the tourism carrying capacity of underwater trails in isabel

1 23

Environmental Management ISSN 0364-152X Environmental ManagementDOI 10.1007/s00267-013-0047-3

The Tourism Carrying Capacity ofUnderwater Trails in Isabel IslandNational Park, Mexico

Eduardo Ríos-Jara, Cristian MoisésGalván-Villa, Fabián AlejandroRodríguez-Zaragoza, Ernesto López-Uriarte & Vicente Teófilo Muñoz-Fernández

1 23

Your article is protected by copyright and all

rights are held exclusively by Springer Science

+Business Media New York. This e-offprint is

for personal use only and shall not be self-

archived in electronic repositories. If you wish

to self-archive your article, please use the

accepted manuscript version for posting on

your own website. You may further deposit

the accepted manuscript version in any

repository, provided it is only made publicly

available 12 months after official publication

or later and provided acknowledgement is

given to the original source of publication

and a link is inserted to the published article

on Springer's website. The link must be

accompanied by the following text: "The final

publication is available at link.springer.com”.

The Tourism Carrying Capacity of Underwater Trails in IsabelIsland National Park, Mexico

Eduardo Rıos-Jara • Cristian Moises Galvan-Villa •

Fabian Alejandro Rodrıguez-Zaragoza • Ernesto Lopez-Uriarte •

Vicente Teofilo Munoz-Fernandez

Received: 4 July 2012 / Accepted: 3 March 2013

� Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Abstract The popularity of ecotourism in the marine

protected areas of Mexico has increased over the last

10 years; in particular there is a large development of a

SCUBA diving industry in the Mexican Pacific including

Isabel Island. Given the risks associated with human

activity in the marine environments around this island, we

propose two ecotourism management strategies: (1) the

creation and use of underwater trails, and (2) the estimation

of the specific tourism carrying capacity (TCC) for each

trail. Six underwater trails were selected in sites that pre-

sented elements of biological, geological, and scenic

interest, using information obtained during field observa-

tions. The methodology used to estimate the TCC was

based upon the physical and biological conditions of each

site, the infrastructure and equipment available, and the

characteristics of the service providers and the adminis-

trators of the park. Correction factors of the TCC included

elements of the quality of the visit and the threat and

vulnerability of the marine environment of each trail (e.g.,

divers’ expertise, size and distance between groups of

divers, accessibility, wind, coral coverage). The TCC val-

ues ranged between 1,252 and 1,642 dives/year/trail, with a

total of 8,597 dives/year for all six trails. Although these

numbers are higher than the actual number of recreational

visitors to the island (*1,000 dives per year), there is a

need for adequate preventive management if the diving

sites are to maintain their esthetic appeal and biological

characteristics. Such management might be initially

directed toward using only the sites and the TCC proposed

here.

Keywords Conservation � Diving � Management �Biodiversity � Island � Pacific

Introduction

In recent years, the extraordinary biological and ecological

biodiversity of Mexico has been well documented. Also, a

solid scientific knowledge has been generated on the

importance of the ecological services generated by the

biodiversity of the natural areas throughout the country

(CONABIO 1998; CONANP 2012). Simultaneously, dif-

ferent methodologies have been proposed in other coun-

tries that have helped to provide increasingly objective

evidence for guiding conservation and ecotourism-related

decisions, allowing recreational activities to be undertaken

within natural areas in an orderly and systematic way that

generates the least possible impact (Carr 2000; Fraschetti

and others 2002; Gossling 2002; Coccossis and Mexa

2004).

According to these methodologies, ecotourism requires

the estimation of the tourism carrying capacity (TCC) of

public use sites and the establishment of interpretive trails

(underwater trails in marine ecosystems) highlighting the

elements of the ecosystem for educational purposes to

visitors. These trails help the visitor to attain a greater

consciousness and knowledge of the environment and

provide those visitors with high-quality knowledge and

experiences. In marine environments, underwater trails

may be designed for SCUBA divers along shallow areas of

particular scenic beauty to make the local flora and fauna

E. Rıos-Jara (&) � C. M. Galvan-Villa �F. A. Rodrıguez-Zaragoza � E. Lopez-Uriarte �V. T. Munoz-Fernandez

Laboratorio de Ecosistemas Marinos y Acuicultura,

Departamento de Ecologıa, CUCBA, Universidad de

Guadalajara, Km. 15.5 Carretera Guadalajara-Nogales,

Nextipac, 45110 Zapopan, JAL, Mexico

e-mail: [email protected]

123

Environmental Management

DOI 10.1007/s00267-013-0047-3

Author's personal copy

more visible and to encourage their appreciation and

understanding for recreation and conservation purposes.

TCC is a specific type of environmental carrying capacity

and refers to the biophysical and social capacity of the

environment with respect to touristic activity and its

development (Wolters 1991; Cifuentes and others 1992;

Acevedo-Ejzman 1997); the TCC represents the maximum

level of visitor use that an area can maintain, that is, the

limit of human activity: if this level is exceeded, the

resource will deteriorate (Ceballos-Lascurain 1996).

Although the first proposals addressing the use of TCC

emerged in the 1970s and 1980s, the initial interest in the

concept as a tool or an element of a conservation strategy

disappeared; however, in recent years, the study of TCC

has garnered renewed attention, as new evidence and

arguments indicate that the TCC concept could be part of a

very effective strategy to address not only environmental

questions but also economic and social issues (Davis and

Tisdell 1995; Coccossis and Mexa 2004). From this per-

spective, TCC serves not only as a scientific measure but

also as a management tool.

In Latin America, a methodology for calculating TCC

proposed by Cifuentes and others (1990) has been applied

in various terrestrial protected natural areas (Rodrıguez

1992; Acevedo-Ejzman 1997), including island systems,

such as the Galapagos National Park in Ecuador (Cayot and

others 1996) and Fernando de Noronha National Park in

Brazil (Mitraud 1998). Recently, Gallo and others (2003)

modified this methodology to estimate the TCC in under-

water trails of the Caribbean island of San Andres.

Marine protected areas (MPAs) have a substantial appeal

to tourists; in recent years, diving has been the activity

undergoing the greatest development at MPAs around the

world, growing at a 20 % annual rate and generating millions

of dollars for the tourism industry (Cesar and others 2003;

Hawkins and others 2005). Many studies have evaluated the

consequences of this increase in the influx of visitors to

MPAs; in many cases, these studies have demonstrated a

significant deterioration in the structure of natural resident

communities (e.g., Kriwoken 1996; Buckley 1999). In

addition, different studies that have estimated carrying

capacity suggest reducing the number of divers allowed on

diving sites to minimize harmful impacts on coral reefs (e.g.,

Davis and Tisdell 1995; Hawkins and Roberts 1997;

Schleyer and Tomalin 2000; Rouphael and Inglis 2001;

Gallo and others 2003), thereby promoting the conservation

of these environments. Simultaneously, the success of trail

management in containing the effects of terrestrial recreation

has prompted calls for greater use of underwater trails in

managing the effects of visitors to marine parks (Hawkins

and Roberts 1993; Plathong and others 2000).

