KORGALZHYN STATE NATURE RESERVE: MANAGEMENT PROCESS AND
ITS PROBLEMS
DINARA YERIMBEKKYZY
A project report submitted in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Science (Planning - Resource and Environmental Management)
Faculty of Built Environment
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
OCTOBER 2009
iii
To my beloved mother and all mothers in the world
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First I would like to express my everlasting gratitude to ALLAH S.W.T for
giving me love, caring, patient and for guiding me throughout my lifetime.
I am greatly thankful to my amazing parents, Yerimbek and Anipa, who have
endlessly giving me their priceless love, huge support and motivation to be the
individual that I am today. My appreciation is also expressed to my dear and
respected brothers, DinMuhamad and Ulygbek, who gives me their strong hands and
wide smiles at any time. I am indebted to all of them.
My special heartily and sincerely thanks to my husband, who is my best life
friend and love forever, Amir. Great thankfulness to dearest person in the world, to
my son Arman. His birthday presented me wonderful feeling of maternity.
From my first days in Malaysia, to the final stages of this thesis, I debt an
enormous of gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Muhammad Rafee Bin Majid, for his
suggestions, patient, encouragement, justice and careful guidance were invaluable. It
was a great pleasure to me to conduct this thesis under his supervision. I am also very
grateful to my all lecturers, staffs in the Faculty of Built Environment, especially to
Prof. Dr. Nooraini Bte Yusoff and Assoc. Professor Dr. Foziah Binti Johar for
believing in my abilities.
Finally, I express my deepest thanks and sincere gratitude to all my friends,
Samah, Aliya, Aigul, Aigul for their supports and encouragements.
v
ABSTRACT
This descriptive qualitative study is looking at the management of
Korgalzhyn State Nature Reserve (KSNR) in Kazakhstan. The objective was to
identify the problems in the management system and to suggest some
recommendation for the stakeholders for the sake of the KSNR‟s functions, both
recreational and ecological reserve. Interview and document reviews were conducted
to collect the necessary data. Comparative analysis has been employed to analyze the
primary and secondary data. It was found that KSNR management system consist of
three subsystems namely service management, resource management, and visitor
management; each of them has its own problems, where integrated solutions are
needed due to their interrelationships. Service management subsystem was facing
some problems with funding and budgetary, human resources, public relations,
natural and non-natural disasters, and infrastructural problems. Resource
management subsystem has to deal with some problems around infrastructure,
environmental control, and abusive behaviors from irresponsible parties. Visitor
management subsystem needs to solve some problems with infrastructure and
visitor-relationships. This study concluded some integrated solutions to be
recommended to the management of KSNR. It was recommended to refer to the
other nature reserves management in other countries where the governments
allocated more percentage of the funding, other suggestions in term of financial
difficulty was to attract more concerning NGOs and individuals to be actively
involved in rightful usages of the park. Solving funding problems would likely to
solve human resource problems, where KSNR should be able to involve more expert
personnel and reorganize the structure of the roster, as well as provide adequate
infrastructures to solve problems around disasters control. It is also recommended to
put more priority to formally and informally educate school-students to be aware
about KSNR, where the awareness would lead to higher interest of rightful usages
and further studies in related useful area. Aside of infrastructural reorganization and
development, it is necessary for KSNR management to develop good mutual
relationships with other institutions and society nearby KSNR in order to obtain
more participation in reserving the ecological and recreational opportunities in
KSNR. For the future researchers, it is recommended to perform more in-depth
qualitative studies on each management subsystem and/or thorough quantitative
studies on several management factors existed.
vi
ABSTRAK
Kajian diskriptif kualitatif ini untuk melihat pengurusan Korgalzhyn State
Nature Reserve (KSNR) di Kazakhstan. Objektif kajian ini adalah untuk
mengenalpasti masalah dalam sistem pengurusan dan mencadangkan beberapa
cadangan kepada pemegang taruh dalam kedua-dua fungsi rekreasi dan simpanan
ekologi KSNR. Temubual dan semakan dokumen dilakukan untuk mendapatkan
data-data yang berkaitan. Analisa perbandingan dijalankan untuk menganalisis data
prima dan skunder. Didapati system pengurusan KSNR terdiri daripada tiga
substistem iaitu pengurusan perkhidmatan, perngurusan sumber dan pengurusan
pelawat yang mana mempunyai masalah tersendiri yang mana penyelesaian
bersepadu diperlukan bergantung kepada hubungan subsistem tersebut. Subsistem
pengurusan perkhidmatan berhadapan beberapa masalah seperti pembiayaan dan
bajet, sumber manusia,hubungan awam,bencana semulajadi dan bukan semulajadi
serta masalah infrastruktur. Subsistem pengurusan sumber berhadapan beberapa
masalah merangkumi infrastruktur, kawalan persekitaran dan sikap buruk pihak yang
tidak bertanggungjawab. Subsitem pengurusan pelawat perlu menyelesaikan
beberapa masalah yang melibatkan infrastruktur dan perhubungan pelawat. Kajian
ini menyimpulkan beberapa penyelesaian bersepadu untuk dicadangan kepada
pengurusan KSNR. Dicadangkan merujuk kepada pengurusan simpanan kebangsaan
negara lain yang mana kerajaannya memperuntukkan dana yang lebih dan cadangan
yang lain dalam kontek masalah kewangan untuk menarik lebih perhatian dari NGO
dan individu untuk terlibat aktif dalam penggunaan yang sebenar. Menyelesaikan
masalah pembiayaan seperti menyelesaikan masalah sumber manusia yang mana
KSNR sepatutnya boleh melibatkan ramai pakar dan mengenalpasti struktur jadual
dan juga menyediakan infrastruktur secukupnya untuk menyelesaikan masalah
berkaitan masalah kawalan bencana. Dicadangkan juga untuk meletakan lebih
kepentingan dalam mendidik pelajar sekolah secara formal dan tidak formal
kesedaran terhadap KSNR , dimana kesedaran akan memacu lebih minat pengguna
yang betul dan kajian lanjutan dalam bidang yang berguna. Selain penstrukturan
semula dan pembangunan infrastruktur adalah lebih baik untuk pengurusan KSNR
membangunkan hubungan baik dengan institusi dan pertubuhan yang lain dalam
memastikan mencapai lebih penyertaan dalam memelihara ekologi dan peluang
rekreasi di KSNR. Untuk kajian lanjutan, dicadangkan supaya melaksanakan lebih
perinci kajian qualitatif untuk setiap subsistem atau melalui kajian quantitatif
terhadap beberapa faktor-faktor yang sedia ada.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
iv
ABSTRACT
v
ABSTRAK
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
vii
LIST OF TABLES
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
xiii
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
xv
LIST OF APPENDICES
xvi
1
INTRODUCTION
1
1.1 Background of the problem
1
1.2 Problem Statement
2
1.3 Purpose of the study
3
1.4 Objectives of the Study
3
1.5 Study Area
3
1.6 Scope of the Study
4
1.7 Methodology
5
1.8 Significance of the Study
5
viii
2
1.9 Organization of the report
6
LITERATURE REVIEW
7
2.1 Introduction
7
2.2 The Necessity of Protected Areas
7
2.3 Management Framework
11
2.3.1 Nature Reserve/National Park/Outdoor Recreation Management
Model
12
2.3.1.1
Resource Management
13
2.3.1.2
Visitor Management
15
2.3.1.3
Service Management
17
2.3.1.4
Combination of the function
18
2.4 Theoretical Foundations of Nature Reserve/National Park/Outdoor
3
Recreation Management
20
2.4.1 Recreational Opportunity Spectrum
21
2.4.2 Recreational Carrying Capacity
24
2.4.3 Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC)
25
2.5 The Recreational Policy in Nature Reserves
27
2.6 Summary
30
THE STUDY AREA
32
3.1 Introduction
32
3.2 Location and size
32
3.3 History of Creation of KSNR
34
3.4 The Global Importance of KSNR
36
3.5 Legal status.
37
3.6 Current Management and Development Processes in Korgalzhyn State
Nature Reserve
38
3.6.1 Human resources
38
3.7 The Current Management Purposes
40
ix
3.8 Climate
3.8.1 Winters
43
3.8.2 Springs
43
3.8.3 Summers
44
3.8.4 Autumns
44
3.9 Hydrology
3.9.1 Water Conditions in KSNR lakes.
44
47
3.10 The Catastrophic and Unusual Natural Phenomena
48
3.11 Social and economic conditions
50
3.11.1Territorial division and the government
50
3.11.2Transportation System
51
3.11.3Demography
52
3.11.4Divisions of KSNR
53
3.12 Natural Features and Importance of KNSR
54
3.13 Flora
55
3.13.1Vegetative communities and ecosystems.
3.14 Fauna
4
41
56
58
3.14.1Amphibians and reptiles
58
3.14.2 Birds
59
3.14.3Mammals
62
3.15 Tourism.
63
3.16 Public Exposure to KSNR and its Preservation Activities
65
3.17 Conclusion
65
METHODOLOGY
66
4.1 Introduction
66
4.2 Design of Study
66
4.3 Aspects Studied
68
4.4 Methods of Data Collection
69
4.5 Data Analysis
72
x
5
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
73
5.1 Introduction
73
5.2 Service Management
73
5.2.1 Financial and Funding Problems
75
5.2.2 Human Resources Problems
75
5.2.3 Public Relations Related Problems
76
5.3 Natural and Non-Natural Hazard
77
5.4 Facilities and Infrastructural Problems
77
5.5 Resource Management.
78
5.5.1 Water Control Problems
79
5.5.2 Anthropogenous pollution of reservoirs
81
5.5.3 Irresponsible Uses of Biological Resources
81
5.6 Visitor Management
6
82
5.6.1 Tourism Infrastructures
83
5.6.2 Tourism Activities Organizer
84
5.7 Conclusion
84
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
85
6.1 Introduction
85
6.2 Conclusion
85
6.2.1 Service Management
86
6.2.2 Resource management
87
6.2.3 Visitor Management
88
6.3 Recommendation
6.3.1 Service management
88
89
6.3.1.1
Finance
89
6.3.1.2
Human resource
91
6.3.2 Resource management
92
6.3.3 Visitor management
93
6.4 Future Research
94
xi
REFERENCES
95
A
Interview questions
99
B
Interview
101
xii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO.
TITLE
Table 2.1: IUCN Protected Areas Categories
PAGE
9
Table 3.1: Morfometric characteristics of KSNR lakes.
46
Table 4.1: Interview.
71
Table 5.1: KSNR‟s service management subsystem findings
74
Table 5.2: KSNR‟s resource management subsystem findings
78
Table 5.3: KSNR‟s visitor management subsystem findings
82
Table 6.1: Financing sources of protected areas of some countries in the world
89
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO.
TITLE
PAGE
Figure 1.1: Map of Kazakhstan with study area
4
Figure 2.1: Rate of Extinction
8
Figure 2.2: Resource management subsystem
14
Figure 2.3: Visitor management subsystem
16
Figure 2.4: Service management subsystem.
18
Figure 2.5: Integration and interaction of the subsystems in the Outdoor Recreation
Management Systems Model
19
Figure 2.6: Recreational Opportunity Spectrum
21
Figure 2.7: Diagram of the recreationists‟ decision process.
22
Figure 2.8: Input and constraints in the production of the recreational opportunity 23
Figure 2.9: Equilibrium between recreational opportunity and the recreational
experience
25
Figure 2.10: Limits of Acceptable Change planning system
26
Figure 3.1: KSNR territory
33
Figure 3.2: Map of Korgalzhyn State Nature Reserve.
33
Figure 3.3: Steppe.
34
Figure 3.4: Korgalzhyn Lakes from the air
34
Figure 3.5: Existing organizational structure of reserve
39
Figure 3.6: Amount of atmospheric precipitations in 2007-2008 years
42
Figure 3.7: Map of Tengiz-Korgalzhyn Lake system
45
Figure 3.8: Lake Tengiz
45
Figure 3.9: Korgalzhyn Lakes with ice
46
Figure 3.10: Flamingo
48
Figure 3.11: Roads in KSNR
51
xiv
Figure 3.12: Cordon Karazhar
52
Figure 3.13: Abai Village
53
Figure 3.14: Picture of Shrenk‟s Tuilp
55
Figure 3.15: Picture of feather grass
56
Figure 3.16: Fish (a Pike, b Perch)
58
Figure 3.17: Steppe viper
59
Figure 3.18: Ducks
60
Figure 3.19: Pelicans (a. Pink pelican, b. Curly pelican)
60
Figure 3.20: Birds (a. Whopper swan, b. Black headed merry fellow)
61
Figure 3.21: Birds (a. Spoonbill, b. Glossy ibis)
61
Figure 3.22: Saiga antelope, rare and typical steppe species
62
Figure 3.23: Ornithology monitoring
63
Figure 3.24: Visitor Centre
64
Figure 4.1: Types of study design
67
Figure 4.2: Design of study
68
Figure 4.3: Methods of data collection
70
xv
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
IBA
-
Important Bird Areas
IUCN
-
KSNR
-
Korgalzhyn State Nature Reserve
LAC
-
Limits of Acceptable Change
RCC
-
Recreational Carrying Capacity
RO
-
Recreational Opportunity
ROS
-
Recreational Opportunity Spectrum
RUP
-
Recreational Use Pattern
WWF
-
World Wide Fund For Nature
International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural
Resources
xvi
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX
A
Interview question
B
Interview
TITLE
PAGE
99
101
CHAPTER 1
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background of the problem
The country of Kazakhstan has been independent for 18 years and went
through many changes. Its result is the stable and economically prospering society,
which means that an effective policy management is very important for the future
success of the country. In some scales, the country can be considered successful in
the area of policy, economy, culture, science, and many other things. Today,
Kazakhstan is well known to be associated with its early age, stability, and
international consents.
For one decade and a half, the primary goals on maintenance of prosperity of
the republic have been defined and solved. However, still there are many problems
needed to be solved. One of the problems is the poor management of natural reserve
areas.
At the very moment of independence, many of the people had no time to
consider about the reserves. All of the reserves became technically ownerless and
abused. The reserve management was failed to play its role to protect the nature. A
proper management system is needed in order to maintain the functions of reserve
areas for the sake of the future generation; thereby, this current study is going to
investigate about the existing management system and find some way to enhance the
management system to a better level. This study will focus on the management
2
process of the biggest nature reserves in Kazakhstan, i.e., the Korgalzhyn State
Nature Reserve (KSNR). The location of KSNR is very close to the capital city of
Astana, where the industrial development expanded out and threatening the function
of the reserve.
Many researchers have conducted their studies in KSNR. Most of them
focused on nature issues, such as monitoring soil, air, and water conditions or the
conditions of flora and fauna. The author indicated that there were less research done
in management of KSNR.
1.2
Problem Statement
During first decade of Kazakhstan independence, KSNR contributed to the
people who benefited from its resources, and its role as nature reserve is gradually
decreasing. This happened due to the inappropriate management, which has failed to
maintain its function as a nature reserve which should preserve nature. There were
uncontrolled visitors to the highly protected sites where few or any people are
allowed to enter, violations of the conservation and reserve norms, unlimited hunting
and fishery, resource extraction.
IUCN recognizes that many approaches to establishing and managing
protected areas are valid and can make substantive contributions to conservation
strategies. This does not mean that they are all equally useful in every situation: skill
in selecting and combining different management approaches within and between
protected areas is often the key to developing an effective functioning protected area
system. Some situations will need strict protection; others can function with, or do
better with, less restrictive management approaches or zoning of different
management strategies within a single protected area. However, the current KSNR
management model employs three management sub-systems such as service,
resource, and visitor management. All sub-systems are interrelated and significantly
influenced on each other and on the function of the reserve.
3
1.3
Purpose of the study
The purpose of this study is to identify and solve problems in management
process of KSNR in order to improve its function as nature reserve.
1.4
Objectives of the Study
The objectives of this study are:
1. To investigate and to analyze current management process in KSNR;
2. To provide some recommendations for better decision-making in term
of the reserve, in term of solving the existing problems.
1.5
Study Area
The study area is Government Establishment, Korgalzhyn State Nature
Reserve, Kazakhstan. It is located in geographical coordinates 50º10 - 50º43 NL and
68º38-69º41 EL. Administratively, it is located in the territory of Korgalzhyn and
Egindykolsky areas of Akmolinsk, and Nurin area of the Karaganda (Figure 1.1).
The state reserve total area makes 258963 hectares, including the 147600 ha
of waters. Round territory on prohibited zone border 2 kilometres security zone by a
total area of 94421 hectares is established. All territory on prohibited zone border is
located in Akmolinsk province (southeast, western, north - east parts in Korgalzhyn
area, northern and northwest part in Egindykol district). The site of territory of the
southern and southwest parts of a two-kilometre security zone is located in Nurin
area of the Karaganda province.
The structure of state reserve territory includes steppes and all water-marsh
grounds located in a downstream of river Nury, including completely extensive is
4
bitter-salty Lake of Tengiz. The western part of territory of state reserve borders on
the land of the state ground fund, presented by steppes.
Figure 1.1: Map of Kazakhstan with study area
Source: www.graphicmaps.com (2009)
1.6
Scope of the Study
This study is investigating the management of KSNR in order to define the
gap between the theories of protected area management and the management of
KSNR. Documentary analysis was done in order to obtain the theories of protected
area management, and structured interview was done to the head of KSNR
management in order to obtain information about the current management process in
KSNR. As similar study has never been done to KSNR before, it is necessary to limit
the management aspects into 3 subsystems namely service, resource, and visitor
subsystem.
5
1.7
Methodology
This research utilized the qualitative research methodology employing
secondary and primary data. The secondary data were collected from a documentary
research about the previous surveys of scientists around the area from December
2002 to March 2007. The author collected the primary data by employing an
interview in August 2009. Three aspects of this case study – resource management,
service management, and visitor management were analysed by using explorative,
data explanative, and data comparative with descriptive analysis method. Research
findings categorized and displayed in the three tables. Those three tables supported
with detailed explanation and description.
1.8
Significance of the Study
This study is important because it aimed to identify and solve management
problems in KSNR. Whenever the management of KSNR successfully play its role,
the nature reservation is supported, and biological varieties are protected for the
sake of the future generations.
This current study would apply new principles of management, which have
shown the efficiency in practice in foreign countries. Due to the lack of previous
studies in the area, this current study could be considered as a novel study in solving
problems of KSNR. Most of the previous studies were done around the ecological,
environmental, and zoological issues. None of the previous studies has done in term
of management process.
The practical importance of the project is valuable for the stakeholders
and the government of Kazakhstan; results of this research might help the
managers and stakeholders to develop and organize an effective management in
order to contribute to environmental reservation more successfully.
6
1.9
Organization of the report
This study provides 6 chapters, which are chapter I: Introduction, chapter II:
Literature Review, chapter III: Methodology, chapter IV: Findings and Discussion,
chapter V: Conclusions, and chapter VI: Recommendations.

