Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
TESIS DOCTORAL
2014
INVESTIGACIÓN FORESTAL AVANZADA
DIRECTOR:
Abril 2014
I
A mis padres, a mi familia.
III
AGRADECIMIENTOS
En primer lugar a Luis Díaz-Balteiro, por su ayuda y dirección pero, sobre todo,
por su compromiso, implicación y dedicación inconmensurables. También han puesto
su empeño personal en mejorar distintas partes de la investigación Mario Soliño, Isabel
Barja, Gema Escribano-Ávila y Carlos Lara-Romero.
A Juan Vielva (Director del Parque Natural de Peñalara y ahora del Centro de
Investigación del Parque Nacional de la Sierra de Guadarrama), segunda persona
determinante para que esta investigación doctoral se haya podido llevar a cabo. Además
un agradecimiento especial a Javier de la Puente (SEO/Birdlife) y Fernando Horcajada
por compartir sus datos de buitre negro y corzo respectivamente, a Ana Díaz-Guerra por
coordinar y custodiar la encuestas de Cotos, a Luis Navalón por atender tantos correos e
interrupciones. A todo el personal del antiguo Parque Natural de Peñalara por su ayuda
y colaboración en diferentes tareas, en particular en la realización de las encuestas a los
visitantes: José Luis izquierdo, Alejandro Ciudad, Gema Cacho, Montserrat Viñuelas,
Mª Ángeles Miguel, Belén Carrillo, Vanesa Moreno, Cristina Soria, Juan A. García,
Genoveva Tenthorey, Carmen Chaves, Desirée Rodríguez, Isaac Sanz, Ángel Sanz,
Javier Díaz y Natalia Ruiz (espero no olvidarme de nadie).
V
“One day man will have to fight noise as fiercely as cholera and pest”
VII
ÍNDICE
1 INTRODUCCIÓN .............................................................................................. 1
1.1 Antecedentes (artículos JCR) .......................................................................... 1
1.3 Los espacios naturales protegidos ................................................................... 3
1.4 Principios inspiradores del marco jurídico ...................................................... 6
1.5 El sonido ....................................................................................................... 11
1.6 Bioacústica y paisajes sonoros ...................................................................... 16
1.7 El ruido ambiental ......................................................................................... 20
1.8 Contaminación por ruido de las infraestructuras de transporte ..................... 23
1.9 Evaluación del ruido ambiental..................................................................... 25
1.10 Mapas de ruido .............................................................................................. 31
1.11 La gestión del ruido y los paisajes sonoros ................................................... 34
1.12 Niveles de ruido y planificación acústica ..................................................... 36
1.13 Efectos sobre la percepción humana ............................................................. 39
1.14 Efectos sobre la fauna ................................................................................... 43
1.15 Valoración Económica del ruido ambiental .................................................. 46
1.16 Gestión del ruido ambiental espacios naturales protegidos .......................... 49
4 RESULTADOS ................................................................................................. 79
4.1 Traffic noise maps accuracy at landscape scale ............................................ 79
4.1.1 Noise models and calculation grid assessment ..................................... 79
4.1.2 Analysis of landscape level changes ..................................................... 81
4.1.3 Noise mapping accuracy ....................................................................... 84
IX
4.2 Aircraft noise disturbance ............................................................................. 87
4.2.1 Soundscape disruption by aircraft overflights ...................................... 87
4.2.2 Visitors’ perception............................................................................... 90
4.2.3 Noise spatial pattern assessment ........................................................... 91
4.3 Road traffic disturbance assessment on wildlife ........................................... 94
4.3.1 Disturbance assessment in a breeding colony of Cinereous vulture
(Aegypius monachus) .......................................................................................... 94
4.3.2 Disturbance assessment in a Roe deer poopulation .............................. 97
4.4 The visitors’ soundscape valuation ............................................................. 100
4.4.1 The listening soundscape .................................................................... 100
4.4.2 Contingent valuation of soundscape ................................................... 104
XI
RESUMEN
Este trabajo ofrece soluciones para caracterizar los paisajes sonoros de forma
compatible con distintas escalas de trabajo, nivel de esfuerzo técnico y en contextos de
recursos limitados que haga viable su tratamiento como cualquier otra variable
ambiental en el ámbito de la conservación y gestión del medio natural. Se han adaptado
herramientas y metodologías propias de disciplinas como la acústica ambiental,
bioacústica y ecología del paisaje, para servir a los objetivos específicos de la
evaluación y gestión de los paisajes sonoros y el ruido ambiental en amplias extensiones
geográficas.
XIII
dividir a los corzos de la zona de estudio en dos grupos con diferente nivel de estrés
fisiológico, más elevado en los que se sitúan más cerca de la carretera con mayor
volumen de tráfico y se expone a mayores niveles de ruido. Por otro lado, ha sido
posible delimitar una zona de exclusión para la nidificación de buitre negro alrededor de
las carreteras, coincidente con la isófona Leq (24h) de 40 dBA que afecta al 11% de su
hábitat potencial.
XIV
ABSTRACT
This PhD Thesis deals with acoustic characterization of natural ecosystems and
anthropogenic noise impact assessment on potential receivers, including non-human
receivers and their ecological effects. Besides, its management implications at different
scales are analyzed and an economic valuation is performed.
A procedure has been established for systematic field measurement surveys and
noise common computer modelling methods have also been adapted in order to analyze
dynamic soundscapes across time and space, from local to landscape scales. It is
possible to create specific thematic cartography as for instance delimiting potential
influence zone from different noise sources on animal habitats quality. Use of
equivalent continuous sound pressure level index (Leq) is recommended because it
provides great flexibility in operation for noise measurement and modelling, and
because of its adaptability to any required temporal and spatial dimension, for instance
landscape, activities or the target species established as study subjects.
It has been found that human voices and conversations in a resting and
contemplation area (Laguna Grande de Peñalara) is the most frequently referred noise
source by national park visitors (51 %) when asked. Human voices alter this recreational
area by increasing the sound pressure level approximately 4.5 dBA over the natural
ambient level (Lnat). It has also been found that low traffic roads (AADT<1000 ) may
cause physiological stress on wildlife and affect the quality of their habitats. It has also
been possible to define a road-effect zone by noise mapping, which suggests an
effective habitat loss within the Leq (24h) 30 dBA isophone in case of Roe deer and also
divide the study area in two groups with different physiological stress level, higher for
those exposed to higher noise levels and traffic volume. On the other hand, it has been
XV
possible to determine an exclusion area for Cinereous vulture nesting surrounding roads
which is coincident with the Leq (24h) 40 dBA isophone and affects 11 % of the vulture
potential habitat.
XVI
SIGLAS Y ABREVIATURAS
AADT. Annual average daily traffic (intensidad media diaria de tráfico, IMD)
DEM. Digital elevation model (modelo digital de elevaciones, MDE o modelo digital
del terreno, MDT).
Fig. Figura
XVII
GIS (SIG). Geographic information system (sistema de información geográfica)
m. Metro (meter)
MHRB. Manzanares High River Basin (cuenca alta del río Manzanares)
Pa. Pascal
s. Segundo (second)
SPA. Special protection area (zona de especial protección para las aves, ZEPA)
XVIII
SPL. Sound pressure level (nivel de presión sonora)
W. Vatio (watt)
XIX
INTRODUCCIÓN
1 INTRODUCCIÓN
Esta Tesis se basa en una serie de trabajos de investigación cuyos resultados han
dado lugar a la elaboración de cinco artículos científicos hasta el momento de su
depósito, con el propósito de validarlos y difundir las principales conclusiones
derivadas de cada uno de ellos en publicaciones especializadas de carácter internacional
que, además, cumplen con un doble requisito: poseen un proceso de revisión por pares
(peer review) y se encuentran catalogadas en el Journal Citation Reports (JCR), en
particular en la categoría de ciencias (JCR Science Edition).
En la fecha actual, dos de estos artículos ya han sido publicados, dos más se
encuentran en revisión en otras tantas publicaciones y el quinto acaba de ser finalizado y
se va a proceder a su envío.
1
INTRODUCCIÓN
Iglesias Merchan, C., Diaz-Balteiro, L. (2013). Noise pollution mapping approach and
accuracy on landscape scales. Science of The Total Environment 449, 115-125.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.01.063. (Impact Factor: 3.26).
Iglesias Merchan, C., Diaz-Balteiro, L., Soliño, M. (2014). Noise pollution in national
parks: Soundscape and economic valuation. Landscape and Urban Planning 123,
1-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.006. (Impact Factor: 2.31).
Iglesias Merchan, C., Diaz-Balteiro, L., De La Puente. (XXXX). Road traffic noise
impact assessment in a breeding colony of Cinereous vultures (Aegypius
monachus) in Spain. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
(enviado).
Iglesias Merchan, C., Horcajada Sánchez F., Diaz-Balteiro, L., Escribano-Ávila G.,
Lara-Romero, C., Virgós, E., Barja I. (XXXX). Effects of road traffic noise
disturbance on faecal cortisol metabolites in roe deer (Capreolus capreolus): can
low traffic roads cause physiological stress in wildlife? (finalizado)
2
INTRODUCCIÓN
3
INTRODUCCIÓN
del paradigma del desarrollo sostenible en las distintas políticas implica la necesidad de
integrar dinámicas y procesos ecológicos, económicos y sociales. Debe guiar los
procesos de planificación territorial de manera que no se reduzca a la simple
yuxtaposición de políticas sectoriales que zonifican el territorio, lo que exige revisar sus
objetivos, las metodologías de trabajo y las herramientas en las que se apoya (Mata,
2005). El origen de los espacios naturales protegidos, como se entienden hoy en día, se
encuentra en la voluntad social por evitar la desaparición de especies o lugares
ambientalmente singulares (Da Cruz, 1996; Gómez-Limón et al., 2008). Si bien la
evidencia científica ha mostrado que por sí solos no logran asegurar el funcionamiento
de los ecosistemas ni la pérdida de biodiversidad. Por lo que su concepto ha ido
evolucionando hacia el diseño de redes y sistemas de conservación, constituidos por
nodos (espacios naturales protegidos) interconectados (corredores ecológicos) como
elementos clave del funcionamiento ecológico a escala regional (Arias, 2007; Gómez-
Limón et al., 2008; Mora y Sale, 2011). Además, recientemente se ha comenzado a
comprender que el buen estado de salud de los ecosistemas repercute en el bienestar
humano, a través de la capacidad de la naturaleza para resistir a las perturbaciones
(resiliencia) y ofrecer servicios de abastecimiento de materias, regulación y culturales
(Balvanera et al., 2006; Gómez-Limón et al., 2008).
4
INTRODUCCIÓN
5
INTRODUCCIÓN
6
INTRODUCCIÓN
7
INTRODUCCIÓN
8
INTRODUCCIÓN
proteger o la existencia de zonas de cría de la fauna (BOE, 2007). De todo esto hay que
destacar que, desde este punto de vista, se omite la posibilidad de que un espacio natural
requiriera protección especial contra la contaminación acústica para conservar o
recuperar la audibilidad de los sonidos de su medio geofísico o por sus paisajes sonoros
culturales.
Ld, índice de inmisión sonora durante el período diurno; Le, referido al período vespertino;
Ln, referido al período nocturno.
* No podrán superarse, en sus límites, los objetivos de calidad acústica para ruido aplicables al
resto de áreas acústicas que colinden con ellos.
Nota: Los objetivos de calidad aplicables a las áreas acústicas están referenciados a una altura de
4 m sobre el nivel del suelo.
Por último, sin afán de extender este apartado con la interminable recopilación
de múltiples normas relacionadas con la conservación, el ruido, los espacios naturales y
todos los sectores de actividad con potenciales efectos sobre los anteriores, sí es preciso
hacer una breve reseña a la reciente Ley 21/2013 de evaluación ambiental (BOE, 2013).
Mediante esta Ley se unifican en una sola norma las anteriores disposiciones sobre
evaluación de los efectos de determinados planes y programas en el medio ambiente y
9
INTRODUCCIÓN
Además, explicita en su artículo 2 los principios a los que está sujeta y subraya
que no se establecen ex novo, sino que son preexistentes en los ordenamientos
comunitario y nacional y, entre otros, son:
10
INTRODUCCIÓN
geográfica) y los efectos en áreas o paisajes con rango de protección reconocido en los
ámbitos nacional, comunitario o internacional.
1.5 El sonido
11
INTRODUCCIÓN
( ) (1)
Donde:
Fig. 1. Curva de audibilidad, áreas de audición humana y lugares que ocupan en la misma la música y la
palabra. La intersección con la línea horizontal discontinua indica el rango de frecuencias audible a un nivel
de presión sonora de 10 dB. Fuente: elaboración propia a partir de Recuero (2002) y Goldstein (2010).
12
INTRODUCCIÓN
- Longitud de onda. Es la distancia (m) que una onda sonora ocupa en el medio
donde se propaga. Es función de la relación entre la velocidad del sonido en el
medio considerado y la frecuencia del sonido.
Por otro lado, la fuerza o capacidad emisora de una fuente sonora se denomina
potencia sonora, y se mide en vatios (W). La cantidad de energía transmitida por la
fuente, en una dirección dada, por unidad de superficie se denomina intensidad acústica
(W/m2). Muchos aparatos exponen su potencia (Lw) sonora expresada en decibelios en
una etiqueta, este valor de emisiones no debe confundirse con el nivel de presión sonora
que soporta un receptor o usuario, que se determina mediante cálculos o mediciones que
dependen del entorno ambos, del emisor y del receptor. Estas mediciones pueden
realizarse con un instrumento denominado sonómetro. En los llamados sonómetros
integradores se puede seleccionar entre varias curvas de ponderación al efectuar la
medición. De hecho, la curva “A” se considera la más parecida a la percepción
logarítmica del oído humano (dB(A)), que no es igualmente sensible a todas las
frecuencias (Fig. 2).
13
INTRODUCCIÓN
Cuando se efectúan mediciones de los niveles de presión sonora, para que las
medidas se consideren significativas, el nivel de fondo (en ausencia de la fuente sonora)
debe ser al menos 10 dB inferior al nivel de la señal evaluada (Recuero, 2002). Dicho de
otro modo, al operar con niveles de intensidad o presión sonora en decibelios, cuando la
diferencia entre los niveles aportados por dos fuentes diferentes es mayor de 10 dB, la
aportación de la menor de ellas al nivel de presión sonora total resulta despreciable. Por
otro lado, cuando dos fuentes sonoras contribuyen con el mismo nivel de intensidad
sobre un receptor, el nivel total se incrementa en 3 dB sobre el valor aportado por cada
una de ellas por separado. Es decir, al duplicar la potencia de la fuente, o el número de
fuentes de la misma potencia, el receptor experimenta un incremento de 3 dB en los
niveles de inmisión soportados. El mínimo cambio de nivel sonoro perceptible se sitúa
en 1 dB (Carrión, 1998)
14
INTRODUCCIÓN
Fig. 4. Ejemplo de propagación del sonido desde una fuente lineal. Fuente: elaboración propia.
15
INTRODUCCIÓN
incidentales (caminar, ropas, etc.) y los controlados (música, teatro, etc.). Estas
distinciones resultan especialmente prácticas al tratar de explorar las relaciones y la
configuración espacial de los sonidos de cada territorio (Farina, 2014). Aunque quizás
debiera discutirse aún más el modo en que se clasifican los sonidos humanos, según su
origen y el contexto, teniendo en cuenta las bases ya consolidadas de la bioacústica.
16
INTRODUCCIÓN
17
INTRODUCCIÓN
efectos asociados como el crepitar del fuego, los sonidos de los terremotos, las
avalanchas, los volcanes, etc. Pero los paisajes sonoros también pueden entenderse
como el resultado de la historia y la cultura de un lugar (Sacerre y Lawson, 2006) y, con
estos enfoques tan diversos, se reconocen como un recurso natural y cultural merecedor
de protección, conservación, restauración y gestión conforme a la mejor información
científica disponible en cada momento (NPS, 2004; Dumyahn y Pijanowski, 2011a).
Tanto los atributos naturales como culturales de un territorio son parte de los
múltiples enfoques posibles que contempla el Convenio Europeo del Paisaje (Council of
Europe, 2000) aunque, como sucede con frecuencia en los estudios sobre paisajes, se
centra en los aspectos visuales, pese a que la combinación con otras percepciones
sensoriales como la auditiva mejoraría la interpretación y el conocimiento de los
mismos (Matsinos et al., 2008) que incluso, junto a la percepción emocional, resultan
esenciales para el respeto y salvaguarda de su identidad y la de sus pobladores
(CM/Rec, 2008). Los sonidos de los paisajes reflejan los procesos de los ecosistemas en
el espacio y en el tiempo y también aportan información sobre las actividades humanas
que tienen lugar en ellos (Krause et al, 2011; Pijanowski et al., 2011a; Raimbault y
Dubois, 2005). El estudio de los paisajes sonoros ha avanzado mucho desde la primera
definición del término por Schafer (1977) y su posterior reconocimiento como un
recurso natural valioso (NPS, 2006). El estudio ecológico del medio sonoro se refiere
comúnmente por la expresión anglosajona “soundscape ecology”, un neologismo
compuesto a partir de dos palabras que en lengua inglesa que se refieren a los “sonidos”
(sounds) y al “paisaje” (landscape). En la actualidad ya se considera una disciplina,
emergente, que es objeto de estudio desde múltiples enfoques (Brown et al., 2011;
Pijanowski et al., 2011a, 2011b; Slabbekoorn y Bouton, 2008). En este campo de
investigación, se estudian los paisajes sonoros y también se evalúan sus posibles
amenazas, con el objeto de conocer su funcionamiento y asegurar la calidad ambiental y
el mantenimiento de su estructura y de sus funciones (NPS, 2006).
18
INTRODUCCIÓN
que estaría exclusivamente compuesto por sonidos del medio biótico, como resultado
sonoro de la vocalización coordinada o voluntaria que se debe al comportamiento
colectivo de un grupo de animales (no necesariamente de la misma especie), el caso
típico de coros de aves al amanecer o del anochecer. El soundtope tiene una zona
interior o central (“core”) y una franja de amortiguación o tampón (“buffer”) y,
seguidamente, el mismo autor acuña el término “sonotone” para referirse a la zona de
transición, encuentro o tensión acústica entre dos soundtopes, por analogía con el
término ecotono (del griego “oikos” casa y “tonos” tensión).
- Sonotopo (por sonotope): del latín sonĭtus, sonido, ruido, etc. y del
griego τόπος (topos), lugar.
- Fonotopo (por soundtope): del griego φωνή (foné), voz y τόπος (topos), lugar.
- Fonotono (por sonotone): del griego φωνή (foné), voz y τόνος (tonos), tensión.
19
INTRODUCCIÓN
20
INTRODUCCIÓN
naturales (Lynch et al., 2011). En cualquier caso, los parámetros meramente físicos no
sirven por sí solos para evaluar el impacto del ruido hasta que se ponen en relación con
su respuesta fisiológica y psicológica en los potenciales receptores (García y Garrido,
2003).
Absolutamente
130 Es el nivel percibido a unos 10 m de un avión.
insoportable y doloroso
Muy peligroso y Reactor de un avión volando a 50 m. Se considera el umbral
120
doloroso del dolor en humanos.
Nivel habitual en discotecas, conciertos tipo rock, pop etc. y
110 Peligroso y muy alto.
a 100 m de un avión aterrizando.
Fuente: elaboración propia a partir de Forman et al. (2003) y García y Garrido (2003).
21
INTRODUCCIÓN
El ruido del tráfico se identifica hoy en día como la fuente más importante de
perturbaciones ambientales, aunque no ha sido así siempre, porque se consideraba que
niveles relativamente bajos de ruido ambiental no representaban un peligro potencial
para la salud (Ising y Kruppa, 2004). Si bien hace ya más de 40 años, en 1971, la
Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) identificó el ruido como una gran amenaza (a
major threat) para el bienestar humano y esa valoración no ha cambiado en la
actualidad, en todo caso la amenaza se ha intensificado (Goines y Hagler, 2007). Más
allá de los daños traumáticos que puede causar la exposición a elevados niveles de
ruido, súbitamente o no, las evidencias científicas han ido produciendo un cambio de
actitud respecto a los riesgos para la salud inducidos por el ruido a largo plazo. De
hecho, en el pasado un ruido nocturno sólo se consideraba molesto en caso de que
activara al individuo e interrumpiera su descanso durante el período de sueño, sin
embargo se ha demostrado que el ruido de fondo de aviones o vehículos pesados puede
inducir la liberación de hormonas del estrés incluso durante el sueño, aún por debajo de
los anteriores umbrales (Ising y Kruppa, 2004).
22
INTRODUCCIÓN
gestión del ruido ambiental (Barber et al., 2010). Sala et al. (2000) sugieren que las
actividades humanas en sí y los cambios de usos del suelo podrían tener un impacto
sobre la biodiversidad terrestre mayor que el cambio climático.
23
INTRODUCCIÓN
han podido evaluar correctamente (EEA, 2009; Tardieu et al., 2013; Marsden y
Docherty, 2013; Ponti et al., 2013), entre otras causas debido al ritmo de la
globalización y los veloces cambios inducidos sobre el medio ambiente (Parris y
Schneider, 2008; Šálek et al., 2010; Schuckmann et al., 2012). No obstante, las
infraestructuras de transporte representan una de las principales fuentes de distintos
tipos de contaminación, como el ruido que se cataloga como un importante problema
ambiental y de salud pública a escala global (Seong et al., 2011; Vogiatzis, 2012). En
esta línea, destaca el causado por el tráfico rodado aunque, en los últimos años, también
se ha producido un considerable aumento de las molestias asociadas a la navegación
aérea (Babisch et al., 2009). Sin que se aborde en esta Tesis Doctoral la no menos
preocupante situación de la contaminación acústica en el medio marino, cuyo medio
sonoro sufre una completa invasión debida al transporte marítimo, entre otras fuentes
(Dotinga y Elferink, 2000; McCarthy, 2004; Hatch et al., 2008; Slabbekoorn et al.,
2010).