The popularity of ecotourism in the natural areas of

Mexico has increased over the last 10 years; in particular,

there is a large development of a SCUBA diving industry

in several coastal destinations of the Mexican Pacific

(Ramırez-Cordero 2008; Alonso-Domınguez 2009; Reyes-

Bonilla and others 2012). The Isabel Island National Park

(IINP) is one of the 19 MPAs of the Mexican Pacific.

However, only the terrestrial portion of this island is offi-

cially protected, leaving the adjacent marine area without

protection. Moreover, no management strategy currently

exists for the marine environment, and the TCCs of the

marine and terrestrial areas of public use are unknown. It is

a small island with a lodging station used by park rangers,

scientists, and frequently by tourists including SCUBA

divers. The number of recreational visitors to the island has

increased in recent years; however, it is relatively low

(*1,000 dives per year) probably because of the lack of

infrastructure. Certain tourists come to the island on their

own vessels, such as sailboats and yachts, whereas others

hire authorized tourism service providers (Rıos-Jara and

others 2003).

Given the risks associated with human activity, it is

absolutely necessary that recreational activities on Isabel

Island be conducted in accordance with an adequate set of

rules and monitoring, as the distinct areas of the island may

suffer impacts of different magnitudes from tourism. To

address this issue, the present study seeks to provide ele-

ments that contribute to the generation of an ecotourism

management strategy that is consistent with the conserva-

tion goals of the marine park. These elements include

proposals for underwater trails and estimates of the specific

TCC for each trail, considering not only the environmental

characteristics but also the economic and social aspects of

trail development. This information should help establish

mechanisms governing the participation of actors con-

nected to the island and thereby contribute to a pertinent

ecotourism proposal, which would be extremely important

for the continued welfare of IINP.

Materials and Methods

Study Area

Isabel Island is located approximately 28 km from the conti-

nental coast, in the mouth of the Gulf of California. It is rel-

atively small (surface area = 82.16 ha, maximum

length = 1.8 km, average width = 0.7 km) and it is of vol-

canic origin characterized by the presence of craters, cliffs,

plains, depressions, and ridges, with the approximate heights

of these features varying between 4 and 85 m above sea level

(Rıos-Jara and others 2003). The island has considerable

ecotourism potential because of its scenic beauty and habitat

diversity. Its terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems are well-con-

served as a result of its relative distance from the coast. Isabel


123


Island also features remarkable biodiversity, which is related

to its location in the extreme southern portion of the Gulf of

California in an area that is influenced by the California cur-

rent; for this reason, the island offers extraordinary short and

long-term scientific research opportunities. The island is

noteworthy for its role as a refuge for marine birds, which, as a

consequence of their life history characteristics (low repro-

duction levels, long life period, few mechanisms against

predators, and highly specialized diet and forage techniques),

are very vulnerable to outside impact (Montes-Medina and

others 2009). These birds depend almost exclusively on the

entire regional island system, from the northern Gulf of Cal-

ifornia to its mouth, for reproduction and the completion of

their migrations; consequently, these islands are very impor-

tant to the continued welfare of these birds. At least nine

marine bird species nest in large colonies on the island and it is

considered to be one of the areas of importance for bird

conservation in Mexico (Rıos-Jara and others 2003).

Perez-Jimenez and others (2005) reported 24 species of

elasmobranchs in waters near the island and indicated that it is

one of the most diverse zones for sharks and rays in the

Mexican Pacific. In addition, there are at least 118 recorded

species of bony fish that are associated with the rocky-shallow

reefs around the island, nine species of hermatypic corals, 185

species of marine invertebrates, and 39 species of macroalgae

(Rıos-Jara and others 2008a, b; Galvan-Villa and others 2010;

Rodrıguez-Zaragoza and others 2011).

Field Work

Underwater Trails

Sites around Isabel Island were selected that presented

elements of biological, geological, and scenic interest,

using information from previous studies and observations

collected in the field between 2005 and 2010. To obtain

these observations, boat excursions and scuba dives were

conducted at 17 locations around the island, and under-

water videos were produced to identify the areas that were

most representative of the different marine ecosystems near

the island. Based on this information, six underwater trails

were proposed around the island (Fig. 1), each one with a

maximum depth of between 5 and 20 m. The trails had a

one-way route from a starting point where the vessel was

originally anchored during the immersion of the divers, to a

final point at the end of the trail were the vessel was moved

to pick up the divers gathered together in the surface. In the

design of these proposed trails, an attempt was made to

insure that the length of each route was similar; in partic-

ular, the trails were designed to be explored in the time that

is normally required to conduct a minimal-experience dive

that consumes 80 % of the air available in a typical scuba

tank, that is, *40 min. In addition, areas were selected that

were protected, shallow, and easy to access, with distinc-

tive flora and fauna as well as excellent topographical

features and scenic beauty. For each trail, an inventory of

natural marine resources was generated, which included

information regarding the trail’s geographical location

(georeference), depth, underwater topography, biota, state

of conservation, accessibility, security during the excur-

sion, and type(s) of seafloors.

Tourism Carrying Capacity (TCC)

The TCC of each underwater trail was determined in

accordance with the methodology proposed by Cifuentes

and others (1999) and modified by Gallo and others (2003).

Correction factors were adjusted such that they were

appropriate to the conditions of underwater activity and the

probabilistic elements of threat and vulnerability for each

trail. This methodology allows for the establishment of the

maximum number of visits that the trail can receive based

upon the physical and biological conditions of each loca-

tion, the socioeconomic conditions, and the regulations

relating to service providers and the administration of

Isabel Island. To this end, it is necessary to calculate the

physical carrying capacity (PCC), the real carrying

capacity (RCC), and finally, the TCC, which can be

expressed as the number of visitor groups per day or the

number of visitors (persons) per day. The different com-

ponents of the TCC have the following consecutive

sequence: PCC C RCC C TCC; thus, the final estimated

value of carrying capacity tends to decrease as each of

these calculations is performed.

Determination of the Carrying Capacity

Underwater Trails

Each underwater trail selected presents representative

marine biota, including those taxonomic groups considered

to be of interest in recreational diving (Table 1). However,

the marine biota and topography of each trail are distinct;

consequently, the trail routes are different. Also the number

and type of conspicuous and charismatic species is differ-

ent. On the Acantilado El Faro trail, the abundance of

gorgonians is notable, whereas the Islote Pelon and Las

Monas trails have a greater diversity of stony corals and

gorgonians. For echinoderms, the trails with the greatest

diversity are Islote Pelon, Las Monas, and Playa Iguanas.

There is a large variety of opisthobranchs on Isabel Island,

Islote Pelon and Las Monas stand out as examples of

opisthobranch-harboring sites, where it is possible to

observe species of great color and beauty that are partic-

ularly attractive to diver-photographers. These same loca-

tions also host the greatest diversity of fish.


123


For each trail, the cover of stony corals was estimated

using video-transects (three replications for each trail).

