Thesis (M.S.)--Humboldt State University, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 38-42). Also available via Humboldt Digital Scholar.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2007. / Title from first page of PDF file. Includes bibliographical references (p. 325-336).

No description available.

This study looks firstly at the historical background to conservation, particularly in the South African National Parks Board, and relates this to developments in interpretation in the National Parks. These are evaluated against international norms as they appear in the current literature. The aim is to establish a platform upon which future developments in interpretation may be built, avoiding the mistakes of the past, while capitalising on the strong points. Current views of what interpretation is, and what it should be, are reviewed. Knowing who the audience is, in terms of cultural background, education, needs and interests, as well as sound planning, clear objectives and ongoing evaluation of interpretive programmes, emerge as essential prerequisites for effective interpretation. Through reviewing the development and current status of interpretation in the National Parks, the study finds that although the view has been expressed by management, both past and present, that interpretation in the national parks is of great importance, the past and current status of interpretation does not reflect that view. Generally, interpretation appears to be regarded as a non-essential service. This report argues that environmental interpretation should be given a higher status in the National Parks Board and that it should form an important part of the conservation strategy and management plan for the national parks. The researcher contends that a greater investment in interpretation could lead to a decrease in the need for further, increased investment in law enforcement in the parks. The researcher is also of the opinion that interpretation aimed at all levels of personnel of the National Parks Board is at least as important as interpretation aimed at visitors.

No description available.

Cheung Ka-Kui. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 111-117). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / Abstract --- p.ii / Acknowledgements --- p.iv / Table of Contents --- p.v / List of Figures --- p.viii / List of Tables --- p.x / Chapter Chapter 1. --- Introduction --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1 --- Background --- p.1 / Chapter 1.2 --- Objectives --- p.3 / Chapter 1.3 --- Significance --- p.4 / Chapter 1.4 --- Organization of the Thesis --- p.5 / Chapter Chapter 2. --- Literature Review --- p.7 / Chapter 2.1 --- Hong Kong Country Parks and Management Practices --- p.7 / Chapter 2.1.1 --- Establishment of Country Parks --- p.7 / Chapter 2.1.2 --- Country Park Management Practices --- p.8 / Chapter 2.1.3 --- Country Park Design --- p.9 / Chapter 2.2 --- Negative Impacts created from Visitors --- p.10 / Chapter 2.2.1 --- General Background --- p.10 / Chapter 2.2.2 --- Specific Impacts --- p.12 / Chapter 2.2.2.1 --- Noise --- p.12 / Chapter 2.2.2.2 --- Trampling --- p.13 / Chapter 2.2.2.3 --- Littering --- p.15 / Chapter 2.3 --- Wildlife Resources in Hong Kong Country Parks --- p.16 / Chapter 2.3.1 --- Wildlife Resources in Hong Kong --- p.17 / Chapter 2.3.2 --- Conservation Efforts in Hong Kong --- p.19 / Chapter 2.4 --- Technological Advancements in Park Management --- p.19 / Chapter 2.4.1 --- Remote Sensing and Vegetation Mapping --- p.20 / Chapter 2.4.2 --- GIS and Park Management --- p.22 / Chapter Chapter 3. --- Study Area and Methodology --- p.25 / Chapter 3.1 --- Introduction --- p.25 / Chapter 3.2 --- Study Site --- p.25 / Chapter 3.2.1 --- Park Settings --- p.25 / Chapter 3.2.2 --- Ecological Resources --- p.28 / Chapter 3.3 --- Field Measurement --- p.32 / Chapter 3.3.1 --- Sampling Strategy --- p.32 / Chapter 3.3.2 --- Impact Indicators --- p.34 / Chapter 3.3.2.1 --- Noise --- p.34 / Chapter 3.3.2.2 --- Trampling --- p.35 / Chapter 3.3.2.3 --- Litter Dispersal --- p.36 / Chapter 3.4 --- Laboratory Techniques --- p.36 / Chapter 3.4.1 --- Remote Sensing Application --- p.36 / Chapter 3.4.1.1 --- Image Pre-processing --- p.36 / Chapter 3.4.1.2 --- Vegetation Index --- p.38 / Chapter 3.4.1.3 --- Vegetation Class Map --- p.39 / Chapter 3.4.2 --- The Ecological Dataset --- p.40 / Chapter 3.4.3 --- GIS Application --- p.40 / Chapter 3.4.3.1 --- Basic Operations --- p.40 / Chapter 3.4.3.2 --- Composite Maps for Recreation Impacts and Conservation Importance --- p.41 / Chapter Chapter 4. --- Spatial Characteristics of Visitor Impact and Natural Resources --- p.44 / Chapter 4.1 --- General Situation of Visitor Impacts --- p.44 / Chapter 4.1.1 --- Patterns from Vector Data Format --- p.44 / Chapter 4.1.2 --- Patterns from Raster Data Transformation --- p.52 / Chapter 4.1.3 --- Composite Impact Level --- p.56 / Chapter 4.2 --- Ecological Attributes of Shing Mun Country Park --- p.59 / Chapter 4.2.1 --- Vegetation Cover --- p.59 / Chapter 4.2.2 --- Water Resources --- p.62 / Chapter 4.2.3 --- General Distribution of Wildlife --- p.62 / Chapter 4.2.4 --- Conservation Significance on the Number of Species found --- p.69 / Chapter 4.2.5 --- Conservation Significance on the Number of Class found --- p.69 / Chapter 4.2.6 --- Conservation Significance on the Number of Trophic Level with Ecosystem --- p.70 / Chapter 4.2.7 --- Composite Conservation Significance --- p.70 / Chapter Chapter 5. --- Discussion --- p.78 / Chapter 5.1 --- Potential Association between Recreation and Conservation --- p.78 / Chapter 5.2 --- Park Design --- p.86 / Chapter 5.2.1 --- Zoning and Site Location --- p.86 / Chapter 5.2.2 --- Road and Footpath Network --- p.88 / Chapter 5.3 --- Problems in Country Park Management --- p.96 / Chapter 5.3.1 --- Recreation Management --- p.96 / Chapter 5.3.2 --- Wildlife Conservation --- p.97 / Chapter 5.4 --- Implications from the Study --- p.98 / Chapter 5.4.1 --- Mode of Recreation --- p.98 / Chapter 5.4.2 --- Importance of Baseline Studies --- p.99 / Chapter 5.5 --- Recommendations for Country Park Management --- p.101 / Chapter Chapter 6. --- Conclusion --- p.104 / Chapter 6.1 --- Summary of Findings --- p.104 / Chapter 6.2 --- Limitations of the Study --- p.105 / Chapter 6.3 --- Recommendations for Further Studies --- p.107 / Reference --- p.111 / Appendices --- p.118 / Chapter 1. --- Descriptions and Basic Sensor Characteristics of IKONOS Satellite Image --- p.118 / Chapter 2. --- Mathematic Conversion in Radiometric Correction --- p.120 / Chapter 3. --- Details on Aerial Photo Interpretation --- p.121 / Chapter 4. --- Recreation Site Recording Sheet --- p.122 / Chapter 5. --- Trespassing Recording Sheet --- p.123

