the
end of the century. Woodland, shrubland and grassland with
shrubs currently comprise 71% of the Kõruse study site.
The time-series of land cover changes in Kõruse likewise
exhibit a clear reduction in open landscape in the coastal zone
(Table 2). The main trend in the dynamics of the land cover
Figure 2. Land cover changes in Tõstamaa study site during 1900-
2000.
Table 1: Most notable land cover changes in Tõstamaa study
site during the 20th century
Land cover change %
grassland → grassland with shrubs → shrubland 20
grassland → grassland with shrubs → woodland 18
arable land → grassland → grassland with shrubs 6
grassland → sparsely vegetated area → grassland
with shrubs 4
arable land → grassland with shrubs → grassland 4
grassland → grassland with shrubs → grassland 3
arable land → grassland with shrubs → woodland 3
grassland with shrubs → arable land → woodland 3
grassland → arable land → grassland with shrubs 3
grassland with shrubs → grassland → grassland
with shrubs 3
Figure 3. Land cover changes in Kõruse study site during 1900-
2000.

1772
Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 64, 2011
3
Estonian Coastal Land Use
structure in the Kõruse study site over the 20th century is as
follows: arable land → grassland → shrubland total 17% of the
change in land cover. Some other trends include arable land →
grassland → grassland with shrubs; grassland with shrubs →
shrubland → woodland; grassland → grassland with shrubs →
shrubland; arable land → grassland with shrubs → shrubland and
arable land → shrubland → woodland. These trends all indicate a
decline in the open landscape. At the same time, some former
fields have been again cultivated (arable land → grassland →
arable land). As for the Tõstamaa site, some imprecision in these
trends can be attributed to ambiguity in analysis or in the original
maps.
Comparison of land cover changes in Tõstamaa
and Kõruse
Both study sites were densely populated typical rural coastal
areas at the beginning of the 20th century. The most characteristic
land cover units were arable lands and grasslands comprising over
60% of the territory. The share of arable land at Kõruse was
slightly greater and of grassland somewhat less than at Tõstamaa.
In contrast, shrubland was abundant at Kõruse and almost absent
at Tõstamaa. In general, shrubland covered the old beach ridges on
regosols, which were unsuitable for either land cultivation or
pasture. Analysis of maps published in the 1930s (at 1:50,000
scale) indicate similar land cover structure dominated by fields
and grasslands in both areas.
By mid-century the land-cover structures of each study site had
changed differently. Although both sites had been incorporated
into the Soviet border zone, the restriction regimes were different.
The changes in political and socio-economic conditions are well
reflected in the land cover pattern of the sites. Whereas the lesser
changes in land cover at Tõstamaa point toward a cessation of
management on seashore grasslands, which tended to overgrow
with shrubs, the arable land typical at Kõruse transformed to
fallows or grasslands with shrubs due to stagnation of agricultural
activity and deportation of the local inhabitants. The grasslands
converted to shrubland and shrubland to woodland.
The political and socio-economical changes in the last decade of
the 20th century stemming from Estonian re-independence
likewise affected coastal land use and the dynamics of coastal
landscape once again. Stagnation of agriculture and
mismanagement of previous arable land is the main trend in the
Estonian coastal landscape. This is particularly clearly visible in
the Tõstamaa study site where grasslands rather than arable land
formed; former grasslands have generally been overgrown by
shrubs and shrubland has transformed to woodland. Analysis of
maps from the 1980s shows that these processes had started before
the collapse of the Soviet Union; a number of fields were being
neglected and grasslands were overgrowing already in the 1980s.
The stagnation of agricultural land use on the Estonian coast was
caused by reduced demand for agricultural products. More fertile
fields in inland regions offered higher agricultural productivity to
meet the demand for agricultural products, especially after the end
of the Soviet regime and the introduction of a free market
economy.
In Kõruse — where agricultural activity had ceased by the
middle of the 20th century — the changes during the last 50 years
are not so dramatic. The overgrowth of former open landscape
continues. Thus, the studied areas are once again becoming
similar, likely due to increasing pressure on the seashores as the
areas of recreation and a lack of interest in restoring the traditional
coastal agriculture.