Chapter I (Introduction) describes what study is all about. It
includes the main points such as background of the study ,
purpose of the study, objectives of the study, brief explanation
about the study area, scope of the study, and significance of the
study.

Chapter II, (Literature Review) provides the nature of the study,
theoretical base, and gives information, which has been published
on a study area or information related to one‟s particular area of
study. The aim of this chapter is to show a critical thorough look
at literature that exists in the area is studied.

Chapter III, (Study Area) describes the related details of the
studied area (KSNR), including its related management systems
and features.

Chapter IV (Methodology) brings out the methods used in
collecting the data for study, where the procedures and
instruments used in the study are described and elaborated.

Chapter V (Findings and Discussions) would explain the analyses,
discuss the findings, and interprets the results of research based on
the research questions of the study.

Chapter VI (Conclusion and Recommendation) would sum up the
main points of the study; clearly relate to the objectives and results
of this study are. Some suggestion to the stakeholders of the
KSNR and the future researchers would be presented in this
chapter as well.
CHAPTER II
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
Introduction
This chapter explores the main existing literature pertinent to the area of
interest of the study. Furthermore, this chapter explains and elaborates the concept
and the theories around the research subjects and study area.
2.2
The Necessity of Protected Areas
Global environmental change, such as global warming, shoreline shrinkage,
and other problems are becoming critical issues. Despite protecting environmental
resources is becoming an enormous issue, it is estimated that the rate of deforestation
reached 16 million hectares yearly in the 1990s, while 20 % of the world‟s coral
reefs were dying out, and 20% degenerated in the last several decades (Miththapala,
2008). Furthermore, as shown in Figure 2.1, existing rate of species extinction is at
smallest amount a hundred to a thousand times higher than the nature rate (McNeely
et al, 2009).
8
Figure 2.1: Rate of Extinction
Source: McNeely et al (2009)
Protected areas play important roles in conserving species and ecosystems.
Such areas would also provide varieties of goods and services necessary to
sustainable use of natural resources. Many governments have extensive systems of
protected areas developed over many years (Batten, 1989). These systems modified
differently in each country, depending on national needs and priorities. Moreover,
differences in legislative, institutional and financial support would likely set some
other differences among the governments in terms of sustaining their natural
resources (Swain, 1970).
Information on protected areas empowers a wide range of conservation and
development activities. Nevertheless, there is a large variation in types of protected
area, objectives of management, and level of protection. Each stakeholder might set
different priority over the issue and use the information they obtained on producing
policy and conducting logical actions. After all, the availability of resources plays an
important role in determining the policy produced and actions conducted (Downy et
al, 1993).
9
Protected areas are important due to their potential to make available a
range of goods and ecological services at the same time as preserving nature and
cultural heritage. Furthermore, they are able to provide poverty alleviation, by
providing employment opportunities and livelihoods to local communities.
Moreover, they have high potential to be significant components of the local or
regional tourism.
According to McNeely et al (2009), a nature reserve is a reserve of land,
typically recognized and owned by a national government, protected from further
development and pollution or any public activities that might lead to deterioration.
Table 2.1 shows how International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural
Resources (IUCN) categorizes the type of protected areas, where KSNR is included
in category Ia.
Table 2.1: IUCN Protected Areas Categories
Category
Definition
I a.
Strict Nature Reserve
Managed mainly for Science
I b.
Wilderness Area
Managed
mainly
for
wilderness
for
ecosystems
protection (large area)
II
National Park
Managed
mainly
protection and recreation
III
Natural Monument
Managed mainly for conservation of
specific natural features
IV
V
Habitat/Species
Management Managed
mainly
for
conservation
Area
through management intervention
Protected Landscape/Seascape
Managed mainly for landscape/seascape
conservation & recreation.
VI
Managed Resource Protected Managed mainly for the sustainable use
Area
of natural ecosystems services to meet
community needs
Source: McNeely et al (2009)
Category Ia are strictly protected areas set aside to protect biodiversity and
also possibly geological/geomorphological features, where human visitation, use and
impacts are strictly controlled and limited to ensure protection of the conservation
10
values. Such protected areas can serve as indispensable reference areas for scientific
research and monitoring (Bishop et al, 2004)
Primary Objective of Nature Reserve is to conserve regionally, nationally or
globally outstanding ecosystems, species (occurrences or aggregations) and/or
geodiversity features: these attributes will have been formed mostly or entirely by
non-human forces and will be degraded or destroyed when subjected to all but very
light human impact.
Other objectives:

To preserve ecosystems, species and geodiversity features in a state as
undisturbed by recent human activity as possible;

To secure examples of the natural environment for scientific studies,
environmental monitoring and education, including baseline areas from
which all avoidable access is excluded;

To minimize disturbance through careful planning and implementation of
research and other approved activities;

To conserve cultural and spiritual values associated with nature.
The area should generally:

Have a largely complete set of expected native species in ecologically
significant densities or be capable of returning them to such densities through
natural processes or time-limited interventions;

Have a full set of expected native ecosystems, largely intact with intact
ecological processes, or processes capable of being restored with minimal
management intervention;

Be free of significant direct intervention by modern humans that would
compromise the specified conservation objectives for the area, which usually
implies limiting access by people and excluding settlement;

Not require substantial and on-going intervention to achieve its conservation
objectives;

Be surrounded when feasible by land uses that contribute to the achievement
of the area's specified conservation objectives;
11

Be suitable as a baseline monitoring site for monitoring the relative impact of
human activities;

Be managed for relatively low visitation by humans;

