ISSN 0004-0894 © Royal Geographical Society (with The Institute of British Geographers) 2005

Area

(2005) 37.3, 312–323

Blackwell Publishing, Ltd.

Land tenure type as an underrated legal constraint on the conservation management of coastal dunes:

examples from Ireland

John McKenna*, Michael MacLeod**, Andrew Cooper*, Anne Marie O’Hagan† and James Power‡

*Centre for Coastal and Marine Research, School of Environmental Sciences, University of Ulster,

Coleraine, Northern Ireland BT52 1SA

Email: j.mckenna@ulster.ac.uk

**Department of Natural Resource Economics, Scottish Agricultural College, Edinburgh EH9 3JG

†Marine Law and Ocean Policy Centre, National University of Ireland, Galway, Republic of Ireland

‡AXYS Environmental Consulting Ltd, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 1H7

Revised manuscript received 26 January 2005

Legal factors play an underrated but significant role as constraints on conservationmanagement. In this paper, based on observations in both Northern Ireland and theRepublic of Ireland, mode of land tenure is assessed to determine its influence on theconservation management of coastal dunes. The tenure types considered are: privateownership, corporate private ownership, tenancy, secured tenancy, leasing, common (joint)ownership, uncertain ownership, public ownership and its subset military ownership. Itis suggested that multiple private ownership is least likely to favour effective conservationmanagement. Public ownership by a statutory conservation authority and corporate privateownership by a conservation-orientated NGO are regarded as the optimum tenure typesfor conservation management of coastal dunes.

Key words:

Ireland, land tenure, coastal dunes, conservation management

Introduction

Geographers pay surprisingly little attention to legalaspects of the people/environment relationship. Yetlegal factors such as jurisdiction, tenure and liability aremajor constraints on effective management of enviro-mental resources, and are often more critical than theavailability of scientific expertise. In this paper wereport on observations of the relationship between oneimportant legal factor, mode of land tenure, and theconservation management of coastal sand dunes inboth Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.The findings provide some generic insights into the

influence of tenure on the management of the sanddune resource which the EU Habitats Directive nowrequires both jurisdictions on the island to protect.

Tenure type barely rates a mention in the man-agement sections of major studies of coastal dunes,such as those by Carter

et al

. (1992), Atkinson andHouston (1993) and Houston

et al.

(2001). Elsewhere,however, land tenure has been acknowledged as animportant constraint on environmental management(Wiebe and Meinzen-Dick 1998; Pressey

et al

. 2002;Becker 2003). Kindscher and Scott observe that,‘land ownership is a powerful determinant of thetypes of conservation that can occur at any specific

Land tenure type as an underrated legal constraint

313

location on the landscape’ (1997, 132). Privatetenure is recognized as particularly problematic. Keiternotes that private property rights are based upon aparadigm of boundaries that has not been defined inholistic ecological terms. The result is that ‘from alegal perspective . . . ecosystem management facesperhaps its stiffest challenge integrating privatelands into an ecologically based approach to landand resource management’ (1998, 338).

Conservation management

In this paper conservation management of dunesystems is defined as a management process thatseeks to maintain natural processes and maximizebiological diversity in coastal dunes. The term includesthe concept that the physical integrity and dynamicphysical processes of the dunes will also be main-tained, as well as valued plant and animal species,their habitats and associated biological processes.

Tenure of coastal dunes in Ireland

In Ireland coastal dunes can be held in a numberof formal tenure types. In both jurisdictions dunescan be held in

private ownership

,

corporate privateownership

,

tenancy

,

leasing

,

public ownership

andits sub-set

military ownership

. In the Republic ofIreland there are additional categories of

common(joint) ownership

and

secured tenancy

. To theseformal modes of ownership can be added

uncertainownership

, which, though not a legal entity, describesthe practical reality. Sites mentioned in the text canbe located on Figure 1.

Private ownership

Private ownership of sand dunes is relativelycommon in both Northern Ireland and the Republicof Ireland, for example at Runkerry in CountyAntrim, and at Rossnowlagh in County Donegal.Rossnowlagh provides a classic illustration of thenegative aspects of fragmented private ownership.Eight landowners own a total of 23 shorefrontproperties (O’Hagan and Cooper 2001). The site hasexperienced large-scale development since the1970s (Plate 1). The main causal factors have beenfragmented private ownership, economic prosperityand a pro-development planning ethos in the localauthority. By 2000 over 25 per cent of the

c

.20hectare dunefield had been lost to visitor infrastructureand holiday homes. There remains a single 9 hectareblock of undeveloped dunes; however plans havebeen approved to develop 2.5 hectares of this block.

The remnant of privately owned dunes is the subjectof an agreement negotiated by the local authority toprotect it from development (see later).

