The Wetland Book pp 1865-1874 | Cite as

Intertidal Flats of East and Southeast Asia

  • John MacKinnon
  • Yvonne I. Verkuil
Reference work entry


A recent rise in economic prosperity in Asia, the most densely populated region of the world, has created a shortage of land for industry, housing developments and aquaculture. Consequently, large extents of tidal flat habitat in East and Southeast Asia, and especially in the Yellow Sea, have been lost since 1980, some through sediment inflow reduction, some through reclamation to satisfy demand for land. Throughout the East Asian–Australasian Flyway (EAAF), over 600,000 ha of tidal flats were the subject of further proposed land claims in 2012; in the Yellow Sea, planned conversions of >300,000 ha would amount to a further loss of 40% of the remaining habitat. Here we articulate five arguments to contribute to convincing governments and other stakeholders in the EAAF that the current rate of loss is a disaster which must be urgently addressed. (1) Global responsibility: the EAAF is a large flyway supporting 176 waterbird species, of which 34 (19%) are globally threatened or Near Threatened. Nine more species are under consideration for such listing. Other flyways have 5–13 threatened species, amounting to 4–12%. (2) Regional responsibility: migratory shorebird species essentially make a single stop, or very few stops, when moving between non-breeding and breeding sites. In the EAAF, most of these critical sites where birds refuel for a few weeks are in the Yellow Sea. (3) Regional effects: shorebird population trends in Japan, and at a single wintering site in Australia showed that shorebirds dependent on the Yellow Sea during migration show the strongest population declines. (4) Local effects: migratory shorebirds that lost their fuelling site due to the largest land claim projects in the Yellow Sea (Saemangeum and Bohai Bay) did not all redistribute to the adjacent tidal flats, resulting in a net population decline. (5) Self-interest: Tidal flats and associated coastal ecosystems provide critical ecosystem services including protection from storm surges and sea level rise. This information was summarized in a 2012 IUCN report and subsequently EAAF governments have committed via IUCN Resolution 28 to protect the EAAF.


East Asian-Australasian Flyway Migratory waterbird Habitat loss Reclamation Coastal protection Coastal fishery Population decline Migratory species agreement 


