Negative impact of rural settlements on natural resources in the ...

Journal of Environmental Biology ©Triveni Enterprises, Lucknow (India) Free paper downloaded from: www. jeb.co.in

May 2009, 30(3) 363-372 (2009) For personal use only Commercial distribution of this copy is illegal

Negative impact of rural settlements on natural resources in the protected areas: Kovada lake national park, Turkey Hasan Alkan* Faculty of Forestry, Suleyman Demirel University, Cunur - 32260, Isparta, Turkey

py

(Received: January 25, 2008; Revised received: May 15, 2008; Accepted: July 10, 2008)

Abstract: In this study, negative human impacts on natural resource values of Kovada lake National park (KLNP) have been discussed in accordance with actual data and evaluations obtained from field surveys. The method used in this study is based on questionnaire, interviews and direct observations conducted in rural settlements within the boundary of the national park. According to the results of this study; Kovada Lake and its environs have not been protected from negative human impacts until now. Therefore, within this study, the proposals for the solutions of problems due to protection and utilization in the national park have been developed. Key words: Rural settlements, Natural resources, Protected areas, Kovada lake national park

Co

PDF of full length paper is available with author (*[email protected] )

the support and participation of local resource users are very important (Gbadegesin and Ayileka, 2000; Cihar and Stankova, 2006; Dolisha et al., 2007). In this respect, each national park needs a long term development plan (master plans) that describes how a park is to be managed, protected, used and developed. It is essential that local people are involved in the planning process (Arias et al., 2000; Thomas and Middleton, 2003; Purnomo et al., 2005).

Kovada lake and its surrounding were declared as Kovada lake national park (KLNP) in 1970. “The First Long Term Development Plan” of this park was prepared by a scientific team of Turkish experts, leaded by American experts. Yet this plan was not applied effectively on account of the exclusion of the local people. “The Second Long Term Development Plan” has already been in synthesis stage. In the planning process, also the local participation was not obtained adequately. Thus, the natural resource values of KLNP have been negatively affected by the activities of local people. In this context, the aims of the study are to: (1) examine the general structure, and natural resources of KLNP, (2) determine the socio-economic conditions of rural settlements in or adjacent KLNP, (3) provide the information related to utilization of the KLNP, (4) identify unwilling human impacts on natural resources and actual environmental problems and (5) make clear and probable solutions to protect KLNP from negative human impacts.

lin e

Introduction Recently the creation of the protected areas has become a main component in nature protection policy (IUCN, 2004; NoughtonTreves et al., 2006). In Turkey, the protected areas have been organized as to The World Conservation Union (IUCN) categories, international agreements, and Turkish national policies. In this context, under the national park law there are protected categories entitled: National Park, Nature Park, Nature Conservation Area and Nature Monument. The Forest Law designates protected areas as Protection Forest, Wildlife Protection Area, Wildlife Improvement Area, Game Sheltering Area, and Game Reproduction Station. In addition to 22 nature parks, 33 nature conservation areas and 104 nature monument areas, there are 38 national parks in Turkey. The term “national park” has been joined to Turkish legislation in 1956. However, national park experience of Turkey dates back to 1958. Since then, their numbers have increased up to thirty-three. At present, the total protected area is 686.631 ha in Turkey (Dikyar and Kiris, 2005).

On

Protected areas not only protect the biodiversity but also they are expected to obtain resources for improving human health and for distributing economic profits for local people (NoughtonTreves et al., 2005). On the other hand, local people conventionally exploit natural resources for their needs such as firewood for cooking and warming, timber for shelter, grazing land for livestock, nonwood forest products (Dixon and Sherman, 1990; Kramer et al., 1992; Turker and Kaygusuz, 2001; Fisher et al., 2005; Hijartso et al., 2006; Rutagarama and Martin, 2006; Mamo et al., 2007; Tolunay et al., 2007). In order to provide the balance between utilization and protection in the protected area and leave the next generations an inheritance the area has to have effective management. Besides,

Materials and Methods Study area: The study has been carried out in KLNP in Turkey which is shown in Fig. 1 and 2. KLNP, takes it’s title from Kovada lake, is located within the boundary Egirdir and Sutculer districts of Isparta Province. Some attributes of KLNP are displayed in Table 1.