Planners permitted much of the new developmentto locate close to a progressively eroding dunescarp. Property owners erected rock armour defencesto defend their investments, so that by 2000 justover half the dune front was armoured. A realisticassessment is that development has irrevocablydestroyed the site’s value as a natural system.

Corporate private ownership

Sand dunes can be privately owned by corporatebodies rather than by individuals. Golf clubs form amajor group in this category, for example at Portsalon,County Donegal and Runkerry, County Antrim(Plate 2). Some see golf courses as offering manyopportunities for conservation of flora and fauna(Stubbs 2001). Others point out that the only realconservation value lies in islands of rough amongthe mown and chemically treated fairways and greens(McKenna

et al.

2000). Size may well be an importantfactor. The British Association of Golf CourseDesigners considers that an area of

c

.40 hectaresor less allows little margin for golf and conservationto coexist (Nature Conservancy Council 1990). TheRepublic of Ireland’s statutory conservation authority,Dúchas (renamed the National Parks and WildlifeService in 2003) excluded land occupied by golfcourses from the list of candidate Special Areas of

Plate 1 The central section of the privately owned dunes at Rossnowlagh, County Donegal. Further

development is planned Source: CCMR, University of Ulster, March 1999

314

McKenna et al.

Conservation (cSACs). However, in Northern Irelanda golf course is included in the Murlough cSAC.

The natural morphology of some links golf courseshas been significantly modified through engineeringinterventions. In 2004, following purchase of partof its course, the Narin-Portnoo Golf Club in westDonegal carried out large-scale physical re-modellingof the dunes. This generated considerable public dis-quiet. However, under current planning legislationthis work was legal, as it took place within the exist-ing course boundary and did not affect a designatedarea. The more positive side of golf club tenureis that the existence of a course may offer duneslong-term protection from building development.Golf courses do, at minimum, provide open areas ofamenity grassland.

Conservation NGOs can also be corporate privateowners of sand dunes. In Ireland, the only NGOthat owns dune property is the National Trust inNorthern Ireland. The Trust owns dunes at PortstewartCounty Derry, Whitepark Bay County Antrim andMurlough County Down. As might be expected,dunes owned by bodies with conservation goals aremore likely to demonstrate best practice in conser-vation management. However, NGO managementcan also face problems, for example at Portstewart

where the Trust met vociferous local opposition afterit introduced sheep to the dunes. This initiative wasecologically desirable (Van Dijk 1992; Oates

et al.

1998), but inadequate consultation resulted in ageneral perception that grazing was an unwelcomeintrusion into a natural landscape. The need tomaintain public support explains why the NationalTrust often prefers negotiation to legal enforcement,even if the outcome is a less than ideal managementregime.

Tenancy

In Ireland, agricultural tenancies are rarely if everlocated entirely in coastal dunes, because youngdune soils are relatively unproductive in agricul-tural terms. Sometimes, however, an area of dunesforms part of a rented property, the major part ofwhich lies on more developed soils. Tenancy is a‘transparent’ form of tenure in that the owner retainsa large measure of control. The tenant may not bepermitted to make major infrastructural additions,or change the physical character of the rentedproperty. However, the tenant will usually havecontrol of grazing regime and stocking rate. Theenvironmental effects will depend on the conditionsof the tenancy, the attitudes of the tenant and thedegree to which the owner monitors practice.

Tenancies on sand dunes can be taken out fornon-agricultural purposes such as sport, or tourism-related commerce. These tenants may construct avariety of buildings and facilities. However, apartfrom the sporting lease provision discussed below,insecurity of tenure inhibits major development.There are also specialized types of tenancy wherethe function is neither agriculture nor sport. Forexample, the Ulster Wildlife Trust is a conservationNGO which leases dunes from a private owner atBenone County Derry to form its Umbra NatureReserve. In such cases the objectives are not com-mercial, and the management ethos is similar tothose cases where the NGO owns the property. AtPortrush East Strand in Northern Ireland the localauthority, Coleraine Borough Council, is the tenantof a private landowner, but the purpose in this caseis amenity provision, rather than conservation.

Secured tenancy

A feature of land law in the Republic of Irelandensures that ownership of sand dunes is not aprerequisite to ensure their future as areas forsporting uses. Until very recently, the Narin-PortnooGolf Club did not own any of its course. Even

Plate 2 Aerial oblique photograph of Runkerry, County Antrim. A golf club owns the foreground dunes,

while the seaward dunes are owned by the local authority. Other areas are privately owned. (The bridge

is 20 metres wide, bank to bank.)Source: CCMR, University of Ulster, November 2003

Land tenure type as an underrated legal constraint

315

though it is a tenant on privately owned dunes, theclub is safeguarded from eviction, because the landshave had a ‘sporting lease’ for at least 21 years.Rents can be reviewed at five-year intervals only,and a demand for increased rent can be taken toarbitration (Landlord and Tenant Acts, 1967 to1984). This legal protection for golf courses andplaying fields will prevent large-scale housing or

industrial development on coastal dunes. Theconservation downside is that sporting uses demandthe maintenance of an unnatural sward on at leastpart of the leased area.