24
INTRODUCCIÓN
25
INTRODUCCIÓN
En todo caso, los ruidos pueden estar producidos por fuentes de distinta
naturaleza, lo que debe tenerse en cuenta a la hora de evaluar las molestias asociadas y
sus medidas de control. Las tres características fundamentales que influyen en mayor o
menor grado son: (i) el nivel de intensidad o presión sonora (ii) el espectro de
frecuencias que representa la distribución de la energía sonora (iii) su comportamiento
en el tiempo durante el período de observación (Recuero, 2002). Además de los factores
ambientales o del terreno, que ya se han mencionado, y que pueden afectar a las
condiciones de propagación del ruido, su naturaleza y el modo de funcionamiento de las
fuentes sonoras determinarán que los ruidos se puedan considerar continuos
(ventiladores, turbinas en funcionamiento, etc.), transitorios (sobrevuelo de un avión),
intermitentes (máquinas programadas, operativa de un aeropuerto, etc.), fluctuantes
(v.g. tráfico rodado.), etc. No obstante, tras muchos años de investigación en relación al
ruido ambiental y sus efectos sobre las personas, no existe unanimidad de criterio a la
hora seleccionar los indicadores más adecuados para su evaluación, lo cual representa
un serio inconveniente en la gestión del medio ambiente sonoro (Segués, 2007).
( ) [∫ ( ) ] (2)
Donde:
26
INTRODUCCIÓN
( ) (∫ ) (3)
Donde:
- Nivel L1: nivel que se sobrepasa durante el 1% del tiempo de medición (valor
próximo al ruido máximo).
- Nivel L10: nivel que se sobrepasa durante el 10% del tiempo.
- Nivel L50: nivel que se sobrepasa durante el 50% del tiempo.
- Nivel L90: nivel que se sobrepasa durante el 90% del tiempo (suele denominarse
ruido de fondo)
- Nivel LN: nivel que se sobrepasa durante el N% del tiempo de medición.
27
INTRODUCCIÓN
Las poblaciones o las zonas donde se elaboran mapas de ruido se determinan por
el tamaño de la aglomeración o el volumen de tráfico que soporta la infraestructura en
cuestión; aglomeraciones de más de 250.000 habitantes, carreteras a partir de 6.000.000
vehículos al año, grandes ejes ferroviarios con más de 60.000 trenes al año y los grandes
aeropuertos. Sin embargo, tanto las normas europeas como su trasposición al
ordenamiento jurídico español (BOE, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010, 2012) no contemplan la
elaboración sistemática de mapas de ruido en espacios naturales como herramienta de
evaluación y planificación acústica de los mismos, ni establecen valores límites de
referencia u objetivos de calidad acústica para ruido aplicables en ellos. Los mapas de
ruido suelen elaborarse a partir de los niveles de presión sonora calculados sobre una
rejilla regular, de acuerdo con los métodos incluidos en los anexos de la Directiva, a
partir de los cuales se evalúa el número de personas expuestas al ruido en función del
nivel y del indicador considerado.
28
INTRODUCCIÓN
Fig. 5. Mapa de ruido de las carreteras del valle del Alto Lozoya
(área de influencia socioeconómica del Parque Natural de Peñalara). Fuente: elaboración propia.
29
INTRODUCCIÓN
Los indicadores de ruidos comunes seleccionados por la Directiva son Lden (nivel
sonoro equivalente del período día-tarde-noche, es decir 24 h), para evaluar molestias, y
Lnight para evaluar las alteraciones de sueño.
⁄ ( )⁄ ( )⁄
( ) (4)
Donde:
30
INTRODUCCIÓN
( ) ( ) (5)
Donde:
- T0 es 1 s.
- T es el tiempo de medida (s).
- L es nivel de presión sonora equivalente medido en el tiempo T.
31
INTRODUCCIÓN
actividades humanas ruidosas sobre los recursos naturales (Iglesias Merchany Diaz-
Balteiro, 2013). Podría caracterizarse como cualquier variable ambiental a escala de
paisaje, desde una perspectiva regional, que no sólo se restringe a determinaciones
acústicas sino también a otros parámetros de evaluación (Barber et al., 2011; Szeremeta
y Zannin, 2009).
(4) la elaboración de los informes estadísticos junto con la edición de los mapas.
32
INTRODUCCIÓN
33
INTRODUCCIÓN
que una mayor densidad de curvas de nivel, propia de los terrenos más accidentados, a
igualdad de escala cartográfica también se traduce en un elevado número de objetos
(items) en el modelo digital. De la misma forma que el número de estos objetos aumenta
con el tamaño del área de estudio. Tanto el nivel de detalle cartográfico como la
resolución espacial de cálculo son dos factores muy restrictivos en términos de tiempo
de cálculo (Licitra, 2012) que causan un aumento exponencial de los costes monetarios
asociados a la etapa número (3) de las tareas descritas anteriormente. Otro detalle
económico que tampoco conviene olvidar es que el número de combinaciones máximo
entre objetos del modelo suele resultar un factor limitado por volumen de
combinaciones posibles en las tarifas comerciales que se ofrecen al adquirir un software
de predicción de niveles de ruido.
Por otro lado, el estudio de las perturbaciones ambientales requiere ampliar las
escalas tradicionalmente consideradas para otorgar un mayor protagonismo a las
interacciones espaciales, en sintonía con las necesidades de gestión en ámbitos
territoriales amplios como la Red Natura 2000, los ámbitos correspondientes a planes de
ordenación de los recursos naturales, etc. (Saura, 2010). La adopción de una escala que
permita un enfoque sistémico, ya sea a nivel de regiones, paisajes o ecosistemas, se
considera la única manera de conservar los procesos y los hábitats, sobre todo aquéllos
más crípticos, aunque al mismo tiempo el trabajo a otros niveles como el de especie siga
siendo esencial (Franklin, 1993). En el ámbito de la modelización de ruido, alcanzar
estos logros pasa por discutir la delimitación de las zonas de estudio, las resoluciones
espaciales de cálculo, etc.
34
INTRODUCCIÓN
(Leung, 2008; Di Giulio et al., 2009; Benfield et al., 2010). Un conflicto paradójico
toda vez que las anteriores finalidades se encuentran entre las competencias y múltiples
objetivos de las administraciones responsables de su gestión (Fristrup, 2007; Wisdom,
2007; McGarigal et al., 2001). Su gestión debe incluir todas las actuaciones que tienen
por objeto, por un lado preservar y mejorar la calidad acústica del territorio y, por otro
lado, prevenir o reducir la contaminación por ruido. Por tanto, las posibles acciones
pueden ser preventivas o correctoras. Además, la gestión ambiental del ruido y de los
paisajes sonoros debe prever la incorporación de criterios acústicos compatibles con la
gestión del espacio y con la planificación de otros usos distintos con influencia a nivel
del territorio (Puig, 2011).
La necesidad de llevar a cabo una gestión activa de los paisajes sonoros es una
idea originada en el servicio de parques nacionales de los EE.UU. (NPS), que
confeccionó un programa de investigación sobre sonidos naturales en el año 2002. Con
el tiempo, dicho programa ha dado lugar a la constitución de un departamento
específico en el año 2011, dentro de la organización de su red de parques nacionales.
Como resultado de la unión de este programa de investigación con otro previo dedicado
a la protección de los cielos nocturnos que, casualmente, constituye otro recurso natural
no siempre reconocido como tal y, por ejemplo, de singular relevancia en algunos
parques nacionales y espacios naturales de España. No en vano, el parque nacional del
Teide superó las 200.000 visitas nocturnas durante el año 2013 y recientemente ha
obtenido una certificación como destino turístico “Starlight” (ABC, 2014), en referencia
a una serie de requisitos y procedimientos establecidos para la protección de los cielos
nocturnos y la calidad de las experiencias turísticas relacionadas con la contemplación
de los mismos. Lo cual incide en la circunstancia de que el reconocimiento del valor, y
promoción, de determinados recursos puede provocar un aumento significativo del
número de visitantes o el desarrollo de nuevas actividades turísticas. De este modo se
expanden aún más distintas forma de presión antropogénica en estos lugares, por
ejemplo en horarios o itinerarios no tan frecuentados con anterioridad. En el caso del
Parque Nacional del Guadarrama, en su vertiente de Madrid, la cifra de visitantes
durante los tres primeros meses tras su declaración como parque nacional (que tuvo
lugar el pasado mes de junio de 2013) se ha incrementado un 7% con respecto al mismo
periodo del año anterior (MDO, 2013).
35
INTRODUCCIÓN
36
INTRODUCCIÓN
En la Fig. 6 se ilustran los niveles del ruido de fondo por debajo de los cuales
suelen situarse las zonas tranquilas en espacios naturales (Forman et al., 2003) y los
niveles del indicador Lden correspondiente a cada porcentaje de población que suele
referir una alta molestia por el ruido procedente de tres medios de transporte diferentes
(Münzel et al., 2014). A la vista de ellos, parece razonable pensar que para cuantificar
un impacto, a priori similar, no tienen por qué emplearse necesariamente las mismas
herramientas, índices o métodos para escenarios y fuentes tan diferentes. Aunque
pudiera darse el caso que por medio de adaptaciones, se permitieran reflejar los cambios
introducidos sobre una situación previa del medio, sus posibles efectos y así realizar una
evaluación de los mismos. El servicio de parques nacionales de los EE.UU. monitoriza
los paisajes sonoros con el fin de determinar las condiciones actuales y, a partir de ello,
predecir los potenciales efectos de su gestión y otros potenciales impactos. Según los
estándares de evaluación del ruido ambiental, los niveles de ruido en los parques suelen
ser relativamente bajos para los criterios habitualmente aplicados a las personas, pero
muy altos considerando criterios de audibilidad del ruido en relación a la fauna silvestre
(Lynch et al., 2011).
37
INTRODUCCIÓN
38
INTRODUCCIÓN
tanto la que se refiere a los propios recursos de los parques como desde la perspectiva
de la experiencia de los visitantes:
El ruido, al igual que otros contaminantes, puede afectar las personas tanto a
nivel fisiológico como psicológico, aunque su impacto se manifieste con variaciones
individuales relativas en función de la subjetividad particular de los receptores y
factores como la edad, el sexo, el ritmo de vida, culturales, etc. (Seoánez y Angulo,
1997; García y Garrido, 2003). El ruido puede causar fatiga auditiva (alteración
transitoria de la capacidad auditiva), hipoacusia permanente, trauma acústico sonoro,
acúfenos (sensación de zumbido en los oídos), etc. Asimismo, el ruido puede generar
numerosas perturbaciones funcionales extra-auditivas en el sistema circulatorio, en el
39
INTRODUCCIÓN
40
INTRODUCCIÓN
41
INTRODUCCIÓN
Entre las razones expresadas por los visitantes de espacios naturales para
acercarse a la naturaleza también se hallan, con frecuencia, las que se refieren a la huida
de los ambientes urbanos, de las multitudes de las grandes urbes y sus diversas formas
de contaminación, aparte de las que les dirigen con el deseo de disfrutar experiencias
cercanas a la naturaleza, incluida la posibilidad de disfrutar sensaciones tales como la
tranquilidad, la paz, el silencio, etc. (Kariel, 1990). Los anglosajones denominan
ambientes restauradores (restorative environments) a estos espacios naturales que
ofrecen oportunidades para mejorar la salud de las personas y el bienestar psicológico a
través del contacto con la naturaleza, los paisajes y sus sonidos (Gidlöf-Gunnarsson y
Öhrström, 2007; Velarde et al., 2007; Ward Thompson, 2011). Pero, para lograr estos
objetivos sobre el bienestar mental, físico e incluso social, los espacios naturales y los
paisajes en general deben garantizar la conservación de una serie de atributos con un
determinado nivel de calidad, un aspecto que actualmente también se estudia y se
pretende cuidar en las zonas verdes de ámbitos urbanos (Abraham et al., 2010; Hartig et
42
INTRODUCCIÓN
al., 2010; Van den Berg et al., 2010). La evaluación del impacto de distintos tipos de
ruido sobre el funcionamiento de estos servicios ambientales, a través de la percepción
de los visitantes de zonas verdes o espacios naturales, es un tema de investigación en el
que se empezó a trabajar hace ya más de tres décadas pero aún hoy se detecta la
necesidad de profundizar en la comprensión de las evidencias detectadas (Kariel, 1990;
Fidell et al., 1996; Mace et al., 1999, 2004, 2013; Ward Thompson, 2011).
Aparte de los daños auditivos que puede causar la exposición a elevados niveles
de ruido, al igual que en humanos, no deben pasarse por alto las alteraciones no
auditivas (Pascuan et al., 2014). El estudio de los efectos del ruido antropogénico sobre
la fauna terrestre es un área relativamente nueva de estudio y se sabe poco sobre la
relación entre niveles de ruido y las molestias reales sobre la fauna silvestre (Brown et
al, 2012.; Coffin, 2007; Leblond et al., 2013), sobre todo debido a la complejidad de
vincular parámetros relevantes para la fauna y de la exposición al ruido a escala de
paisaje (Fahrig, 2003, 2013; Coffin, 2007). Se ha comprobado que la exposición al
ruido puede causar estrés fisiológico en numerosas especies animales (Crino et al.,
43
INTRODUCCIÓN
2013; Farina, 2014) y que el incremento de los niveles de estrés durante largos períodos
de tiempo puede reducir su capacidad para hacer frente a nuevas amenazas o desafíos
(v.g. predadores, infecciones, etc.) que, a su vez, podrían acarrear consecuencias
negativas a nivel de población (Wingfield y Sapolsky, 2003; Romero 2004; Husak y
Moore, 2008). El estrés es una respuesta adaptativa del organismo, un mecanismo de
supervivencia ante un estímulo (estresor), una situación potencialmente conflictiva,
debido a la existencia de cualquier clase de peligro o amenaza real o percibida. Esta
respuesta fisiológica está regulada por el eje hipotalámico-hipofisario-suprarrenal en
organismos vertebrados.
Hasta hace poco tiempo, el principal método para evaluar el nivel de estrés de un
individuo consistía medir la concentración en sangre de glucocorticoides (Young et al.,
2004). Pero estas técnicas, obviamente, requieren la extracción de muestras de plasma y
por lo tanto la captura de los animales que, a su vez, resulta una técnica estresante por sí
misma sobre todo en el caso de la fauna silvestre (Young et al., 2004). Además, las
concentraciones de glucocorticoides pueden sufrir notables oscilaciones a lo largo del
44
INTRODUCCIÓN
Varios autores afirman que las posibles molestias generadas por el tráfico de las
carreteras influyen en la riqueza y la densidad de especies animales presentes en su
entorno (Parris y Schneider, 2008). Un fenómeno muy estudiado en el grupo de las aves
y generalmente relacionado de manera directa con el volumen de tráfico de estas
infraestructuras (Forman et al., 2003; Kociolek et al., 2011; Peris y Pescador 2004). En
este sentido, otro criterio de evaluación del impacto sobre la fauna en el entorno de las
carreteras podría venir dado por el análisis de sus efectos sobre el éxito reproductivo,
que puede influir en la persistencia de determinadas especies, más aún en el caso de las
consideradas amenazadas o en peligro debido a su estado de conservación (Pater et al.,
2009). En la mayoría de los casos, la literatura sugiere que el ruido asociado al tráfico
de vehículos es el causante de este impacto negativo (Halfwerk y Slabbekorn, 2009;
Rheindt, 2003). Sin embargo, resulta muy complicado delimitar una zona de influencia
45
INTRODUCCIÓN
de las carreteras que pueda ser uniformemente considerada en todas las infraestructuras
para indicar hasta donde se produce este impacto (Forman y Deblinger 2000; Hawbaker
et al., 2006). Además, en ocasiones las interpretaciones de los resultados de algunos
trabajos son contradictorias, pese a que se trata de un tema ampliamente discutido en la
literatura desde hace aproximadamente dos décadas (Pieretti y Farina, 2013;
Slabbekoorn y Ripmeester, 2007).
46
INTRODUCCIÓN
para lo que se vuelve a advertir como aspecto crítico la escala de trabajo (Chan et al.,
2006). También se puede analizar la distribución espacial de los costes, para evitar que
un reparto espacialmente inadecuado entre posibles stakeholders (término anglosajón
que abarca un espectro de sujetos interesados más amplio que el concepto habitual de
actores) comprometa el éxito a largo plazo de las actuaciones de conservación (Adams
et al., 2010). En todo caso, las posibilidades de mejora de resultados en materia de
conservación pasan por medir e integrar los costes y otras consideraciones económicas
en su planificación, y no centrarse exclusivamente en los objetivos ambientales (Moore
et al., 2004; Polasky et al., 2005).
Varios autores han calculado el impacto económico causado por diferentes tipos
de ruido ambiental en ecosistemas urbanos (Barreiro et al., 2005; Bjørner, 2004;
Dekkers y Van der Straaten, 2009; Fosgerau y Bjørner, 2006; Xie et al., 2011; He et al.,
2014). En Europa hay aproximadamente 100 millones de habitantes afectados por
niveles molestos de ruido procedente de carreteras, cuyas medidas correctoras durante
un horizonte temporal de 20 años se estima que pueden requerir una inversión que
oscila entre 16 y 4.200 euros por persona y año, en función del tipo de medida
necesaria, y que en conjunto pueden suponer unos 6.000 millones de euros (CEDR,
2013). Según algunas estimaciones de hace una década, los costes sociales del ruido
pueden suponer hasta el 0,1 % del producto interior bruto (PIB) y las inversiones para
reducir el número de personas afectadas por niveles significativos de ruido pueden
suponer un 90% del coste de los daños producidos (García y Garrido, 2003). Según
estimaciones más recientes, los costes sociales del ruido producido por el tráfico rodado
y ferroviario en el ámbito de la UE ascienden a 40 000 millones de euros al año, esto
supone alrededor del 0,4 % del PIB total de la UE y se prevé que el aumento de los
costes externos del transporte en relación con el ruido supondrá unos 20.000 millones
para el período de los próximos 40 años (COM, 2011).
47
INTRODUCCIÓN
48
INTRODUCCIÓN
Los instrumentos clásicos que establecen las directrices básicas del manejo de
los espacios naturales son los planes de ordenación de los recursos naturales (PORN) y
los planes rectores de uso y gestión (PRUG), regulados por la Ley 42/2007, del
patrimonio natural y de la biodiversidad (BOE, 2007). La elaboración del PORN de un
espacio natural actualmente es una exigencia legal antes de su declaración como espacio
protegido. Por su parte, los PRUG son la herramienta técnica que permite articular sus
directrices generales gestión y conservación, entre otras cosas fija la zonificación y las
normas generales del uso público de los parques, deben ser objeto de revisión periódica
y prevalecen sobre el planeamiento urbanístico, y se tienen que revisar de oficio por los
órganos competentes cuando sus determinaciones sean incompatibles con las de la
normativa urbanística.
49
INTRODUCCIÓN
50
INTRODUCCIÓN
51
INTRODUCCIÓN
52
JUSTIFICACIÓN Y OBJETIVOS
2 JUSTIFICACIÓN Y OBJETIVOS
53
JUSTIFICACIÓN Y OBJETIVOS
Objetivo 2. Evaluación de los efectos del ruido ambiental sobre la percepción de los
visitantes de espacios naturales protegidos
Objetivo 3. Evaluación de los posibles efectos ecológicos del ruido de las carreteras
sobre las poblaciones de fauna
Análisis del posible impacto sobre la fauna que produce el ruido emitido desde
las carreteras que discurren por el interior de un espacio natural protegido. Así como la
propuesta de una metodología o recomendaciones para la evaluación del impacto
ecológico del ruido viario que resulte compatible con los procedimientos comunes de
evaluación y gestión del ruido de las carreteras.
- Objetivo 3.1. Evaluación del potencial impacto del ruido emitido por el
tráfico de las carreteras sobre una población de mamíferos terrestres.
- Objetivo 3.2. Evaluación del potencial impacto del ruido emitido por el
tráfico de las carreteras sobre una población nidificante de aves rapaces.
- Objetivo 3.3. Analizar el potencial uso de los mapas estratégicos de ruido de
carreteras como herramienta de apoyo en la evaluación del impacto del ruido
viario sobre los hábitats faunísticos.
54
JUSTIFICACIÓN Y OBJETIVOS
55
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
3 MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
A 2x2 km square-shaped pilot plot (400 hectares) inside the Manzanares High
River Basin (MHRB) Regional Park in the Region of Madrid (Central Spain) was
situated (Fig. 9). Despite its small size, this area has diverse orography, landscape and
wildlife habitats and it is crossed by two important lineal elements: the Manzanares
River (in a north-south direction) and the M-618 road (in an east-west direction).
The MHRB Regional Park covers an area of 52,800 hectares and is the oldest
protected area of the Region of Madrid. It became protected in 1985 and has been a
UNESCO Biosphere Reserve since 1992. This stretch of the Manzanares River is an
ecological corridor between two main core areas of the Park (integral natural reserve)
and connects the Central System high mountains (almost 2,400 m in altitude) with the
holm oak (Quercus ilex) forest ecosystem closest to northern Madrid’s metropolitan
peri-urban area (almost 600 m in altitude).
The M-618 is a two lane road that crosses the study area in an east-west
direction from the 5 km post to the 9 km post. It is an approximately 4 km long stretch
that divides the study area in two. In the first half of the stretch of road (the eastern half
of the study area), the terrain surrounding the road is dominated by the course of the
Manzanares River, which runs from the mountains in the north to the south. In this half
of the study area, the terrain is steeper (80% of the area has slopes over 15%). The road
trace is adapted to the topography, and it is winding, curved, and alternates between
short straights and ramped curves where vehicles need to accelerate or slow down
alternately. This driving mode is called pulsating flow.
56
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
Fig. 9. Pilot plot location in the Manzanares High River Basin Regional Park, Madrid (Spain).
Source: Prepared by the author.
57
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
The western half of the study area is relatively flat or with a constant slope (90%
of the area has slopes under 15%). In this half of the study area, the road trace is flat and
straight, and the drivers’ speed is constant; This driving mode is usually called constant
flow. The absence of houses in the surroundings is another characteristic of both the
western and eastern halves of the study area.
The M-618 road is the only anthropic noise source in the study case. This road
belongs to the Regional Administration and has the category of ‘vía parque’ (park road),
its trace and traffic characteristics are determined by the MHRB Regional Park crossing.
The legal speed limit is 60 km/h through the park and annual average daily traffic
(AADT) is fewer than 3,000 vehicles.
Most of studies that constitute the main body of this thesis were conducted in
Peñalara Natural Park (PNP), which is located in the Lozoya valley in the mountains of
Central Spain. PNP covers 700 hectares but its buffering protected area (Socioeconomic
Influence Area, SIA) under park authorities’ management increases it to almost 15,000
ha. This park became protected in 1990 by a regional law and is part of the Sierra of
Guadarrama National Park (declared by the Spanish Parliament in June 2013).