Journal of Environmental Biology

May, 2009

Hasan Alkan

Fig. 1: The location of Kovada Lake National Park (KLNP)

Co

py

364

A questionnaire was applied to the 10% of total full dwelling number in every forest village by means of face to face method. Survey was applied randomly selected households within each village. The questions were especially directed towards head of family.

Two different semi-structured interview forms were used in this research. The first form was responded by the managers of village e.g. village headman, chief of cooperatives, while the second form was responded by the forest and other district officers for each village.

lin e

The study has been carried out at two phase. In the first phase, resource values of KLNP have been investigated and its actual conditions have been brought up by means of actual studies and field surveys relation to Kovada lake and its environs. On the second phase, it has been determined that which natural resource, how and what kind of damage have stem from human damage. In this respect, the study has been realized in following items: (1) The analysis of existing literature and secondary data, (2) Organization of several meetings connected with topic, (3) Preparing field survey forms and pre-test application, (4) Field surveys and (5) Data analysis.

On

Preparing the questionnaire and interview forms: The questionnaire forms include questions regarding social, economic, cultural and demographic factors of rural settlements together with environmental pressures, opportunities and threats. In addition, the two different semi-structured interview forms have been used in the study as well. These forms include the questions regarding historical, geographical, social, economic, cultural, demographic, projects, stakeholder, environmental opportunities and threats, etc. factors for each forest village. The questions given in these forms have been prepared according to the rules concerning how the questions in question forms should be formed. Field survey: Field surveys were carried out from January to December 2007. After applying the questionnaire and interview forms to the chosen village as a pre-test, these forms were finalized. The forms were applied to 6 forest villages. Besides, research area was directly observed in terms of general conditions, cropping pattern, residence, agricultural crops, forest products etc.


May, 2009

Data analysis: The information at the end of the meetings and literature-secondary data analysis, have been combined with obtained data by means of field surveys. Results and Discussion Natural resources of the Kovada lake national park: KLNP contains a natural lake that is very rich in natural plants and fauna varieties and potentially important for many outdoor sports facilities, rest areas and recreational sites. For proposes indicated above, the lake itself and forest resources have been considered as the most valuable resources of the national park. The resources are not only fairly rich in fauna and flora but also rich in the number of species and genetic diversity (not included here). There is an artificial canal named Kovada canal, connecting Egirdir and Kovada lakes. The source of the irrigation water is provided through the artificial canal of the district. Agricultural fields are irrigated by using pumps established at the edge of Kovada canal.

365

On

lin e

Co

py

Negative impact of rural settlements on the natural protected areas

Fig. 2: Kovada Lake National Park (KLNP) and rural settlements Journal of Environmental Biology

May, 2009

Hasan Alkan

366

Rural settlements: There are six villages in and adjacent to KLNP which shown in Table 4. According to Forest Law numbered 6831, all of them are forest villages. While Kirinti, Serpil, Akbelenli and Karadiken are forest villages as to article 31 (Forest villages that have productive forest within their boundary), the rest villages are forest villages as to article 32 (Forest villages that have only unproductive forest within their boundary).

Physi cal condi ti ons and i nfrastructure of rural settlements: In Turkey, as a whole the residential units are scattered in the rural areas. Scattered ratio is 62.4% for inside forest village and 76.3% for outside forest village (Caglar, 1986). It is found that the scattering ratio is 67% at researched villages. While Kirinti and Yukari gokdere villages consist of one each quarter the other has a few quarters. Some information related to physical conditions and infrastructure is given Table 5. Demography of settlements: The situation of villages is demonstrated in Table 6 according to the results of the various censuses between the years of 1980-2000 (TUIK, 2007) and actual situation. Distribution of the rate of population according to sexuality is approximately 50 percent to in Turkey. The rates by male are 53

py

1001.5 ha of the Kovada lake national park is agricultural area, 810. 5 of it is open area and the rest (4813.5 ha) is forest area (Table 2 and 3). 1811.0 ha of the forest is productive high forest, the rest (4710.5 ha) is under unproductive conditions. The rest area (103. 0 ha) of the national park is unproductive coppice forest. The biggest part of the productive high forest is located at surrounding of the lake (RFDI, 1996).

Table - 1: Some attributes related to Kovada lake national park (KLNP) Planning efforts

Altitude (m)

Latitude

Longitude

Total area (ha)

03.11.1970

“Second Long Term Development Plan” has already been prepared.