Be capable of being managed to ensure minimal disturbance (especially
relevant to marine environments).
The area could be of religious or spiritual significance (such as a sacred
natural site) so long as biodiversity conservation is identified as a primary objective.
In this case the area might contain sites that could be visited by a limited number of
people engaged in faith activities consistent with the area's management objectives.
2.3
Management Framework
According to Wirth (1990), there were two eras after World War II –
extensive management era and intensive management era. The main expressiveness
of the Extensive Management Era was on raising the supply of recreational
opportunities. Most of the management programs in nature management programs
were extensively developed:
1. Resource management
a. Site protection and maintenance
b. Silvicultural treatment of overstory vegetation
c. Integration with other resource management programs
d. Recreation road construction and improvement
2. Visitor management
a. Informational services
b. Concession services
c. Expansion of interpretive programs
d. Public safety
12
One well-known strategy that has risen during Intensive Era is management
by objectives (Steen, 1976). In such strategies, the recreation manager subjected to
estimate baseline data and develop particular management objectives for each
recently planned area. The dilemma often occurs is that the managers frequently
couched their objectives in indistinct widespread terms and look for oversimplified
models to attain the objectives, and measured their output by the numbers of visitors
per days. New way of thinking, fresh mind and recreation-minded managers are
needed, especially those with greater individual vitality to search for new approaches
of old business assets.
According to Jubenville (1986), the complexity of the managerial problems
are affected by the range of social and political external influences. Therefore, a
model helps to acquire a considerate of those complexities. A systematic model
might not only bring benefits to the nature reserve managers or recreation managers,
it might cover the need for baseline information in fields where voids emptiness
exists. Moreover, it might also recommend priorities for future research.
2.3.1
Nature Reserve/National Park/Outdoor Recreation Management Model
In nature reserve, national park or recreation management, there are three
main inputs work with – (1) the visitor, (2) the environmental settings and (3) the
management organisation.
Visitors who visit nature reserve usually have individual recreational interests
and play their roles as customers of the system, which designed to provide
recreational opportunities. Pleasing different recreational interests among individuals
takes different recreational opportunities, and a nature reserve might not provide all
range of the recreational opportunities demanded by all visitors. Somehow, it seems
that when there is a point where managing for everyone‟s interest, might ended up by
satisfying no one (Twight et al, 1993).
13
The natural resources base is the other important aspect after visitors. It is
where the activity takes place and as well as playing its protection roles for birds,
wildlife and watershed protection. It is important to accomplish a level of
understanding that it is necessary to provide an adequate physical environment.
There are many misperceptions about what really are the environmental needs of
various types of recreationists.
Management, as the third input, is the component that protects the originality
of the recreational occasion and the resource base. The existence of the management
completes the entity of the recreational and reservation opportunities.
The interrelationships of all three elements are as follows:
1.
The resource affects the visitor;
2.
The visitor affects the resource;
3.
The resource situation affects management programs;
4.
The management programs affect the resource situation;
5.
The visitor affects management programs
6.
The management programs affect the disposition of the visitor.
Visitor management, resource management, and service management are
subsystems, which formed the functions of the entire system. Existence and
effectiveness of the three subsystems is compulsory, in order to generate higher
reservation and recreational opportunities.
2.3.1.1 Resource Management
Alden (1973) stated that the resource management subsystem consists of two
phases – resource input and the resource management programs aimed at managing
those input (see Figure 2.2). Preserving resource excellence is important and is
should be achieved by monitoring the effects of present custodial programs on the
resource base at some established stage. In other words, maintaining impact in some
acceptable level or getting better the resource‟s capability to uphold an upper level of
14
use within acceptable limits. Monitoring should be conducted at the line between the
resource and human use. It indicates how good the existing programs are, and
provides information about the way the stakeholders should conduct the programs
within acceptable limits. In all resource management programs, preserving the
resource might not be the only final objective, accomplishing some needed outcome,
such as providing specified recreational opportunity, should be put into
consideration.
Site
Soil
management
Overstory
Vegetation M-nt
Water
Turf
RESOURCE
Air
Management
MANAGEMENT
Visual Resource
Management
Flora
Ecosystems
Management
Fauna
Impact
Assessment
Monitoring
Programs
Figure 2.2: Resource management subsystem
Source: Adopted from Jubenville et al (1993)
Resource management programs consist of:
1. Site Management. This is an intense program to protect the site from any
risk of overuse by the visitors and to provide pleasant and aesthetic
surroundings for the activities.
15
2. Overstory Vegetation Management. This
included silvicultural
performance related to the management of the intensively used areas.
3. Ecosystems Management. It concentrates on particular disputable areas
of management business related to the fragments of existing endangered
ecosystems.
4. Visual Resource Management. It is a process where distinctive
landscapes are listed, analyzed, classified and organized based on their
availability to any low-visual-impact development.
2.3.1.2 Visitor Management
Figure 2.3 shows the functions of visitor management. Information systems
are capable of informing users that they can choose logically between environmental
settings and management-influenced sites that best suit their interests. Public safety
should be one of the concerns of the management, regardless the kinds of
recreational opportunity provided. Therefore, a special public safety program must
be provided in each recreational facility. Another important aspect involved is
educational aspect; the visitors should gain an advancement of knowledge around the
landscape and its functions.
Previous study Chase (1983) concluded that the manager should consider the
visitors‟ contribution in developing management programs. The visitors‟
contributions are as follows:
1. Needs Hierarchy, described as requirements and expectations of
individuals (visitors) on recreational events.
2. Style of participation, described as ways visitors choose to get involved
in provided recreational facilities. There are macro-characteristics or
macro-behavioral participations (trophy hunter, meat hunter, and
equipment hunter) and micro-behavioral participations (how people travel
a wilderness trail, interact with one another, and respond to several
environmental influences). Nevertheless, up to recently, there are only
16
few numbers of studies around participants‟ micro-behaviour (Mills,
1985).
3. Visitor Sensation, described as the way people participate based on their
feeling of the recreational opportunity prepared by management. It is not
only their feelings about the resources such as the lake or surrounding
scenes that count, but also their feelings on non-natural provisions such as
boating facilities, roads, services, etc. Even when empirical data about
this aspect are less available, the manager should be capable to forecast
common user response in order to develop suitable programs.
Visitor Management Programs
Understanding the Visitor
Distribution
Needs
of Use
Hierarchy
Style of
Participation
Public
Safety
VISITOR
MANAGEMENT
Visitor
Interpretive
Perception
Programs
Information
Programs
Visitor
Motives
Figure 2.3: Visitor management subsystem
Source: Adopted from Jubenville (1993)
17
2.3.1.3 Service Management
As described in Figure 2.4, Service management gives direction to the
managers and other stakeholders in term of provision, facilities, and related programs
to adapt the visitors (Stankey, 1972).
The service management subsystem can be divided into various programs:
1.
Resource allocation process is an area planning where natural and
physical resources are located to provide specific recreational
opportunities. Area planning procedure is vital to service management;
however some considerations about other auxiliary programs (e.g.,
concessions, preservation and risk management) should not be taken for
granted.
2. Concession management is concentrated on providing particular
facilities/services in order for to satisfy the visitors by specific
environmental settings. In some cases, it has been essential for the
management to support either the facilities for the service or both the
services and facilities.
3. The maintenance subprogram is meant to protect public input in the
facilities and preserving available accommodations for the public. While
it is the first stage of management done on modern buildings or trails, it is
often being taken for granted in other kinds of services (Hendee, 1990).
Even though recreational facility management might like to vary the
functions of the site, however maintenance should be prioritized.
4. Hazard Management is a subprogram aimed at minimizing any risks,
whether natural or manmade, to the visitors. The manager brings out
some specific guidance of activities for the visitors in order to minimize
any hazardous possibility, even though eventually the decision is up to the
visitors whether they would like to implement the guidance or not.
18
Constraints
Programs
Concession
Legislation
Management
Special
Services
Agency
Goals
Maintenance
SERVICE
Program
Management
MANAGEMENT
Coordination
Hazard
Management
Professional
Competence
Area
Planning
User
Attitudes
Site
Planning
Figure 2.4: Service management subsystem.
Source: Adopted from Jubenville (1993)
2.3.1.4 Combination of the function
Due to the various possible interactions among the programs in each
subsystem, integrating all of those functions is not an easy task. Its diagram would
form such a maze of lines that makes it difficult to trace any interrelationships. It
must be realized, however, that there is interdependence within the system (Alden,
1973); as pictured in Figure 2.5, a decision made in one program area can have a
drastic effect on other programs. The manager must consider every ramification of a
particular decision. An understanding of these interactions, it is possible to
manipulate some programs, which produce desired outcomes in general.
19
External Political Environment
Outputs of Satisfying
Recreational
Opportunities
-Air
-Water
-Flora
-Fauna
-Soil
Institutiona
Capability
of
Resource
-Site
-Vegetation
-Landscape
-Ecosystem
l
-Political Demands
-Legislation
-Agency Goals
-Program Coordination with
External Environment
-Competence
-Political Support
Constraints
Resource
Service
Management
Management
Resource
Service
Programs
Programs
-Concessions
-Special Services
-Maintenance
-Area planning
-Site Planning
-Hazards
Visitor
-Visitor perception
-Style of Participation
-Needs Hierarchy
-Visitor Motives
Management
Visitor
Visitor
Needs
Programs
-Distribution
-Information
-Interpretation
-Public Safety
Management Subsystems
Phase of Subsystems
Inputs
of
Natural
Resources,
Interactions
Appropriations, and Authority
Figure 2.5: Integration and interaction of the subsystems in the Outdoor Recreation
Management Systems Model
Source: Twight (1993)
For instance, a plan to improve site conditions in a wilderness area where
outfitters (a service management concern) have tended to camp near a lake, might
cause a deterioration of the resource (resource management problem). Since there is
no direct manipulations are allowed in the wilderness, possible way to conduct the
manipulation might be by redistributing the use by voluntary cooperation or, by
permission from the outfitter, limiting the use to let the site naturally recovers
(Cordell, 1990).
For instance, in a lake, a visitor (visitor management concern) who is a
novice floater regarded floating only as a secondary activity. The visitor might enjoy
the experience and did not perceive any problems such as making noises, but some
safety problems might occur to an unskilled private floater who did not appreciate
one‟s limitations in craft manoeuvring. Public safety should not be a problem when
most people go out on a commercial raft under the guidance of a skilled boatman.
Therefore, every outfitter should have a persuasive way to provide a visitor-friendly
education to avoid any unwanted event without reducing the enjoyment of the
visitors.
20
In a lake area, since floaters are not allowed to stop and leave the craft, the
resource management problems are expected to be minimum, expect those related to
fishing. This eliminates environmental impact expect at or near the access points
where some site deterioration from boating and fishing activities took places.
However, due to some budgetary limits on ranger personnel, conducting some
enforcement (such as monitoring overnight uses, which is not allowed) can be a
difficult task. Service management has the greatest effect on the system. Several
concessionaires have special permits to operate on the lake, and these outfitters
encourage participation by advertising float trips. It is depending on the case,
whether the area managed is a lake or a river, there is must be limitation of visitors
per day, days per year, in order to sustain the environmental resources while
maintaining the tourism values of the facilities. It can be concluded that knowledge
of the system shows the effects that a given decision might influence other several
subsystems on the system‟s environment.
2.4
Theoretical Foundations of Nature Reserve/National Park/Outdoor
Recreation Management
Nature Reserve or recreation management is a professional field rooted in
both ecology and social psychology. Many theories have been improved to explain
user behaviour; most of the them reflected the demand or users‟ side of the recreation
equation. However, the management represents the supplier side. Rather than cover
the waterfront of all possible theories and concepts dealing with recreation
management, this current study will simply discuss the interface of demand and
supply. While this interface has many paradigms, two primary patterns filtered out of
the literature recreational carrying capacity (RCC) and recreational opportunity
spectrum (ROS) (Becker, 1990). This subchapter looks at both RCC and ROS. Both
models did not against one another; instead, they both are complimentary to one
another. Together they form the theoretical foundation of outdoor recreation
management.
21
2.4.1
Recreational Opportunity Spectrum
Many authors have suggested a recreation-management continuum. Hammit,
(1991) described the continuum as a spectrum of recreational opportunities and the
role of the manager as a provider of those opportunities. They defined the setting for
recreational opportunities as the combination of physical, biological, social, and
managerial conditions that give value to a place. An opportunity involves qualities
provided by nature (landscape, topography, scenery, vegetation), qualities associated
with recreational use (levels and types of use), and conditions provided by
management (development, roads, regulations). Management should provide a
variety of opportunities for recreationists, by combining variations of qualities and
conditions aforementioned. Variety expressed in a continuum called the Recreational
Opportunity Spectrum (See Figure 2.6).
Intensively
Managed
Environment
Pristine
Environment
Roads/Access/Develop
ment
1
Primitive
2
Secondary
Primitive
3
Intermediate
4
Secondary
5
Class or Level
Modern
Modern
Figure 2.6: Recreational Opportunity Spectrum
Source: Jabenville et al (1993)
This framework recognized the link between the environment settings and the
psychological outcome, the recreational experience itself. It is based on the
assumption that recreationists choose to participate in those activities that are
consistent with particular environmental settings (Knopf, 1983).
22
The conceptual version advanced by Driver and Brown (1987), and Clark and
Stankey (1979), recognized separated and distinct roles of the manager and user. The
manager provided the opportunity and the users created their own experience within
that given opportunity.
1. Roles of the User
Users are driven by motives to participate (See Figure 2.7). A user then
chooses a site and pursues a recreational experience that leads to personal
satisfaction. Satisfaction means how well the experience meets the expectations of
the user (Schreyer and Knopf, 1984). Choice of site, on-site participation, and the
experience derived may also be influenced by external factors beyond the control of
the manager or the user such as spontaneous actions of others (Chase, 1983).
Constraints
Situational Antecedents (Outside Forces)
Social and
Economic
Motives
Site
User
Plans
Choice
Set
Onsite
Recreational
User
Participation
Experience
Satisfaction
Choice
Psychological
and
Informational
Figure 2.7: Diagram of the recreationists‟ decision process.
Source: Jabenville et al (1993)
2. Roles of the Manager
a.
The Figure 2.8 shows all the inputs of a recreational opportunity. The
environmental setting and managerial actions reflect the supplyrelated function of the manager (Becker, 1990). While visitors do not
23
create environmental setting, it is the manager‟s responsibility to
evaluate, dedicate, and manage sites for specific purposes. Location
where the visitor chose to operate on the ROS is defined as the anchor
point for the specific recreational opportunity.
b.
Managerial actions are specific and are applicable to a site to attract
certain user types, to protect or enhance resource attributes, or to
maintain opportunities for specific experiences. These management
devices are available to alter the value of the site to the user.
Recreational
Opportunity
Environmental
Management
Constraints
Setting
Actions
1. Resource Sensitivity
2.Physiography
3.Legal Mandates
4.Policy
5.Existing Situation
6.Budgets
Environmental
Attractors
General
Landscape
Physical
Resource
Development
7.Information
Management
8.Knowledge
Visitor
9.Other
Services
Regulation
Figure 2.8: Input and constraints in the production of the recreational opportunity
Source: Jubenville et al (1993)
Researches around visitor‟s responses to various attributes of a site are not
luxurious in number (Buist, 1982). Nevertheless, some researches studied about the
attributes and advocated that attributes fell into two categories: direct and indirect
(Hendee, 1990). Direct attributes includes environmental setting and physical
developments. Indirect attributes, such as visitor services, resource management
programs, and regulations are tend to be perceived as less tangible. According to
Stankey (1987), there is a direct link between a physical development and provided
services.
24
2.4.2
Recreational Carrying Capacity
Carrying capacity has been an important theoretical management model since
Wagar‟s monograph in 1964. There are at least four described recreational carrying
capacities: 1. Ecological (the impact of recreational use on the ecology), 2. Physical
(the number of people a facility can accommodate) and 3. Social (the number of
people an area can sustain and still maintain a quality recreational experience
Based on the equilibrium idea, despite it was stated that the there is no
inherent carrying capacity (Stankey, 1984), this current study offers a real and
potentially measurable alternative. Often, the new users have different social
characteristics (experience, age, education, environmental concern, attitude toward
reserve regulations, etc.). The managers find that some changes might attract types of
visitors with high potentials of management problems. Such visitors may turn out to
be destructive to the resource while politically supporting the management agency
and its programs.
In one western state park, for instance, the management tried to promote
traditional low visitation family picnic and camping parks. Management provided
new large parking areas around a 100-plus acre swimming and boating lake. They
assumed that the new additional visitors would have similar characteristics to the
traditional visitors. However, the unanticipated consequences were the attraction of
large crowds of drinking juveniles with many behaviour and law enforcement
problems, let alone the harm and property deteriorations. This problem was
eventually solved by completely fencing off and barricading access to the lake except
through a single entrance station. Rangers in uniform attended the station; they
charged entrance fees and noted the cars‟ license numbers.
With an assumption that the inputs are relatively constant, there is
equilibrium (balance) in any system (Hammit, 1987). In term of nature reserve or
other recreational opportunity resources, there should be equilibrium between the
recreational opportunity provided and the recreational experience that the user
obtained, as shown in Figure 2.9
25
RO
RUP
Figure 2.9: Equilibrium between recreational opportunity and the recreational
experience
Source: Jubenville et al (1993)
Where RO is recreational opportunity and RUP is the resulted recreational
use pattern. It is this equilibrium that represents the carrying capacity of an area; the
dynamic equilibrium between use and recreational opportunity (Schreyer, 1984).
Any introduced managerial change would alter equilibrium; therefore, external
aspects like weather, wildfire, flood, and changes in potential user population might
affect such balance. Nevertheless, even if change introduced is beyond the control of
the manager, the relative impacts are often predictable and mitigable through
management actions.
2.4.3
Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC)
Stankey (1984) provided the framework for LAC by focusing on control of
human-induced change . The aim was to limit the character and rate of change that
would lead to unacceptable conditions, biological or social, within RO‟s.
LAC is an integral part of carrying capacity concept where capacity limits are
the product of value judgment as well as science (McCool, 1989). Management of
recreation areas in Nature reserves, which is actually a management of users and
their impacts, are included in the value judgment. The value judgment considered
three factors: (1) natural resource base, (2) socio-political base, and (3) managerial
factors (Stankey, 1984).
It is important to understand unavoidable changes (Jubenville et al, 1986).
Ecologically, studies show that most of the impact from recreational activities
occurred at low levels. LAC focused on how much change should be allowed, rather
than to answer the questions about the limitation.
26
The LAC system is shown in Figure 2.10. Hendee et al (1990) described
more detail the LAC process. Issues and concerns of both management and visitors
drive the process were explained; the selections of indicators, or limiting factors, of
desired future conditions are at times difficult. The selection is driven by (1)
measurability, (2) usage patterns effects, (3) social conditions of user concerns, and
(4) responsiveness to management control. The options are suppose to be guided by
the concept that minimum regimentation should control management. At some point,
it might necessary to limit numbers, types of users, or modes of travel. A numerical
capacity must be established for the area, and regulations should be set to manage the
limitation of entry permit system. LAC is a reliable tool for identifying all constraints
on the system – social, resource, budget, etc (Hendee et al, 1990).
Figure 2.10: Limits of Acceptable Change planning system
Source: Jubenville et al (1986)
27
2.5
The Recreational Policy in Nature Reserves
According to Bonnicksen (1985), special policy is necessary to conduct a
recreational management. Nowadays, recreational facilities are used to serve some
political purposes, both obvious and discreet, and many of them will continue to be
used further (Jain, 1980). The following is some recommendations for improvement
of existing quality of recreational management (Nakamura, 1981):
1.
Nature Reserve should be considered as recreational objects and
should have an equal priority to security matters. At times in Nature
reserves to a recreation concern as inevitable harm. Sometimes,
visitors might be seen as potential threat, instead of possibility to
carry out a problem of reserve and to serve needs of the society.
Recreation and security should not be mutually exclusive to one
another. In fact, these two functions can support each other;
protection of natural and cultural resources guarantees presence of
recreational possibilities in the future. Moreover, recreational
impressions from the society give strong support to their protection.
Furthermore, a well-planned follow-up to recreational program
provides full compatibility of all types and levels of public use of
nature reserves with protection of their resources. The last point is,
powerful recreational program in KSNR will promote both
recreational, and security solutions to nature reserves problems.
2.
Clear
and
obvious
problem-identification
of
recreational
management should be developed for all parts of system of nature
reserves. For instance, a proper management system might solve the
problem about types of demanded recreational impressions. Thus, it
helps in defining limits of admissible changes of key natural and
social parameters. It helps develop clearer concept of recreational
carrying capacity and to emphasize that recreational possibilities
might support protection of resources of reserves. They also set the
standard of quality in recreational services.
28
It is important to define the problems of recreational management in terms of
indicators and the quality standards (Stevens, 1962). Quality indicators represent
concrete, measurable sizes, which define recreational possibilities. For instance,
natural indicators might indicate the soil‟s firmness along the footpaths or percent of
a vegetative covering in camping sites. Another instance, social indicators might
predict the probability of the casual meetings with other visitors on footpaths or
quantity-limitations of visitors who in the camping sites. Quality standards show
comprehensive value of each indicator. For example, the maximum admissible level
of the soil‟s firmness or infringement of vegetative coverings, and a maximum
quantity of casual meetings on footpaths or camping sites maximum occupation. The
new scheme of nature reserve carrying capacity, impressions of visitors, and
protection of resources are based on a formulation of the objectives of recreational
management and an establishment, supervision and management of indicators and
the quality standards.
The accent of researches should be based on visitors of nature reserves. The
opinion is standard, that nature reserves represent difficult ecosystems, and that for
understanding, management and protection of these ecosystem researches are
necessary. In fact, reserves are complicated social systems (Shepard, 1974). Actually,
nature reserves are the social institutes created to satisfy the needs of a society, which
demands the best understanding of social requirements. Visitors‟ opinion should be
considered in order to formulate the objectives of recreational management, with
assumption that the best possible way to explain a recreation is from the point of
view of visitors. Moreover, it is necessary to develop and estimate recreational
possibilities based on impressions of corresponding visitors. Successful functioning
of a recreation required persistent and systematic information on the visitors.
Special researches and attention to the borders of the nature reserves and their
developed by the managing directors are required (Weinberg, 1975). Despite most of
the visitors settles down on the border of nature reserves, most of the researches
about nature reserves were studying about the internal. Some plans of recreational
management created for internal sites of reserves, are the products of a well-blended
thought over administrative objectives for both quantitative indicators and the quality
standards. Recreational management for the boundary sites of nature reserves were
29
poorly designed (Nakamura, 1985). Fewer studies have done on visitors‟ expectation
of the boundary area. Accordingly, the objective of recreational management often
did not defined adequately, while indicators and quality standards are underworked.
Intensive recreational activities in nature reserves will demand so intensive
management (Hendee et al, 1990). Various possibilities of recreational possibilities
within the limits of System of nature reserves support intensive use of the facilities.
The social demands for access to these resources are high, and have the future
potential growth, thereby, intensive management is necessary. From discussion of
recreational carrying capacity, it can be concluded that there is an interrelation
between carrying capacity and administrative activity: as the higher level of
administrative activity, the higher the carrying capacity. Intensive management is
important in nature reserves to keep the integrity of the important natural and cultural
resources.
Nature reserves should be considered in a context of all system of
recreational possibilities (Zimmerman, 1951). In the light of it, nature reserves
should give those types of recreational possibilities for which they are most adapted.
Considering importance of both natural and cultural resources, and the necessity to
protect their integrity, recreational use should be focused on reception satisfying the
demands to enjoy these important resources. Types of a possible recreation in nature
reserve should be defined on unique major criterion. Recreational services, which are
not based on reception of satisfaction from natural and cultural resources of reserve,
should be conducted outside of the reserve area.
The service of nature reserves should emphasize on administration, both on
quality, and on quantity of given recreational possibilities (Stevens, 1962). In spite of
the fact that the basic measure of a recreation was the number of its visitors, it does
not provide enough information on quality of given recreational services. There is no
regular knowledge of degree to visitors‟ satisfaction, visitors‟ impression, or visitors‟
expectations; however, recreational possibilities carry out functional purposes for
which they have been created, or about degree to which nature reserves give those
recreational possibilities, which they can give according to the purposes of the
creation.
30
The service of nature reserves should show perform better in term of
recreational objective (Zimmerman, 1951). The recreation should receive enough
attention in order to realize its functions, which were set based on the decree of the
Congress for creating nature reserve. It will demand more various active, aggressive
programs of recreational planning, management and researches. It requires creation
and approbation of stronger philosophy of recreational service in nature reserves. By
definition, nature reserves represent national recreational resources and contain
international value. However, in the absence of powerful recreational philosophy and
well-planned program, this potential will not be able to be completely realised.
2.6
Summary
The visitor is the main source of income of an outdoor recreation or nature
reserve systems management model. There is a need for service and resource
management in recreation when there are inputs of political environmental demands
and support for the agency‟s programs. Agencies develop specific visitor
management programs in response to user demands for satisfying experiences.
The service management subsystem offers basic features, including access,
facilities, and other accommodations, which are commensurate with institutional
constraints, resource limitations, and visitor needs. Resource management programs
attempt to maintain the existing resource base within accepted limits of change.
When these limits exceeded, feedback through the system may indicate another need
to reduce the impact such as visitor redistribution program (visitor management).
A systematic model is the only logical approach to manage the natural
resource base for recreational use because it simply depicts the highly complex
interaction of visitor, resource, and the manager in the context of the public policy
system. While not all possible interactions may be fully appreciated, it is good
enough to know that the three subsystems are interrelated and that any change
happen to one subsystem might affect the other. Less knowledge of the
31
interrelationship might produce a situation where a problem solving in one area
might possibly cause catastrophes in others.
The Recreational Opportunity Spectrum model, as presently operationalized
by agencies, ignores input from environmental setting. It is the role of manager to
provide the recreational opportunity through the resource allocation process.
However, it is up to the user to respond to these opportunities to experience a
recreational activity that leads to personal satisfaction. The goal of the user is to
maximize, within whatever personal constraints, their own utility functions.
ROS assumes that a population with a particular set of experience preference
might participate in certain activities to satisfy their demands in a conductive
environmental setting; little do the population know that through provision of access,
development, environmental and social control, the management has modified the
setting.
CHAPTER III
3 THE STUDY AREA
3.1
Introduction
Existing information about the study area is necessary. This chapter gives
general information about KSNR, which located in northern part of Kazakhstan
(Figure 3.1), includes the general characteristics such as social, economical and
physical current situation. History, biological and physical components, climate,
demographic situation, and current management process are described in this
chapter.
3.2
Location and size
The KSNR is located in geographical coordinates 50º10 - 50º43.north latitude
and 68º38-69º41 east longitude. On administrative division is in territory of
Korgalzhynsky and Egindykolsky district of Akmolinsky region, and Nurinsky
district of the Karaganda region (Figure 3.2). There is 258963 ga of total area where
147600 ga is taken by water resources such us lakes and rivers. The landscape
structure of the KSNR includes as steppes (see Figure 3.3) and all water-marsh lands
located along the Nura river, and fresh and bitter-salty lakes, biggest is lake Теngiz
(see Figure 3.4) The western part of the reserve territory presented by steppe.
33
Figure 3.1: KSNR territory
Source: Adopted from www. wikipedia.com (2009)
Figure 3.2: Map of Korgalzhyn State Nature Reserve.
Source: Kuragulova (2007)
34
Figure 3.3: Steppe.
Source: www.iucn.org (2009)
Figure 3.4: Korgalzhyn Lakes from the air
Source: Lenk (2007)
3.3
History of Creation of KSNR
An agricultural program called “Virgin Lands” was launched in 1954 by
Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, which sought to increase grain production in
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) by enhancing uncultivated, or virgin,
land and sowing it with grain. A swath of virgin lands roughly three times the land
35
area of England, primarily in northern Kazakhstan and southwestern Siberian Russia,
was cultivated within five years. The Virgin Lands program was given less priority
by the Soviet government by 1960. Despite its defects, the campaign made a longterm contribution to the growth of Soviet agriculture.
Nevertheless, the virgin land program caused natural disaster to some flora
and fauna in term of biodiversity. The cultivation of „virgin land‟ decreased the
forage in central and northern steppes areas. As a result, the animals have drawn out
of their natural ecosystem. Therefore, it is very important to reserve the wildlife in
the steppes. Hence, the strict control of game and feathery hunting was implemented,
and free zones for the animals were created around Korgalzhyn Lake.
In March 1957, Tengiz - Korgalzhyn lakes have been declared as hunter-free
reserve area. In January 1958 the branch “Borovoy State Gare Reserve” has been
founded around Lake Korgalzhyn. In May 1958, some political adjustment has made,
and the name was changed to “Korgalzhyn Virgin Reserve” with 15,000 hectares of
steppes has been founded on the right coast of the river Kon and southern coast of
Lake Korgalzhyn. The water area of all lakes in the existing borders of the reserve in
this territory had not included as parts of the reserve (Kerteshev, 2003).
Since then, the status of Korgalzhyn Virgin Reserve, including its lake and
reserved area, were inconsistent. There were times it was a reserve - hunting (1961)
and other times when it was a gare reserve (1962). Existing organizational structures
actively used natural resources. However, there were no controls towards the hunting
limits.
The reservation function was threatened by several industrial activities
around the area. There were some other facilities such as reed-factories, musquash
beaver farms, fish factories, brucellosis cattle insulator and cattle-breeding areas
organized and set nearby the territory of gare reserve (Sidorova, 1997).
In April 18th, 1968 the ministerial council of the Kazakh Soviet Socialist
Republic has formed KSNR with the area of 177200 hectares, including the water
36
area has made 147600 hectares. Now the reserve total area makes 258963 hectares,
including water space - 147600 hectares, and reserved zone - 94421 hectares.
In 1976 according to Ramsar Convention, Tengiz-Korgalzhyn lakes are
included in the list of wetlands of the international value, and in year 2000, the lakes
of the reserve have entered the international network Live Lakes. Some other reserve
zones around the area shared the waters area of the lakes (lake Kyzylkul, reed
thickets in east part, stale lake the "Suhoy", salty lake Zharsuat, some saline soils).
On border of these adjacent sites, amateur hunting is resolved, that obviously creates
the factor of fauna anxiety. In 2008, UNESCO was declared KSNR as one of the
world natural heritage.
3.4
The Global Importance of KSNR
The Tengiz-Korgalzhyn lakes were famous for huge stocks of natatorial
game, fish, and huge herds of saiga for ages. KSNR, which created in 1968, is one of
the greatest reserves of Republic of Kazakhstan. It is located at the central junction of
the Central Asian - Indian and Siberia - Eastern-Africa birds‟ migratory ways and it
has important international value as water-marsh area.
The large amount of fish stocks and advanced geographical position of KSNR
creates favorable conditions for birds‟ reproduction. Extensive water areas provide
necessary vital space for the wetland birds‟ population, which is the largest in Asia.
Lake Tengiz area is potentially capable to provide food requirement of 15 million
birds.
Birds in reserve are represented by 320 species, 126 kinds of them are nesting
species. High concentrations of many representatives of those species were observed
to be existed, especially the endangered species. There are 37 species those included
in the Red Book of Kazakhstan and 22 kinds that were included in the Red List of
IUCN (Kerteshev, 2003). The most northern nested population of the ordinary
flamingo located here which number can be reached 50,000-60,000. It was
37
monitored that the reserve lakes concentrates to 10% of world population of curly
pelican and to 10-20% of one white-headed duck (savka), the whooper swan, blackheaded merry fellow is usual, while spoonbills is a bit rare (Koshkina, 2003).
The water-marsh complex of birds on Tengiz-Korgalzhyn lakes consists of
112 kinds that make 87% from 130, known for all Kazakhstan. Reserve lakes
uniquely have huge value as reservoir for a waterfowl. There are 374 kinds of plants
from 60 genuses in KSNR, which represented 25% of Kazakh‟s low mounds flora. It
is necessary to note that the importance of KSNR is to serve as preservation place of
unique natural steppe ecosystems.
Steppe ecosystems need to be protected and reserved due to its important role
as residing places for rare species such as marmot, saigas, bustards, little bustard,
merlin, a steppe eagle, steppe harrier, etc. animals, including huge number
invertebrates. Moreover, eventually, the reserve territory represents a natural
complex of high aesthetic value and natural beauty (Sidorova, 1997).
3.5
Legal status.
Legal status of KSNR is defined by following state acts:
1. The Republic Kazakhstan regulation about especially protected nature
territories №162-1, from 15.07.1997.
2. The regulation on preservation of the environment of Republic of
Kazakhstan from July, 15th 1997.
3. The decision of Ministerial council of the Kazakh Soviet Socialist
Republic from April, 16th 1968 for № 214 about transformation
Korgalzhyn state hunting economy in KSNR4. The decision of
executive committee of the Tselinograd country council of deputies of
workers from April, 25th, 1974 about an establishment of borders and a
mode of a security zone of Korgalzhyn reserve.
38
4. The governmental order of Republic Kazakhstan from June, 15th, 1999,
№ 767 about granting of the ground areas to Korgalzhyn State Nature
Reserve.
5. The state certificate cadastral number of the ground area 01-0108-019001 given by akim (governor) of Korgalzhyn area of Kazakhstan
Republic from 12.05.2004. №164 the right of constant using the ground
area, the area of 258963 hectares in borders it agree the land tenure
plan.
From April 25th 1974, Executive Committee of the Tselinograd Country
Council of Workers Representatives decided to establish security zone around
KSNR, which covers two kilometers from the border.
Around the Korgalzhyn State Nature Reserve, two-kilometer security zone is
established: according to the Decision of Executive Committee from April 25th,
1974 for №7/285.
3.6
Current Management and Development Processes in Korgalzhyn State
Nature Reserve
3.6.1
Human resources
The existing organizational structure (Figure 3.5) of the KSNR provides
information about staff directory that consist of 64 person and their responsibilities.
In conformity with Regulation about Protected Areas, chapter 5-1 items 27-1 and 272, the organization of protection especially protected nature territories is carried out
by the state inspectors on protection of their territory.
39
Director
Chief
The deputy of
director for
scientific work
The chief of
Science and
monitoring
department
Lawyer
The deputy
of director
accountant
The chief of
ecoeducation
department
Manager of
an economy
Economist
Secretary
Museum manager
Driver
Scientific
employees (4)
Librarian (1)
The chief of a
protection
service
department
The electrician
The tractor operator (3)
The watchman (3)
The fireman(3)
The cleaner(3)
retary
Employees of
ecoeducation
department
The state
inspectorheads of
cordons (4)
The state
inspector of
security (25)
Figure 3.5: Existing organizational structure of reserve
Source: Korgalzhyn State Nature Reserve (2004)
All protected territory of KSNR is divided into the several cordons, a cordon
is divided to several beats, and a beat is divided to several blocks. One beat is put
under the responsibility of one of the KSNR state inspectors. The deputy directors,
the chief of protection service department, and heads of cordons are KSNR state
staffs whom responsible for the management and coordination of territory protection.
Many scientific researches have done at the reserve.
Management and
coordination of scientific activity of reserve are managed by the deputy director on a
science and the chief of Educational Department. Excursion-educational activities
such as ecological excursions, educational exhibition, museum, cultural-educational
and other work concerning wildlife management and reserve are managed by the
department of science as well. The chief of Ecological Education department carries
out the management of ecological and cultural educational activities.
The state inspector of protection service carries out 24 hours scheduled
surveillance on cordons, and beats. Office accommodations in cordons are located in
40
security zones on territory perimeters, which provide ease of visual supervision over
the fixed territory from one place.
Distance between cordons and office buildings located at the center of village
Korgalzhyn should not be further than 30 to 80 km by road. It is necessary to notice,
that some important sites of territory have no regular control during the night and
daytime. Absence of post attendants at the given sites of territory might trigger other
problems, especially with trespassers.
Kerejsky plait, district Symtas and Istembet, natural boundary Karasu, which
one of the big congestions of birds and wild animals, might be a good example for
such cases. These sites also are the most attractive to poachers within the year. In
these places, attended posts are necessary.
3.7
The Current Management Purposes
Management of reserve is carried out based on Regulation about Government
establishment of KSNR.
According to Regulations, following functions are carried out:

territory Protection (including water areas) reserve with a view of
preservation of a biological variety

carries out scientific researches, develops and introduces scientific
methods of preservation of natural complexes

carries out ecological monitoring within the limits of uniform state
system of monitoring of environment

organize ecological education, carrying out of educational excursions

carries out cultural and educational and tourist actions

participates in the state ecological examination of projects and
schemes of placing of economic and other objects, and in working out
of rational wildlife management in representation region
41

assistance in preparation of scientific shots and experts in preservation
of the environment.
The general management is done according annual KSNR Plan, which
affirms on reserve scientific and technical council. Committee of Forest and Hunting
economy Ministry of Agriculture of Republic Kazakhstan confirmed KSNR
development program for 2003 to 2010. The purpose of the program is about the
future development of KSNR, including the maintenance of its supporting function
to modern social and economic conditions.
Objectives of the program:

Optimization of borders and arrangement of territory of reserve

Creation of material and technical base for reserve protection

Creation of material and technical base for conducting scientific
researches and cultural-educational work

Development of ecological tourism

The organization of actions for realization
the limited economic
activities
The basic actions:
3.8

Increase and preserve the biological and landscape variety

Improve protection service in reserve

Rehabilitate research activities

Conduct ecological education among local population

Develop ecological tourism

Conduct the limited economic activities
Climate
The reserve territory is located in both semiarid and humid continental
climate zones. The sharpest temperature change showed that KSNR has severe
42
winters and hot summers at small quantity of atmospheric precipitation due to the
long distance to the oceans.
Annual totals radiation makes 100-120 kcal/sm ², radiating balance - 40-50
kcal/sm ². The average 1500-1600 hours are duration of solar light for the warm
period (April-October). The sum of positive annual temperatures high also reaches
3500º. Vaporability shows 1.000 mm, and the humidifying factor falls to 0,5-0,3.
It was uneasy to find a properly collected hydrometeorological information
in KSNR territory. The nearest meteorological station is located 40 km from KSNR.
According to report of the mentioned meteorological station, the characteristic of
climatic features and seasons is like the presentation in Figure 3.6. The absolute
minimum reaches a minus 45ºС (January, 1969), and a maximum - plus 41,5ºС
(June, 1988). The quantity of atmospheric precipitates for 2007-2008 years has
dropped out to 300 mm (see Figure 3.6).
Figure 3.6: Amount of atmospheric precipitations in 2007-2008 years
Source: Meteorological Korgalzhyn station (2008)
The mid-annual temperature has increased on 0.6ºС. March, July and
November is colder, but the monthly average temperature of December, January,
43
February, April and August has raised. Winters became warmer on 2-4º. With
frequent thaw in this connection the height of a snow cover began to decrease.
During summer and autumn time droughts have become frequent.
3.8.1
Winters
Winters in KNSR are long and cold, with steady negative temperatures of air
and strong winds. The average long-term temperature of January is a minus 17ºС. In
1999 and 2000, the winters were severely long and cold. It is considered a basic sign
of the beginning of winter transition of positive values of temperature of air through
0º and an establishment of a steady snow cover. The steady snow cover is formed in
the first 10 days of November. 20-30 % of annual deposits, mainly as snow drops in
the winter. Snow blizzards and snow-storms are frequent. The average height of a
snow cover 25-30 cm. Winters with a snow cover in 40-50 cm and more happen once
in 10 years. On its open steppe sites it is not enough, as it is blown off by strong
winds. Reservoir lakes freeze in the end of October - the beginning of November.
3.8.2
Springs
Springs in KSNR are short with late frosts. Transition from winter to the
spring characterized by a quick weather change. At the end of the winter, warm air
from Central Asian desserts quickly reduce the amount of the snow cover.
Spring precipitations increase dampness of the soil. In the first half of the
spring, the rainfall is high enough for rapid growth of grasses. During this period, the
steppe is covered by colorful grasses. April and May has moderate arid weather. It
increases air temperature and bring the strong winds, which might lead to dusty
storms.
44
3.8.3
Summers
Summers are moderately long with high temperature at daytime and low
temperature at nighttime, moderately arid and slightly cloudy. Daily amplitudes of
air temperature are considerably large (14-15ºС). July is hottest month; the average
climate is around +19 to +22ºС. The maximum temperature in July is plus 43ºС. In
first half of June, frosts might come at nighttime.
Long-term average quantities of rainfalls on months distributed as follows: in
June - 30-40мм, in July - 20-50мм, in August - 20-45мм. Droughts, dusty storms and
dry winds are often observed.
3.8.4
Autumns
Autumns are short with quick fall of temperature. The beginning of the
autumn is characterized by transition of average daily climate through 10º. It occurs
in the first 10 days of September. The cold snap is accompanied by frosts. Transition
of monthly average climate through 0ºС occurs in the end of October to the
beginning of November. Duration of unfrosted period is 100-130 days. In the second
half of the autumn, the snow cover is developed.
3.9
Hydrology
Tengiz-Korgalzhyn lake system (see Figure 3.8) is the only source of water in
KSNR. Rivers such as Nura and Kulanotpes are the main water suppliers for the lake
system, together with around 20 small streams. It is considered a rare river network
of 0,022 km/km2.
45
Figure 3.7: Map of Tengiz-Korgalzhyn Lake system
Source: KSNR (2004)
The lake system consist more than 60 lakes with various degree of a
mineralization. The largest lakes in the system are Tengiz (see Figure 3.8, 3.9),
Korgalzhyn, Sultankeldy, Esey, Kokai and Zhamankol. Some lakes are hydrochloric;
they dried up during summer and turned to saline soils and mud. Table 3.2 presents
the characteristics of the lake system.
Figure 3.8: Lake Tengiz
Source: www.iucn.org (2009)
46
Figure 3.9: Korgalzhyn Lakes with ice
Source: Koshkin (2008)
Table 3.1: Morfometric characteristics of KSNR lakes.
Tengiz
Korgalzhyn
Height
above
sea
level,
mBS
304,4
307,7
Water
surface
area,
m2
1136
471
Sultankeldy
Esey
Kokai
Acaubalyk
UlkenKarakol
307,5
307,7
307,5
305,6
307,5
36,14
36,46
23,74
12,05
3,26
Lakes
Length
, km
Width,
km
Mean
depth,
m
74,0
32,0
2,52
36,0
30,0
1,0
Including small lakes
13,3
5,2
8,1
6,5
8,1
4,5
4,7
3,5
2,3
1,7
Maximu
m
depth,m
Water,
mln.m
3
Water
basin
area,
km2
6,7
12
2865
450
94900
55100
3,0
2,75
2,70
3,60
2,75
87,0
71,3
50.46
32,385
7,27
Source: Kerteshev (2003)
Hydrochloric lakes of Tuz and Aktailak possess stocks of table salt and
radon-concentrated sand, which is useful for medication. Due to its distance from the
settlements, there is no professional or standardized utilization of the sand and the
salt. Some lakes at the west part were formed by spring waters, where cattle used to
be taken to the water. Recently the reservoir lakes are utilized by waterfowls as their
congestion place.
47
3.9.1
Water Conditions in KSNR lakes.
While tourism activities would not do any harm, pollution from superficial
reservoirs is more devastating for the fish population (Sidorova, 1999). Water level
fluctuations in River Nura, the main source of water in KNSR, have periodic
phenomena of overflowing and drying. The fluctuations, both by natural climatic and
anthropogenous (regulated streams of the river and water detention in the basins)
causes. These fluctuations brought negative influence to natatorial birds in term of
their dwelling places. To minimize the natural influence, the water level used to be
regulated by artificial dams. Unfortunately, due to the poor designs, some of these
dams got out of order.
The water quality of the area is badly influenced by untreated wastewater
from villages along the Rivers Nura and Kulanotpes and the industrial complex of
Temirtau near Karaganda. Very high amounts of heavy metals were released into the
river during Soviet times but, so far, remain restricted to the upper reaches of the
river. The avifauna of the proposed IBA is relatively secure. Some threatened species
(e.g. Anser erythropus and Branta ruficollis) might suffer from hunting in the
neighbouring non-protected lakes, but there is no information available quantifying
this threat.
Future threats might be caused by the growing size of the nearby capital
Astana. Water supply and sewage disposal might strongly influence hydrological and
nutrient characteristics of the rivers and freshwater lakes in the area. If nutrient
supply becomes higher, a conversion of freshwater lakes to reedbeds and swamps
and thus significant changes in bird communities are to be expected. An analysis of
these threats is necessary. In 2007, a start of small-scale oil exploitation is planned to
the north of the IBA. Given the fact that primary steppe ecosystem are concerned, a
significant influence on the bird fauna in the region as whole has to be expected
(BirdLife International, 2009).
Drying reservoirs is the main problem for KNSR. Drying lakes leads to fish
suffocation, and fish suffocation leads to many other worse situations for other kinds
48
of animal. In lake Tengiz, the situation would be dangerous for ground-nesting
colonial birds (Volkov, 1972), such as flamingo in the Figure 3.10.
Figure 3.10: Flamingo
Source: Aitzhanov (2007)
After the winter, dams at Samarkand water basin used to be opened to
prevent overflowing from the melted ice that might flood the area of Samarkand.
This action affected lakes in Nurinsky system, where the fishes are usually
accumulated. The water from Samarkand brought mud and dirt from some boggy
area to the lakes in Nurinsky, and suffocate the fishes.
In addition, heavy metals, mineral oil, and other chemical products from the
sewage of Carbide factory at Temirtau polluted the river of Nura. The technogenic
silt were carried away by the flow and represent potential threat for the inhabitants in
any lakes along the system.
3.10
The Catastrophic and Unusual Natural Phenomena
Steppe fires are often occurred during arid years in the central and southwest
territory of KNSR. Most of the time, thunderstorms during dry season might burst
the first flame, and sometimes people could be blamed for the fire, whether it is on
49
purposely or casually. Sometimes, Firefighters from Akmolinsky should be involved
to put off the fire, but most of the times, the fire put off without any human help.
Strong winds are frequent (30 km/sec.), however, they do not cause any
serious consequences. Strong snow blizzards or snowstorms with several days
duration occurred during winter and spring. As a result, communication with the
remote settlements is interrupted. Human-heighted snow piled on the KSNR and
covered the roads, hence several remote settlements became abandoned.
On April 29th 1980, many sparrows have indicated to be lost after such a
powerful snowstorm. On May 7-8th 1993, high temperature gap between day and
night, and strong snowstorms, devastated numbers of birds and livestock. The most
recent terrible snowstorm was in 1996 at the end of December, where many people
were killed.
Hailing storms do not considered to be harmful, except when the size of the
hailstones is very large. In the summer of 2004, strong hailstones had been partially
destroyed crops grain and gardens in the region, the considerable quantity of wild
birds (basically sparrow) were also deteriorated.
Every spring, the ice in river Nura melts and floods the area. The increase of
the mass of the ice when it froze during winter added the volume to the new flood.
Big loss for a waterfowl and mammals is the result of the flood nearby the river.
Many kinds of small animals were exposed to the predators, including human, due to
ecosystem deterioration. In most cases, waterfowl lost their eggs and nests during a
heavy flood.
50
3.11
Social and economic conditions
3.11.1 Territorial division and the government
KSNR is located in the territory of three administrative areas: Korgalzhyn
and Egindikol districts of Akmolinsk province and Nurin district of the Karaganda
province. The total area of a reserve zone makes 258963 hectares; the total area of a
security zone makes 94421 hectares. It is prohibited to live and build in state reserve
territory.While the prohibited zone of 258963 hectares is located in the territory of
Korgalzhyn district, the districts Egindikol and Nurin housed a security zone.
The Kazakhstani Forest and Hunting Committee of Ministry of Agriculture
authorized a governmental agency that controls the field of protected nature
territories. The Committee directly controls KSNR, directs its activity and provides
necessary actions according to the current legislation and standard documents of the
Government of Kazakhstan Republic. The agency is as well assigned to Akmolinsk
and Karaganda regional territorial branch of the Committee. The management and
monitoring of ichthioufauna is assigned to Committee of a Fisheries and its regional
branch over KSNR activity.
According to section 11 of Chapter 3 of Regulation about Protected Areas,
the powers are defined for the local representative and executive of the government.
Local representative body is called Maslihat. Its responsibility includes consideration
and the coordination of the program of development of special protected nature
territory, development of obligatory rules on protection of the objects of the state
nature-reserved fund.
Executive local body is called Akimat, which responsible for state control
over a condition and the activity of nature reserve located within their administrative
territories. Their responsibility are as follows:

Makes the offer under the program of development protected area, coordinates substantiations on creation of the territory
51

Decides the establishment of security zones of protected areas, and monitor
any activity within the territory that might harm ecological systems
conditions.
Akimat plays a considerable role in coordination of various state agencies
within an administrative unit, in joint operating plans on protection, fire-prevention,
and protection from extreme situations. Akimat is as well responsible to develop the
knowledge of local population on ecology.
Adjacent territories on reserve borders have low population density of 3.5
persons on 1 km ², while in the western part of KSNR, on the Tengiz coastal area, the
population is zero. Citizens are only allowed to stay or presence in the adjacent
territory only during their journey on the field roads.
3.11.2 Transportation System
Neither railways nor highways leading to borders of territory of nature
reserve and in adjacent territories existed. Only country 120 km of country roads
(Figure 3.11) are connecting the outer world to the cordon of Karazhar (see Figure
3.12), passed the security and forbidden zones. Motor transport journey should be
carried out only under permissions and is under the constant control of a protection
service of reserve.
Figure 3.11: Roads in KSNR
Source: Caryn (2007)
52
Figure 3.12: Cordon Karazhar
Source: Koshkin (2004)
Citizens of Zhanbobek, Taldysai, Aktubek, Nygyman, Nurinsky district use
regular bus route through village Korgalzhyn to capital 2 times per week and only in
summertime. For these purposes, personal automobile or other motor transport is
used.
3.11.3 Demography
There are 17 settlements located around the borders of KSNR (approximately
in 35 kilometers distances), those settlements are including 13 villages in Korgalzhyn
district (Figure 3.13), 1 village in Egindykol district, and 3 other villages are located
in Nurin district, 99 % of the population around the reserve, consists of native
population.
53
Figure 3.13: Abai Village
Source: Koshkin (2007)
While the economy around KSNR is agricultural-based, especially grain
crops (wheat, barley), animal husbandry industries are handled by private companies.
Local residents are engaged in cultivation of livestock, sheep breeding and horse
breeding. Many local residents are involved part-time farming and poultry activities.
3.11.4 Divisions of KSNR
KNSR spreads as wide as 258.963 hectares. According to Ramsar
Convention (1976) the area is classified as international wetland area, the perimeter
border reaches 450km long. The area is quite flat; therefore, there are no natural
barriers to prevent any unwanted trespassing. Therefore, the area should be
constantly supervised and protected, especially the most important sites (location of
the congestion of wild animals etc.).
All territory is divided by 5 cordons (districts) containing 30 beats containing
200 quarters in order to make it easier to manage and protect. One quarter is equal to
16 km2. One state inspector is responsible for the management of one beat,
personally fixed to the state inspector; each of the inspectors might be responsible for
more than one quarter, depending on the importance and complexity of the protected
territory. Schedule for each inspector was fixed at the cordon level, where 24 hours
54
consecutive controlling job is applied. In every cordon, watchtowers were erected to
allow at least 200 km visual supervision and avoid any trespassing activity.
3.12
Natural Features and Importance of KNSR
KNSR is located in a scarce populated (average population density in
Korgalzhyn area makes 1.4 persons/km2) agricultural area developed for pasture
cattle, and to a lesser degree, farming land. There are no industrial targets and large
settlements. During "The virgin land" program, the territory was not even prioritized
due to its infertility and poor soil (Koshkina, 2003).
Two of central Asia‟s most important steppe-wetland Important Bird Areas
(IBAs), Tengiz-Korgalzhyn and Naurzum have been recognised as being of the same
outstanding natural value as sites such as Yellowstone National Park and the
Galapagos Islands (BirdLife International, 2009).
The ecological situation on Tengiz- Korgalzhyn territory is related to social
and economical condition. The economical crisis brought negative environmental
influence to the area. Reduction of
cattle livestock as agricultural animals (in
separated farms up to 70-80%) and loading on flora has decreased, added by
decreased living standard of the population due to the absence of the income sources,
has entailed mass willow cutting along Nura river.
Previously, fisheries brought income to local residents (Kerteshev, 2003).
The lakes of Birtaban-Shalkarsky and Ujalinsky were fishery-productive,
commercial fishing constantly took place. In fact, there is not enough people in
charge of controlling and monitoring the fishery and natatorium game hunting
activities; even though they have quota for fishing and hunting, it was pretty difficult
to control the anglers and hunters. After some period of overfishing, the lakes are no
longer fishery-active.
55
Recently, KSNR is under negative external influences. The agricultural
production around KSNR did not play any big role in deteriorating the park. The
anthropogenous factor is ecological tourism. However, it should be supervised and
follow existing ecological routes. In addition, during some years, ice fishing is
permitted as ecological tourism. As long as all the rules of fishing are obeyed and
kept, and expert ichthyologists are participating in the control and protections, such
tourism activities would not do any harm to the population of the fishes.
3.13
Flora
There are several vital forms of plants presented in KNSR such as wood,
semi wood, and grassy vegetation. Trees are absence; nevertheless, there are 12 kinds
of bushes, dated on flood-lands of the rivers: shrubby willows, dogroses, and
honeysuckles. Elms and meadowsweets grow in steppes area, while Shober's
smooth-tongue grows at the coastline of the lakes. Many kinds of the semiwood form
(dwarf semishrubs) concern a wormwood family and other plants, while grasses such
as xerophyte represented the genus of ephemers. Many plants in KSNR are registered
in the Red Book of Kazakhstan, which means they are scarce in the country, but
somehow they exist at the territory of KSNR (see Figure 3.14).
Figure 3.14: Picture of Shrenk‟s Tuilp
Source: Koshkin (2005)
56
3.13.1 Vegetative communities and ecosystems.
KSNR is hosting many of the helophytes from Kazakh regions, where at least
50% of them are well presented in the reserve. Vascular plants are presented by
damped and arid elements. According to Karamysheva (1973), the kernel of steppes
flora consists of following types:

Panonsko-prichernomorsko-Kazakhstansky
(ephedradoublespicate-
the mastitis shaggy);

Prichernomorsko-Kazakhstansky;

Prichernomorsko-tsentralnokazahstansky;

East-chernomorsko-Kazakhstansky;

Zalessky's Feather grass (see the Figure 3.15);

Zavolzhsko-Kazakhstansky (a Wilted Tulip);

Kazakhstansky (a feather grass);

Prichernomoro-kazahstansko-Mongolian (shrubby goat's-wheat)

Zavolzhsko-kazahstansko-Mongolian (Gemelin's tick trefoil).
Figure 3.15: Picture of feather grass
Source: Bragin (2004)
57
The reserve vegetation is non-uniformed and presented by steppe, meadow,
marsh and water communities (Aitzhanov, 2002).
Steppe vegetation (42.8%) could be found in at the sloping surface of plains
and some of them might be found at mounds nearby waters. It represents feathergrass and fescues communities grow on some meadows, and meadow-chestnut clay
soils. Only 16 kinds of vegetation can be found in 1m2 of the steppe area. The
average height of these herbage might reach 30-35 cm. General projective covering
on May reaches 60-70%.
Halophytic
vegetation
occupies
some
areas
in
reserve
territory.
Blackwormwood communities are the most extended. They occupy some surfaces of
plain and coastline of the lakes. This kind of vegetation is formed both on the
meadow-chestnut salted soils, and on high-salinity meadow-chestnut soils.
The meadow vegetation is represented by couch grass and alkali grass
communities. Couch grass meadows, including juncaceous, reed and pure couch
grass occupy flat falls with the meadow and meadow-marsh, salted clay soils.
Alkali grass meadows occupy shallow slopes of meadow-chestnut soils and
high-salinity meadow-chestnut soils. The marsh vegetation occupied the southeast
part of KNSR (Lake Korgalzhyn) and represented more often by monoprepotent
genus on meadow-marsh and marsh soils. In a coastal strip to the reed it is small
amount of motley grass might be found.
The water vegetation is represented by pondweed ganus. In 1994-1996, mass
development of parrot's-feather was observed. In salty lakes, on shoal widgeon weed
communities are developed; nitrewormwood genus are extended on the mounds
nearby waters and lake's coastal shaft. Combinations of quack grass and fescue
genuses could be found in various sites.
58
3.14
Fauna
Korgalzhyn lakes are very famous for its fishes (Figure 3.16). The main areas
for fisheries are on lakes Esei, the Sultan-keldy, Kokai and Asaubalyk. Ichtyofauna
(fisheries) in KNSR is represented by 14 kinds of them. Pike, small fry,and ide are
the usual kinds of fish in the lakes. Depending on the situation in the year, number of
tench, crucian silver, crucian gold, and perch could be found in the area. Carp and
bream sometimes became so numerous in the lake at KNSR, especially pikeperch.
All fish are characterized by good rate of growth and high degree of fatty acid. As a
whole, the condition of ichthyofauna is in a steady predator-victim environmental
balance (Aitzhanov, 2002).
a
b
Figure 3.16: Fish (a Pike, b Perch)
Source: Kevin Cullimore/Dorling Kindersley
3.14.1 Amphibians and reptiles
There are two kinds of amphibious animals in KSNR, and both of them are
living on the borders of their natural habitats. Green toads are found dwelling at the
northern borders, while moor frogs can be seen around the southern borders. During
the last decade, kinds of the green toad at the coastal area of the lakes became
numerous. Moor frog can only be seen occasionally on the small isolated reservoirs.
Four kinds of reptiles can be found in KSNR. A nimble lizard and a steppe
viper (Figure 3.17) are usual representatives of this kind. Multi-coloured lacerta and
59
a figured runner are rare and populated the northern border (Koshkina, 1999,
Gavrilov, 1995).
Figure 3.17: Steppe viper
Source: Zaitcev (2008)
3.14.2 Birds
KNSR is a very rich and interesting ornitofauna reserve. The feathery world
is presented by 321 species, out of them, 37 is covered in the Red Book of
Kazakhstan, and 22 kinds in the Red List. There are 126 species of nesting birds (see
the following Figures 3.18 - 3.21). Among them, 17 are rare and endangered, and all
endemics (3 species) and relicts (7 species). In their migrations, 219 species stop by
at KSNR, 14 of them are listed in the Red List. Almost annually, the general list of
birds of reserve replenishes with new species (Borsienko, 1987).
Since 1976, Tengiz-Korgalzhyn lakes are recognised by Ramsar as
international wetlands. Extensive reservoirs which are rich of forage involving heap
of natatorial and water-marsh birds. Those 112 kinds that make 87 % known for all
Kazakhstan are fixed in KSNR.
60
Figure 3.18: Ducks
Source: Lohman (2005)
During the summer, around 2000 pairs of swans, 5000 hoopers, 3500 curly
pelicans, 5000 stifftails, tens of thousands of geese, and hundreds of thousands of
ducks and sandpipers stop by in large watery area of KSNR to moult, while in the
autumn, they stop by at the same place during their migration. Almost 500000 rednecked phalarope migrates during the spring, and they stop by at one part of lake
Tengiz.
a
b
Figure 3.19: Pelicans (a. Pink pelican, b. Curly pelican)
Source: Koshkin (2007)
Constant amount of fish provides enough food for some birds (cormorants,
herons, seagulls, terns, mergansers) to stay in the area. Big drying salty lakes are
rich of invertebrates, it attracted some tropical birds as flamingo. Anually, 5000 to
61
15.000 flamingos nested in the small isles of lake Tengiz. Their numbers can
sometimes reach 50.000.
a
b
Figure 3.20: Birds (a. Whopper swan, b. Black headed merry fellow)
Source: Koshkin (2004)
Numerous endemic kinds of birds such as black and whitewinded larks,
meets Kestreland steppe and steppe harrier can be found on steppe sites. The last two
kinds brought into the Red List are Grey crane and Demoiselle. Little bustards are
even more often to be seen. During the winter, there are only 30 species of birds
found because the others were migrated. Those who stay are included grey partridge,
black lark, moustached titmouse, and many other northern birds like white polar owl,
rough-legged hawk, snow bunting, lappish plantain, horned lark, waxwing, ordinary
redpoll, chaffinch and others.
a
Figure 3.21: Birds (a. Spoonbill, b. Glossy ibis)
Source: Koshkin (2004)
b
62
3.14.3 Mammals
Rather numerous and various group of animals presents the class of mammals
in KSNR. Representatives of almost all groups of land mammals live here. Total
genuses of mammals in KSNR are noted as 46, while six out of them are brought in
the International Red List. 45 genuses of mammals are reported to live in KSNR
(Red List, 1978).
Animals in KSNR are typical steppe and semidesertic genuses. More than
half of the mammals are presented by typical steppes rodents such as steppe marmot;
steppe lemming; steppe birch mouse, etc. Among the reeds near the lakes of KSNR,
wild boars are usually seen. Occasionally some elks, roes, or deer are seen in KSNR
as well. Predators are represented by wolves, foxes, corsac foxes, badgers, polecats,
ermines, lynx, and weasel. Two groups of rabbits in KSNR (white-haired European
hares and rock rabbits) are considered endangered. Group Cheiroptera is presented
by ordinary bats. In KSNR, there are 3 genuses of them: mouse-eared bats, longeared bats, and moustached bats.
Since the middle of last century, thousands herds of saiga antelopes (see
Figure 3.22) killed during virgin land program. As a result, saiga is listed as one of
the endangered animals, that requires special measures on protection.
Figure 3.22: Saiga antelope, rare and typical steppe species
Source: Belalov (2004)
63
3.15
Tourism.
Based on the global modern requirements, the government of Kazakhstan
allows tourism and recreational activities to be conducted in KSNR. In the law of
special protected natural areas, Ch.32 item 1, it is specified that special protected
areas can be used for acquaintance of tourists with natural and historical purpose.
Scientific researches, such as ornithology monitoring (Figure 3.23), and other
kinds of researches are taking place in KSNR. However, only experts (ornithologists,
entomology, botanists, or other scientists) are allowed to visit special protected
reserved areas while tourists, school students, and other excursion participants are
allowed only to visit visitors‟ areas of KSNR with special permission and
acquaintance of the staffs.
Figure 3.23: Ornithology monitoring
Source: Koshkin (2004)
Tourism in KSNR has started back in 1996. The management has built 3
ecological routes in the security zones for excursions. The routes are designed to
support the movement of the tourists inside KSNR. Concerning about the tourists
movement, JSC "Akmolatourist" provides transportation facilities (tourist buses with
36 and 24 sits, 2 minibuses).
There are 6 homestays located in Korgalzhyn. It serves 22 people (1 single
room, 9 double rooms and 1 triple room). There are optional activities such as :
Concert: After a day on the steppe around the lakes, tourists are welcome to
relax and enjoy traditional concert by a local composer with a variety of
64
instruments including the Kazakh national instrument, the dhombra. Price
is KZT 2500 (RM 1 = KZT 40).
Korgalzhyn State Nature Reserve: Lake Tengiz at the heart of the
Korgalzhyn Reserve and is the primary breeding ground Kazakhstan's rare
birds. Entrance fee: KZT 206/day.
The amount of tourists is limited due to underdeveloped service, and limited
quantity of special sites for acquaintance with the nature. Independent visitors are
often to be objected by such limitations. Moreover, the management does not
organize tours or plan seasonal arrivals of tourists. Tours are organized and provided
by the partner company, JSC "Akmolatourist" which sponsor the development of
homestays in cordon Karazhar (see Figure 3.11). Most of the times, tourists visit
tourism center in Korgalzhyn (Figure 3.24). The tourism activities are focused on the
scientific excursions. Students from schools in Korgalzhyn, Egindykol, and Astana
are often participating in one day acquainted excursion tours.
Figure 3.24: Visitor Centre
Source: Corey (2009)
65
3.16
Public Exposure to KSNR and its Preservation Activities
KSNR established more than 40 years ago. Nevertheless, despite the local
societies are pride of KSNR, there are still some conflicts between them and the
management due to the need to hunt from the societies and the need to reserve from
the management.
International values and successful ecological-educational activities brought
high rate for KSNR. Several nature protection activities such as ecological subbotnik
(weekend activities to clean public areas), lectures, nature museum visits, and other
activities develop positive public opinion concerning KSNR. "Rodnik", an NGO
located nearby KSNR, is responsible for ecological-educational activities towards
ecologically competent population.
3.17
Conclusion
Study area has been elaborated in this chapter, including brief information
about its importance for the republic of Kazakhstan. Some existing problems in its
management activities were explored, as well as the way it exposed to the society.
The next chapter discussed about the authors‟ methodology in conducting the
research in KSNR.
CHAPTER IV
4 METHODOLOGY
4.1
Introduction
This chapter discusses the methodology of the study, which includes
introduction, a study design, aspects, instruments used, data collection methods, and
data analysis method. This is a descriptive study and used the qualitative method.
4.2
Design of Study
According to Kumar (1996) designs can be classified into three groups based on the
number of contacts with the study population:

cross-sectional studies;

before and after studies; and

longitudinal studies.
As the interview conducted once, this study is under the cross-sectional
classification (see Figure 4.1). Cross-sectional designs are the most commonly used
in the social sciences, and also known as one-shot or status studies. They are
„designed to study some phenomena by taking a cross-section of it at one time‟
(Babbie, 1989). The cross-sectional designs regard to both the study population and
the time of investigation.
67
One
Three or
more
Retrospective
Longitudi
nal
Prospective
Nonexperimental
Retrospectiveprospective-
Semiexperimental
Two
Crosssectional
Nature of the
investigation
Before
and after
studies
Experimental
Study designs
Reference period
Number of contacts
Classification
Types of study design
Figure 4.1: Types of study design
Source: Kumar (1996)
Study design serves patterns, which include typical nomenclature and
procedures for: (1) organizing variables (aspects), (2) selecting samples (no sample
in this study), (3) establishing a schedule for data collection, and (4) selecting
appropriate techniques for data analysis (Gall, 2003).
The primary data were collected and analyzed in two phases (see Figure 4.2).
In the second phase created structured interview questions. Then in the third phase
was interviewing.
68
PHASE 1
Define the Objectives, Scope,
Statement and Literature
Creation of structured
PHASE 2
interview questions
Improved questions and
PHASE 3
Interviewing
Documentation and
PHASE 4
Selection of appropriate data
analyses technique
Data Collection Process
PHASE 5
Analyses and
Recommendation
Figure 4.2: Design of study
4.3
Aspects Studied
There are three aspects in this study, which are the primary inputs of a
management system of nature reserve: (1) resource management that represented by
resource inputs and resource management programs aimed at managing those inputs;
(2) visitor management – represented by visitor information and visitor management
programs aimed to help visitors choose various opportunities or to manipulate visitor
69
use; and (3) service management-represented by constraints and programs aimed to
refer provisioning of facilities, services, and
related auxiliary programs to
accommodate the user.
4.4
Methods of Data Collection
Qualitative method was used in this study by utilizing both secondary and
primary data (see Figure 4.3). Secondary data about study area were obtained from
respective governmental and private agencies. Literature review were as well
investigated and completed from books, journals and publications.
Primary data was obtained by utilizing interview as main instrument. The
primary data consists of the current management situation and problems facing
during the management process. Primary data collection was done through interview.
It was done to one main informant, Director of the KSNR, Atzhanov M.S. According
to Wellington (2000), it is good to have one main informant or interviewee in a
qualitative research, especially when it comes to case studies. To overcome the
financial and technological problems to conduct the interview, the interview
questions were sent via email.
According to Abdul Majid (2007), interviews are classified according to the
degree of flexibility as:

structured;

semi-structured; and

unstructured
70
Methods of data collection
Secondary
Primary sources
sources
Document
Observation
s
Questionnaire
g
Participan
Govt.
publications
Earlier research
Census
Personal records
Interviewin
Structured
Mailed
questionnaire
t
Non- Participant
Unstructured
Collective
questionnaire
Figure 4.3: Methods of data collection
Source: Kumar (1996)
According Kumar (1996) in a structured interview the investigator asks predetermined set questions, using the same wording and order of questions as specified
in the interview schedule.
In this study, interview questions were structured. The total amount of the
questions are 17 and divided into 3 sections – (1) „service management‟, (2)
„resource management‟, (3) „visitor management‟ and was sent to the director of
government establishment KSNR. The section „service management‟ include 7
specific questions, the section „resource management‟ contains 5 specific questions,
and the section „visitor management‟ contains 5 which are also specific (see
Appendix 1). Following table 4.1 displays the interview questions, segregated based
on the sections.
71
Table 4.1: Interview.
№
1.
Interview Questions
Resource management section
What are problems in realisation of monitoring of soil, water, air, flora and
fauna?
2.
What kind of problems you should solve in term of realization of the program of
environmental impact assessment?
3.
How organised activities on designing of landscape and on overstory vegetation
management?
4.
What are problems arise on a way of their realisation?
5.
What are the complexities arise in ecosystem management and soil
management?
1.
Visitor management section
What are problems you are adjoin during drawing up and distribution of tourist
routes?
2
What do you think, what is the level of public safety and security in reserve?
3.
4.
2.
What are the environmental impacts of visitors in KSNR?
What is the level of visitors‟ satisfaction with organizational process in KSNR?
(Please give your response according the 5 scales)
What is the level of visitors' dissatisfaction, with organizational process in
KSNR? (Please give your response according the 5 scales)
Service management section
What legislation and statutory acts are Korgalzhyn State Nature Reserve
activities are based on?
Is there any program for the Korgalzhyn State Nature Reserve development?
3.
What is the plan for?
4.
Is there any problem in professional competence of employees of reserve?
5.
What kinds of problem are there in professional competence in the reserve?
6.
What are the difficulties you might face in the process of creating good
conditions for normal functioning of reserve establishment and granting of
services for visitors?
7.
What are basic the problems in the organisational work under hazard
prevention?
5.
1.
72
4.5
Data Analysis
Norazman et al. (2007) stated that qualitative data involves finding
commonalities, regularities or emerging patterns among the responses to the
interview questions. The data should be categorized and presented as a table or
graph.
The researcher divided the analyses works into 3 phases namely data
exploration, data explanation, and data comparative with descriptive analysis.
Explorative-based analysis is needed in order to get the knowledge about current
existing management process in KSNR and to investigate and analyzed the
appropriate management model.
According to Najib (1999), descriptive analysis is one method used to explain
and interpret any phenomena or problem that happened in some population.
Descriptive based analysis would help to identify the problems created from
interrelationship between aspects written above.
Comparative based analyses are needed to compare the designed management
model to the current management situation in KSNR. The same type of analyses
would be necessary to identify problems in the existing management process in
KSNR.
CHAPTER V
5 FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
5.1
Introduction
This chapter discusses the research findings based on the descriptive analyses
of the obtained data on each management subsystem, started by service management,
resource management, and ended by visitor management subsystem. A triangulation
table would be presented to summarize the triangulation analyses between secondary
and primary data.
As stated by Wellington (2000), every qualitative researcher should be
knowledgeable of every data collection method and the triangulation analysis. A
proper qualitative research must employ more than one data collection method and
all methods should be triangulated in order to develop conclusion. Some
recommendations for future researchers were offered to conclude this chapter.
5.2
Service Management
Based on the interview and documentary researches, several problems with
the service management subsystem were identified.
74
Table 5.1: KSNR‟s service management subsystem findings
Theory
Constraints:
 Legislation
 Agency Goals
 Program Coordination
Service Management
KSNR Problems
 Professional
Competence
 User Attitudes
Programs:



o
o
o



o
 Concession
Management
o
 Special Services


 Maintenance
Management


 Hazard Management


 Area Planning
o
 Site planning
o
Note:
Implication
Legislation is efficient
Clearly stated
Clearly stated
It was identified that the
reserve did not meet the
requirements
of
qualified
personnel. The situation of
working in KSNR, including
the physical situation (rural,
remote area) and financial
situation (low average wages),
did
not
attract
young
professional experts
Due to Kazakhstani Specially
Protected Areas regulations
concession is prohibited
The problems are appeared due
to low financial support
The problems are appeared due
to low financial support
Natural and non-natural hazards
might risk a big loss of wild
animals, birds and surface
vegetation.
Natural
hazard
creates the dangers for visitors.
Due to Kazakhstani Specially
Protected Areas regulations area
planning activities is prohibited
Due to Kazakhstani Specially
Protected Areas regulations site
planning is prohibited
available input
presence of problem
absence of problem
The first column of the table above displays inputs which are considered in
management process. These inputs are inhesion for management of all protected
areas categories and outdoor recreational places. Therefore, KSNR belongs to Ia
category “Strict Nature Reserve”, inputs such as, concession management, area
planning, and site planning not considered in KSNR‟s management. Second column
75
shows what KSNR has. Third column shows the presence or absence of the problems
in listed inputs, which are described bellow in detail. The fourth column provides
implication.
5.2.1
Financial and Funding Problems
Based on the documentation, financing scheme of KSNR is supported by the
federal and local budgets. It is necessary to notice, that financing cannot be carried
out without professional experts in finance and accounting department. Furthermore,
according to the confirmation of the Committee of Forest and Hunting Economy
under the Ministry of Agriculture of Kazakhstan Republic, the management of
KSNR is planning to integrate the management of KSNR with the adjoining
territories, including providing preservation typical and unique ecosystems and a
biological variety. Realization of this plan, and maintenance of its achievements,
might need some special budgeting plan.
However, the occurrence of some problems in KSNR, would not be solved
without any stronger financial support, such as territory arrangement, organization of
the protection, necessary buildings or facilities development, personnel payment, and
purchasing of necessary special equipment.
5.2.2
Human Resources Problems
It was identified that the reserve did not meet the requirements of qualified
personnel. The situation of working in KSNR, including the physical situation (rural,
remote area) and financial situation (low average wages), did not attract young
professional experts. Lack of thorough professionally obtained information on
biodiversity indicated this problem.
76
Another problem indicated was lack of staff in the department of science. In
the interview, the management emphasized that the current basic problem is shortage
of young qualified personnel. The reason was the fact that it is not enough vocational
training in universities, weak material resources and less comfortable working
places.
Inadequate staff number was also indicated in the post of inspector of
department of ecological education, whose duties related to escort visitors on some
ecological excursion trip. KSNR has one qualified personnel for this position, and it
is not enough to serve all groups during peak seasons, especially because KSNR is
almost big territory.
5.2.3
Public Relations Related Problems
KNSR has limited contact between stakeholders of nearby activities (hunting
farmers, farmers) and local communities. It was identified that working out some
programs involving local communities would not produce any long term benefit
without involving stakeholders of nearby economic activities.
KSNR management did not encourage the nearby societies to be involved and
get some benefits. For instance, accommodation facilities at nearby settlements
would raise the potential tourism values of the reserve, and industrial values of the
society involved. Tourism organizers are also another potential participation for the
nearby societies to utilize the reserve, by having professional tourism organizers ran
by locals, KSNR would gain the exposure to the public, while industrial value would
increase for the local societies.
77
5.3
Natural and Non-Natural Hazard
Spring fires on the reed lakes might risk a big loss of wild animals and birds.
Sometimes hunters and anglers in adjacent territory started the fires without being
able to control the risk of what they have done.
In the interview, the management did not express any problem related to
hazard, except the natural hazards occasionally occurred. Nevertheless, it showed
that some natural hazards took place in KSNR: fire hit the steppes and ignited
surface vegetation due to thunderstorms.
The situation was unpredicted and warning acknowledgement was difficult to
be delivered in such a short period. Hazard management is the purposeful action
taken by the management to reduce the probability of loss of life, injuries, or loss of
property of the participants from known or suspected hazards within the recreational
environment. If the steppes and surface vegetations‟ fire might be ignited by
thunderstorms, it might be ignited by non-natural causes as well. In sum, participants
should be responsible for themselves, it is important for the managers to provide
hazard management programs to warn visitors to otherwise reduce unnecessary
dangers.
5.4
Facilities and Infrastructural Problems
As described in the previous subsection, financial-related problems triggered
other problems. One of the problems is the facilities and infrastructural problem.
Cordons for security officers in some area are necessary to support their job. Several
important sites where cordons are urgently needs are natural boundaries of Istembet,
Karachiy, and Symtas.
Other facilities need to be built are the good quality dam to control the water
level on some rivers and lakes at KSNR. The water level control is important for
resource management subsystem, especially to maintain the ecosystem of the
78
natatorial birds around the lakes. So far, dams were built to control the water level;
however, the financial limitation led to the building of low-quality dams.
The nature of KSNR, especially its size, makes it important to have adequate
accommodation facilities for the visitors. Nevertheless, there are no accommodation
facilities in the regional centre, while the management did not involve nearby society
to develop some accommodation facilities in their area. For this reason, the potential
tourism values of the natural environment remained not exposed to the tourists.
5.5
Resource Management.
Based on the interview and documentary researches, several problems with
the resource management subsystem were identified.
Table 5.2: KSNR‟s resource management subsystem findings
Theory
Resource Monitoring:
Resource Management
KSNR Problems
 Soil

o
 Water

o
 Air

o
 Flora

o
 Fauna

o
Implication
Carried out in order with
Development Program, and
Annual Management Plan
Carried out in order with
Development Program, and
Annual Management Plan
Carried out in order with
Development Program, and
Annual Management Plan
Carried out in order with
Development Program, and
Annual Management Plan
Carried out in order with
Development Program, and
Annual Management Plan
KSNR
KSNR
KSNR
KSNR
KSNR
KSNR
KSNR
KSNR
KSNR
KSNR
Resource Management Programs:
 Site Management
 Overstory Vegetation
 Turf Management
o
o
o
Due to Kazakhstani Specially
Protected Areas regulations site
management is prohibited
Due to Kazakhstani Specially
Protected
Areas
regulations
overstory vegetation is prohibited
Due to Kazakhstani Specially
Protected Areas regulations turf
79
 Visual Resource
Management
o
 Ecosystems (set of
organisms and
environment of their
dwelling)
Management


