Sand Dune Restoration in North Brittany, France - Global ...

Sand Dune Restoration in North Brittany, France: 

A 10-Year Monitoring Study 

Françoise Rozé 1,2 and Servane Lemauviel 1 

Abstract 

Dunes, which account for 13% of the Ille et Vilaine north 

Brittany coast, France, were degraded by high tourist 

pressure, and they were restored from 1988 onward. Ten 

years after commencing work an assessment of the 

restoration was made on three dunes: Les Chevrets, 

L’Anse Du Guesclin, and Le Verger. Annual monitoring 

of the vegetation and dune morphology provided an 

opportunity to study the restoration process. The dune 

front, which is similar to a reference pioneer dune, lies in 

front of the mobile dune. The highest part of the dune is an 

advanced stage of mobile dune. The restoration of the 

fixed rear dune was accomplished neither in terms of 

vegetation composition nor in terms of species richness. 

The vegetation parameter study allows differentiation 

between the dune front, the dune summit, and the rear 

dune. The variation in species richness and floristic 

composition from one zone to another can be explained 

by abiotic factors such as salinity and the accretion of sand. 

The restoration was satisfactory in terms of the geomorphology. 

Marram grass is a good tool for restoring the 

topography, but it will take a very long time to restore the 

conservation value of the dune. 

Key words: dune, marram grass, reference ecosystems, 

restoration, vegetation. 

Introduction 

In Ille et Vilaine, northern Brittany, dunes only account 

for 13% of the total coastline and cover 200 ha (Meur et al. 

1992). These are unusual ecosystems that can be defined as 

boundary dunes (Paskoff 1985) or residual dunes (Olson & 

Van der Maarel 1989). They lie between two rocky promontories 

and have special features because of their small 

size. 

Western France, and particularly Brittany, is a region 

that has attracted very large numbers of tourists since the 

Second World War (Guilcher & Hallégouët 1991). The 

dunes have been greatly disturbed by factors such as sand 

quarrying and erosion caused by trampling and automobile 

traffic. 

A restoration program has been implemented on the 

dunes of the Ille et Vilaine since 1988. The protection 

works have been conducted by the Ille et Vilaine local 

council. Wooden fences have been installed, and marram 

grass (Ammophila arenaria) has been planted using standard 

methods (Jacamon 1975; Despeyrou 1984; Boucheron 

1987; Klomp 1989; Van der Maarel 1997). In some cases 

initial landscaping was conducted (Duffaud 1998). The 

study area consisted of three dunes: Les Chevrets, 

L’Anse Du Guesclin, and Le Verger. The dune morphology 

and the vegetation were monitored from 1989. The 

1 Université de Rennes 1, Equipe ‘‘Dynamique des communautés,’’ U.M.R. 

ECOBIO 6553, Complexe scientifique de Beaulieu, 35042 Rennes cedex, 

France. 

2 Address correspondence to F. Rozé, email francoise.roze@univrennes1.fr 

Ó 2004 Society for Ecological Restoration International 

aim of the restoration was to recreate the dune topography 

and return to a landscape including a pioneer dune, a 

mobile dune, and stabilized dune, with all characteristics 

of an undisturbed ecosystem. Ten years after the start of 

work a first assessment of the restoration program was 

made. 

Methods 

The study sites are situated along a 5-km length of coastline 

(54°10 0 N, 4°70 0 W). They have the same geomorphological 

origin and similar sand. After installing picket 

fencing around the whole of each dune system without 

soil preparing, the enclosures were immediately planted 

with marram grass over their entire area. The plants were 

kept in place and planted during the management day 

(April 1988) without other treatments. 

The Les Chevrets dune, with an area of about 4 ha, was 

heavily degraded before 1988 by a campsite and was 

re-landscaped before the start of restoration. The L’Anse 

Du Guesclin dune, also with an area of about 4 ha, is 

bounded to the rear by a road and had a high visitor 

pressure. The Le Verger dune has an area of about 2.5 ha 

and had been subjected to extensive sand quarrying. 

