1. Threats to surfing
International Symposium on the Protection of Waves
Biarritz, France and San Sebastian-Donostia, Spain
October 24-25, 2011
Dr Neil Lazarow
Visitor, Fenner School of Environment and Society
Australian National University

2. Scope of presentation
• The contested coast
– Key coastal management challenges
• Surfing Capital and key threats
• Recreation
– Preferences and specialisation
– Surfing Capital and Recreation Management
• Threats and management strategies
• Discussion and opportunities
• Framework to manage Surfing Capital

3. Pressures on the coast
• Population - growth and expansion of
settlement footprint
• Development – changes and expansion in
industry and land use types
• Natural Capital – changes in the natural
resource base, including from climate change
and climate variability (local to global scale)

4. ¿Cómo se enfrentan los problemas?
Utilizando la metodología NISDES
• NEGANDO lo que existe
• IMPROVISANDO soluciones
• SUBESTIMANDO el problema
• DESAUTORIZANDO a los expertos
• EQUIVOCANDOSE en la aplicación
• SORPRENDIENDOSE de los resultados
Dr Eduardo A. Vallarino, UMDP, 2010

5. Case study locations /
country of origin GFTP
surveys

6. Surfers society and culture
Motivation for Surfing (n=800 - 830)
80%
70%
60%
Percentage of respondents
50%
Srongly Disagree
Disagree
40% Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
30%
20%
10%
0%
Relax Outdoors Solitude Family Sport Competition Fitness Bond with
(N=828) (N=831) (N=821) (N=824) (N=818) (N=800) (N=824) Nature
(N=821)
Multiple response options mean that values add up to more than 100%

7. Key surfing and ICM issues
South
Bastion Palm Kirra Asbury Bells Port Capes
Issue / Locati o n Stradbroke Trestles Chile
Point Beach Point Park Beach Campbell region
Island
Infrastructure &
engineering issues
a
Wave quality ü ü ü ü - ü - ü - -
Wave frequency ü ü ü ü - ü - ü - -
Environmental issues
Reef health - ü ü ü - - - - - -
Water quality ü ü - - ü - - ü - -
Ecosystem health - ü ü ü ü - - ü - -
Legislative and
management issues
Public access ü ü - - ü - ü - - ü
Local knowledge ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü
Community involvement ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü
Attachment to place ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü
Stewardship ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü
Recreation ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü
Tourism ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü
Culture
Surf culture ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü
Aesthetics ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü
Significance ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü
Economics
Economic impact ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü
Non-market value ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü
Rating /10 (Surfline
b e c d h g i f
ranking, unless otherwise 8 6 5-6 10 4 7-9 9 8-9 8 7-9
noted)
a b c
Debated issue, Refers to wave at southern end of island, Authors own rating. Variety of beach breaks over a 4km stretch
d e f
of coast, Rating pre-1995, Author’s own rating, Variety of surf breaks over an 80km stretch of coast, including a number of
g h i
world class surf breaks, Variety of surf breaks over a 2km stretch of coast, Author’s own rating, Refers to Punta de Lobos.

8. Free-rider
Romanticised notions of the sea rarely engage with, relate to or ‘genuinely
recognise the economic, social or cultural issues that threaten it (Stocker,
2009) ’.
The ecosystem services provided by the ocean have for many years absorbed
our waste and our pollution (how many times have coastal managers heard the phrases
‘out of sight out of mind’ or ‘dilution is the solution to pollution’).
On the one hand, the ocean has been used as a dumping ground for toxic
waste, sewage and munitions and on the other hand we rely on the ocean for
food, recreation and open-space, the ocean drives climatic conditions and the
sea is the source of dreams and inspirations for so many.
Nowhere is the principle of the ‘free-rider’ better exemplified (and
encouraged through poor policy and laws) than in our relationship with the
ocean.