Videos were filmed on a 50 m line at a height of 0.4 m

from the bottom, providing an image equivalent to

*0.4 m2 of ocean floor area. A review of the video-tran-

sects was conducted using a series of 13 points that were

systematically distributed on the monitor, with 40 pauses

for each one (Arias-Gonzalez and others 2008). The fol-

lowing six benthonic groups were defined: rock, sand,

macroalgae, sponges, stony corals, and soft corals. The

average coverage (C) for each benthonic group was esti-

mated using the following equation:

C ¼ Np

520

� �� 100

where Np is the number of points observed per benthonic

group in the 40 images of each video transect.

The Physical Carrying Capacity (PCC) of Underwater

Trails

The PCC consists of the estimation of the theoretical

maximum number of visits that could physically occur

during a given time and in a given place, when practical

restrictions related to operational capacity and management

(e.g., site access, ecosystem fragility, infrastructure, and

financing) are not considered. The PCC of the underwater

trails was estimated using:

PCC ¼ S

SP

� �� NV

where S is the total available surface in linear meters (i.e.,

the trail length), SP is the surface used by each diver, and

NV is the number of times that the visit could be repeated

per day, that is, the number of visits per day to each trail.

Fig. 1 Diving sites and

representative taxonomic groups

of each proposed underwater

trail in Isabel Island National

Park


123


Without considering decompression models, NV equates

to:

NV ¼ Vt

Tv

where Vt is the total potential visiting time in a day (i.e.,

park hours) and Tv is the time used for each visit.

A route length of *240 m was established for the Islote

Pelon, Las Monas, and Punta Bobos trails, and a length of

200 m was established for the Playa Iguanas, Caleta Sin

Nombre, and Acantilado El Faro trails. The total route

travel time for all trails was similar (60 min); thus, the

estimated route speed on the longer trails was 4 m/min,

and the estimated route speed on the shorter trails was

3.3 m/min. The limiting factor for all immersion activities is

the time that it takes to consume the air supply; in particular,

40 min was considered to be the approximate duration of an

air tank used by an amateur diver at a depth of between 10

and 20 m. The total route travel time includes not only the

route along the trail, based on its physical conditions, but

also the descent and ascent time of the diving group to and

from the vessel, as well as the time that a diver needs to

adjust him- or herself on the seafloor to establish neutral

buoyancy and a horizontal position and the time during

which the guide provides instruction prior to initiating the

dive. Thus, the average velocity (AV) of a route depends on

the length of the trail (S) and the route travel time (Tt):

AV ¼ S

Tt

To establish the surface used by each diver, a maximum

physical human length of 2 m was used, and, in accordance

with international diving regulations, it was assumed that

immersions would be conducted in pairs. In addition, it was

further assumed that to dive in a line, the members of a pair

would be separated from each other by approximately 2 m;

consequently, each partner would ultimately occupy an

average of 4 m, and thus, SP = 4 m. Given that on Isabel

Island, nighttime navigation is restricted for security

reasons, only daylight dives between 8:00 and 16:00 h

were considered (Vt = 8 h = 480 min); thus, the value of

NV for all trails is as follows:

NV ¼ 480 min

60 min¼ 8 visits=day=trail

The value of PCC for long trails is therefore:

PCC ¼ 240 m

4 m� 8 ¼ 480 visitors=day=trail

and for short trails, the value of PCC is instead:

PCC ¼ 200 m

4 m� 8 ¼ 400 visitors=day=trail

Because the proposed trails have the same physical

characteristics (surface used by each diver, visiting hours

and time per visit, and number of visits per day), the

differences in the values of the trail PCCs were strictly due

to the available surface, that is, the difference in route

distance between the short and long trails (Table 2).

Real Carrying Capacity (RCC) of the Underwater Trails

To estimate the RCC, different correction factors were used

that are specific to each dive site. The correction factors

employed in this study were the following: (a) social

(CFsoc), (b) fragility (CFfg), (c) damage caused by

touching (CFdt), and (d) wind accessibility (CFwind).

These factors were calculated based on the following

general formula:

CFx ¼ 1� Lmx

Tmx

where CFx is the correction factor for variable x, Lmx is

the limiting magnitude of variable x, and Tmx is the total

magnitude of variable x. The correction factors equate to

the empirical probability of variable x that is associated

with the relative frequency of x, estimated using observa-

tions recorded during field work to evaluate the physical

and biological conditions of the trails. Thus, the correction

factors quantitatively propose the non-occurrence proba-

bility of x (Gallo and others 2003).

(a) Social correction factor (CFsoc). This factor uses

different aspects of visit quality to achieve a greater sat-

isfaction during the excursion. Excursions should be

undertaken in guided groups for greater security and to

enable control of diver behavior and the possible impact of

divers on the environment. Groups of nine divers (eight

visitors and one guide) were established, which is in

Table 1 Taxonomic groups and number of species observed in the

underwater trails

IP LM PB CSN PI AF

Corals

Soft corals (gorgonians) 8 5 6 0 5 9

Stony corals 7 5 4 3 4 0

Opisthobranchs

Sea hares and sea slugs 24 28 14 2 21 20

Echinoderms

Sea stars 4 5 2 3 3 1

Brittle stars 3 2 2 2 2 0

Sea urchins 5 7 3 3 3 2

Sea cucumbers 1 5 0 0 3 0

Fishes 59 48 33 29 27 40

Total species 111 105 64 42 68 72

IP Islote Pelon, LM Las Monas, PB Punta Bobos, CSN Caleta Sin

Nombre, PI Playa Iguanas, AF Acantilado El Faro


123


accordance with the rules of the Recreational Scuba

Training Council (RSTC) and the Professional Association

of Diving Instructors (PADI). In addition, an interval of

60 min was established between visitor groups. This

interval is the approximate time that a single group occu-

pies the site and facilitates the prevention of accidental

encounters between vessels and divers, both on the surface

and on the seafloor. Thus, this limitation insures that a trail

should not have more than one group at a time conducting a

underwater excursion.

To calculate CFsoc, the limiting magnitude (Lm), that

is, the occupancy limits that result from the distance

between groups, must be calculated:

Lm ¼ S� ðP � NgÞ

where S is the distance between groups (240 m for long

trails and 200 m for short trails, given that there should not

be more than 1 group on the trail at a time), P is the number

of persons per trail (nine divers), and Ng is the number of

groups per trail, in this case 1. Thus, the value of Lm for

long trails is:

Lm ¼ 240� 9 � 1ð Þ ¼ 231

and for short trails, Lm is:

Lm ¼ 200� 9 � 1ð Þ ¼ 191

CFsoc is calculated as follows:

CFsoc ¼ 1� Lm

L

� �

thus, CFsoc for the long trails is:

CFsoc ¼ 1� 231

240

� �¼ 0:037

and for the short trails, CFsoc is:

CFsoc ¼ 1� 191

200

� �¼ 0:045

(b) Fragility correction factor (CFfg). To estimate CFfg,

the coverage of stony corals was considered, as these are

particularly vulnerable to contact with divers and to the

anchoring of vessels (Hawkins and Roberts 1992; Harriott

and others 1997; Nickerson-Tietze 2000; Tratalos and

Austin 2001; Lynch and others 2004; Uyarra and Cote

2007). The stony corals of Isabel Island primarily consist of

branching, massive, and nodular types. The majority of

these corals belong to seven species of the genera

Pocillopora, Porites, Pavona, and Psammocora (Rıos-Jara

and others 2008b; Rodrıguez-Zaragoza and others 2011).

Their distribution is variable, and the greatest coverage of

these corals occurs in the western and southern zones of the

island (Table 3). The main reef formation is found along the

southern face of the island, along the Punta Bobos trail. This

reef is essentially composed of Pocillopora capitata and

Pocillopora verrucosa and has a maximum length of 60 m, a

maximum width of 18 m, and a height of *1.5 m. The

coverage of live coral is 55 %. Dead coral (45 %) is

primarily located in the shallow area near the intertidal zone.

Along the edges of the reef, there are large clumps of the

massive coral Porites lobata, with colonies of between 40

and 70 cm in diameter.

The CFfg of each trail was estimated by considering

only the percentage of fragile coverage (stony corals) of

each site:

CFfg ¼ 1� Cð% fragile coverageÞ100 %

� �

c) Correction factor of damage caused by touching (CFdt).

This correction factor subtracts, as a limiting factor, the

mathematical expectation of damage caused by contact

Table 2 Physical carrying capacity (PCC) of the underwater trails

IP LM PB CSN PI AF

S is the linear surface available (trail length) (m) 240 240 240 200 200 200

SP is the surface used by each person/diver (m) 4 4 4 4 4 4

Vh is the total potential daily visiting time (min) 480 480 480 480 480 480

tv is the time used per visit (min) 60 60 60 60 60 60

NV is the number of visits per day 8 8 8 8 8 8

Physical carrying capacity (PCC) 480 480 480 400 400 400

The underwater trail codes correspond to those of Table 1

Table 3 The percentage of stony coral coverage and the fragility

correction factor of the underwater trails of Isabel Island

Trail Coverage (%) CFfg

Islote Pelon 2.93 0.970

Las Monas 2.21 0.977

Punta Bobos 5.28 0.947

Caleta Sin Nombre 1.76 0.982

Playa Iguanas 4.61 0.953

Acantilado El Faro 2.40 0.976


123


with divers. The frequency of touching used was estimated

in the recent work of Alonso-Domınguez (2009), which

was conducted at a site in the Mexican Pacific featuring

divers who are similar to the divers that visit Isabel Island

(Table 4).

This correction factor for damage caused by touching

was therefore estimated as follows:

CFdt ¼ 1� Frequency of touches=diver=min

Dive time minð Þ � 100

� �

Thus,

CFdt ¼ 1� 0:172

60� 100

� �¼ 0:713

d) Wind accessibility correction factor (CFwind). The

seasonality of Isabel Island entails a low season with very

little recreational diving activity that lasts *3 months

(90 days) each year (January–March); as a result, the

greatest influx of visitors is concentrated within the months

of summer and fall, during this time of the year the car-

rying capacity is most important. The wind directly influ-

ences wave action, and both factors temporarily make

access difficult to certain dive areas. On certain trails

(Islote Pelon, Caleta Sin Nombre, and Acantilado El Faro),

which are situated to the north and west of the island (the

windward zone), visits could be restricted during the

summer because of the strong wind and waves that pre-

dominate during this season. For these trails, the number of

days with limiting wind and wave action was calculated as

*90.

Accordingly, CFwind was estimated as follows:

CFwind ¼ 1� hl

ht

where hl is the number of hours of limiting wind per year

for the trail (90 days 9 7 h/day = 630 h/year) and ht is

the total number of hours in the year in which dive sites are

open (365 days 9 7 h per day = 2,555 h/year). Using this

information, trails located in the windward zone have a

calculated CFwind value of 0.753, and trails located in the

leeward zone, which do not have wind-caused limitations,

have a value of 1.

Finally, the correction factors were applied for each dive

site, and the RCC was estimated as follows:

RCC ¼ PCC � CFsoc � CFfg � CFdt � CFwind

The RCC was less for the Islote Pelon, Caleta Sin

Nombre, and Acantilado El Faro trails, principally due to

differences in the CFwind (Table 5).

Tourism Carrying Capacity (TCC) of the Underwater

Trails

Following the methodology of Cifuentes and others (1992),

the management capacity (MC) was first estimated by

accounting for variables such as available infrastructure,

equipment, professional capacity, and the availability of

protected area personnel and service providers. The opti-

mal MC is defined as the best state of conditions that the

administration of a protected natural area must have to

develop its activities and reach its objectives (Cifuentes

and others 1999).

For each variable, multiple components were considered

that facilitated the estimation of operational and MC. In

particular, the following components were incorporated

into the considerations: (1) infrastructure, such as an

administrative office on the island, a residential area for

personnel, a meeting room or showroom, a camping area,

trash cans, waste recycling, seats, tables, bathrooms,

showers, sinks, a drainage or septic tank (or waste system),

Table 4 Frequency of touches and maximum probable damage of the

various categories of divers at Marietas islands in the Mexican Pacific

(taken from Alonso-Domınguez 2009)

Types of divers

and certification

level

Frequency of

touches/diver/

mina

Maximum likely

damage

per excursion

(damage/diver)b

Discovery 0.592 35.52

Certified open water diver

(COWD)

0.682 40.92

Open water diver (OWD) 0.124 7.44

Advanced diver 0.088 5.28

Divemaster 0.048 2.88

Instructor 0.114 6.84

Homogenous groupsc 0.172 10.32

a Obtained by direct observation of 101 divers at 6 different training

levels during 33 dives at 7 sitesb Dive excursions of 35 min were usedc Average of the values of frequency of touches/diver/min of all types

of divers

Table 5 Real carrying capacity (RCC) of the underwater trails

Trail PCC CFsoc CFfg CFdt CFwind RCC

Islote Pelon 480 0.037 0.970 0.713 0.753 9.249

Las Monas 480 0.037 0.977 0.713 1 12.371

Punta Bobos 480 0.037 0.947 0.713 1 11.991

Caleta Sin

Nombre

400 0.045 0.982 0.713 0.753 9.490

Playa Iguanas 400 0.045 0.953 0.713 1 12.230

Acantilado El

Faro

400 0.045 0.976 0.713 0.753 9.432

PCC physical carrying capacity, CFsoc social correction factor, CFfgfragility correction factor, CFdt damage caused by touching correc-

tion factor, CFwind wind accessibility correction factor


123


a workshop, a cellar, viewpoints, an island approach canal,

landing dock, anchoring buoys, walking paths, signage,

explanatory signs, benches, a site sketch or model, elec-

tricity, and potable water; (2) equipment, such as a mete-

orological station, park and service provider vessels and

vehicles, dive equipment, an air compressor, communica-

tions radio, extinguishers, first-aid kits, screen and projec-

tion equipment, computers, chainsaws, wheelbarrows,

dollies, GPS, and compasses; (3) personnel, such as

administrators, park rangers, dive guides, service operators,

certified boatmen, certified divers, operational protocols,

security protocols, and park use regulations.