One of the most frequented areas in PNP comprises a 2.6 km hiking trail called
The Water Pathway (TWP). This trail is a hikers’ “there and back” route, supposed to
be completed in only 2 or 2.5 hours (Fig. 10), that is used by approximately 70,000
people per year (20,000 on weekdays and 50,000 on the weekends) according to data
provided by the park managers’. TWP ranges from an easy hike through a Scots pine
forest that starts at the park visitors’ centre (1,850 metres in altitude) and rises up the
forest's upper limits to challenging climbs with panoramic views of the valley. The
second half of the pathway goes through shrub and pasture highlands to the glacier
lagoon of Peñalara (2,020 m) and the mountain peak of the same name, the highest
mountain (2,428 m) in the region of Madrid. The more demanded recreational activity is
to hike along TWP with the goal of resting by the lagoon. Fewer visitors are able to
continue climbing to the peak.
58
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
Fig. 10. Study area location in PNP and monitoring stations (MS) emplacement with
road traffic sound pressure levels scale for an average day period. Source: Prepared by the author.
59
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
The limits of the considered study area at higher Lozoya valley are coincident
with the Socioeconomic Influence Area (SIA) of PNP and the municipality of Rascafría.
It covers almost 15,000 ha of the valley under PNP authorities’ management (Fig. 11).
This area is also part of the Sierra of Guadarrama National Park at present.
This area also includes the Higher Lozoya river bird’s special protection area
(SPA, 7.800 ha) that is part of the ecological network of European protected areas called
Natura 2000. One of the most important European colonies of Cinereous vulture is
located in the pine forests of the higher Lozoya valley, with 100 breeding pairs in 2013.
The colony represents within about 5% of European breeding population and
approximately 85% of the regional population of Cinereous vulture (BirdLife
International, 2014; De la Puente et al., 2007). Besides there are approximately 2,000
inhabitants in the study area and two regional two-lane roads (road M-604 and road M-
611) that give access to more than 150,000 recreationists every year.
The SIA is crossed by two regional roads (M-604 and M-611) which are two-
lane, narrow, paved and mountain roads with an AADT of approximately 850 vehicles
(M-604) and 400 vehicles (M-611). Therefore the study area matches with a low-traffic
area definition (Selva et al., 2011).
These mountains had been kept out of major transport infrastructures influence
until the Adolfo Suárez Madrid-Barajas (hereinafter referred to as Barajas) international
airport expansion was finished in 2006, and initiated aircraft flyover in Higher Lozoya
SPA. The airport is located at 35 km to the southwest from the study area and
overflights occur randomly depending on the airport’s weather conditions, which
determines changes in routes. The airport’s environmental impact statement
summarized the widespread concern about noise pollution of houses in the airport’s
vicinity, and airport strategic noise maps (SNM) were fully elaborated in 2008 (AENA,
2008) according with the END. However, the field of action for airport SNM and action
plans with regard to environmental noise is only limited to the so-called “airport
polluted area”, which is 28 km away from the study area (Fig. 11), because it is
delimited by a polygon that may include complete isophones Lden >55 dB(A) and
Lnight > 50 dB(A), as defined in ISO 9613-2 (1996).
60
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
Fig. 11. Higher Lozoya valley location, airport noise-polluted area limits and aircraft tracks.
Source: Prepared by the author.
61
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
The noise prediction software package Predictor™ Type 7810 version 8.1 (Brüel
& Kjaer, 2010) was used for the noise model computation. This software package
allows the modelling of the effect of changing the calculation settings or the physical
parameters of the environment. It allows the characterization of past, present or future
scenarios for different noise sources. Most of the XPS 31-133 standard conditions have
been considered (Table 4) and the road surface has been classified as smooth asphalt.
62
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
The AADT for noise modelling on the surroundings of the M-618 was obtained from
the Regional Transport and Infrastructures Department. Separate data for light and
heavy vehicles (less than 3.5 ton and 3.5 ton and over) from a traffic count station
located at the 4.9 km post were available. The official AADT for 2008 used for the case
model gave a total of 2,838 vehicles (4.2 % of them being heavy vehicles).
The model required the establishment of three different road sections (Fig. 9)
according to the driving conditions and traffic flow. The traffic flow is considered to be
pulsating (vehicles in a transitory state i.e. either accelerating or decelerating) over
stretch 1, with a real average speed of 35 km/h for both heavy and light vehicles. Heavy
and light vehicles are considered to move at a nearly constant speed (constant flow) in
section 2 (50 km/h) and section 3 (60 km/h).
Predictor™ Type 7810 version 8.1 includes the file PropagationNMPB.DLL for
Propagation
‘NMPB-Routes-2008’ distributed by ‘CETE de l'est - LRPC de Strasbourg’
conditions
(updated on July 19th 2011)
Ground factor Value =1 (represents porous ground: grass land, farming land)
Lden and Lnight are two main noise indicators readily available for communities all
over Europe and are therefore recommended, if feasible, for defining the noise levels
(Gjestland, 2008). This study is based on the Lden indicator results in decibels (dB) as a
noise indicator required by END. In accordance with END Annex I, three calculation
periods, commonly known as day, evening and night, have been established in which
Lday, Levening and Lnight are the A-weighted long-term average sound levels as defined in
63
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
ISO 1996-2: 1987, determined over all the daytime periods of a year, over all the
evening periods of a year and over all the night periods of a year, respectively.
According to Spanish legislation and END, the day period lasts from 07.00 to 19.00, the
evening period from 19.00 to 23.00 and the night period from 23.00 to 07.00.
The height of the points of the Lden assessment grid depends on the application.
In accordance with END and Spanish legislation, a 4.0 m grid height above the ground
for noise immission modelling has been considered. Fifteen different noise maps of the
Lden indicator in the study area have been calculated, as a result of considering 15
different resolutions or calculation grid densities with constant increments of 10 m
distance (since X and Y = 10 m, 20, 30, 40 ... up to 150) as shown in Fig. 12. Other
possible calculation parameters have been kept constant for the 15 scenarios.
Fig. 12. 15 different grid regions have been used with constant increments of 10 m in the X and Y
receiver points from 10x10 m resolution up 150x150 m resolution. Source: Prepared by the author.
The study area soundscape is only affected by road traffic noise whose
assessment has been represented in a noise map by the value of the Lden indicator at each
point in the territory. The export of the noise map results into a GIS allows for the
geostatistical analysis of thousands of pieces of SPL data. Spatial pattern analysis is
frequently undertaken for land-use management and landscape dynamics studies and
particularly in relation to other environmental variables, such as habitat modelling,
biodiversity and so on, over a given study area where different temporary scenarios are
64
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
usually compared (Li et al., 2000; Olsen et al., 2006; Paudel and Yuan, 2012). Spatial
models can be used not only for understanding landscape dynamics, but also for
simulating other landscape patterns, mostly based on scenarios changing over time. In
this case, the independent variable ‘time’ has been replaced by the variable ‘calculation-
grid size’, resulting in 15 different and comparable noise map scenarios for the same
study area.
65
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
amount, length,
and Patch perimeter or edge length (E) referred to the
distribution of Edge density, landscape (A) or class area (CA)
Edge Metrics
edges between ED (m/ha) 𝑖=1 𝑖
𝐷=
specific patch 𝐴 𝑜𝑟 𝐶𝐴
types
66
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
Some of the selected metrics quantify the area in absolute terms (hectares), but it
could be desirable to quantify the area in relative terms as a percentage (McGarigal and
Marks, 1995). Therefore, it is proposed to evaluate noise CA changes in relative terms
(regarding their original size on a reference map, 10-Lden grid map, and the study area
size) and thus calculate an indicator called the area-weighted class area (AWCA). Also,
if the patch ED is referred to in relative terms with respect to the study area and the
original value on the reference map, an index called the area-weighted edge density
(AWED) can be used.
Landscape indices provide both statistical and ecological information useful for
landscape planning, but are known to have limitations (Rempel et al., 2012). For
example, some indices only offer landscape interpretation by themselves and do not
convey any information about the distribution of patch areas (McGarigal and Marks,
1995), leading to misinterpretation of identical landscapes where patch types and
number of patches can be very different.
In order to assess the accuracy of noise maps with respect to spatial patterns
within the study area, the Kappa index (pixel-by-pixel change detection among
scenarios) was computed using GRASS GIS 6.4.2. This is a GIS used for geospatial
data management and analysis, image processing and spatial modelling. The Kappa
index gives a measure of agreement between categorical maps and it is used by many
biostatisticians, researchers and specialists for land-use and remote sensing (Pontius,
2000; Knight and Lunetta, 2003; Hernández-Stefanoni and Ponce-Hernández, 2004; De
Mast, 2007; Wang and Yu, 2010). Kappa also quantifies the proportion of changes from
one class to another between different noise maps (Congalton and Green, 1999; Ruiz-
Luna and Berlanga-Robles, 2003).
The Kappa index is calculated by crossing classified map layers (Lden maps from
grid 20 up to 150) with a reference map layer (grid 10). The Kappa analysis takes the
assessed value and position of the Lden indicator into account for every pixel of the study
area and it also considers the relative area occupied by every noise level category on the
map. The Kappa analysis complements the patch analysis. The calculation is based on
independent comparisons between pairs of cells; small displacements between the cell
67
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
values on the reference map and the compared map are considered to be errors.
Comparison maps must be previously transformed to raster format, so a raster dataset
must be created with the same cell size. In this case, the raster dataset cell size is
determined by the highest resolution noise map (cell size 10x10). The Lden maps were
used as input features for raster conversion and the pixel central value was the criterion
adopted. The Kappa index can range from -1.00 to 1.00, extreme values indicate full
negative or positive correlation and a zero value means no correlation between the
items. Generally, a Kappa value higher than 0.70 or 0.80 is considered to be a
satisfactory level of agreement (De Mast, 2007; Maithani, 2009).
The noise map results and patch shapes are very much influenced by the
topography and road trace. Therefore, it is advisable to perform three calculations of the
Kappa index for every scenario: i) the overall Kappa value relating to the whole study
area, ii) a partial Kappa value in the western half of the study area (slightly hilly
topography and shallow slopes) and iii) a partial Kappa value in the eastern half of the
study area (irregular topography and more abrupt slopes).
The noise monitoring analysis in the valley was conducted on different dates
from July 2011 to April 2013. Different monitoring stations were located when
considering natural and human-made noises, because having monitoring locations in the
absence of anthropogenic noise would allow characterisation of the natural ambient at
non-disturbed emplacements. In this way it was possible to assess the actual level of
noise intrusion caused by overflights in quiet areas within the park.
A professional PCE-322 “A” frequency weighting sound level meter (SLM) type
II and an Olympus VN-85000PC digital voice recorder connected to the SLM were
employed. The equipment was situated at approximately 1.5 m above the ground and it
was calibrated before and after every recording period. Sampling-measures were only
accepted within calibration reading deviations of under ±0.5 dB and weather conditions
(temperature, humidity and wind speed) were also monitored to meet the devices’
technical specifications or methodological requirements. The field sampling method is
68
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
The noise model was computed in NMSim 3.0, the modeling software developed
by Wyle Laboratories for the U.S. National Park Service (Ikelheimer and Plotkin,
2005). Noise modeling allows one to calculate SPL caused by noise sources over a set
of receiver-points defined by a calculation grid, and it can cover large regions, unlike
SPL measurements taken at a monitoring single location. Grid density can be
determined by addressing factors such as source type, topography or working scale
(Iglesias Merchan and Diaz-Balteiro, 2013) and it is used for plotting map isophones. It
was applied at a distance of 100x100 m between receiver points in the study area as an
acceptable resolution in case of aircraft noise mapping (WG-AEN, 2006). The digital
elevation model (DEM) built with ArcGIS 9.3 (ESRI, 2009) was based on official
1:5,000 scale topography maps from the Regional Cartography Service of Madrid. The
aircraft model was built considering the flights’ public data included in the Barajas
Airport SNM (AENA, 2008), and flight model parameters (e.g. aircraft tracks, altitude
or speed) were estimated from the noise monitoring web system in airports developed
by the Spanish Air Navigation Authority.
In total 3 air routes that cross over the study area (1 take-off route, TKO-01; and
2 landing routes, LND-1 and LND-2) connecting the airport were modeled (Fig. 11).
Take-off and landing overflight track altitudes oscillate when crossing the study area. In
the case of take-off movements an average altitude of 4,000 m when entering the valley
was established, and 4,500 m when leaving the study area. In the case of landing routes,
a constant altitude of 3,500 m throughout the whole the study area was determined.
69
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
The survey consisted of 22 questions that were structured in three main parts, as
follows: i) Visitors’ motivation and the time spent in visiting the park ii) Visitors’ noise
pollution perception with respect to their park experience. In this part, visitors were
asked in two ways: to report audibility from a noise sources inventory and to rate them
in the case of annoyance iii) A socio-economic and socio-demographic characterisation.
70
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
Fragstats version 4.2 (McGarigal et al., 2012) was used for calculating MESH.
Furthermore five class-level and six landscape-level of the most common spatial pattern
metrics, as defined by McGarigal (2013) and McGarigal and Marks (1995), were used
for interpreting the landscape-structure of the noise maps. Calculations were separately
referred to the whole higher Lozoya valley (the same area than SIA) and the SPA
(which is a portion of the SIA).
The SIA roads noise model computation was performed with Predictor™ Type
7810 software version 9.01 (Brüel & Kjaer, 2012) by using the French national
71
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
computation method referred to in the French standard ‘XPS 31–133’ (AFNOR, 2001).
It has been recently revised as ‘NMPB-Routes-2008’ (Dutilleux et al., 2010; Dutilleux,
2012b) and it is the method recommended by the European Union (EU) environmental
noise Directive 2002/49/EC (END). In addition, it is routinely and widely used to assess
road traffic noise (King and Rice, 2009). The digital elevation model was based on
official 1:5000 scale topography digital maps (5 m contour lines) from the Regional
Cartography Service. The Regional Transport and Infrastructures Department provided
official AADT data in year 2010. Separate hourly traffic flow data for light and heavy
vehicles (approximately 6 %) were considered in both roads modeling. Besides, the
average speed was estimated at 60 km/h for light vehicles and 50 km/h for heavy ones
along road M-604. In case of the narrower, highly curved and sloped road M-611, the
general speed was reduced to 55 km/h for light vehicles and 45 km/h for heavy vehicles.
Finally the pavement surface was classified as smooth asphalt in both roads.
Three hourly calculation periods commonly known as day (from 07.00 to 19.00
h), evening (from 19.00 to 23.00 h) and night (from 23.00 to 07.00 h) were established
in models in accordance with Spanish legislation and END Annex I. In which Lday,
Levening and Lnight are the A-weighted long-term average sound level indicators (dB) as
defined in ISO 1996-2 (1996). Moreover, the 24-hour equivalent continuous sound
pressure level, Leq (dB), was calculated. The noise model was performed at 4.0 m height
above the ground according with END recommendations.
72
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
6,100 ha of the study area. Breeding available data in the location of nests were grouped
according with 4 categories for analysis related to different breeding phases (De la
Puente, 2012): i) Non-breeding pairs (NB), ii) failed-incubation (FI), iii) failed-nestling
(FN) and iv) Fully-fledged (FF).
Noise calculations from the SIA roads noise model were repeated at height of
20.0 m considering the average tree-nesting height for data analysis within the study
area (De la Puente, in press). Noise exposure levels and breeding parameters data were
statistically analysed in five steps (Fig. 13) to compare potential noise influence at
different breeding phases. The considered variables were NB, FI, FN, FF and Leq (dB).
Whether data were not normally distributed (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test), the
nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis H and the Mann–Whitney U tests were used depending
whether comparing two or more than two independent groups according with the
analysis framework scheme illustrated in Fig. 13. The Kruskal-Wallis H test required
that noise exposure levels were categorized. Thus noise levels in nests were ranged by
classes of 5 dB (Fig. 7), as commonly defined in noise mapping (Iglesias Merchan and
Diaz-Balteiro, 2013). On the other side, the Mann–Whitney U test allowed assessing
differences in median noise values with regard to the breeding variables if analyzed by
pairs. In the final step comparison between failed or succeed nestling required a T test
because a normal distribution was displayed by the K-S- in these two groups. A
significance level of 0.05 was considered as significantly different between the
compared groups.
Fig. 13. Breeding data analysis schedule. Source: Prepared by the author.
73
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
A data set of 120 Roe deer faecal samples including FCM levels (ng/g) from
eight surveyed plots in higher Lozoya valley was provided by PNP managers. Sample
collection was originally performed monthly from October 2009 to March 2010 by PNP
staff. In total 81 samples (from seven plots) that were located up to 1000 m distant from
the roads’ margins were used for assessing the potential annoyance from SIA roads
traffic (Fig. 14). As location coordinates were annotated, 57 samples were assigned as
closer to road M-604 and 24 samples were assigned as closer to road M-611
accordingly with their Euclidean distance. The seven plots averaged 140 ha/plot that
approximately covered 1000 ha of roe deer potential habitat surrounding roads.
74
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
Noise calculations from roads noise model were repeated at height of 0.1, 0.5
and 1.0 m over ground because of being considered more adequate whether considering
the species approximate height during routinely activities such as resting, grazing,
standing or walking. Sampling data were classified in two groups with regard to their
assignation to the closer road (M-604 or M-611) and we analized mean values of
sample locations distance (m) to roads, FCM levels (ng/g) in faecal samples and Leq
levels (dB) in faecal sample locations. The T test was used in order to examine the
relationships between FCM levels and distance to roads M-604 and M-611 because a
normal distribution was displayed by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test in these variables.
Nevertheess, as Leq data were not normally distributed (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test) we
used the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test for comparing noise level median values.
We also employed a preliminary Pearson test to illustrate strength of relationship
between variables. In total, 79 samples were analized after removing 1 outlier data in
FCM levels from each group. The significance was set at p < 0.05 and all analyses were
performed with SPSS v.19.0 (IBM, 2010).
75
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
sound capture and noise-source deskwork verification. The SLM was situated at
approximately 1.5 m above the ground and collected data each second during the
recording periods.
There are many studies regarding ecological effects of noise pollution (Cham
and Blumstein, 2011) that are usually based on very short records (González-Oreja et
al., 2012; Lengagne, 2008; Patón et al., 2012; Summers et al., 2011) compared to those
other works designed to develop a full soundscape inventory in USA national parks
(Miller, 2008; NPS, 2013). We have intended to design an intermediate-effort solution
for acoustic sampling, aiming toward standardisation inspired by the European
legislation on environmental noise (Directive 2002/49/EC, 2002) and their
recommendations on principles and methods stated in ISO 9613-2 (1996) the most
commonly used methodology to assess outdoor noise exposure from a variety of
sources (Brittain, 2004). The present work also took into account that measurements
and records must be representative for the study purposes, in this case limited to daily
periods of recreational visitation. Therefore, the soundscape sample consisted of 21
noise measurements and sound records that were taken in 7 different monitoring
periods. Each monitoring period consisted of 3 measuring and recording intervals 5
minutes' long (logging in slow response mode, every 1s) alternated with 5-minute
interval breaks between records. The data collection resulted 1 hour and 30 minutes of
data logs and audio recorded files that fulfilled atmospheric requirements.
76
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
In CVM (Carson, 2000), the individual i chooses between two options: the status
quo, which represents the outcome that would occur in the absence of any intervention,
and a noise-reduction programme at an additional cost to the individual. To identify the
value of this policy change to individuals, a variety of elicitation formats have been
proposed (Bateman et al., 2002; Mitchell and Carson, 1989). In this study, the payment
card (PC) format was applied (Table 6). The resulting interval that bounds the
respondent’s WTP can be modeled using the analytical approach developed for the
payment card (Cameron and Huppert, 1989). The probability that WTPi lies between the
“yes” amount (AiYES) and the lowest “no” bid in the payment card (AiNO) will be
calculated as follows:
77
MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS
* The complete questionnaire is included in Apéndice A: “Encuesta a los visitantes del Parque
Natural de Peñalara”
78
RESULTADOS
4 RESULTADOS
Fifteen noise maps for the Lden indicator have been calculated depending on the
calculation grid size as previously explained. Noise levels are represented by categories
defined by ranges of 5 dB. It must be noted that the coloured area results vary slightly
within the 2x2 km square because they are based on grid points whose density and
coordinates are different in each case (Fig. 12 and Fig. 15) as the grid resolution
changes. Therefore, there is a square of 324 ha within the study area that allows a
comparison of the 15 scenarios or isophone maps.
The 10 m grid resolution (grid 10) is the most detailed noise map calculated in
the study area, so it is considered to be the reference map (Fig. 15) when comparing the
15 model results. The grid 10 calculation process lasted 1 hour 31 minutes 18 seconds
(Noise models were calculated with a Pentium Dual CPU T2390 with 1.87 GHz
processor, 3.00 GB of RAM and Windows 7 Service Pack 1 for a 32 bit system) and the
noise level map results were represented in 9 category intervals (from less than 35 dB
up to 75 dB), grouped in 62 patches dominated by intermediate levels (from 40 dB to 60
dB). The higher level categories show faster attenuation at increasing distances from the
noise source. Lden values over 65 dB are almost only represented on the road surface and
its closest surroundings.
The grid 150 Lden indicator noise map is the least detailed map and the
calculation time was only 37 seconds. The calculation times for grids between grid 10
and grid 150 reduces non-linearly with increasing grid sizes. The grid 150 Lden map has
only 11 patches grouped into 6 noise level categories. The lower the resolution settings,
the more information is lost both in the higher level categories and the closer the noise
source is (smaller polygons as a result of the faster attenuation), but likewise in the
lower levels and further from the source (because of its small original size). The rest of
the 13 compared scenarios represent 13 intermediate situations of the study area
soundscape defined by the Lden indicator.
79
RESULTADOS
Fig. 15. Noise maps for the Lden indicator calculated from different
calculation-grid sizes (spatial resolution). Source: Prepared by the author.
80
RESULTADOS
Fig. 16. Spatial indices result curve graphs of the landscape level analysis.
Source: Prepared by the author.
81
RESULTADOS
The Lden map analysis at class level shows general behaviour that looks just like
common indices compared at landscape level. It reflects a soundscape simplification
trend expressed by the NumP decrease and the general simplification of the polygons’
shape (MPFD, AWMSI and ED) for all categories when increasing the calculation grid
size from 10 m to 150 m (Fig. 17), although some intermediate grid size fluctuations are
shown. A general increase in MPS is also observed, particularly at intermediate noise
levels (45, 50, 60 and 65 dB). However, the CA curves remain approximately constant
for all noise categories when increasing the calculation grid size.