Surveys 

At each site two lines measuring 50 m in length were set up 

from the beach to the rear dune. Three permanent parallel 

transects were installed at right angles to each of these 

lines as a function of their topographical position in 1989: 

one in front of the dune, the second at the summit, and the 

MARCH 2004 Restoration Ecology Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 29–35 29

Sand Dune Restoration in North Brittany, France 

third in the rear dune. Topographical measurements were 

made from 1989 to 1998 using a theodolite. These provided 

information on the accumulation of sand from the beach to 

the rear dune. 

Every year, in June, the vegetation was surveyed using 

the permanent transect method (Daget & Poissonet 1971; 

Gloaguen & Touffet 1974). This linear method was chosen 

because it is well suited to the vegetation structure and was 

more reliable than measurements on quadrats. One hundred 

permanent points were distributed at 10 cm intervals 

along these transects, whose ends were marked by posts. 

The vegetation was recorded as the presence or absence of 

each species at each point. The frequency of the species in 

the 100 points provided an estimate of their cover. 

Statistical Analysis 

The accumulation of sand, the frequency of plant species, 

and the species richness of the vegetation in the three 

zones, predetermined by their topography, were compared 

in each year using one-way analyses of variance 

(ANOVA) (Sokal & Rohlf 1969). Means were compared 

using Tukey tests (Sherrer 1984). The normality of the 

data was checked by Ryan–Joiner tests (p 5 90%) and 

equality of variances by Levene tests (p 5 95%). The species 

richness data were log-10 transformed. 

Reference Ecosystems 

The aim of the restoration was to re-establish the complete 

dune landscape, including the plant communities of the 

pioneer dune, mobile dune, and fixed dune. The original 

state was not known precisely, because the degradation 

had taken place gradually. Since the start of this operation, 

studies on references in restoration ecology (White & 

Walker 1997; Egan & Howell 2000) encouraged us 

to describe our aims in terms of European habitats. The 

‘‘Mobile pioneer dunes,’’ adopted in version Eur 15 of 

the Natura 2000 habitats document (Romao 1996) under 

code 2110, is equivalent to the association Euphorbio 

3 Agropyretum (Géhu 1994) (association characterized 

by Euphorbia paralias and Agropyrum junceum or Elymus 

farctus). It is an open, perennial grassland with E. farctus 

(Géhu & Tuxen 1975). 

The ‘‘Mobile coastal dunes with Ammophila arenaria,’’ 

listed as code 2120 in Romao (1996), is equivalent to the 

association Euphorbio 3 Ammophiletum (Géhu 1994) 

(characterized by E. paralias and Ammophila arenaria). 

This is a community that colonizes dunes after the pioneer 

dune stage and that persists with heavy accretion of sand 

(Géhu 1969). 

The fixed dunes described under the term of ‘‘Northern 

fixed dunes with a vegetation of Galio-Koelerion albescens, 

Corynephorion canescentis’’ (2131) (Romao 1996) belong 

to the association Hornungio 3 Tortuletum (Géhu & De 

Foucault 1978). Also called gray dunes or mossy dunes, 

they are typified by a carpet of bryophytes dominated by 

Tortula ruralis ssp. ruraliformis and colonize relatively 

unstable parts of rear dunes (Géhu & De Foucault 1978). 

The associations of the pioneer dunes and mobile dunes 

(Géhu & Tuxen 1975) and the fixed dune association 

(Géhu & De Foucault 1978), described in our study area 

by detailed phytosociological tables, served as reference in 

our work. 

Results 

Build-up of the Topography 

Figure 1 shows that there was a progressive build-up of the 

topography in the front and at the summit of the dune. The 

very light sand accumulation in the rear dune significantly 

differentiated it from the front of the dune from 1992 and 

from the dune summit from 1993 (Fig. 1; Table 1). The 

front of dune and the summit of dune became distinct in 

terms of sand accumulation from 1993, this being greater 

at the front of the dune than at the summit. This amounted 

to 2 m in 9 years and could in time have formed a new 

dune ridge in front of the initial summit. 