950-1000

370 34’ 46’’-

300 51’ 48’’-

6534

950 -1000

37 0 42’ 30’’ North

30 0 56’ 01’’ East

Co

Declared date

Distance to some counties (km)

Ankara (capital)- 480 Istanbul-660 Antalya-180 Isparta-58 Egirdir-24

Table - 2: Distribution of the forests of the national park by quality (RFDI, 1996) Forest area

Non forest area

Generally total

Degraded %11-40 (ha)

Productive %11-100 (ha)

Much degraded %0-10 (ha)

Total (ha)

Total (ha)

(ha)

922.5

888.5

1811.0

3002.5

4813.5

1950.0

6763.5

lin e

Normal %41-100 (ha)

Table - 3: Distribution of forest by exploitation system (RFDI, 1996) High forest

Coppice forest

Much degraded %0-10 (ha)

Total (ha)


Much degraded %0-10(ha)

1811.0

2899.5

4710.5

-

103.0

On


Scrub (ha)

Total (ha)

Total forest land (ha)

103.0

4813.5

Table - 4: The distance between counties and rural settlements of Kovada lake national park (KLNP) and their relations No.

Villages

Distance (km)

The kind of relations

1 2 3

Serpil Kirinti Yuvali

Egirdir county- 20 Egirdir county- 25 Egirdir county-24

4 5 6

Yukari gokdere Akbelenli Karadiken

Egirdir county-22 Egirdir county-35 Sutçuler county-13

Certain farmlands of the village are within the boundary The village is totally within the boundary Bahçivanlar quarter, Alisarincali and Zamkadin arable fields of the village are within the boundary Certain farmlands of the village are within the boundary Denizalti quarter of the village is within the boundary Yeni mahalle and Kizilboluk quarters of the village are within the boundary


May, 2009


367

Table - 5: Physical conditions and infrastructure at the studied villages Transportation network (Asphalted roads)

Villages Kirinti Serpil Yukari gokdere Karadiken Akbelenli Yuvali

Electricity network

Telephone network

⊕ ⊕ ⊕ ⊕

⊕ ⊕ ⊕ ⊕

⊕ ⊕ ⊕

Sewerage network and purification establishment

Active village clinic

(-) (-) (-) (-) (-) (-)

⊕

Primary education

(-) (-) ⊕ (-) (-) (-)

Outside of the village Outside of the village In the village Outside of the village Outside of the village Outside of the village

Table - 6: Demographics trend in the studied villages Dwelling (Actual situation) Total dwelling

Kirinti Serpil Yuvali Yukari gokdere Akbelenli Karadiken Total

Populations (According to Census)

Dwelling

Full

Empty

inside KLNP

80 160 260 360 30 160 1050

20 4 8 0 10 20 62

100 8 6 33 147

521 464 1127 1119 191 786

Source: TUIK, 2007 Table - 7: Income sources of villagers Agriculture

Kirinti Serpil Yuvali Y. Gokdere Karadiken Akbelenli

Vegetable growing + + + ∇ ∇ ∇

Livestock

1990

1997

2000

418 369 1103 1268 157 695

284 473 2055 2034 159 470

340 659 1169 1223 131 449

Forestry activities

Furit growing

Dry farming

Stable livestock

Nomadic livestock

Wood production

Non-wood production

Fishing

⊕ ⊕ ⊕ ⊕ ∇ ∇

∇ ∇ ∇ ∇ ⊕ ⊕

∇ ∇ ∇ ∇ ∇ ∇

(-) (-) + (-) + +

(-) (-) + (-) ⊕ ⊕

∇ ∇ ∇ ∇ ∇ ∇

(-) X X X X (-)

lin e

Villages

1980

Co

Villages

py

⊕ = Available, = Partly available (In Karadiken: with the exception of Kizilboluk quarter, In Akbelenli: with the exception of Denizalti quarter, In Yuvali: with the exception of Bahcivanlar, Alisarincali and Zamkadin quarters) and ( - ): Unavailable

Handicraft Trading

(-) (-) (-) (-) (-) (-)

Ecotourism activities

+ + + + + X

X X X X X X

⊕ : Available and important livelihood at present, + : Available but don’t important livelihood at present, ∇: Available for household consumption, ( - ) : Important livelihood in the past but completely quit at present, X : Don’t happen livelihood never Table - 8: The damage levels in natural resources of the KLNP (LTDP, 2007) Intact

A few damaged

Middle Heavy level damaged damaged

On

Resources Forests Kovada lake Kovada canal

(Yukari Gokdere), 51 (Akbelenli), 50 (Serpil), 48 (Yuvali), 47% (Kirinti), respectively. These rates present that there is a balance between the male and female in term of the stand point of sexuality.