Landscape metrics allow the general trend of detail loss to be described when
increasing the calculation grid size in noise mapping. However, in order to find
breaking thresholds between similar landscapes and determine which maps can be
considered equivalent at landscape scales, it would be useful to know whether there is a
calculation grid size range where landscape attribute changes occur at different rates.
82
RESULTADOS
Fig. 17. Spatial indices result curve graphs at the class level. Source: Prepared by the author.
Fig. 18. AWCA and AWED changes at the class level. Source: Prepared by the author.
83
RESULTADOS
The AWED graphs show that all the noise categories have negative values and
their curves decrease when increasing the calculation grid size (Fig. 18). However, the
AWED reductions are lower than -2% for almost every noise level category (except the
higher categories) when the calculation grid size is smaller than 50 m. The decrease in
AWED values is greater than -2% for almost all the noise categories when the
calculation grid sizes are higher than 100 m.
Differences between the result maps in relative terms are represented by the
AWCA and AWED curve distances from the horizontal axis. Changes that indicate
alterations to soundscape attributes can be seen in the graphs of both indices. It is
possible to identify three distinct areas depending on the graphical dispersion of these
charts. The curves are relatively concentrated from grid 10 to 50, then there is a
pronounced phase of change between the grid 50 and the grid 100 values and,
ultimately, there is a great dispersion with the greatest curve separations above grid 100.
For every noise map (from grid 10 to grid 150), the Kappa index has been
calculated to determine the equivalence level with regard to the reference map (grid 10).
It also allows a threshold of equivalence to be established depending on management
purposes or noise mapping goals.
By analysing the eastern and the western study areas separately, it is possible to
see the same general decreasing trends of partial Kappa values when increasing the
calculation grid size, as well as how the reduction in the number of noise classes occurs.
Nevertheless, fewer fluctuations are produced at intermediate grid sizes than in the case
of the total study area. However, a clearly higher level of accuracy in the western half of
the study is obtained, where the topography is smoother and the traffic flow is
continuous.
84
RESULTADOS
Fig. 19. Overall and partial Kappa indices by noise classes. Source: Prepared by the author.
Table 7 shows the Kappa index value of the 15 scenarios when compared to the
reference map (grid 10). Partial Kappa values show where the main differences between
landscape features are located. It also indicates the calculation time of every noise
model according to the calculation grid size.
85
RESULTADOS
Table 7. Kappa analysis and noise calculation time with respect to the calculation-grid size
The Kappa analysis of the noise maps in the whole study area provides higher
than 0.9 accuracy values when the calculation grid size is lower than 50 m, which
represents a computation time saving of over 95% compared to the reference map (grid
10) in the studied case. The same accuracy level is obtained with grid values lower than
100 m in the western half of the study area. A calculation time saving of 98.7% is
achieved when employing grid 100 instead of grid 10. In the more irregular and abrupt
orography (eastern half of the study area), high levels of accuracy are only obtained
below grid 30 (Kappa > 0.9), which means an 88.3% saving in calculation time. The
Kappa index and calculation time saving values with respect to grid size allow an
accuracy range to be estimated depending on the decision-maker’s objectives.
86
RESULTADOS
Field monitoring revealed that Lnat levels were situated at around 30 dB and
aircraft overflight noise disruptions on the soundscape were easily observable in the
spectrograms (Fig. 20). Noise metrics for quiet areas are presented in Table 8, in which
2 overflights are shown in both the second (t2) and the third (t3) sampling subperiods.
These aircrafts increased Leq values in 7.5 dB (aircraft #2 and #3) and 9.5 dB (aircraft
#1 and #4) with respect to the first (t1) monitoring subperiod in which no overflights
occurred. Lmax values rose to 53 dB during t2. In SEL terms, overflight events exceeded
55 dB in two cases and 60 dB in the other two cases.
Table 8. Noise metrics at a quiet area MS and four overflight-events sound exposure levels (SEL).
Period / Leq Lmax Lmin Lnat SEL #1 SEL #2 SEL #3 SEL #4
Subperiod dB(A) dB(A) dB(A) dB(A) dB(A) dB(A) dB(A) dB(A)
T 37.9 53.0 27.9 29.8 61.3 56.6 55.9 64.1
t1 30.8 34.8 28.4 30.1 - - - -
t2 40.3 53.0 30.4 32.0 61.3 56.6 - -
t3 38.3 50.3 27.9 29.1 - - 55.9 64.1
T, total monitoring time; t1, 2, 3, first, second and third individualized monitoring periods
Leq, the equivalent continuous sound pressure level (SPL); Lmax, maximum SPL period value; Lmin,
minimum SPL period value; Lnat, level of noise exceeded for 75% of the specified measurement period t
Source: Prepared by the author.
87
RESULTADOS
Fig. 20. A 5 minute monitoring subperiod (t3) sonogram example and SPL series data.
Source: Prepared by the author.
88
RESULTADOS
Fig. 21.The four overflight-scenarios noise maps. Source: Prepared by the author.
89
RESULTADOS
Table 9. Aircraft noise annoyance and perception of noise pollution in the Valley
(in number of visitors).
Aircraft noise annoyance
Perception of noise
Null Low Medium High Very high
pollution in the valley
(7.64%) (28.47%) (34.72%) (21.53%) (7.64%)
Null (18.80%) 5 10 3 0 0
Low (59.79%) 6 28 37 18 4
Medium (16.97%) 0 2 9 10 4
High (3.92%) 0 1 1 1 2
Very high (0.52%) 0 0 0 0 0
Source: Prepared by the author.
The survey results showed that aircraft noise perception was related to the
season (χ2=16.557, ρ=0.001), the duration of the visit (χ2=32.414, ρ=0.039) and
considering that the valley was affected by noise pollution (χ2=7.983, ρ=0.005). The
percentage of visitors who claimed to have heard aircraft noise rose to 42% in the
summer, unlike what was reported by only 16% of winter visitors. Overflights noise
perception was also related to previous experience as a PNP visitor (χ2=4.748, ρ=0.029)
and in considering that noise pollution may affect nature conservation (χ2=5.870,
ρ=0.015). But it was not related to being a resident in the valley (χ2=1.203, ρ=0.273) nor
to positively valuing outdoor enjoyment in the absence of noise (χ2=0.053, ρ=0.818).
90
RESULTADOS
Table 10. Relationships between aircraft noise annoyance, visit time, previous experience and
conservation (in # responses).
Noise affects
Level of noise Visit time (hours) Previous visit
conservation
pollution <=2.5 (2.5 – 5) (5 - 7.5) >7.5 No Yes No Yes
Null 5 4 2 0 6 5 4 7
Low 6 26 7 2 7 34 6 35
Medium 4 30 16 0 12 38 5 45
High 6 17 6 2 12 19 2 29
Very high 3 4 3 1 2 9 0 11
Source: Prepared by the author.
Overflights noise annoyance was related to: the season (χ2=18.220, ρ=0.003), the
duration of the visit (χ2=24.308, ρ=0.060), having previously visited the valley
(χ2=11.955, ρ=0.035), positively valuing outdoor enjoyment without noise (χ2=11.405,
ρ=0.502), considering that noise pollution affects conservation (χ2=12.886, ρ=0.024)
and noise levels perception in the valley (χ2=49.949, ρ=0.002).
91
RESULTADOS
SIA SPA
Noise
Scenario Class NP PD PLA LPI AI NP PD PLA LPI AI
Level (#) (#/100 ND (%) (%) (#) (#/100 ND (%) (%)
ha) (%) ha) (%)
LND-01 0-5 25 0.167 13.63 13.03 96.14 14 0.179 15.29 14.90 95.45
5-10 14 0.093 32.66 31.28 97.93 14 0.179 30.56 28.16 96.67
10-15 12 0.080 7.52 6.92 95.04 7 0.090 11.53 11.37 96.18
15-20 9 0.060 10.17 10.10 98.01 9 0.115 11.75 11.62 98.00
20-25 6 0.040 10.02 9.95 98.14 7 0.090 12.12 12.00 98.01
25-30 1 0.007 10.88 10.88 98.73 1 0.013 7.79 7.79 98.11
30-35 4 0.027 11.12 10.36 97.90 2 0.026 7.69 7.67 96.59
35-40 2 0.013 2.41 2.40 90.72 4 0.051 1.59 1.51 84.25
40-45 2 0.013 1.59 1.56 97.09 2 0.026 1.68 1.64 95.86
45-50 - - - - - - - - - -
LND-02 0-5 - - - - - - - - - -
5-10 - - - - - - - - - -
10-15 3 0.020 0.01 0.05 73.33 - - - - -
15-20 5 0.033 10.38 5.66 97.69 1 0.013 3.79 3.79 97.79
20-25 9 0.060 10.88 8.91 95.55 9 0.115 4.58 2.20 93.59
25-30 5 0.033 24.57 14.12 98.07 3 0.038 23.28 13.22 97.57
30-35 6 0.040 18.52 10.79 97.27 6 0.077 23.67 15.86 97.32
35-40 3 0.020 31.40 31.38 99.16 4 0.051 37.02 36.99 98.78
40-45 1 0.007 4.20 4.20 98.72 1 0.013 7.67 7.67 98.67
45-50 - - - - - - - - -
TKO-01 0-5 - - - - - - - - - -
5-10 1 0.007 0.00 0.00 NA - - - - -
10-15 5 0.033 0.00 0.01 55.56 2 0.026 0.00 0.01 80.00
15-20 4 0.027 4.05 4.00 96.49 4 0.051 1.46 1.33 90.67
20-25 16 0.107 1.53 1.24 84.03 16 0.205 1.47 1.01 81.21
25-30 3 0.020 18.55 14.20 98.23 1 0.013 18.45 18.45 98.40
30-35 6 0.040 5.96 3.19 94.30 6 0.077 5.44 4.38 94.37
35-40 2 0.013 44.08 23.65 99.22 2 0.026 43.93 31.48 98.90
40-45 1 0.007 25.80 25.80 99.23 1 0.013 29.23 29.23 99.08
45-50 - - - - - -- - - - -
GLOBAL 0-5 - - - - - - - - - -
5-10 - - - - - - - - - -
10-15 - - - - - - - - - -
15-20 - - - - - - - - - -
20-25 2 0.013 3.05 3.04 97.22 1 0.013 0.00 0.57 91.48
25-30 3 0.020 8.96 8.95 98.40 3 0.038 7.88 7.86 97.27
30-35 3 0.020 4.04 3.98 95.32 3 0.038 5.50 5.41 94.93
35-40 2 0.013 49.67 25.00 99.05 2 0.026 43.84 33.30 98.62
40-45 5 0.033 34.25 26.91 98.74 5 0.064 42.18 30.80 98.50
45-50 5 0.033 0.00 0.01 58.06 2 0.026 0.00 0.02 60.00
ZERO N/A 1 0.006 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 0.013 100.0 100.0 100.0
SIA, Socioeconomic influence area; SPA, Birds’ special protection area; NP, number of patches;
PD, patch density; PLAND, percentage of landscape; LPI, largest patch index (0LPI100);
AI, aggregation index (0AI100); LND-1, landing route #1; LND-2, landing route #2;
TKO-01, take-off route #1; GLOBAL, the cumulative Leq scenario (TKO-01 + LND-1 + LND-2);
ZERO, zero alternative
Source: Prepared by the author.
92
RESULTADOS
Area of Scenario
Indices LND-01 LND-02 TKO-01 GLOBAL ZERO
reference
NP (#) SIA 76 32 38 20 1
SPA 60 24 32 16 1
93
RESULTADOS
First of all, descriptives for Leq levels at nesting location revealed a mean
difference of 0.6-1.0 dB between results at calculation height of 4 or 20 m above ground
(Table 13). All the nests were situated below 40 dB at a calculation height of 4 m above
ground and only two nests ranged up 40.6 dB in case of calculations computed at 20 m
height. In addition, mean Leq values always ranked less than 25 dB.
Table 13. Descriptives for breeding parameters and Leq levels (dB) at calculation heights of 4 m and 20 m
above ground.
Breeding 95% Conf. Skewness
Mean ± SD Range
Parameter Int. for Mean ±SE
Calculation NB (N=35) 21.2 ± 9.2 18.0 – 24.3 5.0 – 38.5 0.055 ± 0.40
Height 4 m
FI (N=69) 20.4 ± 9.2 22.6 – 20.4 5.0 – 36.7 -0.290 ± 0.30
FN (N=14) 21.3 ± 8.2 16.6 – 26.0 5.0 – 35.5 -0.186 ± 0.60
FF (N=169) 22.3 ± 9.1 21.0 – 23.7 5.0 – 39.2 -0.258 ± 0.20
Breeding pairs (N=252) 21.7 ± 9.1 20.6 – 22.9 5.0 – 39.2 -0.260 ± 0.15
Total (N=287) 21.7 ± 9.1 20.6 – 22.7 5.0 – 39.2 -0.221 ± 0.14
Calculation NB (N=35) 21.9 ± 9.4 18.7 – 25.2 5.0 – 40.2 0.186 ± 0.40
Height 20 m
FI (N=69) 21.0 ± 9.3 18.8 – 23.3 5.0 – 38.6 -0.249 ± 0.30
FN (N=14) 22.3 ± 8.6 17.4 – 27.3 5.0 – 36.5 -0.300 ± 0.60
FF (N=169) 23.1 ± 9.2 21.7 – 24.5 5.0 – 40.8 -0.237 ± 0.20
Breeding pairs (N=252) 22.5 ± 9.2 21.3 – 23.6 5.0 – 40.8 -0.238 ± 0.15
Total (N=287) 22.4 ± 9.2 21.4 – 23.5 5.0 – 40.8 -0.187 ± 0.14
NB: non-breeding pairs; FI: failed-incubation; FN: failed-nestling; FF: fully-fledged
Source: Prepared by the author.
94
RESULTADOS
The same analysis for noise exposure computed levels at 4 m above ground, also
revealed that Leq levels in the breeding group were higher than the non-breeding group
with not statistically significantly different (U=4,131, p=0.544).
Fig. 22. Ranked noise exposure levels in nest sites: a) at calculation height of 4 m b) at calculation height
20 m. NB: non-breeding pairs; FI: failed-incubation; FN: failed-nestling; FF: fully-fledged.
Source: Prepared by the author.
95
RESULTADOS
Table 14. Kruskal Wallis H test for Leq levels (dB) at calculation heights of 4 m and
20 m above ground.
Mean Rank
Test Mean Rank Test
Variable at 4m
Statisticsa,b at 20m height Statisticsa,b
height
Specific analysis on breeding pairs in the third step of analysis (Fig. 13) reported
not a statistically significant difference on Leq values between FI, FN and FF groups
(Table 15) at 20 m of calculation height(H(3)=1.412, p=0.494) neither considering noise
levels at height of 4 m above ground (H(3)=1.893, p=0.388).
Table 15. Kruskal Wallis H test for Leq levels (dB) in breeding pairs (FI, FN and FF) at calculation
heights of 4 m and 20 m above ground.
96
RESULTADOS
Regarding success at incubation stage (FI, FN+FF) in the fourth step of analysis
(Fig. 13), paired comparison analysis resulted in higher noise levels for the succeed-
incubation pairs (FN+FF) than the failed-incubation group (FI) at every height of
calculation, but it was not statistically significantly different at average nesting height
(U=5,602, p=0.168) neither at 4 m height (U=5,673, p=0.214). Finally, as data from
pairs that succeed incubation revealed (FN+FF) were normally distributed (Kolmogrov-
Smirnov test, p>0.050) the T test was used in order to examine relationships among
variables at nestling stage in the last step of analysis (Fig. 13). This comparison did not
find that succeeding pairs (FF) suffered statistically significantly higher Leq level than
failed in nestling (FN) at 20 m height above ground (t(181)=0.363, p=0.784) neither at 4
m (t(181)=0.591, p=0.689).
FCM levels ranged from 287 to 3314 ng/g in faecal samples and there was not
found correlation between FCM levels and distance to roads neither correlation between
FCM levels and Leq levels (Table 16). Nevertheless, the T test reported a significant
difference in the FCM mean levels (t(77)=2.556, p =0.013*) between samples located
closer to road M-604 (M=1263, SD=528.7) and samples collected closer to road M-611
(M=947, SD=418.3) (Fig. 23).
97
RESULTADOS
Leq levels ranged from 21.9 to 42.0 dB in faecal sampling locations and negative
correlations between distance to roads and noise levels illustrate the coherent
attenuation of sound pressure levels with distance from the noise source (Table 16).
Comparisons of noise exposure levels between groups of samples (Fig. 23) revealed that
Leq levels in samples closer to road M-604 were statistically significantly higher than
samples closer to road M-611 (Mann-Whitney U test: U=444, p=0.031*). Leq levels
frequency distribution in sampling locations ranged between 22.4 and 45.4 dB.
There were not found correlations between distance to roads and FCM levels,
unlike Leq values that resulted negatively correlated with distance to roads because of
sound attenuation with distance from a noise source (Table 16). The T test was used in
order to examine the relationships between distance (m) to roads (M-604 and M-611)
from every faecal sample site (Fig. 23). This comparison found that faecal locations did
not distribute statistically significantly closer from one road than other (t(77)=-0.093,
p=0.926).
98
RESULTADOS
Fig. 23. Box-plot diagrams indicating median values and p-values for FCM levels, Leq levels and
distance to roads from faecal samples grouped according to their closer road (M-604 or M-611).
* significant correlation at p<0.05; ** p<0.01. Source: Prepared by the author.
99
RESULTADOS
The main aspect of the TWP visitors’ acoustic experience is the dominance of
anthropic noises during the most frequent daily visitation periods (Fig. 24 and Table
17). The MS-1 audible time is 100% occupied by anthropogenic noises such as road
traffic and hikers’ voices or footsteps that overlapped in a frequency range of 100-2,000
Hz in spectrogram plots (Fig. 24). Hikers’ conversations at higher volumes, shouts or
singular noisy episodes, like a motorcycle accelerating, are easily visible in the
spectrograms between 30-100 Hz. For approximately 60% of the audible time, it is
possible to identify sounds from the biophony (mainly birdsongs). Geophony
phenomena, such as the noise of wind through vegetation or rain noise, was minimised
because the data were recorded under wind speeds lower than 0.8 m/s on days that were
not rainy.
The conversations from visitors resting by the lagoon occupied 100% of the
audible time (ranging 100-1,500 Hz) at MS-2. People shouting, laughing and sneezing
are plotted as higher-volume events and at higher frequencies (2,500-5,000 Hz). Aircraft
overflights (20-400 Hz) are singular episodes that last for a little more than a minute and
can also be seen by recreationists from this place but not by visitors hiking up TWP
through the forest. It is possible to identify birdsong (approximately 50% of the audible
time), and the existing geophony from the feeble streams is fully masked by
anthropogenic noise during the summer (but not as much in the other seasons).
Regarding SLM measurements, the TWP’s Leq is 6 dB(A) higher than by the
lagoon (41.6 dB in TWP and 35.5 dB by the lagoon, Table 18). The L90 is usually
regarded as the background noise level without any discrete events. This value
corresponds to 35.7 dB in TWP and less than 30 dB by the lagoon. Lynch et al. (2011)
established the desired condition for natural ambient as a metric (Lnat) that is an estimate
of what the median ambient sound levels for a national park would be in the absence of
all extrinsic (or anthropogenic) sources. A less-conservative metric has been adopted as
a reference for the natural ambient in this work (L75) because it was obviously not
possible to do any field work to characterise visitor’s experiences in the absence of
these sources. The anthropic noise is assumed to be affecting this recreational area by
100
RESULTADOS
increasing the SPL approximately 4.5 dB over the natural ambient in both places. This
change can be considered as a noticeable impact because it means that the sound energy
more than doubled; these values together with the percentage of time that anthropogenic
noise is audible lead to accept that anthropogenic noise pollution exists in the park.
In addition, the SPL exceeded 44.2 dB in the TWP (and 37.8 dB by the lagoon)
for 10% of the measurement period. However, some discrete episode SEL values
(motorcycles accelerating, shouts, sneezes or aircraft overflights) clearly exceeded L75
and Leq values during the monitored periods (Table 18). Therefore, repetitive events
such as overflights or accelerating vehicles are able to cause a very significant
environmental impact on the natural soundscape. Human shouts or loud voices are also
particularly significant in quantitative terms of energy.
101
RESULTADOS
Fig. 24. SPL readings, spectrograms and audible sounds in monitoring stations*.
* Charts from top to bottom: 1) SPL readings of 15 minute records (5 minute recording periods alternated
with 5 minute breaking periods); 2) SPL reading detail of events in a 5 minute record (Series A and B);
3) Spectrogram of the same 5 minute monitoring periods; 4) Main components of the soundscape (percent
of audible time) in the same 5 minute monitoring records. From left to right: Charts of The Water
Pathway (TWP) monitoring station (MS-1) and charts of the lagoon monitoring station (MS-2).
Source: Prepared by the author.
102
RESULTADOS
Table 18. Noise metrics at monitoring stations (MS-1: TWP; MS-2: Lagoon) and singular events sound
exposure levels (SEL).
Leq, the equivalent continuous sound pressure level (SPL); Lmax, maximum SPL period value;
Lmin, minimum SPL period value; Ln, level of noise exceeded for n% of the specified measurement
period; TWP, The Water Pathway
103
RESULTADOS
A total of 321 collected questionnaires were considered fully valid and relevant
to the CV question; six visitors were removed from the sample because they did not
reply to the CV question. On average, the interviewed visitors were 42 years old, and
96% of them had Spanish nationality. Most of the visitors (85%) live in near
municipalities located in the region of Madrid, mainly in Madrid city (42% of the
respondents). An environmentalist affiliation (mountaineers, ecologist groups, etc.) was
reported by 21% of the interviewed visitors. The percentage of respondents with college
degrees was 63% which is much higher than the current percentage of people with
higher education in Spain. Regarding the household composition, the reported
households consisted of an average of 3 individuals, and 62% of the households do not
have any children (under 16 years). The surveyed households’ average net monthly
income is 1,500-2,000 euros, while the personal average income ranged between 1,000-
1,500 euros. The respondents were confronted with a prospective scenario in which
visitors would pay an entrance fee to contribute to mitigating the noise levels of the
valley. A payment card (Table 6) was used, and WTP measures were calculated using
the theoretical framework of Cameron and Huppert (1989).
In this study, we have estimated two behavioural models (simple and expanded).