Vegetation Changes by Analysis of the Permanent Transects 

The Front of the Dune. The front of the dune was dominated 

by two perennial grasses Elymus farctus and Ammophila 

arenaria (Fig. 2). From 1993, E. farctus became 

dominant, despite a brief decline in 1998. 

The Dune Summit. Ammophila arenaria dominated the 

dune summit. Its cover increased until 1995 and then 

stabilized at about 60% (Fig. 3). Elymus farctus increased 

in the early stages of restoration but declined from 1993 to 

1994. The vegetation became more diverse in the later 

stages, with the appearance of Festuca arenaria, Calystegia 

soldanella, and Vulpia membranacea. 

The Rear Dune. The rear dune saw the greatest changes 

during the 10 years (Fig. 4). Ammophila arenaria persisted 

Figure 1. Evolution of sand accumulation, regardless of the initial state of 

1989, in the front dune (F), the dune summit (S), and the rear dune (R). 

Values are means and standard errors. Letter indicate the results of the 

mean comparison—two different letters indicate a significant difference at 

p < 0.05. 

30 Restoration Ecology MARCH 2004


Table 1. Effects of the topographic position (front of the dune, summit, 

and rear dune) on the sand accumulation, analyzed with ANOVA. 

Year F p 

1990 2.04 Not significant 

1991 3.39 Not significant 

1992 4.01


Figure 3. Dynamics of the vegetation in the dune summit. Species with cover less than 5% are not represented. Values are means and standard errors. 

Figure 4. Dynamics of the vegetation in the rear dune. Species with cover less than 10% are not represented. Values are means and standard errors. 

elsewhere (Jacamon 1975; Despeyrou 1984; Boucheron 

1987; Klomp 1989; Van der Maarel 1997). The resulting 

dune morphology included low dune ridges along the seafront, 

followed by flatter areas. This corresponds to the 

description of Brittany dunes made by Duffaud (1998). 

In addition to the geomorphological structuring of the 

landscape, the front of the dune, the dune summit, and the 

rear dune were distinguished by their plant composition 

and species richness. 

The plant composition reflected spatial variations in 

environmental factors. The front of the dune is characterized 

by strong salinity constraints, indicated by both the 

dominance of lyme grass and the scarcity of marram grass 

that is much less tolerant of salt stress (Boucheron 1987). 

Marram grass is strongly related to sand accretion (Jungerius 

& Van der Meulen 1997). Its loss of vigor in the rear 

dune can be explained by the low rates of sand accumulation 

that were recorded. In the rear dune the constraints 

Table 2. Effects of the topographic position (front of the dune, summit, and rear dune) on the cover and the number of species, analyzed with ANOVA. 

Cover 

Number of Species 

Year F p F P 

1989 1.41 Not significant 0.95 Not significant 



1992 0.98 Not significant 17.3


Figure 5. Evolution of the vegetation cover in the front dune (F), the dune summit (S), and the rear dune (R). Values are means and standard errors. 

related to being close to the sea and the instability of the 

soil decrease. Less specialist species appear, and the 

species richness increases. 

The landscape units identified in 1988 changed little in 

their positions, but the restoration operation led to an 

advance of the dune ridge toward the sea. At the dune 

fronts, the pioneer dunes, similar to those described in 

Géhu and Tuxen in 1975, lay in front of the mobile dune 

and retained a high cover of marram grass that was related 

to the initial plantation. The dune summits corresponded 

to the advanced dynamic stage of mobile dunes as 

described by Géhu and Tuxen in 1975. They became 

enriched with species that frequently occur in fixed 

dunes. Both in terms of diversity and structure, the rear 

dune remained clearly different from the association 

defined by Géhu and De Foucault (1978). Tortula ruralis 

ssp. ruraliformis was present but with a low cover that did 

not result in the formation of a moss and lichen carpet, 

characteristic of fixed dunes. A species richness of about 

13 species in a few square meters was described by 

Géhu (1997), but species richness did not exceed 11 

species on average on all our transects. At this part of 

the dune profile, the floral composition greatly depends 

on the local context. The occurrence of some nitrophilous 

plants that do not belong to the reference association 

reflects the strong human interference in the past. 