Leasing

Leasing of land for agriculture in a system called‘conacre’ is very common in Ireland. Conacre is not

Figure 1 Location of dune systems mentioned in the text

316

McKenna et al.

a tenancy, and does not confer the legal rights of alandlord/tenant relationship. It allows the leasingof agricultural land for an 11-month period, andthe use to which the land can be put is rigidlyprescribed. Leasing may lead to overgrazing wherethe owner does not insist on an upper limit to stocknumbers. At Benone, the owner of a touristenterprise leases the major part of his dune propertyto a local farmer for grazing. Farmers with grazingrights on dune commonage occasionally lease theirrights to other farmers. Publicly owned dunes canalso be leased for grazing, for example KerryCounty Council at Rossbeigh and Donegal CountyCouncil at Culdaff. Statutory and NGO conservationorganizations sometimes lease dunes for grazing aspart of their management plans, e.g. in the RepublicDúchas at Ballyteige, Co. Wexford, and in NorthernIreland the National Trust at Portstewart and theUlster Wildlife Trust at Benone.

Common ( Joint) ownership

In Ireland the term ‘commonage’ refers to a type ofcommon tenure in which individuals hold grazingrights on jointly owned land. Grazing commonagesare found in both jurisdictions, but in NorthernIreland none of these are located on coastal dunes.Joint ownership has some positive aspects. It preventsthe sale of development plots, and it can alsoencourage the low-intensity grazing regime bestsuited to conservation aims, because individualjoint-owners will not incur expense to improve soilfertility. The same reluctance to spend money oncommon property discourages the erection ofengineered coastal defences; as a result their negativeknock-on effects are avoided.

However, commonage tenure brings its ownmanagement problems, as illustrated on the DooeyPeninsula, a large sandspit in northwest Donegal.Today most of the legal owners are inactive, and thefew remaining users are free to overstock the landwith sheep. This has led to overgrazing, a problemgreatly exacerbated during the 1980s and early1990s by generous EC headage payments.

Uncontrolled access for recreation presents addi-tional problems. Vehicles damage the dune grass-land, and the visitors have generated a serious litterproblem in an area without waste facilities. It isdifficult to counter these abuses because it would besocially unacceptable and illegal for anyone to closeoff the entrance right of way. In rural areas localneeds often take precedence over National andEuropean scale concerns such as conservation man-

agement. In 1997 the informal playing field on theDooey sandspit was upgraded by spreading topsoil.This was a clear breach of management regulationsinside a cSAC, but local opinion was so heavily infavour of the playing field development that Dúchasfound it difficult to exercise its statutory authority.

Uncertain ownership

Where there is no visible management presenceover a long period, coastal dunes can come to beperceived and used as open access common land.Fly tipping, the use of off-road vehicles and thespread of rank vegetation due to undergrazing arecharacteristic problems of unmanaged dunes. In the1970s a non-local company bought the southernsection of the Portsalon dune system as a speculativeinvestment. The company pursued no active manage-ment of its property. Locals began to cross thedunes to the beach and, more seriously, to removelarge quantities of sand from the beach face. Sandextraction ended only when the dunes reverted tolocal ownership, and fences were restored.

Public ownership

Coastal sand dunes may be owned by a public body.In some cases a statutory conservation authority isthe owner, for example Dúchas at Ballyteige, CountyWexford. Management in this type of public owner-ship is similar to that practised by a conservationNGO. Dunes can also be owned by local authorities,

Plate 3 Local authority-owned dunes at Culdaff, County Donegal. The playing field is leased to a local

clubSource: CCMR, University of Ulster, April 1999

Land tenure type as an underrated legal constraint

317

for example in Northern Ireland Limavady BoroughCouncil at Benone County Derry, and Down DistrictCouncil at Tyrella County Down; and in the RepublicKerry County Council, Cork County Council, DublinCity Council and Donegal County Council atRossbeigh, Roscarbery, North Bull Island and Culdaffrespectively. The Culdaff dunes (Plate 3) have highconservation interest, and are included in a cSAC.Public tenure may be a positive factor at Culdaff,but other factors are probably more significant.The site is remote, and after 1970 visitor numbersdeclined in response to the Troubles in NorthernIreland. Visitor numbers are still low, and sorecreation-induced degradation has been minimal.The decline in sand extraction from dunes andbeach, once widespread in the 1950s, is attributedto changes in farming practice, rather than anoutcome of environmentally sensitive management.