For each model, the analytical median (-α/β) and the nonnegative mean (-
ln(1+exp(α))/β) values of WTP were estimated (Table 19), where α represents the
“grand constant” (i.e., the sum of the products of the means of the explanatory variables
times their associated coefficients) and β is the coefficient associated with the bid
amount. The 95% confidence intervals for the average WTPs were estimated using the
Krinsky and Robb (1986) approach with 1,000 replications.
The simplest model considers that preferences are only influenced by the bid.
The results from this model show a negative relationship between the bid amount and
the probability of saying ‘yes’ to the programme. The median WTP is €0.84, and the
mean is €0.94 per individual, i.e., the results show a positive and significant WTP for
the noise-reduction programme.
104
RESULTADOS
105
RESULTADOS
Noise* The noise levels are very high in the Valley 2.49 0.156
(1: yes; 0: no)
Know One of the main reasons for her/his visit was to know the 40.50 0.492
Nat. Park (1: yes; 0: no)
Income Individual income is more than €1,500 monthly (1: yes; 0: 28.97 0.454
no)
Phone* During the visit, she/he was greatly bothered by noise of 0.93 0.097
phones (1: yes; 0: no)
* The 1 value represent the highest rating (5) in a Likert scale from 1 (null) to 5 (maximum).
106
DISCUSIÓN
5 DISCUSIÓN
Environmental noise tools, such as strategic noise mapping and derived action
plans, are intended to be updated every 5 years at the European level (COM, 2011). This
global assessment takes a significant continuous monitoring effort of an environmental
pollution type whose monitoring costs are greatly influenced by the size of the study
area to be modelled (WG-AEN, 2006). To be reasonably sustainable in diverse
economic circumstances and because this type of mapping is being applied to a growing
geographic area, the cost effectiveness of noise mapping should be incorporated into the
procedures based on technical criteria, as well as on availability of trained technicians
and reduced calculation processing time. The noise map calculation process is based on
a number of combinations of receiver grid points, number of sources and number of
defined periods; thus, mapping costs are correlated with map resolutions and the study
area size.
Spatial pattern and map accuracy analysis suggest that it is possible to determine
an appropriate resolution range for large area noise mapping, as had been shown
revealed for many other environmental variable mappings (Saura, 2002; Knight and
Lunetta, 2003; Wu et al., 2003; Wu, 2004; Buyantuyev and Wu, 2007; Rutchey and
Godin, 2009). A good characterization of terrain and noise source properties in the
study area could be useful for taking decisions on calculation grid sizing.
107
DISCUSIÓN
The main patch number and shape changes caused by grid spacing are
predictable and localizable by noise mapping experts when changing the calculation
grid resolution. Therefore, technicians would be able to improve the accuracy of the
map results if different calculation grid sizes are employed, depending on the locations
of the receiver points and their distances from the noise sources. This method of
designing a grid region is congruent with De Kluijver and Stoter (2003) and Asensio et
al.,’s (2011) work on how to adapt grids for noise mapping, without a significant loss in
result quality. However, potential changes in the results may be different depending on
whether or not they are referred at class or landscape level and that meaning must be
understood for successful grid design.
Finally, the results of this work show that noise map calculation time can be
reduced, thus making possible further cost savings, based on each model’s calculation
time as shown in Table 7 (in absolute terms with respect to the reference grid or in
relative terms with respect to the next lower grid resolution). There are no standardized
cost-benefit recommendations that can guide decision-maker judgments (De Kluijver
and Stoter, 2003) but it is a costly and time-consuming task as pointed out by Murphy
and King (2010). This is a very important consequence of the proper use of GIS and
noise calculation models with regard to noise mapping in large areas outside
agglomerations, optimizing the quality and efficiency of noise prediction studies.
Lnat levels were situated at around 30 dB in human-remote areas within the park.
This figure could be interpreted as an indicator of quiet areas, which does not mean the
absence of noise (Clarke, 2011). And overflights caused higher Leq increases of almost 8
dB during a complete monitoring period. Which is a noticeable disturbance once than a
3 dB change is noticed by a person of normal hearing engaged in activities other than
attentive listening (Falzarano, 2005). Aircrafts’ noise-footprint mapping showed that
disruptions were caused from 15.7% to 73.5% of the study area. This value rises 87.9%
in the GLOBAL scenario, when considering the cumulative effect of the three overflight
routes that currently cross over the park. The qualitatively and quantitatively impact
108
DISCUSIÓN
assessment of overflights noise confirms that aircraft traffic is noticeably polluting the
park as it has been observed in both ways: by field measurements and noise modeling.
Aircraft noise perception was reported by 37% of the surveyed visitors in PNP,
which would make it very difficult to experience quietness and the natural soundscape
(Mace et al., 2013). Nevertheless, this noise was found to be disturbing by only 29% of
those respondents, which represents a scant 11% of the total of the interviewed people.
In detail, the percentage of visitors who claim to have heard aircraft noise was up to
42% in the summer, unlike that reported by only 16% of winter visitors. These
divergences could respond to seasonal visitors’ profile or leisure habits, which may
determine their subjective perception of anthropogenic disturbances (Iglesias Merchan
et al., 2014), since there was not such a great difference in the percentage of flight
operations from the airport during the months monitored. Thus, according to data from
the air navigation authority, 55% of flights were operated in Summer-Autumn and 45%
during Winter-Spring.
109
DISCUSIÓN
Fig. 25. Visitors annoyed by aircraft overflights (modified from Miller, 2008).
Source: Prepared by the author.
In addition, the study area was qualified as being a very little polluted one by
76% of respondents, despite green areas may also being positive effects providers rather
than just offering the absence of negative impacts (Payne, 2013). But our findings are
situated very close to guidance values proposed for quiet areas in Northern Europe,
where at least 80% of the visitors should perceive the sound environment as good
(Nilsson and Berglund, 2006). Therefore, it is not possible to affirm that visitors are
prevented from feeling satisfaction with the park experience because of aircraft noise
disruptions.
Low perception of noise pollution levels by visitors does not match the scientific
community’s increasing concern on this topic (Blickley and Patricelli, 2010; Chan and
Blumstein, 2012) when taking into account a characterised noise impact. Nevertheless,
82% of visitors agree that noise pollution may negatively impact on nature
conservation. This resulting lack of relationship between quantitative and qualitative
anthropogenic noise assessment and visitors’ perception may become another issue of
interest for further research.
110
DISCUSIÓN
The smaller the effective mesh size the more fragmented the landscape is
(Jaeger, 2000; Jaeger et al., 2008). However, the smaller the MESH value the quieter the
areas remaining in the scenarios studied. This is considered to be so because noise
emission levels are common to every track alternative. Thus a higher NP for an
alternative means that there are more opportunities for aircraft noise attenuation due to
distance. This attenuation depends on route-alternative tracing and land orography, and
it results in a wider variety of class levels together with some quiet areas that exist at
present. However, this interpretation should be complemented and agreed on by reading
PAFRAC, CONTAG and SHDI values. In this way, it was found that LND-01 causes
less global impact and less habitat quality reduction than the rest of the alternatives.
Therefore, LND-01 offers better conditions for keeping the present acoustic diversity, a
good proxy for overall faunal richness (Pekin et al., 2012) like for instance, landscape
heterogeneity metric values when used as an indicator of birds diversity (Morelli et al.,
2013). It is interesting to note that the MESH index may be useful in assessing the
acoustic fragmentation of landscapes, but not only by itself. This finding agrees with
Roedenbeck (2007) when recommending MESH to be complemented by other
measuring criteria for environmental monitoring (e.g. when studying habitat quality and
availability). Hence, the proposed set of landscape metrics makes it possible to assess
acoustic interference by overflights in the natural environment of wide areas.
111
DISCUSIÓN
112
DISCUSIÓN
vulture breeding. Even more, it could be possible to plot a more extended area close to
the road-effect zone definition for the species by drawing the Leq 25 dB isophone (Fig.
26). These observed effects may be ecologically significant, in respect of altering the
structure and functionality of adjacent ecosystems, which agrees Forman and Alexander
(1998) and Hawbaker et al., (2006) when defining the roads’ impacts on adjacent areas.
Not in vain disturbance linked to roads has been related as more evident in forest
habitats because the preservation of rare species may be threatened by the whole
ecosystem functionality decrease due to fragmentation by roads that inhibit the
persistence of a forest core habitat (Marcantonio et al., 2013; Wei and Hoganson, 2005).
Fig. 26. Cinereous vulture (Aegypius monachus) potential habitat and road-effect zones.
Source: Prepared by the author.
113
DISCUSIÓN
Noise modelling based on END offer a feasible and accurate alternative to field
assessment measurements of anthropogenic disturbances on large wildlife areas that
fulfils the physics of sound propagation. In addition modelling may result more feasible
than alternatives like mapping based on sound pressure level measurements from
hundreds of control sites at regional scale (Mennitt et al., 2013). In the present case
study, a mean difference of 0.6-1.0 dB between results at calculation heights of 4 m and
20 m above ground matches in the same order than differences when comparing noise
modeling precision showed by different computer programmes or whether varying the
accuracy in the digital terrain model (Arana et al., 2010; 2011). Therefore, noise
mapping may become a useful tool on assessing and predicting anthropogenic impacts
on the wilderness as intended by green regulation such as the National Environmental
Policy Act in the United States (Wisdom, 2008) or the European Directive 011/92/EU
(2011). Even more, noise modelling allows assessing present, past or future scenarios
for different disturbing sources (Iglesias Merchan and Diaz-Balteiro, 2013).
114
DISCUSIÓN
The more significant finding of this work is the difference between FCM mean
levels of roe deer faecal sampling groups with regard to the closer road (316 ng/g,
p=0.013*). In this case, the higher FCM levels are significant statistically related with
the noisier and higher traffic volume road (M-604). In general, the physiological effects
of a large dose of noise on exposed people are well known, including increase in stress
hormone levels, but little is known about these effects on wild animals (Farina, 2014;
Münzel et al., 2014). However, the direct relationship between physiological stress level
and traffic volume has been suggested by many authors (Forman and Alexander, 1988;
Millspaugh et al., 2001; Creel et al., 2002; Wikelski and Cooke, 2006; Barber et al.,
2010; Navarro-Castilla et al., 2014). In this sense, the presence of high FCM levels may
lead individuals to a complex set of physiological and behavioral changes (Cabezas et
al., 2007; Piñeiro et al., 2012) not only during unpleasant events while the stressful
perturbation persists. Thus, the potentially chronic stressor role of transport
infrastructures may be crucial in terms of conservation and the viability of roe deer
populations in fragmented landscapes (Kuehn et al., 2007). Indeed, hormonal responses
may become a reliable fitness indicator in predicting how animals cope with their
changing environment at broad spatial and temporal scales (Romero, 2004; Piñeiro et
al., 2012; Escribano-Avila et al., 2013; Navarro-Castilla et al., 2014).
Secondly, it has also been found a significant difference between roe deer groups
and their median exposure to noise levels from the closer road (3 dB, p=0.031*). In
acoustics, it is a traditionally global accepted rule that a 3dB level difference is a
noticeable variation in hearing sensations that may play an important role in listener
responses. Moreover, the threshold modulation decreases relatively quickly in respect to
sound pressure level and it reaches a value of about 1.2 dB at 30 dB (Fastl and Zwicker,
2007). Besides, considering the physical model developed by Barber et al., (2010) on
listening area reduction when noise elevates the masked hearing threshold. In our case
study, a 3 dB increase in background noise level results in 71% of the original detection
distance, and 50% of the original listening area among individuals from the two
compared groups of roe deer.
115
DISCUSIÓN
2004; Gagnon et al., 2007a, 2207b; St. Clair and Forrest 2009) our study has not found
a significant difference in distance to roads from sampling locations between compared
groups (p=0.926). Unlike findings by Millspaugh et al. (2001) and Creel et al. (2002)
where elk (Cervus elaphus) avoided the more frequented roads. In the present case
study, the sampling sites have resulted very homogeneously distributed along the 1,000
m buffer area from both roads. Nevertheless, median FCM levels in faecal samples and
Leq levels in faecal sampling locations from nearby road M-604 resulted significantly
higher than median values from samples locations closer to road M-611 that give rise to
a quantitative border at Leq 30 dB isophone, which graphically may separate both groups
of roe deer.
Fig. 27. Faecal samples location, potential habitat of roe deer (8,300 ha of pine and oak woods) and road-
effect zone (noise level 30 dB isophone polyline). Source: Prepared by the author.
116
DISCUSIÓN
This work has been designed to give response a demand from researchers on
isolating traffic noise assessment as a major driver of effects on animal populations
(Barber et al., 2010, 2011; McClure et al. 2013). Despite disturbance may be caused by
a variety of factors from the environment and other traffic disturbances than traffic
noise (Summers et al., 2011). Indeed, our findings are supporting that strategic noise
mapping, as the intended tool for the assessment and management of environmental
noise at large scale in Europe (Iglesias Merchan and Diaz-Balteiro, 2013), could give
adequate inputs as a factor to be included in multicriteria analysis as for instance
habitat-selection modeling (Blickley and Patricelli, 2010). However, national parks and
low-traffic areas are supposed to be relatively undisturbed habitats and functioning
ecosystems (Selva et al., 2011) where strategic noise mapping is not mandatory
according to European regulations on environmental noise management except when
crossed by major roads (over 8,200 veh/d) at present.
117
DISCUSIÓN
118
DISCUSIÓN
The on-site soundscape survey results reveal that the majority of the perceived
anthropogenic noises were from visitors’ voices (51%) and aircraft overflights (42%).
Both of these noise sources are easily visible by receivers, which could suggest
significant influence of visual stimuli on respondents’ sensitivity and evaluation
(Anderson et al., 1983; Mace et al., 2004). Human voices were not reported as a
significant noise source causing impact to soundscapes and were not considered of great
management concern by USA park managers (Dumyahn and Pijanowski, 2011a).
Nevertheless, because of the high percentage of respondents referring to this disturbance
and given our measurement results, we find that the human-voice pollution at PNP is
closer to the findings of Pilcher et al. (2009), who observed that loud talking was a good
indicator of quality that detracts from the visitor experience, thereby becoming an issue
for management to consider.
119
DISCUSIÓN
drivers is very different from that of hikers. Subjective noise perception is correlated
with psychological phenomena, and reported annoyance levels might be increased when
a noise is perceived as unnecessary or it is assumed that the noise producer is
unconcerned about the welfare of others (Mace et al., 2004, 2013).
Two very different scenarios have been defined from both aspects: from the
background noise and from the visitors’ activities (hiking TWP or resting by the lagoon
for a while). Accordingly, visitors were asked about the duration of their visit because it
is assumed that stays shorter than 2.5 hours correspond to people who did not walk as
far as the lagoon. In total, 17.5% of the PNP visitors surveyed had stayed for less than
2.5 hours, and therefore, they had only been exposed to the TWP soundscape.
Unexpectedly, this issue did not influence the visitors’ willingness to pay despite the
facts that spatiotemporal changes of soundscape elements influence the perception by
people significantly (Liu et al., 2013) and that opportunities to rest far from the road
traffic may positively affect psychological well-being and the valuation of spiritual
services in regard to landscape gradients from a less to more natural composition
(Gidlöf-Gunnarsson and Öhrström, 2007; Radford and James, 2013).
In addition, almost 90% of PNP visitors arrive in their own vehicle. Considering
that cell phones and other devices are brought by the visitors, it is possible to affirm that
the main noise disturbances referred to by visitors are caused by visitors themselves
(except aircraft). This linkage is a challenge in the field of national park soundscape
management that overlaps the action field of the park’s public-use management, in the
120
DISCUSIÓN
context of the findings of Lawson et al. (2003) with regard to the carrying capacity in
national parks to conserve heritage but also the quality of the visitors' experience. This
balance is required even though soundscapes do not have clearly defined boundaries
(Dumyahn and Pijanowski, 2011a).
121
CONCLUSIONES
6 CONCLUSIONES
- Este trabajo ilustra distintos modos y grados de perturbación por ruido ambiental
en el medio natural, refuerza la idea y los argumentos sobre la conveniencia de
caracterizar y gestionar activamente los paisajes sonoros y la contaminación
acústica en espacios naturales. En dicho contexto, se demuestra la conveniencia
de caracterizar los paisajes sonoros en campo, y los niveles de ruido ambiental,
mediante el empleo combinado de sonómetros (como herramientas de medición
de niveles sonoros) y grabaciones de audio (para registrar las características de
audibilidad de distintas fuentes sonoras).
- Se ha establecido un método general de muestreo sistemático para trabajo de
campo (basado e inspirado en los principios y recomendaciones del Real
Decreto 1367/2007, la Directiva 2002/49/CE y la norma internacional ISO 9613-
2), que resulte factible con el objeto de estudio, dado que las normas de
referencia suelen tratar por separado cada tipo de fuente sonora, y con el trabajo
en un contexto realista de recursos limitados sobre amplias extensiones del
territorio. De este modo resulta viable el esfuerzo requerido para caracterizar un
elevado número de puntos de evaluación en grandes áreas geográficas. Los
intervalos de observación, propuestos durante los períodos de interés, se
componen de tres mediciones de cinco minutos, alternadas con dos períodos de
descanso de la misma duración.
122
CONCLUSIONES
123
CONCLUSIONES
124
CONCLUSIONES
Sobre la posible molestia del ruido ambiental en las expectativas de los visitantes
de un parque nacional
125
CONCLUSIONES
- Pese a la escasa tradición que existe en España para abonar una entrada de
acceso a un espacio natural protegido, ha resultado una disposición al pago de
aproximadamente 1 euro por visitante (sobre una muestra de campo de más de
300 excursionistas), con la premisa de destinar la recaudación a sufragar los
costes de desarrollo de un hipotético programa de mejora de la calidad acústica
en el ámbito del valle.
- Teniendo en cuenta que las voces humanas constituyen el tipo de ruido más
frecuentemente percibido por los propios visitantes (51%), con el mismo nivel
de molestia medio (2,9) que el indicado para los turismos (sobre una escala
máxima de 5,0), y considerando que el vehículo propio es el principal medio de
acceso al parque, este mecanismo de financiación supondría, en cierto modo, la
adopción de una medida de compensación en aplicación del principio de quien
contamina paga. Establecido en el ordenamiento comunitario y nacional, y que
explícitamente se menciona en la vigente Ley 21/2013 de evaluación ambiental.
126
CONCLUSIONES
Conclusión general sobre el Objetivo 3.1: Las carreteras pueden causar estrés
fisiológico en la fauna en función de su volumen de tráfico, alteran sus
capacidades físicas y afectan a la calidad de sus hábitats. Es posible representar
gráficamente la zona de influencia del ruido procedente de las carreteras sobre la
calidad de los hábitats faunísticos.
127
CONCLUSIONES
Sobre el potencial impacto del ruido de las carreteras en una población nidificante
de aves rapaces.
128
CONCLUSIONES
- Los resultados de este trabajo demuestran que las carreteras que se consideran de
bajo nivel de tráfico (IMD<1.000 vehículos), pueden causar un impacto
ecológico significativo sobre distintas especies de fauna (alterando su
comportamiento, los niveles de estrés fisiológico, etc.). La evaluación de los
niveles de ruido con efectos significativos puede cuantificarse en términos de
presión sonora continua equivalente.
- Este trabajo respalda el empleo del índice Leq por su adecuación como indicador
ambiental y para evaluar períodos de distinta duración, según el objeto del
estudio, por su operatividad y compatibilidad entre mediciones de campo y
modelos de cálculo.
- La semejanza de los resultados entre los modelos de ruido obtenidos a diferentes
alturas de cálculo, sobre el nivel del suelo, concluye la validez de los estándares
recomendados para la elaboración de mapas estratégicos de ruido (a 4 m de
altura sobre el suelo, Directiva 2002/49/CE), como herramienta de evaluación de
los potenciales efectos del ruido viario sobre distintas especies animales (corzo y
buitre negro en los casos estudiados). Este resultado amplía los campos de
aplicación de los mapas estratégicos de ruido.
- Los diferentes valores obtenidos para identificar las zonas de influencia de las
carreteras (Leq(24h) igual a 30 dB para el corzo y 25 dB para el buitre negro), así
como la existencia de una zona de exclusión para la nidificación de buitre negro
(Leq(24h)>40 dB) refuerza las teorías sobre la conveniencia de investigar los
efectos del ruido ambiental para cada especie objetivo.
Conclusión general sobre el Objetivo 3.3: Las carreteras con bajo nivel de tráfico
(IMD<1000) pueden causar un impacto ambiental significativo. Los mapas
estratégicos de ruido son una herramienta válida para la evaluación del impacto
ambiental de las carreteras sobre la fauna terrestre. Se recomienda el uso del
índice Leq por su operatividad con las herramientas de medición y modelización
de ruido ambiental. Es necesario extender la investigación sobre los efectos
ecológicos del ruido antropogénico a otras especies animales.
129
CONCLUSIONES
130
CONCLUSIONES
131
CONCLUSIONES
132
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
7 BIBLIOGRAFÍA
1. Abáigar, T., Domene, M.A., Palomares, F. (2010). Effects of fecal age and
seasonality or steroid hormone concentration as a reproductive parameter in field
studies. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 56, 781e787.
2. ABC. (2014). Más de 200.000 visitas nocturnas al año en el parque nacional del
Teide. Retrieved in 10-01-2014 from
http://www.abc.es/agencias/noticia.asp?noticia=1563811
4. Acosta, J.M. (2008). Gestión del Estrés: Cómo entenderlo, cómo controlarlo y
cómo sacarle provecho. Ed. Bresca S.L., Barcelona.
5. Adams, V.M., Pressey, R.L., Naidoo, R. (2010). Opportunity costs: Who really
pays for conservation?. Biological Conservation, 143(2), 439-448.
8. Anderson, T.W., Mulligan, B.E., Goodman, L.S., Regan, H.Z. (1983). Effects of
sound preference for outdoor settings. Environment and Behavior, 15(5), 539-
565.
9. Arana, M., San Martín, R., San Martin, M.L., Aramendía, E. (2010). Strategic
noise map of a major road carried out with two environmental prediction software
packages. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 163(1-4), 503-513.
10. Arana, M., Martín, R.S., Nagore, I., Pérez, D. (2011). What precision in the
Digital Terrain Model is required for noise mapping?. Applied Acoustics, 72(8),
522-526.
11. Arenas, J.P. (2008). Potential problems with environmental sound barriers when
used in mitigating surface transportation noise. Science of The Total
Environment, 405, 173-179.