The lack of species typical of fixed dunes can be 

explained by the depleted seed bank after many years 

of degradation and isolation from seed sources, that is, 

intact fixed dunes. 

For a long time the aims of dune management were 

concentrated on fixing moving sand. The proximity of 

human economic interests made it essential to control 

large-scale geomorphological phenomena and, especially, 

the drifting of sand into inland areas. The fixing of dunes is 

now well controlled, but a new challenge has come to the 

fore: the conservation of the natural character (Gadgil & 

Ede 1998). In dune restoration Sabino et al. (1993) distinguished 

two objectives: the restoration of the dune profile 

and the restoration of the original vegetation. Monitoring 

the restoration processes on the dunes of the Ille et Vilaine 

showed that these two mechanisms are independent. The 

implementation of restoration measures quickly led to a 

good plant cover in all the landscape zones. On the other 

hand, the conservation value and diversity only returned 

slowly and the rate of return varied from one site to 

another. 

According to the terminology used by Aronson et al. 

(1993, 1995), the return to reference ecosystems involves a 

rehabilitation in which the succession passes through a 

transitory ecosystem: a plantation of marram grass. 

Marram grass provides a quick soil cover and builds up 

the dune height by trapping sand (Kühnholtz-Lordat 

1923). It is very effective at restoring dune ridges, but it 

seems to slow the vegetation succession in the rear dune. 

This phenomenon was reported by Lemauviel (2000) and 

Lemauviel et al. (2003) in France, by Webb et al. (2000) in 

Australia, and by Poulson and McClung (1999) in Indiana 

with the American species, Ammophila breviligulata. The 

presence of marram grass is undesirable in a semifixed or 

Figure 6. Evolution of the species richness (SR) in the front dune (F), the dune summit (S), and the rear dune (R). Values are means and standard errors. 

Letters indicate the results of the means comparison—two different letters indicate a significant difference at p < 0.05. 

MARCH 2004 Restoration Ecology 33


Table 3. Analysis of the species composition along the permanent transects compared to the reference system. 

Reference System 

Permanent Transects Géhu and Tuxen (1975) Géhu and De Foucault (1978) 

Front of Dune Dune Summit Rear Dune Pioneer Dune Mobile Dune Fixed Dune 

Elymus farctus X X X X X 

Ammophila arenaria X X X X X X 

Eryngium maritimum X X X X 

Calystegia soldanella X X X X X X 

Euphorbia paralias X X X X 

Leontodon taraxacoides X X X X 

Festuca rubra ssp. arenaria X X X X 

Homalothecium lutescens X X X 

Tortula ruralis ssp. ruraliformis X X X 

Phleum arenarium X X X 

Ononis repens X X X 

Vulpia membranacea X X X 

Cerastium diffusum X X 

Carex arenaria X X 

Plantago lanceolata X X 

Conyza canadensis X X 

Bromus rigidus X X 

Sonchus oleraceus 

X 

Lagurus ovatus X X 

Diplotaxis tenuifolia 

X 

Senecio jacobaea 

X 

Geranium dissectum 

X 

Elymus repens 

X 

Honkenya peploides X X 

Raphanus raphanistrum 

X 

fixed dune, where the preservation of conservation value is 

paramount. This plant helps maintain instability by trapping 

sand and by disturbing the soil by the movements of 

its leaves. Its presence indicates that the soil is not sufficiently 

stabilized. 

These restoration procedures were fully justified, 

because, as recommended by Hobbs and Norton (1996), 

they resulted in a vegetation cover on what previously had 

been bare soil and gave a conservation value to protected 

sites by combating degradation factors and visitor 

pressure. However, a return to a reference state (sensu 

Aronson et al. 1993, 1995) has not yet been completed. 

At the landscape scale the structures and the communities 

of pioneer dunes and mobile dunes have been restored. On 

the other hand, at the ecosystem scale, although the 

pioneer and mobile dunes have been restored, the fixed 

dune restoration is not complete but is in a correct 

trajectory toward restoration. Continued monitoring will 

be needed. 

Acknowledgments 

We are grateful to J. Prod’homme for his participation. 

LITERATURE CITED 

Aronson, J., C. Floret, E. Le Floc’h, C. Ovalle, and R. Pontanier. 1993. 

Restoration and rehabilitation of degraded ecosystems in arid and 

semi-arid lands. I. A view from the south. Restoration Ecology 

3:8–17. 

Aronson, J., C. Floret, E. Le Floc’h, C. Ovalle, and R. Pontanier. 1995. 

Restauration et réhabilitation des écosystèmes dégradés en zones 

arides et semi-arides. Le vocabulaire et les concepts. Pages 11–29 

in R. Pontanier, A. M’Hiri, N. Akrimi, J. Aronson, and E. Le Floc’h, 

editors. L’homme Peut Il Refaire Ce Qu’il a Défait? John Libbey 

Eurotext, Paris. 

Bakker, J. P., A. P. Grootjans, M. Hermy, and P. Poschlod. 2000. How to 

define targets for ecological restoration? Introduction. Applied 

Vegetation Science 3:3–6. 

Boucheron, C. 1987. Aménagement et gestion des dunes littorales. Ministère 

de l’environnement, France. 

Daget, P., and J. Poissonet. 1971. Principes d’une technique d’analyse 

quantitative de la végétation des formations herbacées. Doc: 

CEPE-CNRS 56, 85–100. 

Despeyrou, J. L. 1984. La végétation des dunes littorales du golfe de Gascogne, 

Université de Bordeaux III Institut de Géographic, France. 

Duffaud, M. H. 1998. Végétation des dunes littorales Atlantiques de 

l’Adour à Noirmoutier. Revue Forestière Française 4:328–348. 

Egan, D., and E. Howell. 2000. The historical ecology handbook. A restorationist’s 

guide to reference ecosystems. Island Press, Washington. 

Gadgil, R. L., and F. J. Ede. 1998. Application of scientific principles to 

sand dune stabilization in New Zealand: past progress and future 

needs. Land Degradation and Development 9:131–142. 

34 Restoration Ecology MARCH 2004


Géhu, J. M. 1969. Essai synthétique sur la végétation des dunes 

armoricaines. Penn Ar Bed 7:81–104. 

Géhu, J. M. 1994. Schéma synsystématique et typologie des milieux littoraux 

français atlantiques et méditerranéens. Pages 183–212 in J Cramer, 

editor. Colloques Phytosociologiques XXII. La syntaxonomie et 

la synsystématique européennes, comme base typologique des 

habitats. J. Cramer, Vaduz, France. 

Géhu, J. M. 1997. Phytodiversité et intérêt patrimonial de la végétation 

des dunes littorales françaises. Pages 158–164 in J. Favennec, and 

P. Barrère, editors. Biodiversité et protection dunaire. Lavoisier, Paris. 

Géhu, J. M., and M. De Foucault. 1978. Les pelouses à Tortula ruraliformis 

du Nord-Ouest de la France. Pages 269–273 in J. M. Géhu, 

editor. Colloques Phytosociologiques VI. Les pelouses sèches. 

J. Cramer, Vaduz, France. 

Géhu, J. M., and R. Tuxen. 1975. Essai de synthèse phytosociologique des 

dunes atlantiques européennes. Pages 61–70 in J. M. Géhu, editor. 

Colloques Phytosociologiques. J. Cramer, Vaduz, France. 

Gloaguen, J. C., and J. Touffet. 1974. La végétation des landes du Cap 

Fréhel: étude orientée le long de quelques transects. Botanica 

Rhedonica 13:57–75. 

Guilcher, A., and B. Hallégouët. 1991. Coastal dunes in Brittany and their 

management. Journal of Coastal Research 7:517–533. 

Hobbs, R. J., and D. A. Norton. 1996. Towards a conceptual framework 

for restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 4:96–110. 

Jacamon, M. 1975. Incidences sur la végétation des travaux de fixation et 

de correction des dunes sur le littoral de Gascogne. Pages 237–244 

in J. M. Géhu, editor. Colloques Phytosociologiques. J. Cramer, 

Vaduz, France. 

Jungerius, P. D., and F. Van der Meulen. 1997. Aeolian dynamics in 

relation to vegetation in a blow-out complex in the Meijendel 

dunes, The Netherlands. Journal of Coastal Conservation 3:63–70. 

Klomp, W. H. 1989. Het Zwanenwater: a dutch dune wetland reserve. 

Pages 305–312 in F. Van der Meulen, P. D. Jungerius, and J. Visser, 

editors. Perspectives in coastal dune management. Academic Publishing, 

The Hague, The Netherlands. 

Kühnholtz-Lordat, G. 1923. Les dunes du Golfe du Lion. Thèse d’état. 

Université de Montpellier, Montpellier, France. 

Lemauviel, S. 2000. Les dunes grises des côtes Atlantiques: fonctionnement, 

dynamique potentielle, principes de gestion conservatoire et 

processus de restauration. Thèse d’université. Université de Rennes 

1, Rennes, France. 

Lemauviel, S., S. Gallet, and F. Rozé. 2003. Sustainable management of 

the fixed dunes: example of a pilote site in Brittany (France). Comptes 

Rendus Biologie 326:183–191. 

Meur, C., B. Hallégouët, and J. C. Bodéré. 1992. Coastal dune management 

policies in France: The example of Brittany. Pages 419–427 in 

M. Carter, P. Curtis, and A. Sheehy-Skeffington, editors. Coastal dunes. 

Balkema, Rotterdam. 

Olson, J. S., and E. Van der Maarel. 1989. Coastal dunes in Europe: 

a global view. Pages 3–32 in F. Van der Meulen, P. D. Jungerius, 

and J. H. Visser, editors. Perspectives in coastal dune management. 

SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague. 

Paskoff, R. 1985. Les littoraux, impact des aménagements sur leur évolution. 

Masson, Paris. 

Poulson, T. L., and C. McClung. 1999. Anthropogenic effect on early dune 

succession at Miller, Indiana. Natural Areas Journal 19:177–179. 

Romao, C. 1996. Manuel d’interprétation des habitats de l’union européenne 

Version Eur 15, Union européenne DG6XI-D2. 

Sabino, C. M., P. F. Teixeira Filho, D. M. W. Zee, and C. F. D. da Rocha. 

1993. Restoring the beach profile with vegetation. Pages 2312–2323 

in O. T. Magoon, W. S. Wilson, H. Converse, and L. T. Tobin, editors. 

Coastal Zone 93. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York. 

Sherrer, B. 1984. Biostatistiques. Gaetan Morin, Boucherville. 

Sokal, R. R., and F. L. Rohlf. 1969. Biometry. Freeman and Company, 

New York. 

Van der Maarel, E. 1997. The multiple use of dry coastal ecosystems. 

Pages 573–588 in E. Van der Maarel, editor. Ecosystems of the 

world, 2C: Dry coastal ecosystems. Elsevier, Amsterdam. 

Webb, C. E., I. Oliver, and A. J. Pik. 2000. Does coastal foredune 

stabilization with Ammophila arenaria restore plant and arthropod communities 

in south-eastern Australia? Restoration Ecology 8:283–288. 

White, P. S., and J. L. Walker. 1997. Approximating nature’s variation: 

selecting and using reference information in restoration ecology. 

Restoration Ecology 5:338–349. 

MARCH 2004 Restoration Ecology 35

Sand Dune Restoration in North Brittany, France - Global ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?