Local authority ownership of coastal dunes is notalways sensitive to conservation goals. Actions topromote economic development or provide ameni-ties can damage or, in the worst cases, destroy sanddunes. In the early 1960s the local authority lev-elled the entire dune system at the Portrush WestStrand County Antrim to make way for visitor facili-ties. At the Warren beach in Roscarbery, Dúchashad to exercise its statutory powers to prevent theCounty Council from armouring the dune front.

It is particularly difficult for an elected publicbody to enforce conservation management measuresthat threaten traditional community uses. The authoritymay succeed in stopping activities that are widelyperceived as harmful, e.g. sand extraction, but if tra-ditional uses have public support the best compro-mise that can be achieved may be that they areformalized, for example Donegal County Councilleases a playing field at Culdaff (Plate 2). Localauthorities can find it difficult to monitor dunes. Inthis respect on-site private ownership has an advant-age, in that local people are less likely to damagethe property of a neighbour than that of an imper-sonal (and absentee) public body.

Military ownership

Military uses can be considered a special case ofpublic ownership. In Northern Ireland the BritishMinistry of Defence (MOD) maintains military basesat Magilligan, Co. Derry and Ballykinler, Co. Downwhich cover 960 hectares and 560 hectaresrespectively of mainly sand dune habitat. In theRepublic of Ireland, the Department of Defence’sFinner Camp at Ballyshannon Co. Donegal covers

325 hectares of the Tullan Strand sand dunes.Military tenure prevents public access not only todunes, but often also to the ocean beaches frontingthe dunes. Reasons given for the denial of publicaccess predictably include security needs, andpublic safety. In recent years military organizationshave taken a more proactive public relations stance;for example, the MOD in the UK maintains aconservation office with specialist staff, and producesa conservation magazine,

Sanctuary.

Militaryauthorities now emphasize the conservation valueof their tenure (Corbett 1994; Baker 2001), pointingout that denial of public access protects habitat; forexample, part of the Magilligan base is designatedas an Area of Special Scientific Interest (ASSI). Thisis a valid point. In Northern Ireland, militaryauthorities have been proactive in facilitating duneconservation and research projects, and are currentlyparticipants in a voluntary management initiative atMagilligan. However, military tenure of sand duneshas the inevitable disadvantage that large tracts ofdune habitat are destroyed by tank and armouredvehicle exercises, the construction of firing rangesand general building work.

Statutory strategies for transcending tenure to achieve conservation objectives

Statutory conservation designation and planningcontrol provide two mechanisms by which centraland local governments endeavour to transcend theinfluence of tenure and attain conservation goals.

Statutory conservation designations

In the Republic of Ireland the primary nationaldesignation is Natural Heritage Area (NHA). Thesecondary national designations include StatutoryNature Reserve (SNR) and National Park (NP) (Hickie1996). In Northern Ireland the basic national de-signation is Area of Special Scientific Interest (ASSI),with secondary designations of National NatureReserve (NNR) and Local Nature Reserve (LNR)(Environment and Heritage Service 2003a). Bothjurisdictions have dune systems included in theEuropean designation, Special Area of Conservation(SAC), although as yet the sites have only candidateSAC status (cSAC). Sites often have overlappingor coterminous multiple designations. The localauthority-owned North Bull Island in the Republichas nine, including NHA, SNR and cSAC. In NorthernIreland, the extensive Magilligan system with itsseveral different tenure types is designated both

318

McKenna et al.

ASSI and cSAC (with coterminous boundaries).Within this large area there are two NNRs, and anLNR managed by the local authority. The NationalTrust-owned dunes at Murlough are designated bothASSI and cSAC, and contain a NNR.

There is significant variation across the variousdesignations in the degree of protection offered.One of the advantages of multiple designation isthat a site can take advantage of the strongest pro-tection available in the set. Both north and south,the strongest protection in practice is associatedwith nature reserves, rather than with the primarydesignations NHA and ASSI. This is partly becausenature conservation is the absolute priority withinthe reserves, but also because the managementeffort can be much more focused in these relativelysmall areas. In theory SAC designation offers power-ful legal protection, even in advance of full con-firmation. There are large financial penalties forbreaching the designation, and SAC status allowsthird parties, including NGOs, to bring violations tothe attention of the European Union.