12. Arroyo, B., Razin, M. (2006). Effect of human activities on bearded vulture
behaviour and breeding success in the French Pyrenees. Biological Conservation,
128, 276-284.
133
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
13. Asensio, C., Recuero, M., Ruiz, M., Ausejo, M., Pavón, I. (2011). Self-adaptive
grids for noise mapping refinement. Applied Acoustics, 72, 599–610.
14. Aspuru, I., García-Pérez, I., Madariaga, I., Uribe, M. (2012). Soundscapes of
Urkiola: sounds in Natural Parks of Bizkaia. Conference Proceedings Internoise
2012, EE.UU., New York
15. Ausejo, M., Recuero, M., Asensio, M., Pavón, I., López, J.M. (2010). Study of
precision, deviations and uncertainty in the design of the strategic noise map of
the macrocenter of the City of Buenos Aires, Argentina. Environmental Modeling
& Assessment, 15,125–135.
17. Babisch, W., Houthuijs, D., Pershagen, G., Cadum, E., Katsouyanni, K.,
Velonakis, M., Dudley, M.-L., Marohn, H.-D., Swart, W., Breugelmans, O.,
Bluhm, G., Selander, J., Vigna-Taglianti, F., Pisani, S., Haralabidis, A.,
Dimakopoulou, K., Zachos, I., Järup, L. (2009). Annoyance due to aircraft noise
has increased over the years-Results of the HYENA study. Environment
International, 35(8), 1169-1176.
18. Ballester, F., Peiró, R. (2008). Transporte, medio ambiente y salud. Informe
SESPAS 2008. Gaceta Sanitaria, 22, 53-64.
19. Balvanera, P., Pfisterer, A.B., Buchmann, N., He, J.S., Nakashizuka, T., Raffaelli,
D., Schmid, B. (2006). Quantifying the evidence for biodiversity effects on
ecosystem functioning and services. Ecology Letters, 9 (10), 1146-1156.
20. Barber, J.R., Crooks, K.R., Fristrup, K.M. (2010). The costs of chronic noise
exposure for terrestrial organisms. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 25, 180–9.
21. Barber, J.R., Budett, C.L., Reed S.E., Warner K.A., Formichella C., Crooks K.
R., Theobald, D.M., Fristrup, K.M. (2011). Anthropogenic noise exposure in
protected natural areas: estimating the scale of ecological consequences.
Landscape Ecology, 26, 1281–95.
22. Barja, I., Silván, G., Rosellini, S., Piñeiro, A., González-Gil, A., Camacho, L.,
Illera, J.C. (2007). Stress physiological responses to tourist pressure in a wild
population of European pine marten. The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology, 104(3-5), 136-142.
23. Barja, I., Silván, G., Illera, J.C. (2008). Relationships between sex and stress
hormone levels in feces and marking behavior in a wild population of Iberian
wolves (Canis lupus signatus). Journal of Chemical Ecology, 34(6), 697-701.
24. Barja, I., Silván, G., Martínez-Fernández, L. Illera, J.C. (2011). Physiological
stress responses, faecal marking behaviour, and reproduction in wild European
pine martens (Martes martes). Journal of Chemical Ecology, 37(3), 253-259.
134
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
25. Barja, I., Escribano-Ávila, G., Lara-Romero, C., Virgós, E., Benito, J., Elena
Rafart, E. (2012). Non-invasive monitoring of adrenocortical activity in European
badgers (Meles meles) and effects of sample collection and storage on faecal
cortisol metabolite concentrations. Animal Biology, 62, 419–432.
26. Bardeli, R., Wolff, D., Kurth, F., Koch, M., Tauchert, K.H., Frommolt, K.H.
(2010). Detecting bird sounds in a complex acoustic environment and application
to bioacoustic monitoring. Pattern Recognition Letters, 31(12), 1524-1534.
27. Barreiro, J., Sanchez, M., Viladrich-Grau, M. (2005). How much are people
willing to pay for silence? A contingent valuation study. Applied Economics, 37
(1), 1233-1246.
28. Bartí, R. (2010). Acústica medioambiental. Vol I. Ed. Club Universitario, Spain,
Alicante.
29. Bateman, I.J, Carson, R.T., Day, B., Hanemann, M, Hanley, N., Hett, T., Jones-
Lee, M., Loomes, G., Mourato, S., Özdemiroglu, E., Pearce, D.W., Sugden, R.,
Swanson, J. (2002). Economic Valuation With Stated Preference Techniques: A
Manual. Edward Elgar, UK, Cheltenham.
31. Benfield, J.A., Bell, P.A., Troup, L. J., Soderstrom, N.C. (2010). Aesthetic and
affective effects of vocal and traffic noise on natural landscape assessment.
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30 (1), 103-111.
32. Benfield, J.A., Nurse, G.A., Jakubowski, R., Gibson, A.W., Taff, B.D., Newman,
P., Bell, P.A. (2014). Testing noise in the field: A brief measure of individual
noise sensitivity. Environment and Behavior, 46(3), 353-372.
34. Bisbal, G.A. (2001). Conceptual Design of Monitoring and Evaluation Plans for
Fish and Wildlife in the Columbia River Ecosystem. Environmental
Management, 28(4), 433-453.
35. Bjørner, T.B. (2004). Combining socio-acoustic and contingent valuation surveys
to value noise reduction. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and
Environment, 9 (5), 341-356.
36. Blickley, J.L., Patricelli, G.L. (2010). Impacts of anthropogenic noise on wildlife:
Research priorities for the development of standards and mitigation. Journal of
International Wildlife Law and Policy, 13, 274–292.
37. Brearley, G., McAlpine, C., Bell, S., Bradley, A. (2012). Influence of urban edges
on stress in an arboreal mammal: a case study of squirrel gliders in southeast
Queensland, Australia. Landscape Ecology, 27(10), 1407-1419.
135
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
38. Block, W.M., Franklin, A.B., Ward, J.P., Ganey, J.L. White, G.C. (2001).Design
and Implementation of Monitoring Studies to Evaluate the Success of Ecological
Restoration on Wildlife. Restoration Ecology, 9, 293–303.
39. BOE. (2003). Ley 37/2003, de 17 de noviembre, del Ruido. Boletín Oficial del
Estado, 276, 40494-40505.
41. BOE. (2007). Real Decreto 1367/2007, de 19 de octubre, por el que se desarrolla
la Ley 37/2003, de 17 de noviembre, del Ruido, en lo referente a zonificación
acústica, objetivos de calidad y emisiones acústicas. Boletín Oficial del Estado,
254, 42952-42973.
43. BOE. (2010). Sentencia de 20 de julio de 2010, de la Sala Tercera del Tribunal
Supremo, por la que se anula la expresión "Sin determinar" que figura en relación
con el Tipo de Área Acústica, f), dedicado a los "Sectores del territorio afectados
a sistemas generales de infraestructuras de transporte, u otros equipamientos
públicos que los reclamen", dentro de la Tabla A, que establece los "Objetivos de
calidad acústica para ruido aplicables a áreas urbanizadas existentes", del Anexo
II del Reglamento, dedicado a los denominados "Objetivos de calidad acústica",
del Real Decreto 1367/2007, de 19 de octubre. Boletín Oficial del Estado, 259,
90215-90215.
44. BOE. (2012). Real Decreto 1038/2012, de 6 de julio, por el que se modifica el
Real Decreto 1367/2007, de 19 de octubre, por el que se desarrolla la Ley
37/2003, de 17 de noviembre, del ruido, en lo referente a zonificación acústica,
objetivos de calidad y emisiones acústicas. Boletín Oficial del Estado 178,
53556-53557.
46. Boucher, T.M., Spalding, M., Revenga, C. (2013). Role and Trends of Protected
Areas in Conservation. In Levin, S.A. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Biodiversity
(Second Edition). Academic Press, Waltham, pp. 485-503.
47. Bristow, A.L., Rowcroft, P., Shields, P., Woodin, S. (2012). The value of quiet
areas in providing respite from traffic noise. The Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America, 131(4), 3264-3264.
48. Brittain, F. (2004). Noise modeling using ISO 9613-2 for designing facilities to
meet a not-to-exceed community noise limit. The 2004 National Conference on
Noise Control Engineering, Baltimore, Maryland. INCE Conference proceedings,
861-873.
136
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
50. Brown, C.L., Hardy, A.R., Barber, J.R., Fristrup, K.M., Crooks, K.R., Angeloni,
L.M. (2012). The effect of human activities and their associated noise on
ungulate behavior. Plos One, 7(7), e40505.
51. Brown, C.L., Reed, S.E., Dietz, M.S., Fristrup, K.M. (2013). Detection and
classification of motor vehicle noise in a forested landscape. Environmental
Management, 52(5), 1262-1270.
52. Brüel & Kjær. (2010). Technical documentation Predictor type 7810. Version
8.1. User manual. Brüel & Kjær Sound & Vibration Measurement A/S. DK,
Naerum.
53. Brüel & Kjær. (2012). Technical documentation Predictor type 7810. Version
9.0. User manual. Brüel & Kjær Sound & Vibration Measurement A/S. DK,
Naerum.
55. Cabezas, S., Blas, J., Marchant, T.A., Moreno, S. (2007). Physiological stress
levels predict survival probabilities in wild rabbits. Hormones and Behavior,
51(3), 313-320.
56. Cameron, T.A., Huppert, D.D. (1989). OLS versus ML estimation of non-market
resource values with payment card interval data. Journal of Environmental
Economics and Management, 17 (3), 230-246.
57. Can, A., Leclercq, L., Lelong, J., Botteldooren, D. (2010). Traffic noise spectrum
analysis: Dynamic modeling vs. experimental observations. Applied Acoustics,
71(8), 764-770.
58. Carles, J.L., Barrio, I.L., De Lucio, J.V. (1999). Sound influence on landscape
values. Landscape and Urban Planning, 43(4), 191–200.
60. Carson, R.T. (2000). Contingent valuation: a users’ guide. Environmental Science
& Technology, 34 (8), 1413-1418.
61. Carver, S., Tricker, J., Landres, P. (2013). Keeping it wild: Mapping wilderness
character in the United States. Journal of Environmental Management, 131, 239-
255.
63. CEDEX. (2007). Instrucciones para la entrega de los datos asociados a los mapas
estratégicos de ruido de la 1ª Fase Grandes ejes viarios, ferroviarios y
137
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
64. CEDR. (2013). Value for Money in Road Traffic Noise Abatement. Final Report,
v2, 1 March 2013. CEDR Project Group Road Noise: subgroup tyre/vehicle
noise. Conférence Européenne des Directeurs des Routes, CEDR, Paris, France.
Retrieved from http://www.fomento.gob.es/NR/rdonlyres/65C31277-4D32-457E-
9B02-107645CF0586/120684/3CEDRIMValueforMoney.pdf
65. Cessford, G.R. (1999). Recreational noise issues and examples for protected areas
in New Zealand. Noise Control Engineering Journal, 47(3), 97-103.
66. Cessford, G.R. (2000). Noise impact issues on the Great Walks of New Zealand.
In Cole, D.N., McCool, S.F., Borrie, W.T., O'Loughlin, J. Wilderness science in a
time of change conference-Volume 4: Wilderness visitors, experiences, and
visitor management. 1999 MT, Missoula Proceedings RMRS-P-15-VOL-4, 69–
76. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research
Station, USA, CO, Fort Collins.
67. Chan, K.M., Shaw, M.R., Cameron, D.R., Underwood, E.C., Daily, G.C. (2006).
Conservation planning for ecosystem services. PLoS biology, 4(11), e379.
69. Chester, M.V., Ryerson, M.S. (2014). Grand challenges for high-speed rail
environmental assessment in the United States. Transportation Research Part A:
Policy and Practice, 61, 15-26.
70. Clark, C., Martin, R., Van Kempen, E., Alfred, T., Head, J., Davies, H. W.,
Haines, M.M., Lopez Barrio, I., Matheson, M., Stansfeld, S.A. (2006). Exposure-
Effect Relations between Aircraft and Road Traffic Noise Exposure at School
and Reading Comprehension The RANCH Project. American Journal of
Epidemiology, 163(1), 27-37.
71. Clarke, L. (2011). Is Quiet the New Loud? Developing a Framework for Valuing
Quiet Areas. IAIA Conference on Impact Assessment and Responsible
Development for Infrastructure, Business and Industry. Puebla, Mexico. IAIA
Conference 2011, Retrieved from
http://www.iaia.org/conferences/iaia11/proceedings/presentations/The%20Value
%20of%20Quiet%20%28IAIA_v1%29.pdf
72. CM. (1992). Decreto 18/1992, de 26 de marzo por el que se aprueba el Catálogo
Regional de especies amenazadas de fauna y flora silvestres y se crea la categoría
de árboles singulares (Act 18/1992 about the Regional list of endangered species
of wildlife, flora and unique trees). Consejería de Medio Ambiente y Ordenación
del Territorio. Comunidad de Madrid, Madrid. Retrieved from
http://www.madrid.org/wleg/servlet/Servidor?opcion=VerHtml&nmnorma=1165
&cdestado=P#_ftn1
138
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
73. Coffin, A.W. (2007). From roadkill to road ecology: a review of the ecological
effects of roads. Journal of Transport Geography, 15(5), 396-406.
74. Collins, P.C., Croot, P., Carlsson, J., Colaço, A., Grehan, A., Hyeong, K.,
Kennedy, K., Mohn, C., Smith, S., Yamamoto, H., Rowden, A. (2013). A primer
for the Environmental Impact Assessment of mining at seafloor massive sulfide
deposits. Marine Policy, 42, 198–209.
75. COM. (2011). Report from The Commission to The European Parliament and
The Council on the implementation of the Environmental Noise Directive in
accordance with Article 11 of Directive 2002/49/EC. COM June 2011. 0321
final. The European Commission, Brussel-Bruxelles. Retrieved from
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/com/com_com%
282011%290321_/com_com%282011%290321_en.pdf
76. Congalton, R.G., Green, K. (1999). Assessing the accuracy of remotely sensed
data: principles and practices. Lewis Publishers. USA, Florida, Boca Raton.
78. Cowan, J.P. (1994). Handbook of environmental acoustics. John Wiley & Sons,
Inc. NY, New York.
79. Creel, S., Fox, J.E., Hardy, A., Sands, J., Garrott, B., Peterson, R.O. (2002).
Snowmobile activity and glucocorticoid stress responses in wolves and elk.
Conservation Biology, 16(3), 809-814.
80. Crino, O.L., Johnson, E.E., Blickley, J.L., Patricelli, G.L., Breuner, C.W. (2013).
Effects of experimentally elevated traffic noise on nestling white-crowned
sparrow stress physiology, immune function and life history. The Journal of
Experimental Biology, 216(11), 2055-2062.
81. Cushman, S.A., McGarigal, K., Neel, M.C. (2008). Parsimony in landscape
metrics: Strength, universality, and consistency. Ecological Indicators, 8, 691-
703.
82. Czech, B. (1991). Elk behavior in response to human disturbance at Mount St.
Helens National Volcanic Monument. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 29(1),
269-277.
83. D’Antonio, A., Monz, C., Newman, P., Lawson, S., Taff, D. (2013). Enhancing
the utility of visitor impact assessment in parks and protected areas: A combined
social-ecological approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 124, 72-81.
139
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
85. Dallat, M.A.T., Soerjomataram, I., Hunter, R.F., Tully, M.A., Cairns, K.J., Kee,
F. (2013). Urban greenways have the potential to increase physical activity levels
cost-effectively. The European Journal of Public Health, 24 (2), 190-195.
86. Davies, W.J., Adams, M.D., Bruce, N.S., Cain, R., Carlyle, A., Cusack, P., Hall,
D.A., Hume, K.I., Irwin, A. Jennings, P., Marselle, M., Plack, C.J., Poxon, J.
(2013). Perception of soundscapes: An interdisciplinary approach. Applied
Acoustics, 74 (2), 224-231.
87. De Groot, R.S., Alkemade, R., Braat, L., Hein, L., Willemen, L. (2010).
Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in
landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological Complexity,
7(3), 260-272.
88. De Kluijver, H., Stoter, J. (2003). Noise mapping and GIS: optimising quality and
efficiency of noise effect studies. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems,
27: 85–102.
90. De la Puente, J., Moreno-Opo, R. Del Moral, J.C. (2007). El buitre negro en
España. Censo Nacional 2006. SEO/BirdLife, Spain, Madrid.
92. De la Puente, J. (in press). Biología y conservación del buitre negro en la ZEPA
Alto Lozoya. Parque Natural de Peñalara (Biology and conservation of Cinereous
vulture in Higher Lozoya SPA. Penalara Natural Park). Consejería de Medio
Ambiente, Vivienda y Ordenación del Territorio. Comunidad de Madrid, Madrid.
94. Dekkers, J.E.C., Van der Straaten, J.W. (2009). Monetary valuation of aircraft
noise: A hedonic analysis around Amsterdam airport. Ecological Economics, 68,
2850–2858.
95. Di Giulio, M., Holderegger, R., Tobias, S. (2009). Effects of habitat and
landscape fragmentation on humans and biodiversity in densely populated
landscapes. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(10), 2959-2968.
96. Díaz-Varela, E.R., Crecente, R., Alvarez, C. (2004). Turismo y ordenación del
territorio en el municipio de Ribadeo. Ed. Universidade de Santiago de
140
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
97. Dietrich, C., Palm, G., Riede, K., Schwenker, F. (2004). Classification of
bioacoustic time series based on the combination of global and local decisions.
Pattern Recognition, 37(12), 2293-2305.
98. Diniz, F.B., Zannin, P.H.T. (2004). Noise impact by electrical energy substations
in the city of Curitiba, Brazil. Science of the Total Environment, 328, 23-31.
100. Directiva 2002/49/CE. (2002). Directiva del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo,
de 25 de junio de 2002, sobre evaluación y gestión del ruido ambiental -
Declaración de la Comisión ante el Comité de Conciliación de la Directiva sobre
evaluación y gestión del ruido ambiental. Diario Oficial de las Comunidades
Europeas, L189, 12–25.
101. Directiva 2009/147/CE. (2009). Directiva del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo,
de 30 de noviembre de 2009, relativa a la conservación de las aves silvestres
(versión codificada). Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea, L20: 7-25
102. Directiva 2011/92/EU. (2011). Directiva del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo,
de 13 de diciembre de 2011, relativa a la evaluación de las repercusiones de
determinados proyectos públicos y privados sobre el medio ambiente. Diario
Oficial de la Unión Europea, L26, 1–21.
105. Directive 2002/49/EC. (2002). Directive of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 25 June 2002 relating to the assessment and management of
environmental noise. Official Journal of the European Communities, L189, 12–
25.
106. Directive 2009/147/EC. (2009). Directive of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds. Official Journal
of the European Union, L20, 7-25.
107. Dooling, R., Brittan‐Powell, E., Lauer, A., Dent, M., Noirot, I. (2005). The
problem of frequency weighting functions and standards for birds. he Journal of
the Acoustical Society of America, 118, 2018.
141
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
108. Dotinga, H.M., Elferink, A.G.O. (2000). Acoustic pollution in the oceans: the
search for legal standards. Ocean Development & International Law, 31(1-2),
151-182.
109. DOUE. (2008). Versiones consolidadas del Tratado de la Unión Europea y del
Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea. Diario Oficial de la Unión
Europea, C 115
110. Dugan, P., Pourhomayoun, M., Shiu, Y., Paradis, R., Rice, A., Clark, C. (2013).
Using High Performance Computing to Explore Large Complex Bioacoustic
Soundscapes: Case Study for Right Whale Acoustics. Procedia Computer
Science, 20, 156-162.
111. Dumyahn, S.L., Pijanowski, B.C. (2011a). Beyond noise mitigation: managing
soundscapes as common-pool resources. Landscape Ecology, 26, 1311–1326.
113. Dutilleux, G. (2012a). Anthropogenic outdoor sound and wildlife: it's not just
bioacoustics! Proceedings of the Conference Acoustics 2012 Nantes, France.
Retrieved from http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/81/07/95/PDF/hal-
00810795.pdf
114. Dutilleux G. (2012b). Road traffic noise. In: Noise mapping in the EU: models
and procedures. CRC Press, USA, FL, Boca Raton, 55-80.
115. Dutilleux, G., Defrance, J., Ecotière, D., Gauvreau, B., Bérengier, M., Besnard,
F., Le Duc, E. (2010). NMPB-Routes-2008: The Revision of the French Method
for Road Traffic Noise Prediction. Acta Acustica united with Acustica, 96 (3),
452-462.
117. EPA. (1981). Noise effects handbook: A desk reference to health and welfare
effects of noise. Ed. Office of the Scientific Assistant, Office of Noise Abatement
and Control, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
118. Escribano-Avila, G., Pettorelli, N., Virgós, E., Lara-Romero, C., Lozano, J.,
Barja, I., Salas, F., Puerta, M. (2013). Testing cort-fitness and cort-adaptation
hypotheses in a habitat suitability gradient for roe deer. Acta Oecologica, 53, 38-
48.
119. ESRI. (2009). ArcGIS 9.3. ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute),
Redlands, CA.
142
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
121. Falzarano, S. (2005). Natural ambient sound sample site selection. Grand Canyon
National Park. Overflights and Natural Soundscape Program 2005. NPS Report
No. GRCA-05-01. Retrieved from
http://www.nps.gov/grca/naturescience/upload/sample-site.pdf
123. Farina, A., Lattanzi, E., Malavasi, R., Pieretti, N., Piccioli, L. (2011a). Avian
soundscapes and cognitive landscapes: theory, application and ecological
perspectives. Landscape ecology, 26(9), 1257-1267.
124. Farina, A., Pieretti, N., Piccioli, L. (2011b). The soundscape methodology for
long-term bird monitoring: a Mediterranean Europe case-study. Ecological
Informatics, 6(6), 354-363.
126. Farina, A., Pieretti, N. (2012). The soundscape ecology: A new frontier of
landscape research and its application to islands and coastal systems. Journal of
Marine and Island Cultures 1 (1), 21–26.
128. Fidell, S., Silvati, L., Howe, R., Pearsons, K. S., Tabachnick, B., Knopf, R. C.,
Gramann, J., Buchanan, T. (1996). Effects of aircraft overflights on wilderness
recreationists. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 100(5), 2909-
2918.
130. Forman, R.T., Alexander, L.E. (1998). Roads and their major ecological effects.
Annual review of ecology and systematics 29, 207–31.