9. Typology of Surfing Capital
Item Description Natural or human impact
Wave quality Dominant local view of • Construction of coastal protection/amenity structures (for example,
how the wave breaks. groynes, seawalls, piers, seawalls, riverwalls, breakwaters, artificial
Both beauty and physical reefs)
form become assessable. • Sand management (for example, beach fill, dredging, sandbar
Wave ‘Surfable’ waves grooming)
frequency measured against an
accepted standard.
Environmental Environmental or Biological impacts (for example, water quality or nutrient loading)
biophysical conditions Climate change/variability (for example, temperature change, sea level
that may mitigate against rise, less or more storms less or more often)
a surfers’ physical health. Amenity of the surrounding built and natural environment
Marine predators (for example, sharks)
Experiential Societal conditions Legislation/regulation that might grant, restrict or control access (for
surrounding the surfing example, community title, private property, payment strategies, craft
experience. registration, proficiency requirement, policing)
Code of ethics i.e. road rules for the surf
Signage & education strategies
Surf rage, aggression, intimidation
Self-regulation/localism/lore
Mentoring, sharing, physical activity, challenge, joy and laughter, well-
being, community spirit, Self-fulfilment
Local aesthetic
Risk, safety

10. Preferences and specialisation
• The importance of preferences
• Ritual potential of surfing
– Personal relevance
– Scenes / collective expression
• Serious leisure
• Specialisation
• Subculture seduction

11. Surfers society and culture
What would stop you from going surfing (n=663 - 666)
50%
45%
40%
Percentage of respondents
35%
30%
25%
If I have to
20% walk a long
way
15%
If there is a
10%
chance my
vehicle may be
5%
vandalised
What would stop you from going surfing (n=663 - 666)
0%
If there is
No way I'm going I'll think about it Neutral Some hesitation Definitely going likely to be
35% surfing but probably not but I'll probably surfing aggression in
go the line-up
30%
Percentage of respondents
25%
20% I may contract
gastroentiritis
15%
I may contract
an ear
10% infection
I may contract
5% a skin rash
0%
No way I'm going I'll think about it Neutral Some hesitation Definitely going
surfing but probably not but I'll probably surfing
go

12. Surfbreaks
Surf break type Bastion Point, Australia
Headland or Pointbreak • Independent review sought by community
Beach break finds that the preferred option “will place
the groyne across the end of the outer
River mouth or estuary bar
break, imposing an additional hazard to
Reef break surfers as well as destroying part of the
Ledges (including Bomboras) break.”
Sea mount • EES states that there are “opposing views
Tidal bore about the impact that the breakwater
walls will have on surf further out..… The
‘region then becomes a more attractive
place for the type of visitor who is family
orientated and with young children, or
teenagers who are interested in taking up
surfing as a sport.”

13. Degradation of surf break –
community health consequences
• Decrease in trust in government and loss of local sovereignty.
• Increased negative social impacts on other already crowded surf breaks.
• Increase in criminal behaviour with bored youths.
• People may turn away from surfing and aspects of a healthy lifestyle, which would mean
increased longer –term health costs for the community.
• Surfing provides a significant mentoring and intergenerational co-learning experience.
• Changes in personal relevance, loss of self-worth and potential opportunities (for example,
Kyle, et al., 2007a).
• Negative impact on local and visitor perceptions.
• A local surf break may be the only recreational amenity facility that youth can access quickly
and safely.
• Beaches and surf breaks often present the only access to ‘public space’ in highly urbanised
areas.
• Increased potential for crowding and conflict at remaining venues (Manning, 1999).
• Potential displacement of certain users (Manning, 1999).
• Change or loss to the natural character of a location.

14. Managing outdoor recreation
Modify supply or demand (Manning, in Buckley 2004)
1. Increase supply
2. Limit demand
Fixed supply or demand
1. Modify the character of the recreational activity
2. Improve the durability of the resource base
Five basic management strategies to ration and allocate use:
reservation systems; lotteries; first-come, first-served or
queuing; pricing; and merit (Manning, in Buckley 2004)

15. Strategies to manage user impact and resource base
Do nothing Legislate/Regulate Modify the resource base Educate/advocate
Do Restrict users through Groynes Code of ethics (that is,
nothing strategies such as Seawalls road rules for the surf)
payments, restricted Artificial reefs Signage
access or parking, craft Sand bypass systems Education strategies
registration, restricted Beach and nearshore Surf rage, aggression,
time in the water sandbar grooming intimidation
Modify user behaviour Nourishment Self-
using legislation such as campaigns regulation/localism
requiring proficiency to Break becomes Lore
surf particular areas or unsurfable due to Declaration of surfing
policing a surf break on water pollution reserves
jetskis Direct action
Community title (for Protests and
example, Tavarua) demonstrations
Declaration of surfing Lobbying and the
reserves promotion of
alternative strategies
Provision of new
information

16. Legislation / regulation
• New Zealand – National Coastal Policy Statement
• Australia – Exclusion zones in southwest Western
Australia
• USA – restricted access for surfing in New Jersey (up to
2003)
• Australia – shared zoning for surfers, swimmers and
boats at Bastion Point
• Surfing Reserves and Sanctuaries
– NSR
– WSR
– Bells