Statutory designation is a valuable force in duneconservation management, both for the level ofresources it brings, and the legal authority it gives toenforce management decisions across a range oftenure types. However, designation applies only toa limited number of sites, usually the best sitesdefined in habitat terms. Legal powers may be com-prehensive and the financial penalties intimidating,but, as Burrows (2003) describes at the NationalTrust site of Whitepark Bay County Antrim (bothASSI and cSAC), there are often huge problems,both practical and legal, in effective enforcement ofmanagement regulations.

In both parts of Ireland, violation of planningand environmental laws is commonplace. There isa long-established culture of construction withoutapproval, and retrospective approval, which is inim-ical to conservation interests. Ironically the designa-tion of a few outstanding sites may increase thepressure on the far more numerous non-designatedsites. On these sites the management practices ofthe owners remain of great significance.

Planning controls

Planning authorities have an obvious influence ondune conservation through their control of development.Both north and south, they are required to consult thestatutory conservation authority where a developmentmight impact on a sensitive area. Planners can alsotake their own conservation initiatives – for example,

Wexford County Council in the Republic of Irelandimposes a 100 metre development set-back from thelandward margin of dunes on eroding coasts.

Planning authorities can achieve strategic conser-vation objectives through landscape designationsthat serve to control development. In Northern Ire-land, the landscape designation Area of OutstandingNatural Beauty (AONB) is designated by the statu-tory conservation authority, but it is implementedvia the planning process. AONBs cover large areasof coastal lands, including all the northern dune sys-tems on Figure 1, except for Portstewart (Environ-ment and Heritage Service 2003b). In the Republicof Ireland, planning legislation allows Councils todesignate their coastal zones as ‘areas of outstand-ing natural beauty’ (although only Leitrim has doneso). Planners can also designate ‘scenic areas’ as abasis for development control. In the County Done-gal Development Plan (Donegal County Council2000) the Portsalon and Culdaff dunes are includedin a protected landscape category. A potentiallyvery powerful, but currently underused, localauthority designation is Special Area Amenity Order(SAAO). One of the few sites to have this designa-tion is North Bull Island.

However, planning authorities are not conservationagencies. They exist to regulate development, not toprevent it. The existence of legislation does not meanthat it is used; in the Republic, local Councils makeonly minimal use of their powers to designate scenicareas. Planners can face pressures to allow use ofdunes for economic and amenity developments, e.g. atCarrickfin in County Donegal, the Council approvedindustrial development on dunes bordering a cSAC,and at Lisfannon permission was granted for amarina development which resulted in the destruc-tion of active dune ridges (McKenna

et al.

2000).There is also a gap, sometimes a very wide gap,

between theory and practice. In the Republic,chronic under-funding, lack of resources and anunrealistically short consultation period mean thatplanning applications often cannot be rigorouslyassessed for conservation impacts. O’Hagan (2002,6–44) points out that some local authority planningdepartments ignore their statutory duty to consultwith the conservation authority. In Northern Ireland,the Planning Service has also been underfunded his-torically and understaffed. In practice, AONB statushas offered little protection to the environment, andthe Planning Service has been heavily criticized forits failure to protect AONBs from incremental change.Even where authorities are informed by best practice

Land tenure type as an underrated legal constraint

319

principles, they tend to be reasonably effective in

preventing

something from happening, but are inef-fective at

initiating

something, e.g. planners canprohibit house-building in coastal dunes, but cannotcompel a landowner to introduce an environmentallybeneficial grazing regime. Here again, tenure typeremains a powerful control on dune management.

Voluntary strategies for transcending tenure to achieve conservation objectives

The limitations of statutory designation and planningcontrol as instruments to achieve effective duneconservation can be addressed by negotiation ofvoluntary arrangements between authorities andlandowners. In Northern Ireland, landowners of anytenure type can enter into a Management of SensitiveSites (MOSS) agreement with the Department of theEnvironment under which they receive a grant inexchange for signing up to an agreed conservationmanagement plan (Environment and Heritage Service2002). The process is most advanced at Magilligan,where private landowners and the Ulster WildlifeTrust have already signed up to MOSS agreements,the latter on leased property. An application fromthe local authority, Limavady Borough Council, iscurrently being processed, and the Ministry ofDefence is also considering joining the scheme. Ifall of these landowners eventually participate, theMOSS scheme could achieve integrated conservationmanagement of a large dune system without theneed for unified ownership.