131. Forman, R.T., Deblinger, R.D. (2000). The ecological road‐effect zone of a
Massachusetts (USA) suburban highway. Conservation biology, 14(1), 36-46.
132. Forman R.T.T. (2001). Estimate of the area affected ecologically by the road
system in the United States. Conservation biology, 14(1), 31–35
133. Forman, R.T., Sperling, D., Bissonette, J.A., Clevenger, A.P., Cutshall, C.D.,
Dale, V.H., Fahrig, L., France, R., Goldman, C.R., Heanue, K., Jones, J.A.,
Swanson, F.J., Turrentine, T., Winter, T.C. (2003). Road Ecology. Science and
Solutions. Island Press, Washington, DC.
134. Fosgerau, M., Bjørner, T. B. (2006). Joint models for noise annoyance and
willingness to pay for road noise reduction. Transportation Research Part B:
Methodological, 40 (2), 164-178.
143
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
135. Francis, C.D. Barber, J.R. (2013). A framework for understanding noise impacts
on wildlife: an urgent conservation priority. Frontiers in Ecology and the
Environment, 11, 305–313.
136. Francis, C.D., Kleist, N.J., Ortega, C.P., Cruz, A. (2012). Noise pollution alters
ecological services: enhanced pollination and disrupted seed dispersal.
Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 279(1739), 2727-2735.
137. Francis, C.D. Ortega C.P., Cruz, A. (2009). Noise Pollution Changes Avian
Communities and Species Interactions, Current Biology, 19(16), 1415-1419.
139. Frey, B.S. (2000). La economía del arte. Serie de estudios. Ed La Caixa, Spain,
Barcelona.
141. Fristrup, K. (2011). Evaluating the potential spatial extent of chronic noise
exposures of sufficient magnitude to raise concerns of wildlife impacts. The
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130(4), 2320.
142. Frommolt, K.H., Tauchert, K.H. (2013). Applying bioacoustic methods for long-
term monitoring of a nocturnal wetland bird. Ecological Informatics (in press,
corrected proof).
143. Gagnon, J.W., Schweinsburg, R.E., Dodd, N.L. (2007a). Effects of Roadway
Traffic on Wild Ungulates: A Review of the Literature and Case Study of Elk in
Arizona. International Conference on Ecology and Transportation, ICOET 2007
Proceedings. NC: Center for Transportation and the Environment, North Carolina
State University, pp. 449-458. Retrieved from
http://escholarship.org/uc/item/9ms8f1k6.pdf
144. Gagnon, J.W., Theimer, T.C., Boe, S., Dodd, N.L., Schweinsburg, R. E. (2007b).
Traffic volume alters elk distribution and highway crossings in Arizona. Journal
of Wildlife Management, 71(7), 2318-2323.
146. García, B., Garrido, F.J. (2003). La contaminación acústica en nuestras ciudades.
Colección Estudios Sociales. Núm. 12. Ed. Fundación La Caixa, Barcelona.
147. Ge, J., Hokao, K.. (2004). Research on the sound environment of urban open
space from the viewpoint of soundscape - a case study of Saga Forest Park,
Japan. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 90, 555-63.
144
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
148. Geerlings, H., Stead, D. (2003). The integration of land use planning, transport
and environment in European policy and research. Transport policy, 10(3), 187-
196.
150. Geneletti, D. (2004). Using spatial indicators and value functions to assess
ecosystem fragmentation caused by linear infrastructures. International Journal of
Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 5, 1–15.
152. Giménez, J.C. (2007). ISBN: 978-987-584-105-5. Ruido para los posgrados de
higiene y seguridad industrial. Ed. Nobuko, Argentina, Buenos Aires.
153. Girvetz, E.H., Thorne, J.H., Berry, A.M., Jaeger, J. (2008). Integration of
landscape fragmentation analysis into regional planning: a statewide multi-scale
case study from California. USA. Landscape and Urban Planning, 86, 205–218.
154. Gjestland, T. (2008). Background noise levels in Europe. SINTEF A6631 Report.
Trondheim: SINTEF ICT, June 2008. Norway, Trondheim.
155. Goines, L., Hagler, L. (2007). Noise pollution: A modern plague. Southern
medical journal, 100(3), 287-294.
156. Goldstein, E.B. (2010). Sensation and perception. Ed. Wadsworth, Cengage
Learning. USA, Belmont, CA.
157. Gómez-Limón, J., Atauri, J.A., Múgica, M., de Lucio, J.V., Puertas, J. (2008).
Planificar para gestionar los espacios naturales protegidos. Serie monografías
EUROPARC-España. Ed. Fundación Interuniversitaria Fernando González
Bernáldez, Spain, Madrid.
159. Guedes, I.C.M., Bertoli, S.R., Zannin, P.H.T. (2001). Influence of urban shapes
on environmental noise: A case study in Aracajú, Brazil. Science of the Total
Environment, 412-413, 66-76.
160. Gurrutxaga, M., Lozano, P.J. (2008). Ecología del Paisaje. Un marco para el
estudio integrado de la dinámica territorial y su incidencia en la vida silvestre.
Estudios Geográficos, 69(265), 519-543.
161. Hatch, L., Clark, C., Merrick, R., Van Parijs, S., Ponirakis, D., Schwehr, K.,
Thompson T., Wiley, D. (2008). Characterizing the relative contributions of large
145
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
vessels to total ocean noise fields: a case study using the Gerry E. Studds
Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary. Environmental management, 42(5),
735-752.
162. Halfwerk, W., Holleman, L. J., Lessells, C. K., Slabbekoorn, H. (2011). Negative
impact of traffic noise on avian reproductive success. Journal of Applied Ecology
48(1), 210-219.
164. Hamet, J.F., Besnard, F., Doisy, S., Lelong, J., Le Duc, E. (2010). New vehicle
noise emission for French traffic noise prediction. Applied Acoustics, 71(9), 861-
869.
165. Hawbaker, T.J., Radeloff, V.C., Clayton, M.K., Hammer, R.B., Gonzalez-
Abraham, C.E. (2006). Road development, housing growth, and landscape
fragmentation in northern Wisconsin: 1937-1999. Ecological Applications 16(3),
1222-1237.
166. Harper, J.M., Austad, S.N. (2000). Fecal glucocorticoids: a noninvasive method
of measuring adrenal activity in wild and captive rodents. Physiological and
Biochemical Zoology, 73, 12–22.
167. Hartig, T., Van den Berg, A.E., Hagerhall, C.M., Tomalak, M., Bauer, N.,
Hansmann, R., Ojala, A., Syngollitou, E., Carrus, G., Van Herzele, A., Bell, S.,
Podesta, M.T.C., Waaseth G. (2010). Health Benefits of Nature Experiences:
Psychological, Social and Cultural Processes. In: Nilsson K, Sangster M, Gallis
C, et al., (Eds). Forests, Trees and Human Health. Springer, New York. USA,
New York, NY.
168. He, Q., Wollersheim, C., Locke, M., Waitz, I. (2014). Estimation of the global
impacts of aviation-related noise using an income-based approach. Transport
Policy (in press, corrected proof).
169. Helldin, J.O., Collinder, P., Bengtsson, D., Karlberg, Å., Askling, J. (2013).
Assessment of traffic noise impact in important bird sites in Sweden – A practical
method for the regional scale. Oecologia Australis, 17(1), 48-62.
171. Hill, R.W., Wyse, G.A., Anderson, M. (2006). Fisiología animal. Ed. Médica
Panamericana, Spain, Madrid.
172. Holm, P., Goodsite, M.E., Cloetingh, S., Agnoletti, M., Moldan, B., Lang, D.J.,
Leemans, R., Oerstroem Moeller, J., Pardo Buendía, M., Pohl, W., Scholz, R.W.,
Sors, A., Vanheusden, B., Yusoff, K., Zondervan, R. (2013). Collaboration
146
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
between the natural, social and human sciences in Global Change Research.
Environmental Science & Policy, 28, 25-35.
173. Huber, S., Palme, R., Arnold, W. (2003). Effects of season, sex, and sample
collection on concentrations of fecal cortisol metabolites in red deer (Cervus
elaphus). General and Comparative Endocrinology, 130, 48e54.
174. IBM. (2010). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 19.0. IBM Corp. USA,
Armonk, NY.
175. Iglesias, C., Mata, C., Malo, J.E. (2012). The influence of traffic noise on
vertebrate road crossing through underpasses. Ambio, 41(2), 193–201.
177. Iglesias Merchan C., Diaz-Balteiro L. (2013). Noise pollution mapping approach
and accuracy on landscape scales. Science of The Total Environment,449, 115–
125.
178. Iglesias Merchan C., Diaz-Balteiro L., Soliño M., 2014. Noise pollution in
national parks: Soundscape and economic valuation. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 123, 1–9.
179. Ikelheimer, B., Plotkin, K. (2005). Noise Model Simulation (NMSim) User’s
Manual. Wyle Report WR 03-09 (J/N 45762.03). Wyle laboratories, USA,
Arlington, VA.
180. Insley, S.J., Southall, B.L. (2005). Source levels of northern elephant seal
vocalizations in air. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118, 2018.
181. Ising, H., Kruppa, B. (2004). Health effects caused by noise: Evidence in the
literature from the past 25 years. Noise Health, 6, 5-13.
183. IUCN. (1994). Parks for Life: Action for protected areas in Europe. Ed. IUCN-
The World Conservation Union. Switzerland, Gland.
184. Jaeger, J.A.G. (2000). Landscape division, splitting index, and effective mesh
size: new measures of landscape fragmentation. Landscape Ecology, 15, 115–
130.
185. Jaeger, J.A.G., Bertiller, R., Schwick, C., Müller, K., Steinmeier, C., Ewald,
K.C., Ghazoul, J. (2008). Implementing Landscape Fragmentation as an Indicator
in the Swiss Monitoring System of Sustainable Development (MONET). Journal
of Environmental Management, 88, 737–751.
147
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
186. Jaeger, J.A., Bowman, J., Brennan, J., Fahrig, L., Bert, D., Bouchard, J.,
Charbonneau, N., Frank, K., Gruber, B., Toschanowitz, K.T.V. (2005). Predicting
when animal populations are at risk from roads: an interactive model of road
avoidance behavior. Ecological Modelling, 185(2), 329-348.
187. Jaeger, J.A.G., Soukup, T., Madriñán, L.F., Schwick, C., Kienast, F. (2011).
Landscape fragmentation in Europe. EEA Report No.2. Environment European
Agency, Copenhagen Retrieved from
http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/landscape-fragmentation-in-europe
189. Jay, S., Jones, C., Slinn, P., Wood, C. (2007). Environmental impact assessment:
Retrospect and prospect. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 27(4), 287-
300.
190. Job, R.F.S., Hatfield, J. (2001). The impact of soundscape, enviroscape, and
psychscape on reaction to noise: Implications for evaluation and regulation of
noise effects. Noise Control Engineering Journal, 49(3), 120-124.
191. Joo,W., Gage, S.H., Kasten, E.P. (2011). Analysis and interpretation of
variability in soundscapes along an urban–rural gradient. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 103, 259-276.
193. Kerkvliet, J., Nowell, C. (2000). Tools for recreation management in parks: the
case of the Greater Yellowstone’s blue-ribbon fishery. Ecological Economics,
34(1), 89-100.
194. King, E.A., Rice, H.J. (2009). The development of a practical framework for
strategic noise mapping. Applied Acoustics, 70(8), 1116–27.
195. King, E.A., Murphy, E., Rice, H.J. (2011). Implementation of the EU
environmental noise directive: Lessons from the first phase of strategic noise
mapping and action planning in Ireland. Journal of Environmental Management,
92 (3), 756-764.
197. Ko, J.H., Chang, S.I., Lee, B.C. (2011). Noise impact assessment by utilizing
noise map and GIS: A case study in the city of Chungju, Republic of Korea.
Applied Acoustics, 72(8), 544-550.
198. Kociolek, A., Clevenger, A.P., St Clair, C.C., Proppe, D.S. (2011). Effects of
road networks on bird populations. Conservation Biology, 25(2), 241-249.
148
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
200. Krause, B. (2008). Anatomy of the soundscape. Journal of the Audio Engineering
Society, 56(1/2), 73-80.
201. Krause, B., Gage, S. H., Joo, W. (2011). Measuring and interpreting the temporal
variability in the soundscape at four places in Sequoia National Park. Landscape
Ecology, 26, 1247–1256.
204. Krog, N.H., Engdahl, B. (2004). Annoyance with aircraft noise in local
recreational areas, contingent on changes in exposure and other context variables.
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116(1), 323-333
205. Kuehn, R., Hindenlang, K.E., Holzgang, O., Senn, J., Stoeckle, B., Sperisen, C.
(2007). Genetic effect of transportation infrastructure on roe deer populations
(Capreolus capreolus). Journal of Heredity, 98, 13–22.
207. Lam, K.C., Ma, W.C. (2012). Road traffic noise exposure in residential
complexes built at different times between 1950 and 2000 in Hong Kong.
Applied Acoustics, 73(11), 1112-1120.
208. Lawson, S.R., Manning, R.E., Valliere, W.A., Wang, B. (2003). Proactive
monitoring and adaptive management of social carrying capacity in Arches
National Park: an application of computer simulation modeling. Journal of
Environmental Management, 68 (3), 305-13.
209. Leblond, M., Dussault, C., Ouellet, J.-P. (2013). Avoidance of roads by large
herbivores and its relation to disturbance intensity. Journal of Zoology, 289, 32–
40.
210. Lee, A.C.K., Maheswaran, R. (2011). The health benefits of urban green spaces:
a review of the evidence. Journal of Public Health, 33(2), 212-222.
212. Leung, Y.F. (2012). Recreation ecology research in East Asia's protected areas:
Redefining impacts?. Journal for Nature Conservation, 20(6), 349-356.
149
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
214. Licitra, G. (2012). Noise Mapping in the EU: Models and Procedures. CRC
Press. USA, Boca Raton, FL.
215. Lijesen, M., Straaten, W.V.D., Dekkers, J., Elk, R.V., Blokdijk, J. (2010). How
much noise reduction at airports?. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and
Environment, 15(1), 51-59.
216. Liu, J., Kang, J. Luo, T., Behm,H., Coppack, T. (2013). Spatiotemporal
variability of soundscapes in a multiple functional urban area. Landscape and
Urban Planning, 115, 1-9.
217. Lynch, E., Joyce, D., Fristrup, K. (2011). An assessment of noise audibility and
sound levels in U.S. National Parks. Landscape Ecology, 26 (9), 1297–1309.
219. Mace, B.L., Bell, P. A., Loomis, R. J. (1999). Aesthetic, affective, and cognitive
effects of noise on natural landscape assessment. Society and Natural Resources
12 (3), 225-242.
220. Mace, B.L., Bell, P. A., Loomis, R. J. (2004). Visibility and natural quiet in
national parks and wilderness areas - Psychological considerations. Environment
and Behavior, 36(1), 5-31.
221. Mace, B.L., Corser, G.C., Zitting, L., Denison J. (2013). Effects of overflights on
the national park experience. Journal of Environmental Psychology 35, 30-39.
222. Maffei, L., Iachini, T., Masullo, M., Aletta F., Sorrentino F., Senese, V. P.,
Ruotolo F., (2013). The Effects of Vision-Related Aspects on Noise Perception of
Wind Turbines in Quiet Areas. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 10, 1681-
1697.
224. McClure, C.J.W., Ware, H.E., Carlisle, J., Kaltenecker, G., Barber, J. (2013). An
experimental investigation into the effects of traffic noise on distributions of
birds: avoiding the phantom road. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological
Sciences, 280, 20132290.
225. McCowan, B., DiLorenzo, A. M., Abichandani, S., Borelli, C., Cullor, J. S.
(2002). Bioacoustic tools for enhancing animal management and productivity:
effects of recorded calf vocalizations on milk production in dairy cows. Applied
Animal Behaviour Science, 77(1), 13-20.
226. Maithani, S. (2009). A neural network based urban growth model of an Indian
city. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, 37, 363–376.
150
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
227. Manning, R., Lawson, S., Newman, P., Budruk, M., Valliere, W., Laven, D.,
Bacon, J. (2004). Visitor Perceptions of Recreation-related Resource Impacts. In
R. Buckley (Ed.), Environmental Impacts of Ecotourism (pp. 261-273). CABI
Publishing, Griffith University, Australia.
228. Manvell, D., Hartog van Banda, E. (2011). Good practice in the use of noise
mapping software. Applied Acoustics, 72(8), 527-533.
229. Marcantonio, M., Rocchini, D., Geri, F., Bacaro, G., Amici, V. (2013).
Biodiversity, roads, & landscape fragmentation: Two Mediterranean cases.
Applied Geography, 42, 63-72.
231. Marin, L.D., Newman, P.N., Manning, R., Vaske, J.J., Stack, D. (2013).
Motivation and Acceptability Norms of Human-Caused Sound in Muir Woods
National Monument. Leisure Sciences, 33(2), 147-161.
232. MARM. (2011). Instrucciones para la entrega de los datos asociados a los mapas
estratégicos de ruido de la 2ª Fase Grandes ejes viarios, ferroviarios y
aglomeraciones. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Medio Rural y Marino,
Madrid. Retrieved from
http://sicaweb.cedex.es/docs/documentos/INSTRUCCIONES_MER_2Fase_Octu
bre2011.zip
235. Matos, J.C.B., Flindell, I., Le Masurier, P., Pownall, C. (2013). A comparison of
hedonic price and stated preference methods to derive monetary values for
aircraft noise disturbance and annoyance. Transportation Research Part D:
Transport and Environment, 20, 40–47.
237. McGarigal, K., Cushman, S.A., Ene, E. (2012). FRAGSTATS v4: Spatial Pattern
Analysis Program for Categorical and Continuous Maps. University of
Massachusetts, Amherst. Retrieved from
http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html
151
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
238. McGarigal K., Marks B.J. (1995). Fragstats: spatial pattern analysis program for
quantifying landscape structure. Forest Science Department, Oregon State
University. USA, Corvallis, OR
239. McGarigal, K., Romme, W. H., Crist, M., Roworth, E. (2001). Cumulative effects
of roads and logging on landscape structure in the San Juan Mountains, Colorado
(USA). Landscape Ecology, 16(4), 327-349.
240. MDO. (2013). El Parque Nacional del Guadarrama ya es el séptimo más visitado
de España. Madridiario.es. Retrieved April 14, 2014 from
http://madridiario.es/medioambiente/parque-nacional-sierra-
guadarrama/turismo/actividades-gratuitas/404875
241. Memmott, J., Cadotte, M., Hulme, P.E., Kerby, G., Milner‐Gulland, E.J.,
Whittingham, M.J. (2010). Putting applied ecology into practice. Journal of
Applied Ecology, 47(1), 1-4.
242. Mennitt, D., Fristrup, K., Nelson, L., McKenna, M. (2013). Mapping the extent of
noise on a national scale using geospatial models. The Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America, 134, 4159-4159.
243. Miller, N.P. (2008). US National Parks and management of park soundscapes: A
review. Applied Acoustics, 69(2), 77–92.
244. Millspaugh, J.J., Woods, R.J., Hunt, K.E., Raedeke, K.J., Brundige, G.C.,
Washburn, B.E., Wasser, S.K. (2001). Fecal glucocorticoid assays and the
physiological stress response in elk. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 29(3), 899-907.
245. Mitchell, R.C., Carson, R.T. (1989).Using Surveys To Value Public Goods: The
Contingent Valuation Method. Resources for the Future, USA, New York, NY.
246. Moore, J., Balmford, A., Allnutt, T., Burgess, N. (2004). Integrating costs into
conservation planning across Africa. Biological Conservation, 117(3), 343-350.
247. Mora, C., Sale, P.F. (2011). Ongoing global biodiversity loss and the need to
move beyond protected areas: a review of the technical and practical
shortcomings of protected areas on land and sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series,
434, 251–266.
248. Morán-lópez, R., Sánchez, J.M., Costillo, E., Corbacho, C., Villegas. A. (2006).
Spatial variation in anthropic and natural factors regulating the breeding success
of the Cinereous vulture (Aegypius monachus) in the SW Iberian Peninsula.
Biological Conservation, 130, 169-182.
249. Moreno-Opo, R., Fernández-Olalla, M., Margalida, A., Arredondo, A., Guil, F.
(2012). Effect of Methodological and Ecological Approaches on Heterogeneity of
Nest-Site Selection of a Long-Lived Vulture. Plos One 7(3): e33469.
250. Morelli, F., Pruscini, F., Santolini, R., Perna, P., Benedetti, Y., Sisti, D. (2013).
Landscape heterogeneity metrics as indicators of bird diversity: Determining the
optimal spatial scales in different landscapes. Ecological Indicators, 34, 372–379.
152
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
251. Murphy, E., King, E.A. (2010). Strategic environmental noise mapping:
Methodological issues concerning the implementation of the EU Environmental
Noise Directive and their policy implications. Environment International, 36,
290–298.
252. Münzel, T., Gori, T., Babisch, W., Basner, M. (2014). Cardiovascular effects of
environmental noise exposure. European Heart Journal, 35(13), 829-836.
253. Naidoo, R., Balmford, A., Ferraro, P.J., Polasky, S., Ricketts, T.H., Rouget, M.
(2006). Integrating economic costs into conservation planning. Trends in Ecology
& Evolution, 21(12), 681-687.
254. Naidoo, R., Balmford, A., Costanza, R., Fisher, B., Green, R.E., Lehner, B.,T.,
Malcolm, T.R., Ricketts, T.H. (2008). Global mapping of ecosystem services and
conservation priorities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
105(28), 9495-9500.
255. Näf, R.R. (2013). Guía Práctica para el Análisis y la Gestión del Ruido Industrial.
Ed. FREMAP, Spain, Madrid, Majadahonda.
256. Navarro-Castilla, A., Mata, C., Ruiz-Capillas, P., Palme, R., Malo, J.E., Barja, I.
(2014). Are Motorways Potential Stressors of Roadside Wood Mice (Apodemus
sylvaticus) Populations? Plos One, 9(3), e91942.
257. Newman, P., Fristrup, K., Trevino, K., Lawson, S., Taff, D., Weinzimmer, D.,
Archie, T. (2012). Protecting soundscapes in U.S. National Parks: lessons learned
and tools developed. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 131(4),
3381.
258. Newton, A.C., Echeverría, C., Cantarello, E., Bolados, G. (2011). Projecting
impacts of human disturbances to inform conservation planning and management
in a dryland forest landscape. Biological Conservation, 144(7), 1949-1960.