While, the average of inhabitants living in the forest villages is 520 in Mediterranean region, this average value is 372.5 for Turkey (DPT, 2001). In this study, it is determined that the average of the six forest villages is 664.3 in the KLNP. The average number of people by household in rural area and forest village in Turkey is 6.2 and 3.7, respectively (DPT, 1989; DPT, 2001). The average of the specified total of household in the study district is found less than the figures given above. The number of children is more than three per household in the study villages. This ratio is 23, 22, 14.2, 9.5 and 0% in Yuvali, Akbelenli, Serpil, Yukari gokdere, and Kirinti, respectively. As it is pointed out in the tables, the traditional large


May, 2009

368

Hasan Alkan

According to general census of 2000, Turkey’s population is 67.8 million, 35% of the population lives in villages (DIE, 2002). Approximately, 7.6 million of the people live in forest villages located inside or next to the forest areas, which are the poorest regions of country in terms of their physical and socio-economic facilities or lack of working opportunities. As a result of these, they have been forced to immigrate to small towns or metropolis. According to Acun and Geray (1980) this process has unwillingly been accelerating the urbanization since 1950.

Water resources: In the world, the water resources such as lake, river, etc. could be used agricultural irrigation and other purposes as well. Unfortunately these resources have been polluted owing to incorrect and unplanned usage (Samantha et al., 2005; Agtas et al., 2007; Kosygin et al., 2007). Lake Kovada and canal have been rapidly polluted as well. The main factors causing pressure on these resources are given bellow. Approximately half of the active population deals with agricultural works in the district. Fruit production constitutes the major agricultural activity in Kirinti, Serpil, Yukari gokdere and Yuvali villages. However, in Karadiken and Akbelenli villages villagers suffer from deficiency of agricultural land and shortage of irrigation water. Consequently, irrigation water demand has increased from day to day. The irrigation has still made by the traditional systems. The lack of the effective irrigation system like drop irrigation increases the water loss.

Co

There is not a widespread immigration to neighborhood counties and cities in Serpil, Yukari gokdere and Kirinti villages. As, nowadays, the agricultural production has increased and hence the economic conditions of the villagers have been getting well. Besides, the villagers who do not have sufficient land for cultivation work the other villager’s orchards. However, the immigration from Karadiken, Akbelenli and partly from Yuvali village to big neighbor settlements has still been continuing for years.

Negative human impacts on natural resources and actual environmental problems: The people living in the district have been getting benefit from the natural resources legally and vice versa. As a result the resources are being damaged (Table 8, 9). As indicated the main problem is the water pollution in Kavada lake and canal. Besides, the forest resources are destroyed in the district. Under these circumstances, these resources of flora, fauna, hydrogeology, soil, etc. have been damaged for years. Negative impacts of human on water and forest resources are explained separately under this registration.

py

family-type tends to transform into small modern urban-type family. The kernel (nucleolus) family system is dominant in the area, too. Moreover, family planning is an important approach in the villages nowadays.

Some small fruit gardens at the lake shore are established by some villagers at Bahcivanlar and Denizalti settlement which is located in the north of KLNP These new gardens obtain their irrigation water from Kovada lake illegally.

lin e

Income sources of the villagers: According to The World Bank’s Forest Strategy notes, about 60 million local people are almost wholly dependent on forests. Some 350 million people who live within or adjacent to dense forests depend on them to a high degree for subsistence and income in the world (Vedelda et al., 2007; Torn et al., 2007; Adhikari et al., 2004). In general, the basic living source for the forest villagers in Turkey is forestry activities, as well (Acun and Geray, 1980). However, the agricultural activities are the basic living income in the researched villages. The other livelihoods resources are not developed owing to limitation or prohibition of benefits regarding KLNP. Especially, forestry activities, fishing and nomadic livestock have been decreasing in all studying villages since the last a few years (Table 7).