In the Republic of Ireland a Section 47 Agreementis a provision of the Planning and Development Act,2000 (and earlier Acts) under which a local author-ity can negotiate with a landowner to achieve anenvironmental objective as a

quid pro quo

foroverall planning permission for development. Thismechanism has been used to protect the survivingremnant of dunes at Rossnowlagh. In the Republic,the most widely implemented voluntary scheme isan agri-environmental initiative known as the RuralEnvironment Protection Scheme (REPS) (Emersonand Gillmor 1999). This achieves conservationobjectives by offering farmers compensation tomodify or maintain their farming practices. In Done-gal, private owners of dunes at Portsalon and Narinand commonage owners on the Dooey Peninsulatake part in the REPS scheme. The aims of suchconservation initiatives can, however, be subvertedby poor integration of economic and conservationobjectives, for example the overgrazing problem on

Dooey has been partly caused by generous ECsheep headage subsidies administered by the samegovernment department that tries to prevent over-grazing via the REPS scheme.

The success of voluntary conservation schemes isalmost entirely dependent on owner attitudes. Sincelandowners are free to participate in the schemes ornot, their perceptions of environmental issues andtheir own economic self-interest are of fundamentalsignificance.

Assessment

While it is proposed here that there are tenuretypes that are more conducive to effective duneconservation management than others, it is notsuggested that tenure type has a deterministicinfluence. The conservation status of a given dunesystem at any time is the result of a complexinterplay of factors, of which tenure type is just one.Biotic and abiotic factors act as fundamentalenvironmental constraints, while other factors aremacro-scale management variables. The latter includethe protective designations discussed above, theirlegal powers and enforceability, enforcement effort,funding for management, financial incentives forconservation, financial incentives for potentiallydamaging forms of exploitation, capacity andresources, availability of baseline information, man-agement planning expertise, community interest andinvolvement, the prevailing conservation ethic inlocal and wider society, NGO involvement, ease ofaccess to site, infrastructure to support developmentor bring in users, and edge effects. In addition, thereare factors that apply at the level of detailedoperational management, for example availability oflivestock for grazing, antecedent and current degreeof human disturbance, and presence of invasivespecies. Even within the tenure factor randompersonal variables such as owner age, temperament,education, value system and financial circumstancesare very important.

No type of tenure can be regarded as necessarily‘good’ or ‘bad’, but the constraints and opportuni-ties are different in each case. The typical aims ofdifferent types of tenure and some of their associatedstrengths and weaknesses are summarized in Table 1.Hierarchies of tenure type can be constructedaround certain organizing principles. They will varydepending on which principles are chosen. Table 2illustrates how two hierarchies could differ depend-ing on the management aims. For example, if dune

320

McK

enna et al.

Table 1 Typical aims of different forms of tenure and some of the commonly associated strengths and weaknesses

Tenure type Typical aims of managementPrincipal strengths in terms of dune conservation

Principal weaknesses in terms of dune conservation

Private ownership: by individuals

Usually financial, e.g. to maintain income, maximize revenue, protect investments

The relative autonomy of the private owner can lead to many different strengths and weaknesses depending on their values and circumstances. Some will have long-term aims, others will simply be seeking short-term gains. Management style is often characterized by a simple decision-making process and an ability to respond rapidly to changing circumstances.

Private ownership: by a corporate body

To preserve the services that the body has been set up to provide

Continuity Depends on the services provided.

PredictabilityPrivate ownership: by a conservation body

To preserve the systems value as a natural system and cultural artefact

System valued for its intrinsic properties Monitoring of the system can be inadequate. Body may be seen as remote by locals.

Secured tenancy Tenant: To obtain a service Inhibits intervention and development Investment can be inhibited.Landlord: To obtain income by providing a service

Conacre Tenant: To obtain a serviceLandlord: To obtain income by providing a service

Inhibits intervention and development Investment can be inhibited. Can lead to overgrazing.

Common ownership To provide low-cost grazing to large numbers of local people

Inhibits intervention and development Potential ‘Tragedy of the Commons’. Makes responding to changing circumstances difficult. Investment can be inhibited.

Public ownership To manage the system in the public interest

Large potential resources in terms of finance, legal powers and expertise

Management decisions can be influenced by political agendas.

Military ownership To maintain a secure area for military training

Can preserve biodiversity Lack of accountability. Lack of access.

Land tenure type as an underrated legal constraint

321

conservation is chosen as the primary aim of man-agement, then fragmented ownership is undesirable(see below).

On balance the worst scenario for dune conserva-tion management is one where a dune system isdivided into several, privately owned holdings. Eachowner will tend to pursue a personal agenda that isunlikely to consider the health of the system as awhole. Ownership by one individual, or corporateownership, is preferable, because the site can bemanaged as a coherent unit, even if not always inan environmentally enlightened manner. It is a finejudgement whether dunes are more secure in singleprivate ownership or in corporate ‘sports’ owner-ship. In the latter case, it is unlikely that the duneswill ever be sold for development. However, singleownership increases the chances of purchase by aconservation NGO or public body. In some casesthe management advantage of corporate sports own-ership is marginal. While some golf courses do haveconservation interest, all are at least partly anthro-pogenic environments. On the other hand, corpo-rate private ownership by a conservation NGO isclose to the ideal tenure type for sustainable conser-vation management.