259. Nilsson, M.E., Berglund, B. (2006). Soundscape quality in suburban green areas
and city parks. Acta Acustica united with Acustica, 92, 903–911
261. NPS. (2004). Director’s order #47: soundscape preservation and noise
management. National Park Service, Retrieved from
http://www.nps.gov/policy/DOrders/DOrder47.html
262. NPS. (2006). National Park Service Management Policies. National Park Service.
NPS. Retrieved from http://www.nps.gov/policy/mp2006.pdf
263. NPS. (2013). Acoustical Monitoring Training Manual. National Park Service.
Natural Sounds and Night Skies Division. Fort Collins, Colorado. Retrieved from
http://www.nature.nps.gov/sound/resources.cfm#monitor
153
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
264. Olsen, L.M., Dale, V.H., Foster, T. (2006). Landscape patterns as indicators of
ecological change at Fort Benning, Georgia, USA. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 79, 137–149.
265. Palomino, D., Carrascal, L.M. (2007). Threshold distances to nearby cities and
roads influence the bird community of a mosaic landscape. Biological
Conservation, 140, 100–109.
266. Parris, K.M., Schneider, A. (2008). Impacts of traffic noise and traffic volume on
birds of roadside habitats. Ecology and Society 14(1), 29. Retrieved from
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art29/
267. Pascuan, C.G., Uran, S.L., Gonzalez-Murano, M.R., Wald, M.R., Guelman, L.R.,
Genaro, A.M. (2014). Immune alterations induced by chronic noise exposure:
Comparison with restraint stress in BALB/c and C57Bl/6 mice. Journal of
immunotoxicology, 11(1), 78-83.
268. Pater, L.L., Grubb, T.G., Delaney, D.K. (2009). Recommendations for improved
assessment of noise impacts on wildlife. The Journal of Wildlife Management,
73(5), 788-795.
269. Patón, D., Romero, F., Cuenca, J., Escudero, J.C. (2012). Tolerance to noise in 91
bird species from 27 urban gardens of Iberian Peninsula. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 104, 1– 8.
270. Paudel, S., Yuan, F. (2012). Assessing landscape changes and dynamics using
patch analysis and GIS modeling. International Journal of Applied Earth
Observation and Geoinformation, 16: 66–76.
273. Pekin, B.K., Jung, J., Villanueva-Rivera, L.J., Pijanowski, B.C., Ahumada, J.A.
(2012). Modeling acoustic diversity using soundscape recordings and LIDAR-
derived metrics of vertical forest structure in a neotropical rainforest. Landscape
Ecology, 27, 1513–1522.
274. Peris, S.J., Pescador, M. (2004). Effects of traffic noise on paserine populations
in Mediterranean wooded pastures. Applied Acoustics, 65 (4), 357– 366.
275. PIA. (2011). Noches como las de antes. Páginas de Información Ambiental, 37,
4-9. http://www.starlight2007.net/pdf/RevistaMedioAmbienteLaRiojan37.pdf
276. Pieretti, N., Farina, A., Morri, D. (2011). A new methodology to infer the singing
activity of an avian community: the Acoustic Complexity Index (ACI).
Ecological Indicators, 11(3), 868-873.
154
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
277. Pieretti, N., Farina, A. (2013). Application of a recently introduced index for
acoustic complexity to an avian soundscape with traffic noise. The Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America, 134(1), 891-900.
279. Pijanowski, B.B., Farina, A., Gage, S.H., Dumyahn, S.L., Krause, B.L. (2011a).
What is soundscape ecology? An introduction and overview of an emerging new
science. Landscape Ecology, 26, 1213–1232.
280. Pijanowski, B.C., Villanueva-Rivera, L.J., Dumyahn, S. L., Farina, A., Krause, B.
L., Napoletano, B. .M., Gage, S. H., Pieretti, N. (2011b). Soundscape Ecology:
The Science of Sound in the Landscape. BioScience, 61 (3). 203-216.
281. Pilcher, E.J., Newman, P., Manning, R.E. (2009). Understanding and managing
experiential aspects of soundscapes at Muir woods national monument.
Environmental Management, 43 (3), 425-35.
282. Pinto, F.A.C., Mardones, M.D.M. (2009). Noise mapping of densely populated
neighborhoods – example of Copacabana, Rio de Janeiro – Brazil. Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment, 155, 309–318.
283. Piñeiro, A., Barja, I., Silván G., Illera, J.C. (2012). Effects of tourist pressure and
reproduction on physiological stress response in wildcats: management
implications for species conservation. Wildlife Research, 39(6), 532-539.
284. Polasky, S., Nelson, E., Lonsdorf, E., Fackler, P., Starfield, A. (2005).
Conserving species in a working landscape: land use with biological and
economic objectives. Ecological applications, 15(4), 1387-1401.
285. Ponti, M., Boitani, A., Ramella, F. (2013). The European transport policy: Its
main issues. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 1(1-2), 53–62.
286. Pontius, G.R. (2000). Quantification error versus location error in comparison of
categorical maps. Photogrammetric, Engineering and Remote Sensing, 66 (8):
1011–1016.
287. Prada, A., Vázquez, M.X., Soliño, M. (2012). Desarrollo sostenible en la costa
gallega. Serie Economía y Territorio. Ed. Centro de Investigación Económica y
Financiera, CIEF / Fundación Novacaixagalicia, Spain. Retrieved from
http://www.obrasocialncg.com/es/noticia/publicacion_desarrollo_sostenible_en_l
a_costa_gallega
288. Preisler, H.K., Ager, A.A., Wisdom, M.J. (2006). Statistical methods for
analysing responses of wildlife to human disturbance. Journal of Applied
Ecology, 43, 164–172.
155
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
289. Pressey, R.L., Cabeza, M., Watts, M.E., Cowling, R.M., Wilson, K.A. (2007).
Conservation planning in a changing world. Trends in ecology & evolution,
22(11), 583-592.
290. Puig, E. (2011). Gestión ambiental del ruido en Catalunya. Jornada sobre la
mejora y recuperación de la calidad acústica, planes de acción. Departament de
Territori i Sostenibilitat, Generalitat de Catalunya, Spain, Barcelona.
291. Radford, K.G., James, P. (2013). Changes in the value of ecosystem services
along a rural–urban gradient: A case study of Greater Manchester, UK.
Landscape and Urban Planning, 109, 117-127.
292. Raimbault, M., Lavandier, C., Bérengierc, M. (2003). Ambient sound assessment
of urban environments: field studies in two French cities. Applied Acoustics, 64
(12), 1241–1256.
296. Reijnen, R., Foppen, R., Braak, C. T., Thissen, J. (1995). The effects of car traffic
on breeding bird populations in woodland. III. Reduction of density in relation to
the proximity of main roads. Journal of Applied Ecology, 32, 187-202.
297. Reijnen, R., Foppen, R., Meeuwsen, H. (1996). The effects of traffic on the
density of breeding birds in Dutch agricultural grasslands. Biological
conservation, 75(3), 255-260.
298. Rempel, R.S., Kaukinen, D., Carr, A.P. (2012). Patch Analyst and Patch Grid.
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Centre for Northern Forest Ecosystem
Research, Canada, Thunder Bay, ON.
299. Rheindt, F.E. (2003). The impact of roads on birds: Does song frequency play a
role in determining susceptibility to noise pollution?. Journal für Ornithologie,
144(3), 295-306.
301. Romero, L.M. (2004). Physiological stress in ecology: lessons from biomedical
research. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 19(5), 249-255.
302. Romo, J.M., Gómez, A. (2011). La percepción social del ruido como
contaminante. In Ordenamiento territorial y participación social: problemas y
posibilidades. Ed. Aguilar Robledo, M., Delgado López, E., Vázquez Solís, V.,
156
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
303. Ruiz-Luna, A., Berlanga-Robles, C.A. (2003). Land use, land cover changes and
coastal lagoon surface reduction associated with urban growth in northwest
Mexico. Landscape Ecology, 18, 159–171.
305. Saha, D.C., Padhy, P.K. (2011). Effect of air and noise pollution on species
diversity and population density of forest birds at Lalpahari, West Bengal, India.
Science of the Total Environment; 409(24), 5328–5336.
306. Sala, O.E., Chapin, F.S., Armesto, J.J., Berlow, E., Bloomfield, J., Dirzo, R.,
Huber-Sanwald, E., Huenneke, L.F., Jackson, R.B., Kinzig, A., Leemans, R.,
Lodge, D.M., Mooney, H.A., Oesterheld, M., Poff, N.L., Sykes, M.T., Walker,
B.H., Walke,r M., Wall, D.H. (2000). Biodiversity-global biodiversity scenarios
for the year 2100. Science, 287(5459), 1770-1774.
307. Šálek, M., Svobodová, J., Zasadil, P. (2010). Edge effect of low-traffic forest
roads on bird communities in secondary production forests in central Europe.
Landscape ecology, 25(7), 1113-1124.
308. Salerno, F., Viviano, G., Manfredi, E.C., Caroli, P., Thakuri, S., Tartari, G.
(2013). Multiple Carrying Capacities from a management-oriented perspective to
operationalize sustainable tourism in protected areas. Journal of Environmental
Management, 128, 116–125.
310. Sánchez, V., Guiza, B. (1989). Glosario de términos sobre medio ambiente. Serie
Educación Ambiental para América Latina y el Caribe. UNESCO/OREALC,
Chile, Santiago.
311. Saura, S. (2002). Effects of minimum mapping unit on land cover data spatial
configuration and composition. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 23 (22):
4853–4880.
312. Saura, S. 2010. Del rodal al paisaje: un cambio de escala, nuevas perspectivas
para la planificación y ordenación forestales. Conferencias y Ponencias del 5º
Congreso Forestal Español. Cuadernos de la Sociedad Española de Ciencias
Forestales, 31, 213-239
313. Saxen, S. W. (2008). Park visitors and the natural soundscape: Winter experience
dimensions in Yellowstone National Park. Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of
Montana, Missoula, MT. Retrieved from
http://etd.lib.umt.edu/theses/available/etd-12112008-123204/unrestricted/umi-
umt-1108.pdf
157
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
314. Schafer, R.M. (1977). The Tuning of the World. Random House Inc., USA, New
York
315. Schuckmann, S.W., Gnatzy, T., Darkow, I.L., von der Gracht, H.A. (2012).
Analysis of factors influencing the development of transport infrastructure until
the year 2030-A Delphi based scenario study. Technological Forecasting and
Social Change, 79(8), 1373-1387.
316. Segués, F. (2007). Conceptos básicos del ruido ambiental. Ministerio de Medio
Ambiente – CEDEX, Spain, Madrid. Retrieved from
http://sicaweb.cedex.es/docs/documentos/Conceptos-Basicos-del-ruido-
ambiental.pdf
317. Selva, N., Kreft, S., Kati, V., Schluck, M., Jonsson, B.-G., Mihok, B., Okarma,
H., Ibisch P.L. (2011). Roadless and low-traffic areas as conservation targets in
Europe. Environmental Management, 48(5), 865–877.
319. Seong, J. C., Park, T. H., Ko, J. H., Chang, S. I., Kim, M., Holt, J. B., Mehdi, M.
R. (2011). Modeling road traffic noise and estimated human exposure in Fulton
County, Georgia, USA. Environment International, 37(8), 1336-1341.
320. Sheriff, M., Dantzer, B., Delehanty, B., Palme, R., Boonstra, R. (2011).
Measuring stress in wildlife: techniques for quantifying glucocorticoids.
Oecologia, 166, 869e887.
322. Slabbekoorn, H., Bouton, N. (2008). Soundscape orientation: a new field in need
of sound investigation. Animal Behaviour, 76 (4), e5-e8.
323. Slabbekoorn, H., Peet, M. (2003). Ecology: Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban
noise. Nature, 424, 267.
324. Slabbekoorn, H., Ripmeester, E.A.P. (2007). Birdsong and anthropogenic noise:
implications and applications for conservation. Molecular Ecology, 17, 72–83.
325. Slabbekoorn, H., Bouton, N., van Opzeeland, I., Coers, A., ten Cate, C., Popper,
A. N. (2010). A noisy spring: the impact of globally rising underwater sound
levels on fish. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 25(7), 419-427.
326. Slabbekoorn, H., Yeh, P., Hunt, K. (2007). Sound transmission and song
divergence: a comparison of urban and forest acoustics. The Condor, 109(1), 67-
78.
158
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
327. Snyder, S.D. (2000). Active noise control primer. Springer-Verlag New York.
USA, New York, NY.
328. St Clair, C.C., Forrest, A. (2009). Impacts of vehicle traffic on the distribution
and behaviour of rutting elk, Cervus elaphus. Behaviour, 146(3), 393-413.
329. Stack, D.W., Newman, P.N., Manning, R.E., Fristrup, K.M. (2011). Reducing
visitor noise levels at Muir Woods National Monument using experimental
management The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 129(3),1375-80.
330. Summers, P.D., Cunnington, G.M., Fahrig L. (2011). Are the negative effects of
roads on breeding birds caused by traffic noise?. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48,
1527–1534.
331. Suter, A.H. (2001). Naturaleza y efectos del ruido. En Stellman, J.G. (2001).
Enciclopedia de Salud y Seguridad en el Trabajo. Ministerio de Trabajo y
Asuntos Sociales, Spain, Madrid.
332. Szeremeta, B., Zannin, P.H.T. (2009). Analysis and evaluation of soundscapes in
public parks through interviews and measurement of noise. Science of the Total
Environment, 407(24), 6143-6149.
334. Tagliafierro, C., Longo, A., Van Eetvelde, V., Antrop, M., Hutchinson, W.G.
(2013). Landscape economic valuation by integrating landscape ecology into
landscape economics. Environmental Science & Policy, 32, 26-36.
335. Tardieu, L., Roussel, S., Salles, J.M. (2013). Assessing and mapping global
climate regulation service loss induced by Terrestrial Transport Infrastructure
construction. Ecosystem Services, 4, 73–81.
336. Tolón, A., Lastra, X. (2008). Los espacios naturales protegidos. Concepto,
evolución y situación actual en España. M+A. Revista Electrónica de
Medioambiente, 5, 1-25
337. Towsey, M., Wimmer, J., Williamson, I., Roe, P. (2013). The use of acoustic
indices to determine avian species richness in audio-recordings of the
environment. Ecological Informatics (in press, corrected proof).
338. Tyrväinen, L., Mäkinen, K., Schipperijn, J. (2007). Tools for mapping social
values of urban woodlands and other green areas. Landscape and Urban Planning,
79(1), 5-19.
339. Tzoulas, K., Korpela, K., Venn, S., Yli-Pelkonen, V., Kaźmierczak, A., Niemela,
J., James, P. (2007). Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using
green infrastructure: a literature review. Landscape and urban planning, 81(3),
167-178.
159
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
340. Underwood, A.J. (1992). Beyond BACI: the detection of environmental impacts
on populations in the real, but variable, world. Journal of Experimental Marine
Biology and Ecology, 161, 145-178.
341. Van den Berg, A.E., Maas, J., Verheij, R.A., Groenewegen, P.P. (2010). Green
space as a buffer between stressful life events and health. Social science &
medicine, 70(8), 1203-1210.
342. Van der Ree, R., Jaeger, J.A., Van der Grift, E.A., Clevenger, A.P. (2011).
Effects of Roads and Traffic on Wildlife Populations and Landscape Function:
Road Ecology is Moving toward Larger Scales. Ecology & Society, 16(1), 48.
343. Velarde, M.D., Fry, G., Tveit, M. (2007). Health effects of viewing landscapes–
Landscape types in environmental psychology. Urban Forestry & Urban
Greening, 6(4), 199-212.
344. Veldkamp, A., Verburg, P.H. (2004). Modelling land use change and
environmental impact. Journal of Environmental Management, 72(1), 1-3.
346. Vogiatzis, K. (2012). Airport environmental noise mapping and land use
management as an environmental protection action policy tool. The case of the
Larnaka International Airport (Cyprus). Science of the Total Environment, 424,
162–173.
347. Votsi, N.E.P., Drakou, E.G., Mazaris, A.D., Kallimanis, A.S., Pantis, J.D. (2012).
Distance-based assessment of open country Quiet Areas in Greece. Landscape
and Urban Planning, 104, 279-288.
348. Votsi, N. E. P., Mazaris, A. D., Kallimanis, A. S., Drakou, E. G., Pantis, J. D.
(2014). Landscape structure and diseases profile: associating land use type
composition with disease distribution. International Journal of Environmental
Health Research, 24(2), 176-187.
349. Wang, F., Xu, Y.J. (2010). Comparison of remote sensing change detection
techniques for assessing hurricane damage to forests. Environmental Monitoring
and Assessment, 162, 311–326.
350. Ward Thompson, C. (2011). Linking landscape and health: The recurring theme.
Landscape and Urban Planning, 99(3), 187-195.
351. Warren, P.S., Katti, M., Ermann, M., Brazel, A. (2006). Urban bioacoustics: it's
not just noise. Animal behaviour, 71(3), 491-502.
352. Weir, C.R., Dolman, S.J. (2007). Comparative review of the regional marine
mammal mitigation guidelines implemented during industrial seismic surveys,
and guidance towards a worldwide standard. Journal of International Wildlife
Law and Policy, 10(1), 1-27.
160
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
355. WHO. (1948). Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health Organization as
adopted by the International Health Conference, New York, 19–22 June, 1946;
signed on 22 July 1946 by the representatives of 61 States (Official Records of
the World Health Organization, no. 2, p. 100) and entered into force on 7 April
1948. USA, New York, NY.
356. WHO. (2010). Urban planning, environment and health. From evidence to policy
action. Meeting report. World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe,
Denmark, Copenhagen.
357. WHO. (2011). European Centre for Environment and Health. Burden of disease
from environmental noise quantification of healthy life years lost in Europe 2011.
World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, Denmark, Copenhagen.
358. Wisdom, S. (2007). Assessing noise impacts on wildlife under the National
Environmental Policy Act. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,
122(5), 3082.
359. Wisdom, S. (2008). Assessing noise impacts on wildlife under the National
Environmental Policy Act. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,
124(4), 2449.
360. Wisdom, M.J., Cimon, N.J., Johnson, B.K., Garton, E.O., Thomas, J.W. (2004).
Spatial partitioning by mule deer and elk in relation to traffic. In Transactions of
the 69th North American Wildlife and Natural Resource Conference. Spokane,
Washington, Wildlife Management Institute. Retrieved from
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/journals/pnw_2004_wisdom002.pdf
361. Wu, J., Shen, W., Sun, W., Tueller, P.T. (2003). Empirical patterns of the effects
of changing scale on landscape metrics. Landscape Ecology, 17, 761–782.
362. Wu, J. (2004). Effects of changing scale on landscape pattern analysis: scaling
relations. Landscape Ecology, 19, 125–138.
363. Xie, D., Liu, Y., Chen, J. (2011). Mapping urban environmental noise: A land use
regression method. Environmental Science & Technology, 45 (17), 7358–7364.
364. Young, K.M., Walker, S.L., Lanthier, C., Waddell, W.T., Monfort, S.L. and
Brown, J.L. (2004). Noninvasive monitoring of adrenocortical activity in
carnivores by fecal glucocorticoid analyses. General and Comparative
Endocrinology, 137, 148–165.
161
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
367. Zannin, P.H.T., Sant'Ana, D.Q. (2011). Noise mapping at different stages of a
freeway redevelopment project - A case study in Brazil. Applied Acoustics, 72,
479-486.
368. Zhong, L., Deng, J., Song, Z., Ding, P. (2011). Research on environmental
impacts of tourism in China: Progress and prospect. Journal of Environmental
Management, 92 (11), 2972-2983.
369. Zuk, M., Garibay Blanco, V., Iniestra Gómez, R., López Villegas, M.T., Rojas-
Bracho, L., Laguna Monrroy, I. (2006). Introducción a la evaluación de los
impactos de las termoeléctricas de México. Un estudio de caso en Txupan,
Veracruz. Ed. Instituto Nacional de Ecología, México.
370. Zwijacz-Kozica, T., Selva, N., Barja, I., Silván, G., Martínez-Fernández, L.,
Illera, J.C., Jodłowski, M. (2013). Concentration of fecal cortisol metabolites in
chamois in relation to tourist pressure in Tatra National Park (South Poland).
Acta theriologica, 58(2), 215-222.
162
APÉNDICES
8 APÉNDICES
163
APÉNDICES
164
APÉNDICES
165
APÉNDICES
Efectos nocivos (harmful effects): los efectos negativos sobre la salud humana o
sobre el medio ambiente.
Emisor acústico: cualquier actividad, infraestructura, equipo, maquinaria o
comportamiento que genere contaminación acústica.
Evaluación acústica: el resultado de aplicar cualquier método que permita calcular,
predecir, estimar o medir la calidad acústica y los efectos de la contaminación
acústica.
Índice de ruido (noise indicator): una magnitud física para describir el ruido
ambiental, que tiene una relación con un efecto nocivo.
Índice acústico: magnitud física para describir la contaminación acústica, que tiene
relación con los efectos producidos por ésta.
Índice de emisión: índice acústico relativo a la contaminación acústica generada
por un emisor.
Índice de inmisión: índice acústico relativo a la contaminación acústica existente en
un lugar durante un tiempo determinado.
Mapa de ruido (noise mapping): la presentación de datos sobre una situación
acústica existente o pronosticada en función de un índice de ruido, en la que se
indicará la superación de cualquier valor límite pertinente vigente, el número de
personas afectadas en una zona específica o el número de viviendas expuestas a
determinados valores de un índice de ruido en una zona específica.
Mapa estratégico de ruido (strategic noise map): un mapa de ruido diseñado para
poder evaluar globalmente la exposición al ruido en una zona determinada, debido a
la existencia de distintas fuentes de ruido, o para poder realizar predicciones
globales para dicha zona.
Molestia (annoyance): el grado de perturbación que provoca el ruido a la
población, determinado mediante encuestas sobre el terreno.
Objetivo de calidad acústica: conjunto de requisitos que, en relación con la
contaminación acústica, deben cumplirse en un momento dado en un espacio
determinado.
Planes de acción (action plans): los planes encaminados a afrontar las cuestiones
relativas a ruido y a sus efectos, incluida la reducción del ruido si fuere necesario.
Planificación acústica (acoustical planning): el control del ruido futuro mediante
medidas planificadas, como la ordenación territorial, la ingeniería de sistemas de
166
APÉNDICES
167