Biodiversity of the Estonian coast as a function of
coastal landscape structure
Changes in coastal land cover pattern at Tõstamaa and Kõruse
study sites are characteristic of the entire coast of Estonia in
general. Results of the Estonian State Monitoring Program show
that decreases in arable land and replacement of grasslands by
shrubland and reed beds are the most significant changes on the
coast (Ratas et al., 2010) as exhibited at both study sites. These
processes have led to a simplification of the landscape and a
decrease in biodiversity.
Because diverse coastal landscapes provide a proper basis for
higher biodiversity, the changes in land use during the last decades
have also affected the structure of the seashore plant communities.
Concentration of agricultural land use in areas with higher
productivity has resulted in mismanagement of semi-natural plant
communities (Pärtel et al., 2007a). The traditional semi-natural
plant communities, characteristic of the coastal landscape of
Estonia, such as wooded meadows, seashore and alvar grasslands
have left neglected. These plant communities formed through a
centuries-long combination of natural conditions and human
impact, which served as a precondition for high biodiversity
(Pärtel et al., 2007b). The most characteristic coastal landscape –
seashore grasslands – had decreased from 29,000 ha in the 1960s
to 5,100 ha of seashore grasslands with conservation value by the
middle of the 1990s (Leibak and Lutsar, 1996).
Changes in faunistic and floristic composition of the coastal
ecosystems reflect clearly changes in land use. Many plant species
inhabiting seashore grasslands need moderate anthropogenic
intervention, whereas neglected grasslands tend to overgrow with
bushes and reed. Even more extreme changes have occurred in the
species composition of coastal birds. The latest research on
breeding birds of seashore grasslands suggest a decline in the
number of some characteristic species during the last decade
(Kuresoo, 2009). The number of some species of Charadriiformes
as well as of some typical grassland species such as Anas
querquedula and Anas clypeata has fallen below critical values.
Philomachus pugnax and Arenaria interpres are nearly absent
from Estonian seashore grasslands. At the same time, invasion of
species of typical shrubland or reed bed birds to the seashore
grasslands is increasing. These changes and trends indicate
inadequate management of Estonian coastal ecosystems and an
overall loss of species richness.
Ending the reduction in biodiversity is currently an important
issue both on a local as well as global level. In 2001, the European
Union adopted a Strategy for Sustainable Development, which set
Table 2: Most common land cover changes in Kõruse study
site during the 20th century
Land cover change %
arable land → grassland → shrubland 17
arable land → grassland → arable land 10
shrubland → grassland with shrubs → woodland 6
arable land → grassland → grassland with shrubs 5
grassland with shrubs → shrubland → woodland 5
grassland → grassland with shrubs → shrubland 4
grassland with shrubs → grassland → shrubland 4
arable land → grassland with shrubs → shrubland 4
arable land → shrubland → woodland 3
grassland with shrubs → grassland → sparsely
vegetated area 3

1773
4
Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 64, 2011
Antso et al.
a target to halt the loss of biodiversity and restore habitats and
natural systems by 2010 (CEC, 2001). A state program supporting
nature conservation was implemented in Estonia the same year
aiming for systematic restoration and management of semi-natural
plant communities (Zingel and Aasma, 2010). As the traditional
use of semi-natural plant communities is not currently
economically viable, the preservation of these ecosystems can be
guaranteed by special management grants. This campaign has
resulted in an improvement in the state of some semi-natural
coastal plant communities in recent years. These grants can also
be attributed to a decrease in the number of invasive shrubland
and reed bed bird species in grasslands in the last few years
(Kuresoo, 2009).
Stopping the loss of biodiversity remains crucial. At the tenth
meeting of the parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity
in October 2010 an updated strategic plan for the post-2010 period
was adopted that demanded continued action to safeguard and,
where necessary, restore biodiversity and ecosystem services
(CBD, 2010a). To conserve coastal habitats, parties and
governments are urged to formulate long-term conservation and
management plans (CBD, 2010b). As traditional landscapes are
associated with greater biodiversity and offer a unique character
and identity to a place or a region (Antrop, 2005), these plans can
be elaborated effectively by incorporating the results of studies on
land use changes and land cover dynamics. These studies reveal
the most appropriate land use for a particular site in the past, how
to achieve this use and to what extent traditional land use is
applicable today.