 Impact Assessment


Note:
management is prohibited
Due to Kazakhstani Specially
Protected Areas regulations visual
resource management is prohibited
Hazard, anthropogenous pollution of
rivers‟ basins, overuse of biological
resources,
facilities
and
infrastructural problems, weakness
of water level control systems
causes a big lost of biological
species (animals, fishes, birds)
Basin of river Nura is experiencing a
critical situation due to pollution of
its waters by heavy metals, mineral
oil and other chemical products.
Sewage waters throughout tens of
kilometres along the river annually
carry out the pollutants. The
polluted water might have reached
the lakes of KSNR and presented
potential threat for their inhabitants.
available input
presence of problem
absence of problem
The first column of the table above displays inputs which are considered in
management process. These inputs are inhesion for management of all protected
areas categories and outdoor recreational places. Therefore, KSNR belongs to Ia
category “Strict Nature Reserve”, inputs such as, concession management, area
planning, and site planning not considered in KSNR‟s management. Second column
shows what KSNR has. Third column shows the presence or absence of the problems
in listed inputs, which are described bellow in detail. The fourth column provides
implication.
5.5.1
Water Control Problems
Periodic changes of water levels in the river, both by natural climate and
artificial causes (e.g., manipulation of channels of the river and water detention in
artificial water basins), repeats the phenomenon of overflowing and droughty lakes
80
system that negatively influences conditions of the major places of dwelling
natatorial and water birds.
Artificial dams were built to maintain optimum water level in the lake,
however, due to some technical and financial limitation, quality was not prioritized
and the dams often break. Due to this situation, lakes in KSNR experience difficult
conditions such as significant drop of the water level in reservoirs that suffocated
fishes, and floods that deteriorated colonial birds‟ nests.
Deteriorations of the reserved fauna were mainly caused by high tide on
springs. During winter, water in the lake basins upstream (e.g., lake Samarkand)
froze and gained volume. At the end of the winter, the ice melted and produced
higher amount of water. To avoid overflowing, people drained the lake by opening
dams to the rivers. This action brought negative influence for the river and lakes at
the downstream. Overflowed downstream lakes deteriorated thousands of
endangered birds‟ nests.
It is necessary to apply modern engineering system to regulate water levels
on the lakes in KSNR. It was noticed that downstream flows during the winter led to
significant reduction of oxygen in the water, which deteriorates the fisheries. Another
problem is the preservation of water mineralization in the lakes. Various water biotas
essentially depend on the level of water mineralization. Stable and consistent water
mineralization probably can be supported by periodic exchange of water in the lakes.
Adjustable water waste constructions are required in this situation.
Meanwhile, the question about preservation of water quality is the general
problem on all river basins and can be solved by working out of complex measures
on all basins.
81
5.5.2
Anthropogenous pollution of reservoirs
Currently, basin of river Nura is experiencing a critical situation due to
pollution of its waters by heavy metals, mineral oil and other chemical products.
Sewage waters throughout tens of kilometres along the river annually carry out the
pollutants. The polluted water might have reached the lakes of KSNR and presented
potential threat for their inhabitants.
Some hydro chemical researches needs to be done in order to get the
knowledge to predict the future ecological condition of the lakes. Despite the
researchers might lead to re-planting or re-introducing new species of plants or
animals, such activities were considered prohibited by local law. The management
perceived that altering according to the law about Special Protected Nature
Territories, introduction (installation or other kinds of plants and animals) in
protected area is strictly forbidden. For this reason, planting or re-planting in reserve
should not take place, even though it was in order to maintain the ecosystems.
5.5.3
Irresponsible Uses of Biological Resources
Extensiveness and remoteness of many sites of reserve (e.g., coastal lines of
lake Tengiz) makes it almost impossible for the management to enforce the rule of
their protection to the right degree. For example, hunting for birds in lake Tengiz
plaits, and fishing in the lake Korgalzhyn are both illegal and it takes co-operations
from the visitors not to be involved in such unlawful activities. Since there is no
efficient control for the activities of hunting and fishing at local level, this situation
led to the deprivation of the local communities that are supposed to have special
rights to utilize the resource to some degrees. Often, trespassers with highperformance equipment committed illegal hunting and fishing at KSNR and leave
nothing valuable for the local communities.
To some degree, it seemed to be necessary to offer special rights to local
communities to utilize the resource around KSNR. Despite the need to enhance the
82
security system, local communities should be involved in maintaining KSNR with
the controlled special rights as rewards.
5.6
Visitor Management
Based on the interview and documentary researches, several problems with
the visitor management subsystem were identified.
Table 5.3: KSNR‟s visitor management subsystem findings
Visitor Management
Theory
KSNR Problems
Implication
Visitor Management Programs:
There are three eco routs and
limited tourist number with
 Distribution of Use

o
special
permission
and
acquaintance of the staffs.
There are three eco routs and
limited tourist number with
 Public Safety

o
special
permission
and
acquaintance of the staffs.
Inadequacy of the service and
limited quantity of specially
allocated sites of territory for
acquaintance with the nature. For
 Interpretive Programs


this reason, independent visits of
citizens are seldom to be found. It
causes stream of tourists is
significantly limited
The management would brief the
tourists about general information
needed to stay in the territory,
safety precautions regulations, fire
safety, sanitary condition, and
 Information Programs


how to treat the reserved features.
Otherwise it might cause more
problems
in
maintenance
management,
ecosystem
management fields
Understanding the Visitor:
 Needs Hierarchy
Visitors are satisfied

o
 Style of Participation
Visitors are satisfied

o
 Visitor Perception
Visitors are satisfied

o
 Visitor Motives
Visitors are satisfied

o
Note:
available input
presence of problem
absence of problem
83
The first column of the table above displays inputs which are considered in
management process. These inputs are inhesion for management of all protected
areas categories and outdoor recreational places. Therefore, KSNR belongs to Ia
category “Strict Nature Reserve”, inputs such as, concession management, area
planning, and site planning not considered in KSNR‟s management. Second column
shows what KSNR has. Third column shows the presence or absence of the problems
in listed inputs, which are described bellow in detail. The fourth column provides
implication.
5.6.1
Tourism Infrastructures
It was identified that number of tourists is significantly limited. One of the
factors was because of the inadequacy of the service and limited quantity of specially
allocated sites of territory for acquaintance with the nature. For this reason,
independent visits of citizens are seldom to be found. Moreover, lack of
sign/information boards along the ecological routes made it harder for independent
visitors to enjoy the existing facilities.
In regular visits, the visitors should use the entrance of KSNR at post №1,
information centre. Necessary information on reserve and its nature are displayed on
boards and tablets. The management would brief the tourists about general
information needed to stay in the territory, safety precautions regulations, fire safety,
sanitary condition, and how to treat the reserved features.
There is a post of the state inspector of department of ecological education in
the list of staff, whose the duties include the organisation of excursion activity and
carrying out of excursions on ecological routes. However, one employee is not
adequate to serve all groups in during peak seasons and the size of KSNR itself. In
these cases, workers of other departments should be and are involved.
84
5.6.2
Tourism Activities Organizer
Currently, there is no formal position for the tourism organizer in the
administrative body, therefore the primary tourism activities were not be prioritized
due to the assumptions that tourism might create many problems in the future. To
make it worse, there are no accommodation facilities in the regional centre, there are
no tourism facilities in nearby settlements, and the society is not involved in any
tourism industry utilizing KSNR. For this reason, the potential tourism values of the
natural environment remained not exposed to the tourists.
Organizing tourism activities is one of the critical steps to be taken by the
management. In spite of the fact that having tourism organizer is included in the
management plan, the realisation is still under funding problems. Taking into account
of recreational loading, the reserve has no prospect of economic feasibility from
ecological tourism without any tour organizer.
The management emphasized that sometimes weather conditions are not
friendly with the visitors; therefore, they need better facilities to host the visitors in a
sheltered place. However, despite some lack of facilities and organizations, it was
indicated that most of the visitors were satisfied by what they experienced in KSNR.
5.7
Conclusion
This chapter has discussed about analyses of the findings. Each problem
identified in each management subsystem has discussed in details. Some suggestions
for the management of KSNR and recommendation for future researchers would be
offered in the next chapter.
CHAPTER VI
6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1
Introduction
This chapter discusses about the conclusion taken out from the results of the
previous chapter. There are two kinds of recommendations namely the
recommendations for the management of KSNR and recommendations for the future
research.
6.2
Conclusion
After collecting primary and secondary data, the author performed
triangulation analyses and found that there are some problems in the current
management of KSNR. It was indicated that KSNR is currently facing some
management problems. Those problems found in the primary and secondary data
collections are ranged from the problems in the subsystems of resource management,
visitor management, and service management. These problems would be concluded
based on the management subsystems. They are included as follows:
86
6.2.1
Service Management
Service Management direct pointing to the purchasing of facilities, services,
and related ancillary programs to accommodate the user. Service management
subsystem is facing several problems as follows:
1.
Financial and Funding Problems.
Stronger financial supports are required to develop some facilities,
territory arrangement, organization of the protection, necessary
buildings or facilities development, personnel payment, and
purchasing of necessary special equipment.
Plan of integrated
management would not be realized without stronger financial support
and new budgeting system.
2.
Human Resources Problems
It was identified that the reserve did not meet the requirements of
qualified personnel. Quality and Quantity problems were indicated.
Quantity problems are related to the work conditions in KSNR, while
quality problems are related to the existing educational system.
3.
Public Relations Related Problems
KNSR was identified to have lack of mutual relationships with
stakeholders nearby, including nearby societies. It is notified that
involving nearby societies might solve several problems, including
tourism facilities, reserve maintenance, and security problems.
4.
Natural and Non-Natural Hazard
Fire, flood, and other deteriorating hazard are often occurred in KSNR
undetected. Some of the hazards were natural, while some others are
unintentionally started by human. According to KSNR management,
alterations of the landscape in order to secure or renew some species
are prohibited by law; therefore, other prevention activities should be
arranged soon.
87
5.
Facilities and Infrastructural Problems
Water regulation system, information-related facilities, adequate
accommodation facilities, and good facility for working employees
are some of the identified facilities needed to be developed. It is
related back to the financial and funding problems, nevertheless,
involvement of the third parties (government, NGO, nearby societies)
might support KNSR in term of facility and infrastructural matters.
6.2.2
Resource management
Resource management includes two phases – resource input and the resource
management programs. These resource management programs aimed at managing
those input. Resource management has problems as follows:
1.
Infrastructural problems
Periodic changes of water levels in the river repeats the phenomenon
of overflowing and droughty lakes system that negatively influences
conditions of the major places of dwelling natatorial and water birds.
Water regulation system of rivers needed to be improved.
2.
Environmental control problems
Sewage waters throughout tens of kilometres along the river annually
carry out the pollutants. The polluted water might have reached the
lakes of KSNR and presented potential threat for their inhabitants.
3.
Problems in controlling of the recreational facilities
Hunting for birds in lake Tengiz plaits, and fishing in the Lake
Kulanotpes are both illegal and it takes co-operations from the visitors
not to be involved in such unlawful activities. Since there is no
efficient control for the activities of hunting and fishing at local level,
this situation led to the deprivation of the local communities that are
supposed to have special rights to utilize the resource to some degrees.
88
6.2.3
Visitor Management
Visitor management helps visitors choose various opportunities or to
manipulate visitor use. Visitor management also facing problems as are follows:
1.
Infrastructural problems
Lack of sign/information boards along the tourist routes made it
harder for independent visitors to enjoy the existing facilities. Brief
the tourists about general information needed to stay in the territory,
safety precautions regulations, fire safety, sanitary condition, and how
to treat the reserved features are needed.
2.
Visitors‟ accommodation problems
There are no accommodations facilities in the regional centre, there
are no tourism facilities in nearby settlements. Sometimes weather
conditions are not friendly with the visitors; therefore, they need better
facilities to host the visitors in a sheltered place
6.3
Recommendation
This section offers some recommendations about management improvement
and that helps to solve problems reviled above in management process of
Korgalzhyn State Nature Reserve.
In a modern understanding, the nature reserve is the polystructural,
multipurpose organisation created mainly for performance of several problems:
preservations of natural complexes, carrying out of recreational, scientific and
educational activity. It is possible to consider reserve from various positions: as a
natural complex, the legal body, scientific institution, object of managing, the subject
of the right of land tenure, considering all variety of properties of reserve and
functions carried out by it.
89
6.3.1
Service management
6.3.1.1 Finance
It is not exaggerating to mention the biggest problem of the world currently is
the quest of economic means, while balancing the mechanisms for creation and
steady functioning of reserved territories. It is the main barrier and on a way of
perfection management of Korgalzhyn State Nature Reserve.
In most of the national parks/nature reserves in other country, basic expenses
of nature reserves were from the central government, as a sign of recognition of their
national importance. Governmental financing level makes from 50 to 100 % of all
expenses. The missing part was covered by the regional and local authorities,
donations of local population, the nature protection organisations and funds, own
incomes of the reserve (Table 6.1).
Table 6.1: Financing sources of protected areas of some countries in the world
Country
Financing sources
About 50 % of the operational expenditure of nature reserves
Austria
becomes covered by the Federal ministry of environment, and the
others of 50 % - budgets of the corresponding lands
Approximately 70 % of expenses of nature reserves are paid Parks
Canada
Canada, and the others of 30 % - the authorities of provinces
The state finances approximately 90 % of the budget, other
France
expenses become covered at the expense of local communities, and
(Nature Reserves and
also from own income reserve (sale of the goods and services to
Regional
Nature
visitors)
Reserves)
40 % - region; 27 % - department; 20 % - communes in reserve; 1 0
% - the Ministry of environment; 3 % - other sources
Nature reserves basically are financed from budgets of the earths,
receiving some additional income of service of visitors; the federal
Germany
budget includes financing of territories of national value (not
necessarily only nature reserves) which is used for creation of new
nature reserves in territory of the former GDR
Administrative expenses are financed at level of the central
government through Department of art, a heritage, the Irish
Ireland
traditions and Islands; the help of the European Union for
acquisition of the lands in connection with creation of new nature
reserves (for example, Wicklow)
Basically economic means are given by the state and regional
Italy
authorities; some reserves (for example, Abruzzo) receive
additional incomes of visitors and the private organisations
Source: Steponenkov, 2005
90
It is wrong to consider that the overwhelming part of the money arriving in
the state budget from activity nature reserve, it is earned by reserve. Most of them
came from concerning enterprises and organisations realising. In the case of
Korgalzhyn State Nature Reserve, substantial increase of enterprise activity can be
expected to occur in large settlements around reserve: the cities Astana and
Karaganda. Enterprises in nearby settlements do not list the taxes directly on reserve
activity. Some organisations that are carrying out the activity in territory of reserve
might as well contribute to the financial statement, according to the concluded
contracts, which have been given out by licences, permits, etc.
Administrations of the park (reserves, parks, botanical gardens, dendro - and
zoo-reserves), might target some ecological funds such as:

Part of penalties and monetary collected from a damage caused by it
results of infringement of the legislation about especially protected
areas;

The means received from realisation of property confiscated or
withdrawn according to the legislation, served by the tool or a subject
of an ecological offence in their territory;

Part of payments of the enterprises, establishments and the
organisations for pollution of territory and objects of reserve which is
defined on the basis of an ecology-economic estimation of their
influence on surrounding environment;

Incomes of commercial activity of nature reserve (excursion,
ecotourism, visiting of museums, etc.)