17. Bells Beach Surfing Recreation Reserve
Year Action
1971 Management responsibilities for land area handed to municipality
1973 (6 June) Reserve gazetted under State Government public land act
‘permanently reserved for public purposes’ (land area only)
1981 Tenure amended to be ‘permanently reserved for the protection of
the coastline’
1983 Reserve extended from high water 600m out to sea (seabed)
2002 Marine Park declared (covers most of the offshore area of the Reserve
(water column)
‘surfing has minimal impact on environmental values’
2003 Reserve listed on the State Government Heritage Register for its
social, recognising importance of cultural and natural landscape
(terrestrial reserve and seabed out to 400m, but extent of state
jurisdiction also relevant = 3nm)

18. Map of Bells Beach Surfing Recreation Reserve
(Map layer courtesy of Surf Coast Shire, 2009)
Note: The lines have been modified to practically reflect the land and sea areas of the
Reserve. The Shire has no management responsibilities seaward of high water.
Lines approximate.

19. Source: Moriarity & Nelsen, Surfrider Foundation

20. Education / information / advocacy

21. Modify the resource base
Development (adapted from Scarfe, 2008)
• Artificial nourishment • Port developments • Jetty construction or extensions
• Breakwaters • Piers • Boat ramps
• Seawalls • Dredging • Dumping of dredge spoil
• Outfall pipelines • Marinas • Groynes
• Water quality • Biological inputs • Climate change
Surfing EIA input (adapted from Scarfe, 2008)
Wave climate (inshore and offshore) Sediment grain sizes within littoral cell
Surfer numbers and seasonal variations Precise location of surfing rides
Wind patterns Surfer skill level
Wave refraction/diffraction/shoaling Breaker intensity
Peel angle Breaking wave height ration (H/d)
Tidal patterns and long-term water level Surfable days per year
trends Vector change projections
Storm surge Wave and tide induced current patterns
Water quality Biological inputs

22. Bilinga to Kirra, 1983. Source: Dept. Harbours and Marine
Source: Isla
Source: Vallarino Source: ICM

23. Overtures of a framework to manage
Surfing Capital
• Strategic use of legislation and regulations
• Community health and sustainability
• Appropriate knowledge e.g. identification of Surfing Capital,
surf economics, strategies to incorporate local knowledge
• Partnership approach
• Multiple advocacy strategies (within and external to the
surfing community)
• Politicisation of surfing

24. Merci
Gracias
Thank You
Neil.Lazarow@anu.edu.au

25. Some useful references
• Lazarow, N. 2010. Managing and Valuing Coastal Resources: An Examination of the
Importance of Local Knowledge and Surf Breaks to Coastal Communities. Fenner School of
Environment and Society. Canberra, Australian National University. PhD Thesis.
• Lazarow, N., Miller, M. L., & Blackwell, B. 2008. The Value of Recreational Surfing to Society.
Tourism in Marine Environments, 5(2-3), p.145-158.
• Manning, R.E. (2004). Managing Impacts of Ecotourism Through Use Rationing and
Allocation. In R. Buckley (Ed.), Environmental impacts of ecotourism (273-286). UK: CAB
International.
• Rosenblatt, B., Unger, B., & Mencinsky, A. (2005). How to Save a Surf Break? The Story of
Sandy Hook, New Jersey. In G. Hening (Ed.), Groundswell Society: Surfing, Art, Science and
Issues Conference, Conference. Groundswell Society. Location, 78-93.
• Scarfe, B. (2008). The Value, Scarcity, and Fragility of Surfing Breaks. Unpublished PhD Thesis,
University of Waikato, Hamilton.
• Stebbins, R.A. (1979). Amateurs: On the Margin Between Work and Leisure. Beverley Hills:
Sage Publications.
• Stocker, L. (2009). Sea, Self and Sustainability. Life Writing, 6(1), 133-141.

26. Synthesis and implications for ICM and
sustainability
1. Relationship between NRM outcomes and community/place
2. Public involvement processes
3. Post-policy partnerships
4. Access to knowledge through partnership approaches
5. Capacity to review of develop meaningful policy
6. Sustainability requires purposeful and sustained effort
7. Effective engagement requires specialist skills
8. Environmental policy experiments are rarely compatible with policy
cycles
9. Politicised nature of decision-making is often uneven
10. Politicisation of coastal issues many improve the allocation of resources