Somewhat counterintuitively, dune conservationon commonage is optimized when all those withgrazing rights exercise those rights. Degradationcan occur where the traditional controls becomemoribund through non-exercise of rights. Even so,coastal commonage in the Republic of Ireland isstill more likely to exhibit desirable conservationstatus than most examples of private ownership, orsports-dedicated corporate ownership. However,future maintenance of conservation value may bedependent on the establishment of commoners’associations on the UK model to regulate usage(DETR 1998; DEFRA 2002 2003). If they can beeffectively enforced, the recently introduced Com-

monage Framework Plans (CFPs) may help to stopovergrazing (DAHGI 2001).

Dunes whose ownership is perceived as uncertainwill generally not be lost to infrastructure, but ifthere is no one to manage the site its conservationvalue could be irrevocably damaged by abuseand/or neglect. Tenancy and leasing in conacre aresecondary types of tenure that will also ensure thatdunes remain undeveloped, although overgrazingmay be a problem. Secured tenancies for sport willpreserve dunes indefinitely as open grassland, butalways at some cost to conservation values.

Along with tenure by a conservation NGO, publicsector ownership is the most likely tenure type tofacilitate long-term dune conservation management.This is particularly the case where the public owneris a statutory conservation authority that acquiredthe site explicitly to secure its future as a function-ing natural ecosystem. Statutory authorities haveaccess to professional expertise that enhances theirmanagement. Indeed, it can be argued that owner-ship through purchase by bodies with explicit con-servation goals is the only guarantee of conservationinterests (Leonard 2001). However, purchase is oftenunrealistic as resources are too limited, and thereare simply too many sites (Nakashima and Boedhi-hartono 2001). From a conservation standpoint,local authority ownership is less secure. The desireto develop tourist and recreation facilities, or mis-placed concerns over coastal erosion, sometimesresult in damaging actions.

The special case of military tenure forces a judge-ment on whether the conservation gains made byexclusion of the public are greater than the lossesdue to military activities. The concept of a conser-vation programme based on denial of public accesssits rather uneasily with modern thinking on ‘right toroam’, but conservation and access are differentconcepts. In recent years military authorities have

Table 2 Two possible hierarchies showing the potential of different types of tenure for achieving management aims

Overall aim or guiding principle

Dune conservation Public access

High potential for achieving aim Owned by NGO CommonPublic ownership Public ownershipPrivate − corporate Owned by NGO

Low potential for achieving aim Tenancy = common Private − corporate = tenancyPrivate − individual = military? Private − individual = military?

322

McKenna et al.

shown a commendable willingness to becomeinvolved in conservation initiatives. However, easieraccess to information, if not physical access to sites,would do much to dilute public scepticism aboutthe conservation advantages of military tenure.

Both north and south, a very significant changemay be brought about by the ongoing reform of theEuropean Community’s Common Agricultural Policy(CAP), in which subsidies will be decoupled fromproduction, and replaced by a Single Farm Payment(European Commission 2003; DAF 2004). Landmanagement to attain conservation objectives is aprominent aspect of the new scheme. When fullyoperational from 2005 the scheme should removethe incentive to overstock dune grazing.

Conclusion

Negative conservation status of coastal dunes inIreland is more likely to result from managementdeficiencies than from shortcomings in scientificunderstanding of coastal processes or ecology. Someof these management deficiencies are a function oflegal factors, one of which, mode of tenure, is ahighly significant constraint. Statutory and voluntaryattempts to transcend private boundaries are rarelytotally successful. It is hardly controversial to statethat, broadly speaking, the conservation status ofdunes at a given site is a function of the landowner’scommitment to that goal; for example, it will beoptimized when conservation is the explicit aim ofmanagement.

Acknowledgements

This research is based on a number of geomorphological,ecological and coastal management projects carried outover several years in both Northern Ireland and the Repub-lic of Ireland. We would like to thank the landowners andmanagers who provided information and allowed access.We thank Kilian McDaid for drafting Figure 1.