CONCLUSIONS
Estonian coastal land use was strongly influenced by historic and
socio-economic conditions during the 20th century. Although the
land cover changes in Estonian coastal areas have been largely site
specific, the main trends during the 20th century have been similar
– a decline in the traditional rural economic activity has affected
the development of coastal landscapes. These processes have led
to simplification of the landscape and losses in biodiversity. Many
species-rich, semi-natural habitats such as seashore grasslands,
wooded meadows and alvar grasslands have been replaced by
shrubland and forests. The situation at Tõstamaa and Kõruse
clearly reveals that — regardless of the reason for mismanagement
of coastal semi-natural ecosystems — the changes are similar, i.e
overgrowth of former grasslands and wooded meadows by
shrubland or reed beds, a decrease in species richness and an
overall unification of a landscape. In many places, restoration of
traditional land use is neither feasible nor economically viable. At
the same time, Estonian coasts maintain high recreation value, i.e.
suitable for summer cottages and resorts. Thus, Estonia faces a
serious challenge: how to exploit the coast sustainably and to
preserve it for future generations in light of global change and
increasing human impact.
LITERATURE CITED
Antrop, M., 2005. Why landscapes of the past are important for
the future. Landscape and Urban Planning, 70, 21-34
Bürgi, M.; Hersperger, A.M., and Schneeberger, N., 2004. Driving
forces of landscape change – current and new directions.
Landscape Ecology, 19, 857-868
Burnett, M.R.; August, P.V.; Brown, J.H., and Killingbeck, K.T.,
1998. The Influence of Geomorphological Heterogeneity on
Biodiversity: A Patch-Scale Perspective. Conservation
Biology, 12, 363-370
CBD, 2010a. Updating and revision of the Strategic Plan for the
post-2010 period. Decision as adopted (Advance unedited
version). Nagoya: Conference of the Parties to the Convention
on Biological Diversity, Agenda item 4.2, 13p.
CBD, 2010b. Marine and Coastal Biodiversity. Decision as
adopted (Advance unedited version). Nagoya: Conference of
the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Agenda
item 5.2, 15p.
CEC, 2001. A Sustainable Europe for a Better World: A European
Union Strategy for Sustainable Development. Brussels:
Communication from the Commission, COM(2001)264, 17p.
Kuresoo, A., 2009. Estonian Environmental Monitoring Program
– Monitoring of Breeding Birds on Selected Habitats: Annual
Report on Breeding Birds of Coastal Meadows. Tallinn:
Keskkonnateabe Keskus, 20p. (manuscript, in Estonian)
Leibak, E. and Lutsar, L., 1996. Estonian Coastal and Floodplain
Meadows. Tallinn: Kirjameeste Kirjastus, 257p.
Mander, Ü. and Palang, H., 1999. Landscape changes in Estonia –
causes, processes and consequences. In: KRONERT, R.;
BAUDRY, J.; BOWLER, I.R., and REENBERG, A. (eds.),
Land-use changes and their environmental impact in rural
areas in Europe. New York: Parthenon Publishing Group, pp.
165-187.
Nichols, W.F.; Killingbeck, K.T., and August, P.V., 1998. The
Influence of Geomorphological Heterogeneity on
Biodiversity: A Landscape Perspective. Conservation Biology,
12, 371-379
Orviku, K, 1974. Estonian Seacoasts. Tallinn: Eesti NSV
Teaduste Akadeemia, 112p. (in Russian with English
summary)
Palginõmm, V.; Ratas, U., and Kont, A., 2007. Increasing human
impact on coastal areas of Estonia in recent decades. In: C. J.
LEMCKERT, C. J. (ed.), Proceedings of the 9th International
Coastal Symposium. Journal of Coastal Research Special
Issue No. 50, pp. 114-119.
Poska, A., 2001. Human impact on vegetation of coastal Estonia
during the Stone Age. Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala
Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology.
Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 47p.
Pärtel, M.; Helm, A.; Roosaluste, E., and Zobel, M., 2007a.
