Ecotourism Carrying Capacity Evaluation with Emphasis on Sustainable Development in Bisheh Waterfall as a Geotourism Area

Subject Areas : Ecosystems

Farzaneh Behrad ¹ , Mehrdad Hadipour ² , Morteza Naderi ³ , Azadeh Kazemi ⁴

1 - - Graduated in Environment Sciences from Arak University, Arak, Iran
2 - -Department of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Arak University, Arak, Iran.
3 - Department of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Arak University, Arak, Iran
4 - Department of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Arak University, Arak, Iran

Received: 2015-09-28 Accepted : 2015-11-07 Published : 2019-12-22

Keywords: sustainable Ecotourism, Ecological tolerance, Ecological variables, land use,

Abstract :

Introduction: Capacity assessment of natural areas in different directions is one of the tools to achieve sustainable development, to reduce pressure on ecosystems and to prevent their destruction. One of the most effective uses of natural ecosystems is circulation, which can have negative effects on natural ecosystems if not planned and planned. In this regard, determining the capacity of the recreation can mitigate to some extent these effects. Because of the nature of the study area where is mountainous, Lorestan waterfall is one of the most fragile natural areas which needs planning to manage the influx of tourists into the area can be effective in protecting the sensitive resources of this ecosystem. Material & Methods: In this study, environmental units of the region were initially formed based on important factors such as the extent and area needed for circulation activities, climate variables such as hot days, stormy and rainy days, as well as topographical variables such as slope, elevation. And geographical directions, first the physical carrier capacity was calculated and then the actual board capacity was calculated. Results: The results showed that the physical board capacity for eligible zones is 1246792 persons and the actual board capacity for suitable zones is 1664 persons per day. Discussion and conclusion: The results obtained for the range of regionally susceptible regions of the grove yielded two types of range, namely physical and real for the development of tourism. Comparison of the calculated quantities shows that considering the ecological constraints in the bush area including altitude, soil depth, vegetation cover and determined parent rock strength, the physical board capacity in areas prone to tourism development is up to 80%.

References:

 

1. Middleton, V )1998 .(marketing in travel & tourism. Oxford: HEINEMANN, USA, p266.


2. Rahnemaei, M., Farhudi and Ghadami M. 2008. Survey on carrying capacity aiming recreation with confirmation on host society (case study: Kelardasht city), Human Geographic researches, No. 66 (In Persian).


3. Pourahmad A., Mirzaei Gh., Aruji F., Alizadeh M. (2012). A study on recreation carrying capacity in Qeshm aiming sustainable ecotourism, Persian Gulf meeting, Jihad publication (In Persian).


4. Tourtellot, J. (2004). Geo-tourism –national geographic Magazine Business Enterprises for Sustainable Travel.


5. Bishemi B. (2004). Geo-tourism sustainable development with emphasis on carrying capacity. Abstract collection of conference on Geo parks and Geo tourism (In Persian).


6. Rahimpour A. 2007. Geo-tourism, Accessed from Aftab web page.


7. Hovinen, G.R. (1982). Visitor Cycles. Outlook for Tourism in Lancaster County, Annals of Tourism Research, 9(2), 119-127.


8. D'Amore, L., & Jafar, J. )1988.( Tourism- A vital Force for peace. Montreal: First Global Conference.


9. O'Reilly, A. M. (1986). Tourism Carrying Capacity Concept and Issues, Tourism Management, 7, 4.


10. Inskeep, E. (1991). Tourism Planning, New York. Manning, R. (1997). Social carrying capacity of parks and outdoor recreation areas. Parks and Recreation 32, 32-38.


11. Cooke, K. (1982). Guidelines for socially appropriate tourism development in British Columbia, Journal for Travel Research.21, (1), 22-28.


12. Getz, D. (1983). Capacity to Absorb Tourism Concepts and Implications for Strategic Planning, Annals of Tourism Research, 7, pp21-29.


13. Shelby, B., & Heberlein, T.A. (1986). Carrying Capacity in Recreation Settings. Corvallis: Oregon State University Press.


14. Graefe, A., Vaske, J., & Kuss, F. (1984(. Social carrying capacity: An integration and Synthesis of twenty years of research. Leisure Sciences 6, 395-431.


15. Garrigos, S., Fernando J., Narangajavana Y., & Palacios M.D. (2004). Carrying capacity in the tourism industry, a case study of Hengistbury Head, Tourism Management, 25, 275 283.


16. Clivaz, C., Hausser, Y., & Michelet, J. (2004). Tourism monitoring system based on the concept of carrying capacity, the case of regional natural park Pfyn-Finges, University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland.


17. Parvaresh H., Parvaresh A., Parvaresh Z. (2014). Survey on real and unreal physical carrying capacity in boating activity in Harra international wetland, Oceanography, Fourth year, no. 13 (In Persian).


18. Tabibian M., Setudeh A., Shaieteh K., Chalipanlo R. (2008). An investigation on carrying capacity concepts and quantitative estimation, ecotourism development in Abbas Abad, Ganj Naameh Hamadan, Honar-haie-Ziba journal, no. 29. (In Persian).


19. Makhdum M. (2007). Landuse planning, Tehran university's Jihad publication, Sixth edition (In Persian).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.