References

Atkinson

D and Houston

J A

eds 1993

The sand dunes of theSefton coast

Proceedings of the Sefton Coast ResearchSeminar National Museum and Galleries on Merseyside

Baker

J

2001 Military land use, sand dunes and nature con-servation in the UK in

Houston

J A, Edmondson

S E andRooney

P J

eds

Coastal dune management: shared experi-ence of European conservation practice

Liverpool Univer-sity Press, Liverpool 199–205

Becker

C D

2003 Grassroots to grassroots: why forest preserva-tion was rapid at Loma Alta, Ecuador

World Development

31 163–76

Burrows

G R

2003 Management of coastal ASSIs: lessonsfrom sand extraction at Whitepark Bay Unpublished MScdissertation University of Ulster

Carter

R W G, Curtis

T G F and Sheehy-Skeffington

M J

eds1992

Coastal dunes: geomorphology, ecology and man-agement for conservation

Balkema, Rotterdam

Corbett

P

1994 The Ballykinler dunes

Sanctuary

23 26–7

DAF

2004

The single payment scheme: an explanatory guide

Department of Agriculture and Food, Dublin

DAHGI

2001

Rules and practices of the DAHGI

Section 16Reference Book, Freedom of Information Act 1997Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands,Dublin

DEFRA

2002

Common land policy statement

Department forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs, London

DEFRA

2003

Agricultural use and management of commonland: report of the Stakeholder Working Group

Depart-ment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London

DETR

1998

Good practice guide on managing the use ofcommon land

Department of the Environment, Transportand the Regions, London

Donegal County Council

2000

County Donegal developmentplan

Donegal County Council, Lifford, County Donegal

Emerson

H J and Gillmor

D A

1999 The Rural EnvironmentProtection Scheme of the Republic of Ireland Land UsePolicy 16 235–45

Environment and Heritage Service 2002 Management ofSensitive Sites: MOSS guidance notes Environment andHeritage Service, Department of the Environment (NorthernIreland), Belfast

Environment and Heritage Service 2003a Natural heritagestrategic plan Environment and Heritage Service, Depart-ment of the Environment (Northern Ireland), Belfast

Environment and Heritage Service 2003b Shared horizons:statement of policy on protected landscapes in NorthernIreland Environment and Heritage Service, Department ofthe Environment (Northern Ireland), Belfast

European Commission 2003 Council regulation (EC) no1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing commonrules for direct support schemes under the common agri-culture policy and establishing certain support schemes forfarmers Official Journal of the European Union, Brussels

Hickie D 1996 Evaluation of environmental designations inIreland The Heritage Council, Dublin

Houston J A, Edmondson S E and Rooney P J eds 2001Coastal dune management: shared experience of Europeanconservation practice Liverpool University Press, Liverpool

Keiter R B 1998 Ecosystems and the law: toward an inte-grated approach Ecological Applications 8 332–41

Kindscher K and Scott N 1997 Land ownership and tenure ofthe largest land parcels in the Flint Hills of Kansas USANatural Areas Journal 17 131–5

Landlord and Tenant Acts, 1967 to 1984 Government of Ire-land, The Stationery Office, Dublin

Land tenure type as an underrated legal constraint 323

Leonard R 2001 Land purchase/lease for conservation doeswork – some examples (http://www.csiwisepractices.org/?read=329) Accessed 16 February 2001

McKenna J, MacLeod M J, Power J and Cooper J A G 2000Rural beach management: a good practice guide DonegalCounty Council, Lifford, County Donegal

Nakashima S and Boedhihartono 2001 Purchasing coastalareas for protection may not be enough (http://www.csiwi-sepractices.org/?read=331) Accessed 16 February 2001

Nature Conservancy Council 1990 On course conservation:managing golf’s natural heritage NCC, Peterborough

Oates M, Harvey H J and Glendell M eds 1998 Grazing seacliffs and dunes for nature conservation The National TrustEstates Department, Cirencester

O’Hagan A M 2002 The legal and administrative framework forICZM in Ireland Unpublished PhD thesis University of Ulster

O’Hagan A M and Cooper J A G 2001 Extant legal and juris-dictional constraints on Irish coastal management CoastalManagement 29 73–90

Planning and Development Act, 2000 Government of Ire-land, The Stationery Office, Dublin

Pressey R L, Whish G L, Barrett T W and Watts M E 2002Effectiveness of protected areas in north-eastern NewSouth Wales: recent trends in six measures Biological Con-servation 106 57–69

Stubbs D 2001 Golf courses as catalysts for conservation ofcoastal habitats in Houston J A, Edmondson S E andRooney P J eds Coastal dune management: shared experienceof European conservation practice Liverpool UniversityPress, Liverpool 192–8

Van Dijk H W J 1992 Grazing domestic livestock in Dutchcoastal dunes: experiments, experiences and perspectives inCarter R W G, Curtis T G F and Sheehy-Skeffington M J edsCoastal dunes: geomorphology, ecology and managementfor conservation Balkema, Rotterdam 235–50

Wiebe K D and Meinzen-Dick R 1998 Property rights aspolicy tools for sustainable development Land Use Policy15 203–15