  1. Amano T, Székely T, Koyama K, Amano H, Sutherland W. A framework for monitoring the status of populations: an example from wader populations in the East Asian– Australasian Flyway. Biol Conserv. 2010;143:2238–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. An S, Li H, Guan B, Zhou C, Wang Z, Deng Z, Zhi Y, Liu Y, Xu C, Fang S, Jiang J, Hongli LH. China’s natural wetlands: past problems, current status, and future challenges. Ambio. 2007;34:335–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barter MA. The Yellow Sea – a vitally important staging region for migratory shorebirds. In: Boere GC, Galbraith CA, Stroud DA, editors. Waterbirds around the world. Edinburgh: The Stationery Office; 2006. p. 663–7.Google Scholar
  4. Barter M. Shorebirds of the Yellow Sea – importance, threats and conservation status. Global Series 9, International Wader Studies 12, Canberra; 2002.
  5. Battley P, McCaffery B, Rogers D, Hong J-S, Moores N, Ju Y-K, Lewis J, Piersma T, van de Kam J. Invisible connections. Why migrating shorebirds need the Yellow Sea. Collingwood: CSIRO Publishing; 2008.Google Scholar
  6. BirdLife International. Important bird areas and potential Ramsar Sites in Asia. Cambridge: BirdLife International; 2005.Google Scholar
  7. BirdLife International and IUCN-WCPA South-East Asia. Gap analysis of protected areas coverage in the ASEAN countries. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International; 2007.Google Scholar
  8. Buehler DM, Piersma T. Travelling on a budget: predictions and ecological evidence for bottlenecks in the annual cycle of long-distance migrants. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2008;363:247–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. CCICED. Ecosystem Issues and policy options addressing sustainable development of China’s ocean and coast. In: Report of Marine Ecosystems Task Force to CCICED AGM. Beijing; 2010. pp. 264–316
  10. Chang SE, Eeri M, Adams BJ, Alder J, Berke PR, Chuenpagdee R, Ghosh S, Wabnitz C. Coastal ecosystems and tsunami protection after the December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. Earthquake Spectra. 2006;22(S3):S863–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen L, Wang W, Zhang Y, Lin G. Recent progresses in mangrove conservation, restoration and research in China. J Plant Ecol. 2009;2:45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Clemens RS, Rogers DI, Hansen BD, Gosbell K, Minton CDT, Straw P, Bamford M, Woehler EJ, Milton DA, Weston MA, Venables B, Weller D, Hassell C, Rutherford B, Onton K, Herrod A, Studds CE, Choi C-Y, Dhanjal-Adams KL, Murray NJ, Skilleter GA, Fuller RA. Continental-scale decreases in shorebird populations in Australia. Emu. 2016;116:119–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Conklin JR, Lok T, Melville DS, Riegen AC, Schuckard R, Piersma T, Battley PF. Declining adult survival of New Zealand Bar-tailed Godwits during 2005–2012 despite apparent population stability. Emu. 2016;116:147–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Constanza R, de Groot R, Sutton P, van der Ploeg S, Anderson SJ, Kubiszewski I, Farber S, Turner RK. Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Glob Environ Chang. 2014;26:152–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Decho AW. Microbial biofilms in intertidal systems: an overview. Cont Shelf Res. 2000;20:1257–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gill AB. Offshore renewable energy – ecological implications of generating electricity in the coastal zone. J Appl Ecol. 2005;42:605–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kirby J. Review of current knowledge of bird flyways, principal knowledge gaps and conservation priorities. 2010.
  18. KORDI – Korean Ocean Research and Development Institute. Coastal Wetlands conservation plan. Presented at the Symposium for Intertidal habitat Conservation and Sustainable Use, Gochang, Republic of Korea, 28 Sept 2006. 2006.Google Scholar
  19. Li DJ, Daler D. Ocean pollution from land-based sources: East China Sea. Ambio. 2004;33:107–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. MacKinnon J, Verkuil YI, Murray N. IUCN situation analysis on East and Southeast Asian intertidal habitats, with particular reference to the Yellow Sea (including the Bohai Sea), Occasional Paper of the IUCN Species Survival Commission No. 47. Gland: IUCN; 2012. ii + 70 pp. 2012. Available at: Scholar
  21. Melville DS, Chen Y, Ma Z. Shorebirds along the Yellow Sea coast of China face an uncertain future – a review of threats. Emu. 2016;116:100–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Moores N, Rogers DI, Rogers K, Hansbro PM. Reclamation of tidal flats and shorebird declines in Saemangeum and elsewhere in the Republic of Korea. Emu. 2016;116:136–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Myers JP, Morrison RIG, Antas PZ, Harrington BA, Lovejoy TE, Sallaberry M, Senner SE, Tarak A. Conservation strategy for migratory species. Am Sci. 1987;75:18–26.Google Scholar
  24. Nicholls RJ, Cazenave A. Sea-level rise and its impact on coastal zones. Science. 2010;328:1517–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Piersma T, Lok T, Chen Y, Hassell CJ, Yang HY, Boyle A, Slaymaker M, Chan YC, Melville DS, Zhang ZW, Ma Z. Simultaneous declines in summer survival of three shorebird species signals a flyway at risk. J Appl Ecol. 2016;53:479–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rogers D, Hassell C, Oldland J, Clemens R, Boyle A, Rogers K. Monitoring Yellow Sea migrants in Australia (MYSMA). North-western Australian shorebird surveys and workshops, December 2008. 2009.Google Scholar
  27. Rogers DI, Yang H-Y, Hassell CJ, Boyle AN, Rogers KG, Chen B, Zhang ZW, Piersma T. Red knots (Calidris canutus piersmai and C.c.rogersi) depend on a small threatened staging area in Bohai Bay, China. EMU. 2010;110:307–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Short FT, Polidoro B, Livingstone SR, Carpenter KE, Bandeira S, Sidik Bujang J, Calumpong HP, Carruthers TJB, Coles RG, Dennison WC, Erftemeijer PLA, Fortes MD, Freeman AS, Jagtap TG, Kamal AHM, Kendrick GA, Kenworthy WJ, La Nafie YA, Nasution IM, Orth RJ, Prathep A, Sanciangco JC, van Tussenbroek B, Vergara SG, Waycott M, Zieman JC. Extinction risk assessment of the world’s seagrass species. Biol Conserv. 2011;144:1961–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Verkuil YI, Karlionova N, Rakhimberdiev EN, Jukema J, Wijmenga JJ, Hooijmeijer JCEW, Pinchuk P, Wymenga E, Baker AJ, Piersma T. Losing a staging area: Eastward redistribution of Afro-Eurasian ruffs is associated with deteriorating fuelling conditions along the western flyway. Biol Conserv. 2012;149:51–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang H, Bi N, Saito Y, Wang Y, Sun X, Zhang J, Yang Z. Recent changes in sediment delivery by the Huanghe (Yellow River) to the sea: causes and environmental implications in its estuary. J Hydrol. 2010a;391:302–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wang X, Chen W, Zhang L, Jin D, Lu C. Estimating the ecosystem service losses from proposed land reclamation projects: a case study in Xiamen. Ecol Econ. 2010b;69:2549–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wilson HB, Kendall BE, Fuller RA, Milton DA, Possingham HP. Analyzing variability and the rate of decline of migratory shorebirds in Moreton Bay, Australia. Conserv Biol. 2011;4:758–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. WWF, Korea Ocean Research and Development Institute (KORDI), Korea Environment Institute (KEI). The Yellow Sea ecoregion – a global biodiversity treasure. 2006. Available at:
  34. Yu WW, Chen B, Zhang LP. Cumulative effects of reclamation on ecosystem services of tidal flat wetland – a case in the Xinghua Bay, Fujian, China. Mar Sci Bull. 2008;1:88–94 (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  35. Zöckler C, Htin Hla T, Clark N, Syroechkovskiy EE, Yakushev N, Daengphayon S, Robinson R. Hunting in Myanmar is probably the main cause of the decline of the spoon-billed sandpiper Calidris pygmeus. Wader Study Group Bull. 2010a;117:1–8.Google Scholar
  36. Zöckler C, Syroechkovskiy EE, Atkinson PW. Rapid and continued population decline in the spoon-billed sandpiper Eurynorhynchus pygmeus indicates imminent extinction unless conservation action is taken. Bird Conserv Int. 2010b;20:95–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of KentCanterburyUK
  2. 2.Conservation Ecology Group; Groningen Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences (GELIFES)University of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations