DOCSLIB.ORG

Section II: Periodic Report on the State of Conservation of Kinabalu Park

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Section II: Periodic Report on the State of Conservation of Kinabalu Park PERJODIC REPORTING EXERCISE ON THE APPLICATION OF THE WORLD HEIRITAGE CONVENTION - . SECTION I1 State of Conservation of specific World Heritage properties State Party: Sabah, Malaysia Property Name: Kinabalu Park 11.1. Introduction Country: MALAYSIA; State Party: Sabah Name of World Heritage property: Kinabalu Park Centre point: N6.150228; El 16 640733 North-west comer: N6.495262; El 16.578917 South-east comer: N6.041946, El 16.702604 Date of Inscription: 2 December 2000 Organisation(s) or entity(ies) responsible for the preparation of this i-eport Person responsible: Paul Basintal Address: c/o The Board of Trustees of the Sabah Parks Lot 1-3, B,lock K:, Sinsuran Complex 88000 Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, MALAYSIA Tel.: 60-88-21 1881 or 60-88-212273 Fax.: 60-88-221 001 E-mail: [email protected] . Date of preparation of the report: 27 December 2002 Signature on behalf of the State Party Signature:- . A-. Name: Datuk Monica Chia Mui Foong Function: Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Tourism, Environment, Science and Technology, State of Sabah, MALAYSlA 11.2. Statement of Significance At the time of inscribing a property on the World Heritagc List, the World Heritage Committee indicates its outstanding universal value(s), or World Heritage values(s), by deciding on the criteria for which the property desenrcd to be included on the World Heritage List. Circle the criteria retained for inscription: Cultural criteria: i - ii - iii - v - vi Natural criteria: i 4& iii -@ Were ncw criteria added by re-nominating and/or extending the property after the original inscription? 'YES@ If YES,please explain: Please quote observat.ions concerning the property made by the Advisory Elody(ies) during the evaluation ofthe nomination: "Kinabalu Park sets a high standardfirprotected area management in South-east 4sia. Although much ofthe lowland andforest of the region has been tran~formedto 7ther uses and the Park is becoming an island in a sea ofagriculture andjbrestry development, it is shN in a good state of conservation. fie onlypotential threats velare to adjacent land tenure and continued agriculturalpressures around the bundary ofthe park. " Quote the decisions and observations /recommendations, ifappropriate, made by the World Heritage Committee at the time ofinscription and extec-ion (ifappl~cable): "The Bureau reconmended to the Committee that Kinabalir National Park be inscribed on the World Heritage List under natural criteria (ii) and (iv). Tile site has diverse biota and high endemism. fie altitudinaland climatic gradient fmm tropical hest to a[pine conditions combine with precipitous topography, diverse geology mdfrequent climatic oscillations to provide conditions idealfor the develooment of vew species. The Park contains high biodiversity with representatives fmm more !ban halfthe families ~faNjloweringplants. The ma~orityofBorneo 's nza~malr, birds, amphibians and invertebrates (manj~threatened and vulnerable) occur in the Park The Bureau encouraged the State Party to minimize impacts on the Park, as described by the IUCATevaluation by carefilly regulating activities in proximity ro its borders. " Identify the actions taken as follow-up to these observations andlor decisions: Regular patrol ofpark boundary, establishment of an Enforcement Unit at Head Oflice, and establish a close communication with the Foreshy Department. 113. continued Please propose a statement of sig~~ificmccby providing a description of the World Heritage valuc(s) for which lhe properly was inscribed on the World Hcritsge List. This description shou~ldreflect the criterion (criteria on the basis of which he Cornmince inscribed the property on the World Heritage List and should also detail what propetty represents, what makes it outstanding, what specific values ,Ire that distinguish the prope~syas well as what its relationship with its setting is, etc.: Kinabalu Park possess excellent example oifloral divcrsily, containing as many as 5,000 - 6,000 species (Bearnen & Beamcn, 1998), and indicates a high degree of endemism. The extent of Kinabalu Park covers elevation from 152 meters uound the upper eastern boundary at Marak Parak to 4,095 meters at the summit of Alount Kinabalu which provides an outstanding scenic beauty. For the extension of a property or the inclusion of additional criteria a re-submission of the property may bc considered. This might be regarded as necessary in order to recognize cultural values of a natural World Heritage property, or vise-versa, become desirable following the substantive revision of the criteria by the World Helitage Committee or due to better identification or knowledge of specific outstanding universal values of the: property. Should a re-nomination of the property be If YES, please explain.: Are the borders of the World Heritage property and its baer zone (still) ad:quate to cnsure the protection and conservation of the property's World heritage vahres: wo . IfNO, please explain why not, and indicate what ch&es should be made to the boundaries of the property and/ or its buffer zone (please indicate these changes also on a map to be attached to this report): Is the State Party actively consideriu~ga revision of thc property boundarics or the buffcr zone? YES I@ If YES, indicate what is being done to that end: 11.3. Statement of authenticity 1 integrity Have the World Heritage values identified above been maintained s nce the property's inscription? @NO If NO, please describe thc changes and name the causes: What was the evaluation of the authenticity I integrity of the property at the time of inscription? (Please quote from the ICOMOS 1 IUCN evaluation): 4. Integrity 4.1 Boundaries: Tne boundaries of Kinabalu Park enconpass the main biilk of the mountain including the naturai'[yfore.rtedslopes. The site thus incorporates the nc.tura1 diversify and habitats that constitute Kinabalu's key natural heritage values. Settlement and logging occurs right up to tlie boundary in manyplaces but the park's limits are 1:learb marked and regularly patrolled. There is no provision for buffer zonei and it would he beneficial for the Sabah State Government to carefilly regulate development in key strategic locations oulside the park where it still has control. Two modijications to boundaries have resulied in losses to miegriw of Kinabalu Park In 1970, 3,555ha were excised to allow a copper deposit m be mined. This mine is now work out but evidence rrmoins. In 1984, a large area offorest was excised to tuild a goIfcourse, housing development and dairy firm in Pinosuk area. SEveral importantp!ant localities were destroyed and much ,brest lost. Although compensation for 1hi.r loss ofporkland was made, the losses at Pinosuk were signijcanl. While these pats reductions in size were rinfirtunate, the nmajority of the kej, nntural values remain. 4.2 Legislation (Please refer to addendum) 11.3. continued -- --- Have there been changes in he au!heoticity /integrity since insxiption? -a If YES, plcase describe the changes to thc authenticity 1 integrity and namc: the main causes? Arc there (Curihcr) changcs foreseeable to the authenticih' / inteeritv of the uroocrtv in the near future? If YES, please explain and indicate how these changes might affect thc World Heritage values of the property: 11.4. Management How could the arrangements for the protect~onand the management of the properiy best be dcfmcd (more than one indication possible)? Legal ( x ) Contractual ( ) Traditional ( ) 11.4. continired Please describe and assess the inlplementation and effectivcncss of these arrangements for the preservation of the valucs described under iten1 I1 2 at the nationzl, provincial andlor municipal level: At municipal level, regular patrol by rangers at the easily accessible boundary ofthe park is being carried out. Rangers' out-post had been established on two loc~tionson the north- western and north-eastern side of the park. In terms of effectiveness, thir; arrangement could be considcred as partial effcclive. Lack of tnanpowcr to patrol the entirc: park area hampcrs this arrangement. In general terms, can this legislative, contractual andh traditional protection b@;;~d sufficient? Please explain: Presently, the cnforcicment of the Parks Enactment, 1984 is sufieient in controlling activities detrimental to the Park. Provide a list and summaries of laws and regulations concerning cultural and natural properties protection and management (including extracts of relevant articles from the Constitution, Crimin,sl Law. LawRegulations on Land-use, Environmenl Law and Forestry Law, amongst others). Please also attach any documentation availabl~:conceming these points: 1. Parks Enactment, 1984: An Enactment to repeal and reenact the law relating to the provision and control of National Parks and National Reserves in Sabah and to provide for matters incidental thereto and connected therewith so as 16 hake better pr'svisions respecting the constitution, administration, procedure, functions and fmances of Parlc;. 11.4. continued Describe the administrative and management arrangmcnts that are in plm for the property concemcd, ma!+ special mention of the institutions and organmtions that have management authority over the property as well as of ihe arrangements that are in place for the coordination of their actions: Thc Board of Trustees of the Sabah Parks had allocated a total of 99 staff of various ategorics to manage the Park. Twenty (20) of the staff, i.e , Park Vl'ardcn, Asst. Park Wardens and Park Rangcrs have the power to enforce the Parks Eractmcnt, 1984. In addition, Sabah Parks had also allocated 29 research staff to cany out various research programs in the Park. Please indicate under which level of authority the property is managed: Property ( x) Regional ( ) National ( ) Other (please dcscibe): Please provide the Full name, address and phonelfade-mail of the i:ntity(ies) directly responsible for the management (conservation, preservation, visitor management) of the property: Abdul Wahab Siman, Park Warden, Kinabalu Park. Ranau c/o The Board of Trustees of the Sabah Parks P.O.Box 10626,88806 Kota Kiabalu, Sabah, MALAYSIA Tel.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sabah REDD+ Roadmap Is a Guidance to Press Forward the REDD+ Implementation in the State, in Line with the National Development
    Study on Economics of River Basin Management for Sustainable Development on Biodiversity and Ecosystems Conservation in Sabah (SDBEC) Final Report Contents P The roject for Develop for roject Chapter 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background of the Study .............................................................................................. 1 1.2 Objectives of the Study ................................................................................................ 1 1.3 Detailed Work Plan ...................................................................................................... 1 ing 1.4 Implementation Schedule ............................................................................................. 3 Inclusive 1.5 Expected Outputs ......................................................................................................... 4 Government for for Government Chapter 2 Rural Development and poverty in Sabah ........................................................... 5 2.1 Poverty in Sabah and Malaysia .................................................................................... 5 2.2 Policy and Institution for Rural Development and Poverty Eradication in Sabah ............................................................................................................................ 7 2.3 Issues in the Rural Development and Poverty Alleviation from Perspective of Bangladesh in Corporation City Biodiversity
    [Show full text]
  • Harmful Industrial Activities Other Natural World Heritage Sites
    MAP HARMFUL INDUSTRIAL 169 79 170 191 ACTIVITIES 171 100 87 151 45 43 168 WWF DEFINES HARMFUL 44 INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITIES AS: 207 172 204 80 Operations that cause major 167 38 39 81 94 23 203 disturbances or changes to the 46 93 166 141 42 40 94 94 122 218 193192 99 character of marine or terrestrial 165 41 115 114 164 environments. Such activities are of 221 179 119 71 35 173 91 88 142 34 concern due to their potential to involve 220 197 96 62 118 186 95 194 large impacts on the attributes of 217 112 199 222 184 200 214 215 198 113 56 outstanding universal value and other 52 162 101 51 163 natural, economic and cultural values. 136 212 105 58 54 120 187 85 121 53 61 The impacts of these activities are 185 144 50 55 117 140 103 145 60 57 219 137 213 1 104102 often long-term or permanent. 49 59 They can also be of concern due 72 22 139 106 224 138 73 134 48 216 135 149 226 to their impacts on the sustainability 24 116 97 82 175 196 225 of local livelihoods, and/or because 98 133 195 174 176 86 they put at risk the health, safety or 150 227 65 67 160 154 68 47 107 well-being of communities. Harmful 153 63 70 188 161 152 132 159 66 64 223 69 189 industrial activities are often, but not 190 36 74 37 124 131 exclusively, conducted by multinational 76 92 78 125 83 84 77 201202 123 enterprises and their subsidiaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Obtaining World Heritage Status and the Impacts of Listing Aa, Bart J.M
    University of Groningen Preserving the heritage of humanity? Obtaining world heritage status and the impacts of listing Aa, Bart J.M. van der IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2005 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): Aa, B. J. M. V. D. (2005). Preserving the heritage of humanity? Obtaining world heritage status and the impacts of listing. s.n. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 23-09-2021 Appendix 4 World heritage site nominations Listed site in May 2004 (year of rejection, year of listing, possible year of extension of the site) Rejected site and not listed until May 2004 (first year of rejection) Afghanistan Península Valdés (1999) Jam,
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of Destination Attractiveness and Visitor Segmentation on Holistic and Conative Outcomes
    THE INFLUENCE OF DESTINATION ATTRACTIVENESS AND VISITOR SEGMENTATION ON HOLISTIC AND CONATIVE OUTCOMES YALINI A/P EASVARALINGAM UNIVERSITI SAINS MALAYSIA 2019 THE INFLUENCE OF DESTINATION ATTRACTIVENESS AND VISITOR SEGMENTATION ON HOLISTIC AND CONATIVE OUTCOMES by YALINI A/P EASVARALINGAM Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2019 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT My joyful experience in this academic journey is parallel to the thrill, many an adventurous respondent of this National Park research would have received from traversing mountains and basking in natural beauty. For me, this thrill is due to traversing different research terrains and gaining knowledge attributed mainly to having a supervisor like Professor T. Ramayah, with his vast expertise in research and analysis, and his generosity in imparting this knowledge to me. His guidance on materials for good methodology and his immediate feedback at any time of the day eased the process of completing this research tremendously. I am also grateful to Dr. Teh Sin Yin, for her thoroughness in examining my thesis during the proposal stage. I also truly appreciate my external examiner, Prof. Madya Dr. Rosmini Omar and my internal examiners Dr. Teh Sin Yin and Prof. Madya Dr. Shankar Chelliah for their thoroughness in reading my thesis and providing feedback to improve the quality of the thesis. This journey too would not have been possible if it was not for the blessings of my wonderful parents and brother, whose unconditional love and continuous emotional and financial support assisted me when facing challenges throughout this research process. The completion of this thesis would also not have been possible if not for the expertise of my friends, the computer whiz, Viswa, and the translation expert Jaja.
    [Show full text]
  • A Global Overview of Protected Areas on the World Heritage List of Particular Importance for Biodiversity
    A GLOBAL OVERVIEW OF PROTECTED AREAS ON THE WORLD HERITAGE LIST OF PARTICULAR IMPORTANCE FOR BIODIVERSITY A contribution to the Global Theme Study of World Heritage Natural Sites Text and Tables compiled by Gemma Smith and Janina Jakubowska Maps compiled by Ian May UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre Cambridge, UK November 2000 Disclaimer: The contents of this report and associated maps do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of UNEP-WCMC or contributory organisations. The designations employed and the presentations do not imply the expressions of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP-WCMC or contributory organisations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or its authority, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION 1.0 OVERVIEW......................................................................................................................................................1 2.0 ISSUES TO CONSIDER....................................................................................................................................1 3.0 WHAT IS BIODIVERSITY?..............................................................................................................................2 4.0 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY......................................................................................................................3 5.0 CURRENT WORLD HERITAGE SITES............................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Wsn 146 (2020) 36-46 Eissn 2392-2192
    Available online at www.worldscientificnews.com WSN 146 (2020) 36-46 EISSN 2392-2192 Primary Response and Concern of Sabah’s Geopark Potential Economic Effects: Preliminary Study Rafiq Idris*, Kasim Mansur Faculty of Business, Economics and Accountancy, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, 88400 Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia *Email address: [email protected] ABSTRACT Sabah, Malaysia is moving steps forward by announcing the gazettement of some areas as geoparks. Part of the areas include the district of Ranau, Kota Marudu and Kota Belud. Some of the areas involved if not all are under a national park program prior to this. This gazettement undoubtedly has the potential to bring economic benefit to the state. It has the potential to increase land value, stimulating economic activities especially in the services sector via tourism activities, enhancing protection for environment and as a mean to control aggressive use of land for development. On the other hand, there are some concerns of stakeholders. Issues such as potential restriction for farmers to do agriculture related activities and relocation of village among others are potential concern among communities in Ranau, Kota Marudu and Kota Belud. In this regard, in order to examine the real concerns of various stakeholders, some series of roundtable discussions and interviews have been undertaken. Based on the preliminary assessment, very small number of individuals have worry about the geopark idea. Majority look at it positively. Keyword: Sabah, Malaysia, Geopark, Economic Effects, Concern, Response, Kinabalu 1. INTRODUCTION National park is an area that the authority has designated for the preservation of the natural environment. Apart from being a public recreation area, national park is also important due to ( Received 07 May 2020; Accepted 25 May 2020; Date of Publication 26 May 2020 ) World Scientific News 146 (2020) 36-46 its historical, natural attractions and scientific interests, more so since most of its flora and fauna are invariably in its natural state.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Prepare the Final Version of Your Manuscript for The
    Proceedings of the 12th International Coral Reef Symposium, Cairns, Australia, 9-13 July 2012 17C Regional-scale design and local scale actions for marine Bridging the gap between regional plans and local action: The case of the Malaysian Coral Triangle Initiative and Semporna, Sabah. Choo Poh Leem1, Kenneth Kassem1,2,Monique Sumampouw1, 1WWF-Malaysia Semporna, Sabah, Malaysia 2Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies, Kyoto University, Japan Corresponding author: [email protected] Abstract. Within the Sulu-Sulawesi Marine Ecoregion (SSME), Semporna Priority Conservation Area (PCA) ranks among the highest marine biodiversity in the world. Within Semporna waters, there are several government bodies responsible for different islands. Tun Sakaran Marine Park was gazetted under the management of Sabah Parks in 2004. Sipadan Island’s water is under the protection of Majlis Keselamatan Negara (National Security Council). The Department of Fisheries Sabah is interested in Omadal Island for seaweed farming. Mabul Island receives the most attention due to its proximity to Sipadan, and is the base for most tourism operators. Mabul has 2,500 residents relying on fisheries, and more than 15 resorts and dive lodges on 26 hectares of land (Aw et al, 2006). Reef check survey, community-based seagrass survey, seawater quality monitoring and groundwater analysis have been conducted on Mabul over the past 2 years. The environmental condition of Mabul is currently threatened, to the point where it might become the source of pollution that will spread to other islands within the Semporna PCA. Collaborative environmental monitoring has been identified as a primary method to reverse human impacts, so collaborative efforts have been initiated on Mabul since April 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Iucn Technical Evaluation Kinabalu Park (Sabah
    WORLD HERITAGE NOMINATION – IUCN TECHNICAL EVALUATION KINABALU PARK (SABAH, MALAYSIA) 1. DOCUMENTATION i) IUCN/WCMC Data Sheet: (16 references) ii) Additional Literature Consulted: IUCN-SSC. 1998. Global Action Plan for Microchiroptean Bats. Final Draft; Braatz, S. 1992. Conserving Biological Diversity: A Strategy for Protected Areas in Asia – Pacific Region. World Bank Technical Paper 193; Collins, M. et al eds. 1991. The Conservation Atlas of Tropical Forests – Asia and Pacific; IUCN McNeely, J. 1999. Mobilising Broader Support for Asia’s Biodiversity. ABD; MacKinnon, J. ed. 1997. Protected Area Systems Review of the Indomalayan Realm. ABC/WCMC; Hitchcock, P. 1998. Post World Heritage Seminar Report on Mission to Malaysia; CIFOR/UNESCO 1999. World Heritage Forests – The World Heritage Convention as a Mechanism for Conserving Tropical Forest Biodiversity; Cubitt, G. 1996. Wild Malaysia. New Holland; Meng, W. K. 1991. The State of Nature Conservation in Malaysia. Proceedings; Kitayama, K. 1993. Human Impacts and Implications for Management in Mount Kinabalu. in Hamilton, L. et al eds. 1993. Peaks, Parks and People. East-West Centre; IUCN/WWF. 1995. Centres of Plant Diversity. Vol. 2. Asia; MacKinnon, K. et al 1996. The Ecology of Kalimantan. Periplus; Khoom, Wong. 1998. Kinabalu: Sabah’s Tropical Paradise. Plant Talk (15); Cleary M and P. Eaton. 1992. Borneo – Change and Development. OUP; MacKinnon, J. 1975. Borneo. Time-Life Books; Brooks, R. R. 1987. Serpentine and its Vegetation. Croom Helm; Roberts, J. L. 1989. Geological Structures. Macmillan Field Guide. iii) Consultations: 13 external reviewers, officials from Sabah Forest Department, iv) Field Visit: J. Thorsell, January, 2000 2. SUMMARY OF NATURAL VALUES As the highest mountain between the Himalayas and New Guinea, Mount Kinabalu (4,095m) holds a distinctive position for the biota of Southeast Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6 South-East Asia
    Chapter 6 South-East Asia South-East Asia is the least compact among the extremity of North-East Asia. The contiguous ar- regions of the Asian continent. Out of its total eas constituting the continental interior include land surface, estimated at four million sq.km., the the highlands of Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, and mainland mass has a share of only 40 per cent. northern Vietnam. The relief pattern is that of a The rest is accounted for by several thousand is- longitudinal ridge and furrow in Myanmar and lands of the Indonesian and Philippine archipela- an undulating plateau eastwards. These are re- goes. Thus, it is composed basically of insular lated to their structural difference: the former and continental components. Nevertheless the being a zone of tertiary folds and the latter of orographic features on both these landforms are block-faulted massifs of greater antiquity. interrelated. This is due to the focal location of the region where the two great axes, one of lati- The basin of the Irrawady (Elephant River), tudinal Cretaceo-Tertiary folding and the other forming the heartland of Myanmar, is ringed by of the longitudinal circum-Pacific series, converge. mountains on three sides. The western rampart, This interface has given a distinctive alignment linking Patkai, Chin, and Arakan, has been dealt to the major relief of the region as a whole. In with in the South Asian context. The northern brief, the basic geological structures that deter- ramparts, Kumon, Kachin, and Namkiu of the mine the trend of the mountains are (a) north- Tertiary fold, all trend north-south parallel to the south and north-east in the mainland interior, (b) Hengduan Range and are the highest in South- east-west along the Indonesian islands, and (c) East Asia; and this includes Hkakabo Raz north-south across the Philippines.
    [Show full text]
  • Biotic and Abiotic Influences on the Evolution of Elevational Range Limts and Life-History Strategies of Tropical Birds
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2018 BIOTIC AND ABIOTIC INFLUENCES ON THE EVOLUTION OF ELEVATIONAL RANGE LIMTS AND LIFE-HISTORY STRATEGIES OF TROPICAL BIRDS Andrew James Boyce Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Boyce, Andrew James, "BIOTIC AND ABIOTIC INFLUENCES ON THE EVOLUTION OF ELEVATIONAL RANGE LIMTS AND LIFE-HISTORY STRATEGIES OF TROPICAL BIRDS" (2018). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 11116. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/11116 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BIOTIC AND ABIOTIC INFLUENCES ON THE EVOLUTION OF ELEVATIONAL RANGE LIMTS AND LIFE-HISTORY STRATEGIES OF TROPICAL BIRDS By ANDREW JAMES BOYCE Bachelor of Arts, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, 2011 Dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Wildlife Biology The University of Montana Missoula, MT May 2018 Approved by: Scott Whittenburg, Dean of The Graduate School Graduate School Dr. Thomas E. Martin, Chair USGS Montana Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit; Wildlife Biology Dr. John Maron Organismal Biology, Ecology and Evolution; Wildlife Biology Dr. H. Arthur Woods Organismal Biology, Ecology and Evolution Dr. Jeffrey Good Organismal Biology, Ecology and Evolution Dr. Blair O.
    [Show full text]
  • Spectacle of Conservation and Tourism in Protected Areas: Analysis of Management, Issues and Tourist Satisfaction
    PLANNING MALAYSIA: Journal of the Malaysian Institute of Planners VOLUME 18 ISSUE 4 (2020), Page 477 – 498 SPECTACLE OF CONSERVATION AND TOURISM IN PROTECTED AREAS: ANALYSIS OF MANAGEMENT, ISSUES AND TOURIST SATISFACTION Normah Abdul Latip1, Mastura Jaafar2, Azizan Marzuki3, Kamand Mohammadzadeh Roufechaei4, Mohd Umzarulazijo Umar5 1,2,3,4,5School of Housing Building and Planning UNIVERSITI SAINS MALAYSIA Abstract National parks serve as rural ecotourism attractions, even though this area is very fragile. Therefore, conservation management must be implemented to ensure the balance of the environment is maintained. This study aims to study the relationship between park management, issues and tourist satisfaction in a protected area, Kinabalu Park. Moreover, this study considers the mediating role of environmental issues on the relationship between park management and tourist satisfaction. Overall, 351 respondents agreed to participate. A questionnaire survey was administered to visitors of Malaysia’s Kinabalu National Park. In total, 351 completed questionnaires were returned and have been analysed using Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM). Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) was used to analyze the resultant data using SmartPLS 2.0. The results showed that park management has a strong effect on tourist satisfaction and environmental issues. The results also revealed that environmental issues play a mediating role in the relationship between park management and tourist satisfaction. The findings of this study make a significant contribution to our current understanding of the importance of park management, especially in the protected area as well as addressing the existing issues and provide positive satisfaction to tourists. Through the results, it will significantly contribute to the conservation and management of the protected area to be more sustainable in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Harmful Industrial Activities Other Natural World Heritage Sites
    MAP HARMFUL INDUSTRIAL 169 79 170 191 ACTIVITIES 171 100 87 151 45 43 168 WWF DEFINES HARMFUL 44 INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITIES AS: 207 172 204 80 Operations that cause major 167 38 39 81 94 23 203 disturbances or changes to the 46 93 166 141 42 40 94 94 122 218 193192 99 character of marine or terrestrial 165 41 115 114 164 environments. Such activities are of 221 179 119 230 71 35 173 91 88 142 34 concern due to their potential to involve 220 231 197 96 62 118 186 95 194 large impacts on the attributes of 217 112 199 222 184 200 214 215 198 113 56 outstanding universal value and other 52 162 101 51 163 natural, economic and cultural values. 136 212 105 58 54 120 187 85 121 53 61 The impacts of these activities are 185 144 50 55 117 140 103 145 60 57 219 137 213 1 104102 often long-term or permanent. 49 59 They can also be of concern due 72 22 139 106 224 138 73 134 48 216 135 149 226 to their impacts on the sustainability 24 116 97 82 175 196 225 of local livelihoods, and/or because 98 133 195 174 176 86 they put at risk the health, safety or 150 227 65 67 160 154 68 47 107 well-being of communities. Harmful 153 63 70 188 161 152 132 159 66 64 223 69 189 industrial activities are often, but not 190 36 74 37 124 131 exclusively, conducted by multinational 76 92 78 125 83 84 77 201202 123 enterprises and their subsidiaries.
    [Show full text]