Biological Diversity of Estonian Semi-Natural Grassland
Ecosystems. In: PUNNING, J.M. (ed.) Problems of
Contemporary Environmental Studies. Tallinn: Tallinna
Ülikooli Ökoloogia Instituut, pp. 223-302. (in Estonian with
English summary)
Pärtel, M.; Helm, A.; Reitalu, T.; Liira, J., and Zobel, M., 2007b.
Grassland diversity related to the Late Iron Age human
population density. Journal of Ecology, 95, 574–582
Ratas, U. and Puurmann, E., 1995. Human impact on the
landscape of small islands in the West-Estonian archipelago.
Journal of Coastal Conservation, 1, 119-126
Ratas, U.; Rivis, R., and Roosaluste, E., 2010. Monitoring of
Coastal Landscape of Estonia. NJF Seminar No 424. Mapping
and monitoring of Nordic vegetation and Landscapes
(Hveragerði, Iceland), pp. 89-92
Vallner, L.; Sildvee, H., and Torim, A., 1988. Recent crustal
movements in Estonia. Journal of Geodynamics, 9, 215-223
Zingel, H. and Aasma, T., 2010. One hundred years of protected
areas in Estonia. Eesti Loodus (Estonian Nature), 61(5), 234-
241 (in Estonian)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study was supported by Estonian Science Foundation
grants No. 7564, No. 8549 and Estonian Ministry of Science and
Education target-financed project No. SF0280009s07.
4
Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue 64, 2011
Antso et al.
a target to halt the loss of biodiversity and restore habitats and
natural systems by 2010 (CEC, 2001). A state program supporting
nature conservation was implemented in Estonia the same year
aiming for systematic restoration and management of semi-natural
plant communities (Zingel and Aasma, 2010). As the traditional
use of semi-natural plant communities is not currently
economically viable, the preservation of these ecosystems can be
guaranteed by special management grants. This campaign has
resulted in an improvement in the state of some semi-natural
coastal plant communities in recent years. These grants can also
be attributed to a decrease in the number of invasive shrubland
and reed bed bird species in grasslands in the last few years
(Kuresoo, 2009).
Stopping the loss of biodiversity remains crucial. At the tenth
meeting of the parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity
in October 2010 an updated strategic plan for the post-2010 period
was adopted that demanded continued action to safeguard and,
where necessary, restore biodiversity and ecosystem services
(CBD, 2010a). To conserve coastal habitats, parties and
governments are urged to formulate long-term conservation and
management plans (CBD, 2010b). As traditional landscapes are
associated with greater biodiversity and offer a unique character
and identity to a place or a region (Antrop, 2005), these plans can
be elaborated effectively by incorporating the results of studies on
land use changes and land cover dynamics. These studies reveal
the most appropriate land use for a particular site in the past, how
to achieve this use and to what extent traditional land use is
applicable today.
CONCLUSIONS
Estonian coastal land use was strongly influenced by historic and
socio-economic conditions during the 20th century. Although the
land cover changes in Estonian coastal areas have been largely site
specific, the main trends during the 20th century have been similar
– a decline in the traditional rural economic activity has affected
the development of coastal landscapes. These processes have led
to simplification of the landscape and losses in biodiversity. Many
species-rich, semi-natural habitats such as seashore grasslands,
wooded meadows and alvar grasslands have been replaced by
shrubland and forests. The situation at Tõstamaa and Kõruse
clearly reveals that — regardless of the reason for mismanagement
of coastal semi-natural ecosystems — the changes are similar, i.e
overgrowth of former grasslands and wooded meadows by
shrubland or reed beds, a decrease in species richness and an
overall unification of a landscape. In many places, restoration of
traditional land use is neither feasible nor economically viable. At
the same time, Estonian coasts maintain high recreation value, i.e.
suitable for summer cottages and resorts. Thus, Estonia faces a
serious challenge: how to exploit the coast sustainably and to
preserve it for future generations in light of global change and
increasing human impact.
LITERATURE CITED
Antrop, M., 2005. Why landscapes of the past are important for
the future. Landscape and Urban Planning, 70, 21-34
Bürgi, M.; Hersperger, A.M., and Schneeberger, N., 2004. Driving
forces of landscape change – current and new directions.