On

When effectively managed, tourism can obtain important profits to protected areas and nearby people (Eagles et al., 2002; Cihar and Stankova, 2006; Dolisha et al., 2007; Torn et al., 2007). Despite the fact that there is a great potential for ecotourism in the KLNP, there are not sufficient efforts to develop eco-tourism and prevent poverty. By reason of not presenting of the similarly alternative income resources, the pressure has increased on the KLNP in Kirinti, Alisarincali, Bahçivanlar, Zamkadin, Denizalti, Yeni mahalle and Kizilboluk settlements. The villagers, who are subjected to limitations of benefit depending on KLNP, believe that one of the fundamental problems of the villages having priority that the village is surrounded by forests or other natural resources and this provides negative effect on development of the villages.


May, 2009

The usage of fertilizer, pesticide and herbicide are very common in the studied villages. Approximately 90% of chemical fertilizers consist of such kind of application. The rest is composed of organic manure. Because of chemical applications the water of both canal and lake are being polluted. Moreover there are not any measures taken related to cleaning in the villages; the residues, including every kind of remnant, are allowed to flow into canal and lake. Cooling depots (cold storage) are important resources in economical life of district people. However, it is a general assumption that establishing a cooling depot has an important role in polluting the canal water owing to these depots discharge their residues into canal. In addition, the wastes of some other establishments’ also discharge their residues into the canal. There are not any networks for sewerage in studied five villages. There is a refining establishment at Yukari gokdere, the unit is out of service, as it is not extended for economical benefits. This situation causes various negative impacts.


369

Table - 9: Negative impacts of humans on natural resources and environmental problems Effecting usage

Effecting causes and ways

Effecting (damage) level

Hydrogeology

Agricultural activities

The usage of fertilizer, pesticide and herbicide is very common. Because of these chemical applications the water of both canal and Kovada lake are being polluted.

Heavy

Agricultural establishments

Cooling depots are important resources in economical life of district people. However, these establishments have an important role in polluting the canal water owing to these depots discharge their residues into canal. In addition, the wastes of some other establishments’ also discharge their residues into canal.

Heavy

Electricity power plant

Electricity power plants have used to water of Kovada canal. Because of this reason, water amount has decreased flowing to Kovada lake.

A few

Settlement

Physical infrastructure is insufficient in studied five villages. For instance, there are not any networks for sewerage. This situation has caused pollution of Kovada canal and lake.

Heavy


The usage of fertilizer, pesticide and herbicide is very common in the studied villages. On account of this, soil are polluted

Heavy

Nomadic livestock

Ordinary goat breeding is cultural traditional value in the district. On account of over grazing, soil erosion is occurred.

A few

Settlement

Garbage are thrown environment.

Middle level

Nomadic livestock

On account of over grazing flora was destroyed.

Middle level

Settlement

Illegal using of wood and non-wood forest product clearing and to settle Fire

A few A few A few


On account of fertilizer, pesticide and herbicide dense application fauna was negative affected. Dividing of fauna of habitat

For lake and canal: Heavy for forestry: A few A few

Settlement

Dividing of fauna of habitat

A few

Road and transport systems

Dividing of fauna of habitat Fire

A few A few

Illegal hunting

Because of illegal hunting fauna amount that live in lake or forest

Middle level

Road and transport systems Agricultural activities Illegal establishments Nomadic livestock Some recreational activities Fire

Sutculer-Egirdir main road Polluted visual of Kovada Canal and lake Some building is not inharmonious to nature Because of grazing some plant of form was degraded Especially, garbage are thrown environment Bad visual of fired areas and establishment

A few Heavy A few A few A few A few

Fauna

On

Visual value

Co

Flora

lin e

Soil

py

The values under influence

Table - 10: Offence types (FDE, 2007) Offence types

Illegal cutting Illegal transportation Keeping illegal material Illegal consumption material Land clearing and settlement Occupation of the forest land Over grazing Total

Number 112 41 29 2 22 41 209 456

Fish inoculating in the lake also affects the lake water in a negative manner. It is determined that fish inoculating causes weed occupying. These undesirable circumstances affect the lake water as well. From time to time, the extensive alga occupations cause both visual pollution and deterioration of water quality. The illegal hunting has been continuing in the lake for years, too. This kind of hunting caused a great pressure on both fish species and some bird species in eco-system. It is the belief of the villagers that the electricity plants are not proper establishments, since they are decreasing the amount of lake and canal water. Journal of Environmental Biology

May, 2009

370

Hasan Alkan

Table - 11: The forest fires and reasons (%) Lightning

Deliberately

Carelessness and negligence

Unknown

Total

3 7

3 8

30 80

2 2

38 100

Co

In the past a few years, the number of the offences happened in the national park are illegal grazing, occupying and getting advantage as illegal. Furthermore, the illegal housing, unproven canal establishing are the other types of offences. In connection with this, 84% of the offences are materialized by Yuvali and Kirinti inhabitants. 10% of the offences belong to Akbelenli and the rest is for both Karadiken and Serpil inhabitants, respectively.