Target and other voluntary payments of the enterprises, establishments,
the organisations, including international both foreign, and citizens.
It is necessary to introduce new forms of economic development of territories
(free economic zones, zones of priority development, etc.) in order to direct the
financial target of nature reserve from the enterprises, the organisations, or
concerning individuals.
91
One of ways to attract of financial assets in reserve is the participation in the
international nature protection programs, competitions of grants, etc. Competitions of
grants are for both for nature reserve, and for its separate employees, and the
organisations (public, research, educational), leads of work in territory of resereve.
However, they cannot essentially affect a financial position of nature protection
establishment. Inclusion of reserve in the international Nature protection campaigns,
programs, the unions is more effective.
The main requirement of World Bank is biodiversity preservation, socially
and ecologically a region sustainable development. The World Bank supports only
for the development of nature reserves‟ necessary infrastructure. The Kazakhstan
government should provide steady functioning of reserves.
Now the state is in forces to finance in necessary volumes reserved territories
and objects, to provide a sustainable development of regions, important from the
nature protection, historical, cultural, and recreational points of view.
6.3.1.2 Human resource
For increase the professional level of the administrative and research
personnel of reserve it is necessary to organise following actions:

It is necessary to solve problems of ecological formation in high
schools. It is necessary to organise training on specialities like reserve
business and ecological management. To raise stimulus of entrants it is
necessary to establish grants on training, students to encourage with
special grants.

It is necessary to organise training of science officers and other
personnel of reserve with a view of improvement of professional skill,
preparations and continuous training in leading educational institutions
of republic and other countries.
92

It is necessary to increase the number of the personnel, especially for
scientific personals and employees of protection.
6.3.2
Resource management
Reserve protection can be organised as follows:

First, it should be meant to increase number of cordons on perimeter of
reserve with a view on strict control penetrations on its territory of
poachers and other extraneous persons.

Second, it is necessary to supply these cordons with modern monitoring
facilities and protection. So, installation of chambers of supervision,
and not only on cordons, but also in places most often visited by people,
animal and where there are the most valuable kinds of flora and fauna is
supposed.

Third, it is also necessary to provide inspectors of protection with more
modern communication facility, lanterns, transport. Therefore, in the
western countries, protection is carried out by special employees and
technicians equipped with high-tech instruments. From transport they
use during wintertime snowmobile, snowmobiles, and in summer quadracycle and small off-road cars. Such transport considerably
facilitates work of inspectors of protection on investigation of territory
of reserve. For water transports, it is possible to use modern boats
supplied with a special communication facility and other stock for
rendering assistance by the wounded animal and other actions. The
same transport can be used for scientific researches and carrying out of
excursions.
93
6.3.3
Visitor management
For today, information technologies have great value. The given statement
concerns and nature reserves. Hence, author suggests to develop an official site of
KSNR with the full information on reserve, and data will be both on state - Kazakh,
Russian, and in English languages with a view of access to a site of users of other
countries of the world. Similar sites have the majority of the well-known reserves
and national parks.
Unfortunately, the present rising generation has no sufficient knowledge of
our reserves and national parks. The given problems can be solved as follows:

It is necessary to organise often-obligatory trips of pupils, lycées, and
colleges to the nearest reserves. So excursions and tours in Korgalzhyn
reserve.

It is possible to organise such tours for inhabitants of Akmolinsky,
Karaganda districts and of Astana.

Increase of wages to workers of reserve;

Payment of awards, rendering of privileges in sphere medical and other
service.
It is necessary to pay attention to mutual relations with local population,
which uses nature resources in immediate proximity with reserve. Therefore, it is
necessary to organise partner relations with local hunters, fishers, farmers with a
view of rational consumption of nature riches, and minimisation of anxiety living on
territory of reserve of animals.
The control is understood as check of activity of reserve, first, as the state
organisation financed at the expense of means of the state budget. Secondly, as an
object, having huge strategic and nature protection value. Thereby, for the purpose of
restriction of use of the means, allocated to reserve, and also the resources of reserve
which are objects of protection, to suit the own ends it is necessary to organise the
special commissions having as a part of representatives. The state bodies, public
94
organisations and leading experts, which sometimes in a year would carry out the
control over the reserve activity that results, would be nicely exposed in the mass
media.
6.4
Future Research
Due to the limitation of this current study, it is recommended for the future
researcher to do more in-depth qualitative study or comparative quantitative study to
compare the management of KSNR to other reserves‟/national parks‟ management in
other location in order to get the excellent form of nature reserve management.
It is recommended to perform more than one method of qualitative data
collection such as observation, interview with more sources, ethnographic study, or
electronic recording aside of document review and interview. With more data
obtained, the process of triangulation would be easier and the triangulated findings
would be more accurate.
REFERENCES
Aitzhanov M. C. (2002). Korgalzhyn reserve. Flamingo - a pink miracle - Astana,
pp. 88-101.
Alden, H.R. (1973). “Systems for Analysing Impacts of Outdoor Recreation
Programs on Environmental Quality”, Outdoor Recreation and Environmental
Quality. Foss, P.O. (ed.). Ft. Collins, CO: Colorado State University.
Babbie, Earl, (1989). The Practice of Social Research, California, Wadesworth
Publishing Company
Batten, J.D.(1989). Though Minded Leadership. New York, NY: American
Management Association
Becker, R.H., and Jubenville, A. (1990). “Forest Recreation Management”.
Introduction to Forest Science (2nd ed.), R. Young and R. L. Giese (eds.).
New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.
Bishop, K., Dudley, N., Phillips, A., Stolton, S. (2004). Speaking a Common
Language. The uses and performance of the IUCN System of Management
Categories for Protected Areas. IUCN.
BirdLife International (2009) Important Bird Area factsheet: Korgalzhyn State
Nature Reserve, Kazakhstan. Downloaded from the Data Zone at
http://www.birdlife.org on 24/08/2009
Bonnicksen, T.M. (1985). “Initial Decision Analysis (IDA): A Participatory
Approach for Developing Resource Policy.” Environmental Management
9:379-392.
Borsienko V. A. (1977). Rare both disappearing animals and birds of Kazakhstan.Alma-Ata, pp. 101-109.
Buist, L. J., and Hoots, T. A. (1982). “The Recreational Opportunity Spectrum
Approach to Resource Planning”. Journal of Forestry 80:84-86
96
Chase, G., and Reveal, E. (1983). How to Manage in the Public Sector, New York,
NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Chase, G., and Reveal, E.(1983). How to Manage in the Public Sector, New York,
NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Cordell, H.K. (1990). “Outdoor Recreation and Wilderness (Chapter 10).” Nature
Resources for the 21st Century. R.N. Sampson and D. Hair (eds.).
Washington, DC: Island Press.
Dolgushina I.A. (1960). Sandpiper - Birds of Kazakhstan , book I. - Alma-Ata, pp.
200-210.
Dolgushina I.A. (1962). Sandpiper - Birds of Kazakhstan book. 2. - Alma-Ata, pp.
28-38.
Dolgushina I.A. (1970). Sandpiper - Birds of Kazakhstan book. 3. - Alma-Ata, pp.
52-60.
Downy, K.B., Burke, J.F., and Schreyer, R. (1993). “Recreation Resource Planning
and Management and What Defines the Professional”, Journal of Park and
Recreation Administration 2(2): 45-60.
Driver, B. L., and Brown, P. J., Stankey, G.H., and Gregorie, T.G. (1987). “The ROS
Planning System: Evolution, Basic Concepts, and Research Needed.” Leisure
Sciences 13(3):239-246
Gall, M.D., Gall J.B., and Borg W.R., (2003). Educational Research: An
Introduction.Boston: Allyn and Bacon
Gavrilov A. E. (1972) Flyways and number of a crane-krasavki in Kazakhstan.
Alma-ata, pp. 29-46.
Hammit, W.E., and Cole, D. N. (1987). Wildland Recreation: Ecology and
Management. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.
Hendee, J.C., Stankey, G.H., and Lucas, R. C. (1990). Wilderness Management, (2 nd
edition). Golden, CO: North American Press.
Jain, R.K., Urban, L. V., and Stacey, G.S. (1980). 2nd ed., Environmental Impact
Analysis, A New Dimension in Decision Making. New York, NY: Van
Nostrand Reinhold Co.
Jubenville, A. (1986). “Recreational Use of Public Lands: The Role of the Manager”.
Journal of Park and Recreational Administration, 3(4): 53-60
Kerteshev T.S. (2003). Annals of the nature of Korgalzhyn State Nature
Reserve.Astana, pp. 3-15.
97
Knopf, R. C. (1993). “Recreational Needs and Behavior in Nature Settings.”
Behavior and the Nature Environment. I. Altman and J. Wohlwill (eds.). New
York, NY: Plenum Publishing.
Korolev M.N. (1962). Raptorial birds - Birds of Kazakhstan book 2.-Alma-Ata,
pp.109-115.
Koshkina O. I. (2003). The methodical grant on carrying out of phenological
supervision in the area of Korgalzhyn Reserve-Astana, pp. 21-23.
McCool, S. F. (1989). “Limits of Acceptable Change”, Visitor Management
Strategies Workshop. Waterloo, Canada: University of Waterloo.
McNeely, Jeffery A, Mainka, Susan A. (2009). Conservation for a New Era - Gland:
IUCN.
Mills, A,S. (1985). “Participation Motivations for outdoor Recreation: A Test of
Maslow‟s Theory”. Journal of Leisure Research 17(3):184-199
Miththapala, Sriyanie. (2008) UICN Ecosystems and Livelihoods Group Asia,
UICN.
Nakamura, R.T. (1981). “Strategies for Defining Policy During Implementation.” pp.
113-134. In Research in Public Policy Analysis and Management. J. P.
Crecine, (ed.). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Inc.
Norazman A.M., Masdinah A. Md. Yusoff, Tinah A., Zahirah Md. Salleh, Faruk M.,
Siti Aishan A. H., Rohayah K., (2007), Academic Report Whriting, Editor
Dr. Abdul Halim Abdul Raof. Selangor, Pearson Malaysia Sdn. Bhd.
Kumar, R. (1996). Research Methodology, Melbourne, Longman.
Schreyer, R. (ed.). (1984). “Theme Issue: Social Carrying Capacity.” Leisure
Sciences 6 (4).
Shepard, R. N. (1964). “On Subjectively Optimum Selection Among Multi-attribute
Alternatives.” pp. 257-281. In Human Judgment and Optimality. Shelly, and
Bryan (eds.) New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.
Sidorova T. V. (1997). The biological variety Korgalzhyn reserve kept in the
collection book: «Biological and landscape variety of Republic Kazakhstan »Almaty, with. 21-33.
Stankey, G. H. (1972). “A Strategy for the Definition and Management of
Wilderness Quality,” in Nature Environments: Studies in Theoretical and
Applied Analysis. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Press.
98
Stankey, G. H., and McCool, S.D., and Stokes, G.L. (1984). “Limits of Acceptable
Change: A New Framework for Managing the Bob Marshal Wilderness
Complex.” Western Wildlands 10(3):33-37.
Stankey, G.H., and McCool, S.D. (1984). “Carrying Capacity in Recreational
Settings: Evolution, Appraisial, and Application.” Leisure Sciences 6(4):453474.
Steen, H.K. (1976). The U.S. Forest Service: A History, Seattle, WA: University of
Washington
Stevens, S. S. (1962). “Mathematics, Measurement, and Psychophysics”
Swain, D.C. (1970). Wilderness Defender: Horace M. Albright and conservation,
Chicago, IL: University of Chocago Press
The Red book of the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic. (1978). Kinds of animals rare
and plants being under the threat of disappearance and plants - Alma-Ata,
Twight, B.W., Smith, K. L. and Wissinger, G.H. (1993). “Privacy and Camping:
Closeness to the Self vs. Closeness to others.” Leisure Sciences
Volkov E. N. (1972). About placing and number of the central-Kazakhstan
population of a flamingo – Alma-ata, pp. 93-105.
Weinberg, G.M. (1975). An Introduction to General Systems Thinking. New York,
NY: John Wiley and Sons.
Wellington, J. (2000). Contemporary Issues and Practical Approaches. Biddles LTD,
King‟s Lynn Norfolk
Wirth, C. L. (1990). Parks, Politics, and the People. Norman, OK: University of
Oklahoma Press
WWF-Malaysia Annual Review, (2008).
Zimerman, E. W. (1951). World Resources and Industries. New York, NY: Harper
Bros.
APPENDIX A
A
1.
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
Service Management Section
1. What legislation and statutory acts are Korgalzhyn State Nature
Reserve activities are based on?
2. Is there any program for the Korgalzhyn State Nature reserve
development?
3. What is the plan for?
4. Is there any problem in professional competence of employees of
reserve?
5. What kinds of problem are there in professional competence in the
reserve?
6. What are the difficulties you might face in the process of creating
good conditions for normal functioning of reserve establishment
and granting of services for visitors?
7. What are basic the problems in the organisational work under
hazard prevention?
2.
Resource Management Section
1. What are problems in realisation of monitoring of soil, water, air,
flora and fauna?
2. What kind of problems you should solve in term of realization of the
program of environmental impact assessment?
3. How organised activities on designing of landscape and on overstory
vegetation management? And
4. What are problems arise on a way of their realisation?
5. What are the complexities arise in ecosystem management and soil
management?
100
3.
Visitor Management Section
1. What are problems you are adjoin during drawing up and
distribution of tourist routes?
2. What do you think, what is the level of public safety and security
in reserve?
3. What are the environmental impacts of visitors in KSNR?
4. What is the level of visitors‟ satisfaction with organizational
process in KSNR? (Please give your response according the 5
scales)
5. What is the level of visitors' dissatisfaction, with organizational
process in KSNR? (Please give your response according the 5
scales)
101
APPENDIX B
B
1.
INTERVIEW
Service Management Section
1. What legislation and statutory acts are Korgalzhyn State Nature
Reserve activities are based on?

“The Law of The Republic of Kazakhstan about Special
Protected Nature Territories” (Amendment), 1999.”
2. Is there any program for the Korgalzhyn State Nature Reserve
development?

“The Management plan of
KSNR, confirmed by
Committee of wood and hunting economy under the
Ministry of Agriculture of Republic Kazakhstan.”
3. What is the plan for?

“The aim of this plan is to integrate steady management of
protected areas – KSNR and the adjoining territories,
providing preservation typical and unique ecosystems and
a biological variety.”
4. Is there any problem in professional competence of employees of
reserve?

“Yes there are some major problems in professional
competence of employees of reserve”
5. What kinds of problem are there in professional competence in the
reserve?

“The basic problem, for today is shortage of young
qualified personnel. The reason of it, first of all, is not
102
enough vocational training in universities, weak material
resources and not comfortable enough conditions of life
for work in protected areas.”
6. What are the difficulties you might face in the process of creating
good conditions for normal functioning of reserve establishment
and granting of services for visitors?

“There are no essential difficulties in creating conditions
of normal functioning of establishment and representation
of services for visitors in the reserve”
7. What are basic the problems in the organisational work under
hazard prevention?

“Hazards in reserved territory led to ignition of the steppe
and surface vegetation, the number have increased because
of thunder-storms which are impossible to anticipate”.
2.
Resource Management Section
1. What are problems in realisation of monitoring of soil, water, air,
flora and fauna?

“The monitoring process of water, flora and fauna is
carried out with earlier developed and confirmed
“methodical recommendations”, thus no special problem
occurred.
2. What kind of problems you should solve in term of realization of
the program of environmental impact assessment?

“In the field of Environmental Impact Assessment, the
most important question for reserve in the given aspect is
the preservation of a hydrological mode of Korgalzhyn
lakes”.
103
3. How organised activities on designing of landscape and on
overstory vegetation management? And

“According to the regulation "about Special Protected
Nature Territories, introduction (installation or other kinds
of plants and animals) in protected area is strictly
forbidden. For this reason, planting or re-planting in
reserve should not take place”.
4. What are problems arise on a way of their realisation?

There is no problems, because the reason above.
5. What are the complexities arise in ecosystem management and
soil management?

“Management of ecosystems and soils in territory is
forbidden, according to the about Specially Protected
Nature Territories”.
3.
Visitor Management Section
1. What are problems you are adjoin during drawing up and
distribution of tourist routes?

“In a security zone of reserve three are developed and
confirmed Ecological route (not tourist) at which drawing
up of serious difficulties did not arise.”
2. What do you think, what is the level of public safety and security
in reserve?

“Because all ecological routes are laid on flat land
(absence of steep slopes, descents) dangers of movement
of tourists on auto transport do not arise.
Dangerous
representatives of fauna (arthropods, reptiles etc.) for
health of the person are not marked.”
104
3. What are the environmental impacts of visitors in KSNR?

“By working out of ecological routes, this question led to
the basic problem. The most part of routes is laid on roads
of the general using to a security zone of reserve influence
of visitors on environment is to a minimum. Also it is
watched by the employee of reserve accompanying
group.”
4. What is the level of visitors‟ satisfaction with organizational
process in KSNR? (Please give your response according the 5
scales)

“After visiting tourists centre and ecological routes
usually, visitors are enraptured with the scene. They leave
the wishes and comments in the visitors' book in visitor
centre. –Estimated to be 4.”
5. What is the level of visitors' dissatisfaction, with organizational
process in KSNR? (Please give your response according the 5
scales)

“Bad weather conditions, rain and strong wind can be the
unique reason of a dissatisfaction of visitors. At such
weather, departure on eco-routes is strictly forbidden, and
excursion would be conducted only in tourists centre for.
Some tourists were dissatisfied by the absence of forest.–
Estimated to be 4.”