Landscape Ecology, 19, 857-868
Burnett, M.R.; August, P.V.; Brown, J.H., and Killingbeck, K.T.,
1998. The Influence of Geomorphological Heterogeneity on
Biodiversity: A Patch-Scale Perspective. Conservation
Biology, 12, 363-370
CBD, 2010a. Updating and revision of the Strategic Plan for the
post-2010 period. Decision as adopted (Advance unedited
version). Nagoya: Conference of the Parties to the Convention
on Biological Diversity, Agenda item 4.2, 13p.
CBD, 2010b. Marine and Coastal Biodiversity. Decision as
adopted (Advance unedited version). Nagoya: Conference of
the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Agenda
item 5.2, 15p.
CEC, 2001. A Sustainable Europe for a Better World: A European
Union Strategy for Sustainable Development. Brussels:
Communication from the Commission, COM(2001)264, 17p.
Kuresoo, A., 2009. Estonian Environmental Monitoring Program
– Monitoring of Breeding Birds on Selected Habitats: Annual
Report on Breeding Birds of Coastal Meadows. Tallinn:
Keskkonnateabe Keskus, 20p. (manuscript, in Estonian)
Leibak, E. and Lutsar, L., 1996. Estonian Coastal and Floodplain
Meadows. Tallinn: Kirjameeste Kirjastus, 257p.
Mander, Ü. and Palang, H., 1999. Landscape changes in Estonia –
causes, processes and consequences. In: KRONERT, R.;
BAUDRY, J.; BOWLER, I.R., and REENBERG, A. (eds.),
Land-use changes and their environmental impact in rural
areas in Europe. New York: Parthenon Publishing Group, pp.
165-187.
Nichols, W.F.; Killingbeck, K.T., and August, P.V., 1998. The
Influence of Geomorphological Heterogeneity on
Biodiversity: A Landscape Perspective. Conservation Biology,
12, 371-379
Orviku, K, 1974. Estonian Seacoasts. Tallinn: Eesti NSV
Teaduste Akadeemia, 112p. (in Russian with English
summary)
Palginõmm, V.; Ratas, U., and Kont, A., 2007. Increasing human
impact on coastal areas of Estonia in recent decades. In: C. J.
LEMCKERT, C. J. (ed.), Proceedings of the 9th International
Coastal Symposium. Journal of Coastal Research Special
Issue No. 50, pp. 114-119.
Poska, A., 2001. Human impact on vegetation of coastal Estonia
during the Stone Age. Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala
Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology.
Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 47p.
Pärtel, M.; Helm, A.; Roosaluste, E., and Zobel, M., 2007a.
Biological Diversity of Estonian Semi-Natural Grassland
Ecosystems. In: PUNNING, J.M. (ed.) Problems of
Contemporary Environmental Studies. Tallinn: Tallinna
Ülikooli Ökoloogia Instituut, pp. 223-302. (in Estonian with
English summary)
Pärtel, M.; Helm, A.; Reitalu, T.; Liira, J., and Zobel, M., 2007b.
Grassland diversity related to the Late Iron Age human
population density. Journal of Ecology, 95, 574–582
Ratas, U. and Puurmann, E., 1995. Human impact on the
landscape of small islands in the West-Estonian archipelago.
Journal of Coastal Conservation, 1, 119-126
Ratas, U.; Rivis, R., and Roosaluste, E., 2010. Monitoring of
Coastal Landscape of Estonia. NJF Seminar No 424. Mapping
and monitoring of Nordic vegetation and Landscapes
(Hveragerði, Iceland), pp. 89-92
Vallner, L.; Sildvee, H., and Torim, A., 1988. Recent crustal
movements in Estonia. Journal of Geodynamics, 9, 215-223
Zingel, H. and Aasma, T., 2010. One hundred years of protected
areas in Estonia. Eesti Loodus (Estonian Nature), 61(5), 234-
241 (in Estonian)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study was supported by Estonian Science Foundation
grants No. 7564, No. 8549 and Estonian Ministry of Science and
Education target-financed project No. SF0280009s07.