In Turkey, 4% of the forest fires have happened by reason of lightning, the rest of them have resulted from various reasons, e.g. deliberately (14%), carelessness (39%), and unknown reasons (43%). In the last 5 years, 38 forest fires have happened in Egirdir environs and 0.72 ha of forest lands have burned. The information about the forest fire reasons is given in Table 11 (FDE, 2007). From the information given in the table, 91 percent of the main reasons of the forest fires result from human. According to the thought of the people, the main reason of the forest fire risk comes from the limitations and prohibitions in practice. The reason results from the conflicts between the villagers and the authorities of the national parks. In connection with this, sometimes anonymous people cause forest fires deliberately.

py

Forest resources: The diversity of tree species is fundamental to total forest biodiversity, because trees provide resources and habitats for almost all other forest species (Pandeya et al., 2007). Thus, forests are very important in term of biodiversity. Forest lands are under protected statues by various laws in the region. However, there are still some important pressures damaging forests as well. The limitations of the benefits and increasing the prohibitions on the protected areas, especially affect the villagers’ approaches in a negative manner for the forest lands. As a consequence of these, forest offenses have frequently happened in the district (Table 10).

Consequently, natural resources managers and local people have different goals and target about protected areas. While the decision makers might be concerned about the conservation of natural resources; local people may be more concerned about the economic benefits of the natural resources (Kangas et al., 2006). Thus, in spite of hard preservationist approach and applications, many protected areas are still affected by local people negatively, especially in developing countries. By reason of the attempts to preserve the protected areas by exclusion has often led to local people developing antagonistic perceptions and attitudes towards them (Cihar and Stankova, 2006; Rutagarama and Martin, 2006). Similarly, despite the fact that Kovada lake and it’s environ is declared as a national park in order to protect it from negative human impacts, natural resources have not been effectively protected so far (Table 5, 6). As it is the belief of the villagers that they are not in need of a national park. The main reason of this is the benefit loss directed towards the livelihood. Besides, there are not any educational activities about national park and alternative labour facilities, environment, cleaning, etc. There is a positive relationship between the education and local perceptions(Albuqueerque and Albuqueerque, 2005). There are a significant number of welleducated people that are willing to support the decision and

lin e

Nomadic livestock is an important livelihood resource for local people in developing countries. Therefore, forests are used as grazing land for livestock by local people (Tolunay et al., 2007). The nomadic cattle, sheep and ordinary goat breeding are kind of traditional and cultural activities which have much more value than any agricultural activities. However, the damage caused by ordinary goats to the forest areas, especially to afforesttation areas influence the exploitation systems in a bad manner. For this reason, illegal grazing is one of the most serious offence types in the district.

The other important reason affecting the wildlife negatively is noise pollution due to the main road passing through the national park. Settlements and constructions on the main road cause the visual pollution as well. In addition, the high-level pollution of the canal decreases the visual quality. The observations conducted in the KLNP show that the overgrazing demolishes the forms of woody taxa. However, there is not any noise and air pollution in the national park.

On

Generally, the land is often a limiting factor to progress of the livelihood of local people in developing countries (Hjartso et al., 2006). Therefore local people destroy forest land with illegal usage. In KLNP, the other offence types are about to gain new agriculture lands in the forest and in the area, next to the lake. In order to increase their limited income, the local people try to open a new agricultural land from the forest or in state-owned areas for establishing orchards. For this reason, it could be underlined that the state-owned lands next to the lake are under risk. Illegal hunting in the forest area is another type of offence in the district as well. For that reason, there is genitival erosion in term of wildlife. The villagers told that they could not meet some wild animal species in the district, which existed in the past.


May, 2009


Co

In fact, all of the negative process indicated above are stemming from “The First Long Term Development Plan” prepared in 1970, which only brings a strictly protective management approach. On the other hand, “Second Long Term Development Plan” has already been prepared. In this planning process, the participation of villagers is not adequately obtained as well, as it is pointed out in the first long term development plan. In this context, the related previous activities carried out to protection of the KLNP are summarized bellow: -- The second long term development plan should be completed and put in the practice immediately. -- During all of the planning and practice stages, instead of the approach in connection with the protection for minimizing the impacts of human, the priority should be given to the approach for minimizing the impacts of human on the resources. -- Local participation during all of the planning stages should be taken in to consideration without failure. -- A dialogue between authorities of the national park and villagers should be developed, the villagers have to be educated and become conscious about the importance of the issue. In this respect, the authorities of the national park have to extend extension and educational activities about national park and alternative labour facilities, etc. -- The alternative work facilities like eco-tourism should be put into practice. -- In stead of all the prohibition approaches, it is only necessary to prohibit the detrimental benefiting from the national resources.

Cihar, M. and J. Stankova: Attitudes of stakeholders towards the Podyji/ Thaya river basin national park in the Czech Republic. J. Environ. Manage., 81, 273-285 (2006). Caglar, Y.: Forest Villages and Development Activities Concerning them, National Productivity Centre Press, Press No: 340, Ankara, Turkey (1986). DIE: Statistic of 2000 Census of Turkey. Republic of Turkey Prime Ministry, St ate Institut e of Stat ist ics , ht tp: //w ww. die.gov.t r/k onularr/ nufusSayimi.htm (2002). Dikyar, R. and R. Kiris: Forest management plan at protected areas. Symposium of Natural Protected Areas Proceeding Book (Ed.: A. Gul), Suleyman Demirel University Faculty of Forestry Press. Isparta, Turkey. pp. 569-578 (2005). Dixon, J .A. and P.B. Sherman: Ec onom ic s of Prot ec ted Areas: A new look at Benefits and Costs. Island Press, Washington DC (1990). Dolisha, F., J. M., McDaniel and L.D. Teeter: Farmers’ perceptions towards forests: A case study from Haiti. For. Pollut. Econ., 9, 704-712 (2007). DPT: Turkish Family Structure. 5 th Annual Development Plan, Ankara (1989). DPT: Forestry Private Specialization Report. 8 th Five Annual Development Plan, Publication No: DPT:2531-OIK:547. p. 539 (2001). Eagles, P.F.J., S.F. McCool and C.D. Haynes: Sustainable tourism in protected areas, guidelines for planning and management. IUCN ht tp: // turis mo-sos tanible.rds.hn/document indicat ives/ tourism.guidelines.pdf (2002). F is her, M . , G. E. Shiv ely and S. Bucc alo: Act iv it y choic e, labor allocation, and forest use in Malawi. Land. Econ., 81, 503-517 (2005). FDE: Archives of Forest District of Egirdir, Isparta, Turkey (2007). Gbadegesin, A. and O. Ayileka: Avoiding the mistakes of the past: Tow ards a com munit y oriented management strategy for the proposed national park in Abuja, Nigeria. Land Use Pollut., 17, 89-100 (2000). Hjartso, C.N., Steffen S. and H. Finn: Applying multi-criteria decisionmaking to protected areas and buffer zone management: Acese study in the Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal. J. For. Econ., 12, 91-108 (2006). IUCN: The Durban Action Plan. Revise Version, IUCN, Fifth World Parks Congress., S. Africa, http://www.iucn.org/themes/wcpa/wpc2003/ pdfs/outputs/wpc/durbanactionplan.pdf. (2004). Kangas, A., S. Laukkanen and J. Kangas: Social choice theory and its applications in sustainable forest management—A Review. For. Pollut. Econ., 9, 77-92 (2006) Kosygin, L., H. Dremedha and R. Gyenaswari: Pollution status and conservation strategies of Moirang river, Manipur with a note on its aquatic bio-res ources. J. Env iron. Biol., 28, 669-673 (2007). Kramer, R., R. Healy and R. Mendelsohn: Forest Valuation, Managing the World’s Forest: Looking for Balance Between Conservation and Development. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co. , Dubuque, IA (1992). LTDP: Second Long Term Development Plan of Kovada Lake National Park (Draft), Analytical Phase Report (2007). Mamo, G., E. Sjaastad and P. Vedeld: Economic dependence on forest resources: A case from Dendi District, Ethiopia. For. Pollut. Eco., 9, 916-927 (2007). Noughton-Treves, L., M. Holand and K. Brondon: The role of protected areas in conserving biodiversity and sustaining local livelihoods. Annu. Rev. Environ., 30, 219-252 (2005). Noughton, Treves, L., N. Alvares-Berrios, K. Brondon, A. Bruner, M.B. Holland, C. Ponce, M. Saenz, L. Suarez and A. Treves: Expanding protected areas and incorporating human resource use: A study of 15 forest park in Ecuador and Peru, Sustainability. Sci. Practice and Policy, 2, 32-44 (2006).

py

participate the management of the ecosystem (Pavlikakis and Tsihrinttzis, 2006).

371

lin e

Acknowledgments This study is financially supported by Global Environment Facility (GEF)- II Isparta Widespread Area Project. Also, KLNP managers’ and forest officers provided great help as logistic, staff and valuable comments. I would like to thank my colleagues Abdullah Gezer, Sevda Altunbas, Sema Ulker, Mehmet Eker, Ibrahim Ozdemir and Mehmet Korkmaz for their untiring logistic and technical support. References

On

Acun, E. and A.U. Geray: Urbanization of forest villagers and forest village affairs. Sample of Safranbolu Region. Istanbul Univ. Press. No: 2640. Istanbul. p. 85 (1980). Adhikari, M., S. Nagata and M. Adhikari: Rural household and forest: An evolution of households dependency on community forest in Nepal. J. For. Res., 9, 39-44 (2004). Agtas, S., H. Gey and S. Gul: Concentration of heavy metals in water and chub, Leucciscus cephalus (Linn.) from the river Yildiz, Turkey. J Environ. Biol., 28, 845-849 (2007). Albuqueerque, C.A. and U.P. Albuqueerque: Local perceptions towards biological conservation in the community of Villa Velha, Pernombuco, Brazil. Interciencia. pp. 460-465 (2005). Arias, C.H., A.F. Valery and H.H. Faria: Meas uring protect ed area management effectiveness. Forest Innovations Project, WWF/GTZ/ IUCN Technical Series, No. 2. p. 128 (2000).


May, 2009

372

Hasan Alkan

py

Thomas, C. and J. Middleton: Guidelines for Management Planning of Protected Areas. IUCN Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, U.K. (2003). Tolunay, A., H. Alkan, M. Korkmaz and S. Bilgin-Filiz: Classification of traditional agroforestry practices in Turkey. Int. J. Natural Eng. Sci., 1, 41-48 (2007). Torn, A., P. Siikamaki, A. Tolvonen and P. Kauppila: Local people, nature conservation and tourism in Northeastern Finland. Ecol. Soc., 13, 8-24 (2007). TUIK: Republic of Turkey. Prime Ministry, State Institute of Statistics, Archives of Antalya Distinct Directorship, Antalya, Turkey (2007). Turker, M.F. and K. Kaygusuz: Investigation of the variables effects on f uel w oo d c on s u m pt ion a s a n ene rgy s our c e in f o re s t villages of Turk ey. Energy Conser. M anage., 42, 1215-1227 (2001). Vedelda, P., A. Angelsen, J. Bojo, E. Sjaastada and G.T. Berga: Forest environmental incomes and the rural poor. For. Pollut. Econ., 9, 869-879 (2007).

On

lin e

Co

Pandeya, S.C., A. Chandra and P.S. Pathak: Genetic diversity in some perennial plant species within short distances. J. Environ. Biol., 28, 83-86 (2007). Pavlikakis, G.E. and V.A. Tsihrintzis: Perceptions and preferences of the local population in Eastern Macedonia and Thrace National Park in Greece. Landsc Urban Plann, 77, 1-16 (2006). Purnomo, H., G.A. Mendoza, R. Prabhu and Y. Yasmi: Developing multistakeholder forest management scenarios: A multi-agent system simulation approach applied in Indonesia. For. Pollut. Econ., 7, 475-491 (2005). RFDI: Forest Management Plan of Kovada Lake National Park. Archives of Isparta Regional Forestry Directorate, Isparta, Turkey (1996). Rutagarama, E. and A. Martin: Partnerships for protected area conservation in Rwanda. The Geographical J., 172, 291-305 (2006). Samantha, S., K. Mitra, K. Chandra, K. Sahal, S. Bandopathiyav and A. Ghosh: Heavy metals in water of the rivers Hooghly and Haldi at Haldia and their impact on fish. J. Environ. Biol., 26, 517-523 (2005).


May, 2009