These components were evaluated with respect to four

criteria: quantity, state, functionality, and location. These

evaluation criteria principally take the following factors

into account: (1) quantity, which estimates the percentage

relationship between existing quantity and optimal quantity

(optimal quantity is the judgment of authors of this study);

(2) state, which refers to the conservation conditions and

usage of each component, such as its maintenance, clean-

liness and security, providing for adequate and safe use of

the installation, facility, or equipment; (3) location, which

accounts for the location and appropriate spatial distribu-

tion of area personnel, equipment, and infrastructure, as

well as the ease of access to these resources; and (4)

functionality, which is the result of the combination of the

two criteria of state and location, that is, the practical utility

that the given component has for both personnel and visi-

tors. Although these criteria do not represent the totality of

options for evaluating and determining the MC of the

island, it was concluded that they are sufficient for

achieving a good approximation.

Finally, to undertake a more objective estimation of the

MC, it was important to convert qualitative criteria into

quantitative and percentage-based criteria, from ‘‘not sat-

isfactory,’’ which was assigned a value of 0 (\35 %), to

‘‘very satisfactory,’’ which was assigned a value of 4

(C90 %). The MC of Isabel Island was estimated by cal-

culating the average of the values of the infrastructure,

equipment, and personnel variables (Table 6).

With the MC value, the TCC was estimated for each

underwater trail as follows:

TCC ¼ RCC � MC

The TCC was expressed as the number of dive groups

per day, and as the number of dives per day, assuming that

each group is composed of nine visitors (one guide and

eight divers). The TCC values ranged between 1,252 and

1,642 dives/year/trail (Table 7). These are fairly similar

among trails, and their differences are largely due to the

correction factors included in the RCC; in particular, these

distinctions are largely caused by differences in the

fragility and damage caused by touching at the various

trails, which depend on the coverage of stony corals on the

sea floor at each location. It is precisely the trails with the

lowest TCC values that present the greatest coverage of

branching corals of the genus Pocillopora, which are

particularly fragile and, consequently, susceptible to

damage caused by diver touching and vessel anchors. In

addition, wind and wave action was restrictive in the trails

located in the windward zone. The total number of dives

per year for all trails (8,597) provides an approximation of

the carrying capacity of divers visiting Isabel Island.

Discussion

The scenic beauty and biological diversity of IINP render it

a potential destination for undertaking ecotourism activities

that, if managed appropriately and from a sustainable

perspective, should not undermine the conservation area’s

goals. Nevertheless, owing to the small size of the island

and the fragility of its ecosystems, it is important to

establish an appropriate zoning scheme and to establish

criteria for the use of the ecosystem services in accordance

with its carrying capacities, keeping in mind its environ-

mental and socioeconomic characteristics, as is proposed

by current methodologies (Coccossis and Mexa 2004).

Thus, the underwater trails proposed in the present study

for Isabel Island and its TCC consider not only environ-

mental questions but also economic and social issues,

including scenic beauty and the observation of charismatic

species (e.g., opisthobranchs, stony corals, gorgonians,

echinoderms, fishes), as well as the accessibility, infra-

structure, and security conditions for a high-quality recre-

ational diving. All of these considerations correspondingly

decrease the possible impact of visitors, with positive

consequences for the conservation of the natural park

because any modification in the island environments could

have consequences on its biodiversity.

The impacts of visitors may differ qualitatively

between different geographic locations. Several studies

indicate that the development of touristic infrastructure

has the greatest impact on low-latitude islands, where

species are frequently endemic and vulnerable to change

Table 6 Management capacity of Isabel Island National Park

Variable Value

Infrastructure 0.3125

Equipment 0.3813

Personnel 0.4000

Average 0.3610

Management capacity (MC) 0.3637


123


(e.g., Cronk 1997), as in Isabel Island. In addition, the

small size of the island, with its coastline of approxi-

mately 6.5 km, and its considerable richness in species of

invertebrates and marine fish make it particularly sensi-

tive to the human presence. The island’s coral and rocky

reefs are particularly important, as is reported for other

sites in the Mexican Pacific, including the Gulf of

California and the rest of the Mexican Tropical Pacific

(Solıs-Marın and others 1997; Cintra-Buenrostro and

others 2005; Zamorano and Leyte-Morales 2005; Gon-

zalez-Medina and others 2006).

Underwater trails proposed for Isabel Island are

intended as a complementary strategy to reduce potential

hazards and to direct visitors away from areas that are less

resilient to human use (e.g., areas of higher coral cover-

age). Certainly, the creation and use of trails have proved

to be useful in concentrating use within defined areas of

reefs to reduce effects on more vulnerable habitats

(Hawkins and Roberts 1993; Plathong and others 2000).

This is particularly important in MPAs containing coral

reefs and high benthic biodiversity (Ward 1990; Hawkins

and Roberts 1994; Harriott and others 1997; Rouphael and

Inglis 2001), and in regions near the limits of the range

distributions of coral species because these regions fre-

quently present naturally stressful conditions and conse-

quently the effects of colony damage caused by SCUBA

divers may be magnified (Fishelson 1995; Wielgus and

others 2004). This is the case of Isabel Island, located near

the extreme northern distribution of various stony coral

species of the American Pacific (29�N), including several

branching coral types that are very vulnerable to anthro-

pogenic activities.

However, it is not clear whether it is preferable to

concentrate divers along well defined trails or to spread use

over larger areas. Surveys of coral damage along under-

water trails indicate high levels of damage, for example

between 35 and 70 % of susceptible coral colonies were

broken by snorkelers in trails at Orpheus Island of the

Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (Plathong and others

2000). Other observations indicate that the concentration of

visitors in specific locations can increase the levels of stress

experienced by these sites (Hawkins and Roberts 1997).

Additionally, group size has an influence on the ability of

guides to supervise visitors; thus, small groups are better

for the environment in the areas of greatest fragility (Bar-

ker and Roberts 2004). Consequently, any proposal for the

creation and use of underwater trails should be comple-

mented with estimations of the corresponding carrying

capacity and other regulations related with the MC of the

diving sites. Also, many other characteristics should be

taken into consideration, among which are diver experi-

ence, the size of the group of divers, the type of activity

undertaken during dives (e.g., photography), and the

environmental conditions during excursions (e.g., currents,

visibility, and temperature). In addition, different covers

and growth forms of corals have different damage fre-

quencies and fragility, and it is not clear what proportion of

all of these factors should be considered in the estimation

of the carrying capacity of a site, given their significant

variability.