published_or_final_version / Architecture / Master / Master of Architecture

In 1996, two years after the election of a fully democratic government and the return of South Africa as an acceptable member of international society, the Premier of South Africa's Limpopo Province met with his counterpart, the Governor of Gaza Province, in Mozambique, to discuss the potential of establishing business links between these two adjacent regions. As a result, an International Agreement to establish the Great Limpopo National Park (GLTP) was signed in 2000. Areas included in the GLTP are the Kruger National Park (KNP) in South Africa, Limpopo National Park (LNP) in Mozambique and the Gonarezhou National Park in Zimbabwe. Other areas earmarked for inclusion are the Sengwe Communal land in Zimbabwe, and Zinave and Banhine National Parks in Mozambique. This thesis explores the processes of decision making throughout the administrative hierarchy of the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park (GLTP), and evaluates these in terms of social and environmental justice principles. The three main objectives are: to identify decision making procedures and approaches currently being used in the setting up of the GLTP; to determine the extent to which decision making approaches have incorporated concerns relating to social and environmental justice; and to assess public participation in the GLTP to date - particularly at the community level. Findings indicate that the popular rhetoric surrounding the GLTP has, to date not taken place in reality. Many of the flagship projects have been met with opposition from the community. Social justice is not sufficiently prioritised within the GLTP, as shown by ongoing power differentials, prioritising of wildlife over people in terms of water rights, ongoing harsh treatment of "poachers", the disruption of traditional land use activities, and resettlement of villages into new and potentially different communities. Findings displayed in the questionnaire results, indicate that policies and action plans for the GLTP were developed by the state with little public participation. The community's powerless to influence any decisions or affect any change is encapsulated in the fact that they are, at present living with introduced wild animals. A public participation technique that took the form of a community barriers meeting did take place. This however did not contribute to the community having a say in the park plans. One cannot deny that decision makers have realised their mistake of bypassing community consultation and moving directly to implementation. It seems more effort is being made to bring communities into the process, through the formation of the Project Liaison Board, and thereby ensuring that they receive their promised benefit from the development of the GLTP. It is very difficult to try and categorise the type of approach to community conservation in the GLTP. Certain elements from all three relationships are evident, but more so from Protected Area Outreach. / Thesis (M.A.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 2004.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2000. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 266-280).

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Montana, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 163-168). Also available online (PDF file) by a subscription to the set or by purchasing the individual file.