Although there is a considerable number of studies on

recreational diving activities in MPAs that focus on esti-

mating the carrying capacity of coral reefs (e.g., Dixon and

others 1993; Hawkins and Roberts 1997; Hawkins and others

Table 7 Carrying capacity for underwater trails in Isabel Island National Park

Type of carrying capacity IP LM PB CSN PI AF

FCC (dives/day) 480 480 480 400 400 400

Correction factor

FCsoc 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.045 0.045 0.045

FCfg 0.970 0.977 0.947 0.982 0.953 0.976

FCdt 0.713 0.713 0.713 0.713 0.713 0.713

FCwind 0.753 1 1 0.753 1 0.753

RCC (dives/day) 9.249 12.371 11.991 9.490 12.230 9.432

MC (%) 0.3637 0.3637 0.3637 0.3637 0.3637 0.3637

TCC (dives/day) 3.363 4.499 4.361 3.451 4.448 3.430

TCC (dives/year) 1227 1642 1592 1260 1624 1252

Average dives/year/trail 1,433

Total dives/year for all trails 8,597

Underwater trails codes correspond to those of Table 1

PCC physical carrying capacity, CFsoc social correction factor, CFfg fragility correction factor, CFdt damage caused by touching correction

factor, CFwind wind correction factor, RCC real carrying capacity, MC management capacity, TCC tourism carrying capacity


123


1999; Schleyer and Tomalin 2000; Zakai and Chadwick-

Furman 2002), there are few estimations for the diving sites

of the MPAs from the Eastern Tropical Pacific, including

those of the coast of Mexico. Similarly, environmental

research on diving impacts has primarily been conducted in

other tropical regions (e.g., Medio and others 1997; Harriott

and others 1997; Rouphael and Inglis 2001; Tratalos and

Austin 2001). The main approach of these studies was to

estimate the carrying capacity of coral reefs for SCUBA

diving by comparing the damage levels to reefs subject to

known levels of diving intensities; there are few examples of

the use of holistic methodologies based on the physical,

biological characteristics and the management capacities of

the diving sites (i.e., a TCC assessment methodology; Gallo

and others 2003) as the estimates made by Ramırez-Cordero

(2008) and Reyes-Bonilla and others (2012) in MPAs of the

southern region of the Gulf of California, and Sousa-Melo

and others (2006) in the reefs of Paraıba, Brazil.

In tropical environments, estimations of the number of

divers that can be accommodated at a particular reef site

before serious damage is done range between 4,000 and 7,000

dives/site/year for coral reefs in Australia (Harriott and others

1997), the Caribbean (Dixon and others 1993; Hawkins and

others 1999), the Red Sea (Hawkins and Roberts 1997; Zakai

and Chadwick-Furman 2002), and South Africa (Schleyer and

Tomalin 2000). Our estimations of the TCC for Isabel Island

are comparable with these studies, despite the study areas and

methodologies being so different. The final value is approxi-

mately 8,600 dives per year although when underwater trails

are taken into consideration the TCC values range between

1,252 and 1,642 dives/year/trail which are still higher than the

present intensity of diving in Isabel Island (*1,000 dives/

year). Of course diving intensity in Isabel Island is much lower

than that recorded in the most popular high-use reefs of the

Caribbean ([350,000 in the Cayman Islands; Tratalos and

Austin 2001), the northern Red Sea ([30,000 in selected areas

at Eliat reefs; Zakai and Chadwick-Furman 2002) and the

northern New South Wales, Australia (43,000 dives/year at

Byron Bay; Davis and Tisdell 1995). However, if this number

continues to increase, there is a possibility that reef degrada-

tion would become a problem. Also, an increase in concen-

tration of divers would most likely reduce the amenity values

(i.e., satisfaction gained by recreational users) of the marine

park. It is evident that regardless of location, divers have a

wide range of known impacts, including direct physical

damage to habitat—either by divers or from anchoring—and

indirect impacts, such as increased sediment and nutrient

loads associated with the development of inappropriate dive-

tourism infrastructure (Hawkins and Roberts 1992; Harriott

and others 1997; Nickerson-Tietze 2000).

The estimation of carrying capacity presents a significant

intrinsic difficulty, given the problem of determining the

permissible thresholds that should be considered, as these

thresholds differ notably for each case analyzed. In accor-

dance with the methodology used in this study, the carrying

capacity depends largely on correction factors, which

decrease the final value of this capacity. However, several

of these factors are principally related to the natural char-

acteristics of the island environment (e.g., coral coverage,

wind), which are not modifiable. By contrast, the MC is a

factor added toward the end of the calculation that could,

perhaps, be manipulated to modify the carrying capacity, as

it incorporates the criteria of quantity, quality, and func-

tionality of the infrastructure and service-providing per-

sonnel. The MC could be stressed to achieve a sustainable

use of the island with respect to recreational diving.

In the present study, the application of the methodology

originally proposed by Cifuentes and others (1999) and

modified for marine environments by Gallo and others

(2003) facilitated the acquisition of important information

considered to be elements that would help make manage-

ment decisions in accordance with the season and the interest

of visitors to Isabel Island. Despite the possible damage to

the here proposed trails caused by visiting divers, it has been

suggested that it is possible to mitigate these effects by

appropriately regulating and by adequately managing the

behavior of divers (Plathong and others 2000). The initiation

of management measures concerning the use of dive areas

around Isabel Island will contribute to plan their recreation

and touristic use. The development of high-quality tourism

on the island must be compatible with the natural environ-

ment to assure resource conservation and the quality of

future visits. The determination of the TCC is one necessary

instrument, as is the establishment of criteria for the con-

tinuous monitoring of environmental conditions, supported

by environmental education practices and in situ evaluations

of diver conduct. The impact of visitors on the island must be

documented, just as the impact of natural events, such as

hurricanes, which have caused significant damage to stony

corals, has been documented. Currently, conservation efforts

that include flora and fauna inventories, estimations of coral

coverage, and a coral repopulation program are under way.

Furthermore, since the carrying capacity is also influenced

by the behavior of visitors (Leujak and Ormond 2007), the

damage on the environment may be simply because they

might not care or be aware of the impact they are causing (for

instance novice divers might have difficulties to control

buoyance or position, or be in urgent need of a rest on the

reef); they might be unable to change their behavior or they

might be unaware of existing regulations. There is a need of

campaigns promoting more environmentally friendly

behavior. In some cases, simply briefing visitors about the

vulnerability of organisms, such as corals, may mitigate

impacts (Marion and Rogers 1994; Medio and others 1997),

whereas in others more direct intervention may be necessary

(Barker and Roberts 2004).


123


Conclusions

The present study provides two main elements to design

and implement management strategies which may con-

tribute to the sustainable use of the marine environments of

Isla Isabel: a proposal of six underwater trails and estimates

of the specific TCC for each trail. Field observations at the

diving sites indicate that at this time diving activities are

not causing noticeable damage to the coastal environments

of the island probably because there is a low diving

intensity. However, the number of recreational visitors to

the island has increased in recent years (*1,000 visitors in

2011). Therefore, there is a need for adequate preventive

management if the diving sites are to maintain their

esthetic appeal and biological characteristics. Such man-

agement might be directed either toward using only the

sites and the TCC proposed here, changing the behavior of

divers with environmental education, banning access for

users thought to cause most damage (e.g., novices and

photographers) (Tratalos and Austin 2001), or introducing

charges/transferable permits to reduce diver numbers at

sensitive sites (Davis and Tisdell 1996). Other recreational

activities may be more permissible in these sites. For

example, sites where fragile corals are abundant below

depths of 2 m may be able to support large numbers of

snorkelers but relatively few SCUBA divers, especially

beginners who are particularly prone to damaging corals

(Allison 1996). Also, since underwater trails have become

popular attractions in a variety of locations (Plathong and

others 2000), periodic closure and rotation of trails may

reduce the damage to corals, but their implementation

requires more detailed information on the rate of recovery

of damaged colonies. Most importantly, users of the trails

must be made aware of the damage they can inadvertently

cause. Short briefings and/or interpretative material that

explain how to use the equipment safely could consider-

ably reduce the incidence of damage. These measures have

already proved effective in reducing damaging behavior by

SCUBA divers (Medio and others 1997).

Finally, it is evident that methodological approaches for

carrying capacity assessment need to be further improved

with considerations made by planners and MPA designers,

the monitoring and experience of results in other locations.

As Lane (2010) recently stated ‘‘While some existing

carrying capacity methodologies offer significant insights

into the assessment of population carrying capacities, a

comprehensive model is yet to be developed. The carrying

capacity imperative is an environmental and ethical ini-

tiative of vital future importance. In fact, it is an imperative

on which society’s very survival may well depend.’’

Acknowledgments We thank M. Perez-Pena, A. Martınez-Zataraın,

A. Nuno-Hermosillo, and A. Santos-Crespo for their substantial help

during this project. We are grateful to National Commission of Natural

Protected Areas (CONANP) staff, particularly C. Garcıa-Chavelas, J.A.

Castrejon-Pineda, L.E. Cano-Sanchez, G. Perez-Lozano and C. Robles-

Castillo for their help during field work at Isabel Island. The National

Commission for the Knowledge and Use of the Biodiversity of Mexico

(CONABIO) and PROMEP-SEP partially funded this study. All

research activities were also supported by the Academic Group UDG-

CA-046 of the Universidad de Guadalajara, Mexico. Many thanks to

two anonymous reviewers for critically reviewing the manuscript.

References

Acevedo-Ejzman M (1997) Determinacion de la capacidad de carga

turıstica en dos sitios de visita del Refugio de Vida Silvestre La

Marta, e identificacion de su punto de equilibrio financiero.

Universidad Latinoamericana de Ciencia y Tecnologıa, San Jose

Allison WR (1996) Snorkeler damage to reef corals in the Maldive

Islands. Coral Reefs 15:215–218

Alonso-Domınguez A (2009) Comportamiento de buzos en dos areas

naturales protegidas de Bahıa de Banderas, Jalisco-Nayarit: Islas

Marietas y Los Arcos. Dissertation, University of Guadalajara

Arias-Gonzalez JE, Legendre P, Rodrıguez-Zaragoza FA (2008)

Scaling up beta diversity on Caribbean coral reefs. J Exp Mar

Biol Ecol 366:28–36

Barker NHL, Roberts CM (2004) Scuba diver behaviour and the manage-

ment of diving impacts on coral reefs. Biol Conserv 120:481–489

Buckley R (1999) An ecological perspective on carrying capacity.

Ann Tour Res 26:705–708

Carr MH (2000) Marine protected areas: challenges and opportunities

for understanding and conserving coastal marine ecosystems.

Environ Conserv 27:106–109

Cayot L, Cifuentes M, Amador E et al (1996) Determinacion de la

capacidad de carga turıstica en los sitios de visita del Parque

Nacional Galapagos. Servicio Parque Nacional Galapagos,

Instituto Ecuatoriano Forestal y de Areas Naturales y Vida

Silvestre, Puerto Ayora

Ceballos-Lascurain H (1996) Tourism, ecotourism, and protected

areas. The World Conservation Union, IUCN, Gland

Cesar H, van Beukering P, de Berdt-Romilly G (2003) Case Study-

Negril, Jamaica. Mainstreaming economic valuation in decision

making: Coral reef examples in selected CARICOM countries.

ARCADIS-Euroconsult, Arnhem

Cifuentes M, Alpizar F, Barroso F (1990) Capacidad de carga

turıstica de la Reserva Biologica Carara. Informe de consulta,

Servicio de Parques Nacionales/CATIE, Turrialba

Cifuentes M, Alpizar F, Barroso F et al (1992) Determinacion de

capacidad de carga turıstica en areas protegidas. CATIE Serie

tecnica, Turrialba

Cifuentes M, Mesquita CA, Mendez J et al (1999) Capacidad de carga

turıstica de las areas de uso publico del Monumento Nacional

Guayabo, Costa Rica. WWF Centroamerica, Turrialba

Cintra-Buenrostro CE, Reyes-Bonilla H, Herrero-Perezrul MD (2005)

Oceanographic conditions and diversity of sea stars (Echinoder-

mata: asteroidea) in the Gulf of California, Mexico. Rev Biol

Trop 53:245–261

Coccossis C, Mexa A (2004) The challenge of tourism carrying

capacity assessment. Ashgate Publishing, Ashgate

CONABIO (1998) La diversidad biologica de Mexico: estudio de

paıs. Comision Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la

Biodiversidad, Mexico

CONANP (2012) Comision Nacional de Areas Naturales Protegidas.

http://www.conanp.gob.mx. Accessed 27 Feb 2012

Cronk QCB (1997) Islands: stability, diversity, conservation. Biodi-

vers Conserv 6(3):477–493


123


http://www.conanp.gob.mx

Davis D, Tisdell C (1995) Recreational scuba-diving and carrying

capacity in marine protected areas. Ocean Coast Manage 26:

19–40

Davis D, Tisdell C (1996) Economic management of recreational

scuba diving and the environment. J Environ Manage 48:

229–248

Dixon JA, Scura FL, van’t Hof T (1993) Meeting ecological and

economic goals: marine parks in the Caribbean. Ambio 22:

117–125

Fishelson L (1995) Eilat (Gulf of Aqaba) littoral: life on the red line

of biodegradation. Isr J Zool 41:43–55

Fraschetti S, Terlizzi A, Micheli F et al (2002) Marine protected areas

in the Mediterranean Sea: effectiveness and monitoring. Mar

Ecol 23(1):190–200

Gallo F, Martınez A, Rıos JI (2003) Capacidad de carga de visitantes

en areas de buceo de San Andres Isla (Colombia). Universidad

Tecnologica de Pereira, Pereira

Galvan-Villa CM, Arreola-Robles JL, Rıos-Jara E et al (2010)

Ensamblajes de peces arrecifales y su relacion con el habitat

bentonico de la Isla Isabel, Nayarit, Mexico. Rev Biol Mar

Oceanogr 45(2):311–324

Gonzalez-Medina MJ, Holguın-Quinones O, de la Cruz-Aguero G

(2006) Variacion espacio-temporal de algunos invertebrados

(Gastropoda, Bivalvia y Echinodermata) de fondos someros del

Archipielago Espıritu Santo, B.C.S., Mexico. Cienc Mar 32:

33–44

Gossling S (2002) Global environmental consequences of tourism.

Global Environ Chang 12:283–302

Harriott VJ, Davis D, Banks SA (1997) Recreational diving and its

impact in marine protected areas in eastern Australia. Ambio

26(3):173–179

Hawkins JP, Roberts CM (1992) Effects of recreational SCUBA

diving on fore-reef slope communities of coral reefs. Biol

Conserv 62:171–178

Hawkins JP, Roberts CM (1993) Effects of recreational SCUBA

diving on coral reefs: trampling on reef-flat communities. J Appl

Ecol 30:25–30

Hawkins JP, Roberts CM (1994) The growth of coastal tourism in the

Red Sea: present and future effects on coral reefs. Ambio

23(8):503–508

Hawkins JP, Roberts CM (1997) Estimating the carrying capacity of

coral reefs for recreational scuba diving. In: Lessios HA,

Macintyre IG (eds) Proceedings of the eighth international coral

reef symposium, Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Bal-

boa, pp 1923-1926

Hawkins JP, Roberts CM, Van’t Hof T, De Meyer C, Tratalos J,

Aldam C (1999) Effects of recreational scuba diving on

Caribbean coral and fish communities. Conserv Biol 13(4):

888–897

Hawkins JP, Roberts CM, Kooistra D et al (2005) Sustainability of

scuba diving tourism on coral reefs of Saba. Coast Manage

33:373–387

Kriwoken LK (1996) Australian Biodiversity and Marine Protected

Areas. Ocean Coast Manage 33:113–132

Lane M (2010) The carrying capacity imperative: assesing regional

carrying capacity methodologies for sustainable land-use plan-

ning. Land Use Policy 27:1038–1045

Leujak W, Ormond RFG (2007) Visitors perceptions and the shifting

social carrying capacity of South Sinai0s Coral Reefs. Environ

Manage 39:472–489

Lynch TP, Wilkinson E, Melling L et al (2004) Conflict and impacts

of divers and anglers in a Marine park. Environ Manage 33:

196–211

Marion JL, Rogers CS (1994) The applicability of terrestrial visitor

impact management strategies to the protection of coral reefs.

Ocean Coast Manage 22:153–163

Medio D, Ormond RFG, Pearson M (1997) Effects of briefing on rates

of damage to corals by SCUBA divers. Biol Conserv 79:91–95

Mitraud S (1998) Projeto de Desenvolvimiento de Tilhas Iterpreta-

tivas do Parque Nacional Marinho de Fernando de Noronha-PE.

Actividade 3: Determinacao da Capacidade de Carga e Sistema

de Monitoramento de Impacto de Visitacao, Velatorio Tecnico 2,

Convenio IBAMA-WWF No.006.97, WWF-Brazil

Montes-Medina AC, Drummond H, Kim SY (2009) Distance from

the forest edge matters in habitat selection of the Blue-footed

Booby Sula nebouxii. J Ornithol 150(4):845–852

Nickerson-Tietze DJ (2000) Scientific characterization and monitor-

ing: its application to integrated coastal management in Malay-

sia. Ecol Appl 10(2):386–396

Perez-Jimenez JC, Sosa-Nishizaki O, Furlong-Estrada E et al (2005)

Artisanal Shark Fishery at Tres Marias Islands and Isabel Island

in the Central Mexican Pacific. J Northwest Atl Fish Sci 35:

333–343

Plathong S, Inglis GJ, Huber ME (2000) Effects of self-guided

snorkeling trails on corals in a tropical marine park. Conserv

Biol 14(6):1821–1830

Ramırez-Cordero CA (2008) Uso ecoturıstico y capacidad de carga de

buceo en las Islas Marietas y los Arcos en Bahıa de Banderas,

Jalisco-Nayarit, Mexico. Dissertation, University of Guadalajara

Reyes-Bonilla H, Cupul-Magana AL, Loreto-Viruel RM et al (2012)

Evaluacion de la capacidad de carga para buceo en areas

naturales protegidas del mar Caribe y el golfo de California,

Mexico. In: Ivanova A, Ibanez R (eds) Medio ambiente y

polıtica turıstica en Mexico, SEMARNAT, INE, UABCS,

Mexico, pp 149–162

Rıos-Jara E, Perez-Pena M, Lopez-Uriarte E et al (2003) Estudio

previo justificativo para la declaratoria bajo regimen de protec-

cion de la zona marina adyacente al Parque Nacional Isla Isabel.

WWF-Programa Golfo de California, Mexico

Rıos-Jara E, Galvan-Villa CM, Solıs-Marın FA (2008a) Equinoder-

mos del Parque Nacional Isla Isabel, Nayarit, Mexico. Rev Mex

Biodivers 79:131–141

Rıos-Jara E, Lopez-Uriarte E, Perez-Pena M et al (2008b) Listados

taxonomicos de la biota marina del Parque Nacional Isla Isabel

(invertebrados, peces, macroalgas). University of Guadalajara,

Mexico

Rodrıguez V (1992) Determinacion de Capacidad de Carga Turıstica

para el Parque Nacional Manuel Antonio. Dissertation, Centro

Agronomico Tropical de Investigacion y Ensenanza

Rodrıguez-Zaragoza FA, Cupul-Magana AL, Galvan-Villa CM et al

(2011) Additive partitioning of reef fish diversity variation: a

promising marine biodiversity management tool. Biodivers

Conserv 20:1655–1675

Rouphael AB, Inglis GJ (2001) Increased spatial and temporal

variability in coral damage caused by recreational scuba diving.

Ecol Appl 12(2):427–440

Schleyer MH, Tomalin BJ (2000) Damage on South African coral

reefs and an assessment of their sustainable diving capacity

using a fisheries approach. B Mar Sci 67:1025–1042

Solıs-Marın FA, Reyes-Bonilla H, Herrero-Perezrul MD et al (1997)

Sistematica y distribucion de los equinodermos de la Bahıa de la

Paz. Cienc Mar 23:249–263

Sousa-Melo R, Crispim MC, Rodrıguez-Viana E et al (2006)

Estimativa da capacidade de carga recreativa dos ambientes

recifais da Praia do Seixas (Paraıba-Brasil). Turismo: Visao e

Acao 8:411–422

Tratalos JA, Austin TJ (2001) Impacts of recreational SCUBA diving

on coral communities of the Caribbean island of Grand Cayman.

Biol Conserv 102:67–75

Uyarra MC, Cote IM (2007) The quest for cryptic creatures: impacts

of species-focused recreational diving on corals. Biol Conserv

136:77–84


123


Ward F (1990) Florida’s coral reefs are imperiled. National

Geographic, Washington, DC, pp 115–132

Wielgus J, Chadwick-Furman NE, Dubinsky Z (2004) Coral cover

and partial mortality on anthropogenically impacted coral reefs

at Eilat, northern Red Sea. Mar Pollut Bull 48:248–253

Wolters (1991) Tourism Carrying Capacity. World Tourism Organi-

zation-United Nations Environment Program, Paris

Zakai D, Chadwick-Furman NE (2002) Impacts of intensive recre-

ational diving on the coral reefs at Eliat, northern Red Sea. Biol

Conserv 105:179–187

Zamorano P, Leyte-Morales G (2005) Cambios en la diversidad de

equinodermos asociados a arrecife coralino en La Entrega,

Oaxaca, Mexico. Cienc y Mar 9:19–28


123


the tourism carrying capacity of underwater trails in isabel

Documents