www.protectedareasmanagement.org www.protectedareasmanagement.org
www.protectedareasmanagement.org
 
Operations and Environmental Impact
[Everything in bold is required]
ABOUT YOU
The results of this study will be of public domain. However, the identity of the respondents will not be disclosed and their contact information will not be shared with anyone. Occasionally, with his or her permission, I may contact a respondent to ask for further clarification on any of the answers. Respondents will receive a message to acknowledge their participation.
If you wish, you may check the consent form approved by the Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board, University of Calgary. Answering this questionnaire indicates that you agree to participate in the research.
 
Name:
 
Position:
 
Years of experience in this field:
 
Country:
 
Name of the park or organization:
 
Category:
IUCN
I Strict Nature Reserve
Ib Wilderness Area
II National Park
III Natural Monument
IV Habitat/Species Management Area
V Protected landscape/seascape
VI Managed Resource Protected Area
Biosphere Reserve
OTHER
 
In which State or Province is the park:
 
CONTACT INFORMATION
Street Address
Address Line 2
City
Postal Code
Province
Country
 
E-mail:
 
Area Code and telephone:
 
Do you want to keep the name of your organization anonymous?
 Yes  No 
 
Do you wish to remain anonymous?
 Yes  No 
 
Would you like to receive information about the results of the study?
 Yes  No 
 
[In this questionnaire, the term "park" refers to any category of protected area. I encourage you to use the spaces provided if the available options do not reflect what you wish to share and to expand on your responses.]
 
Operations
Monitoring and Auditing
Environmental Impact Assessment
 
OPERATIONS
 
Please indicate which of the following activities are permitted inside your park:
Agriculture
Aquatic activities
Boating/sailing
Canoeing/rafting
Education/interpretation
Fishing
Golf
Grazing
Harvesting of medicinal/edible plants
Hiking, camping, ecotourism
Hunting/trapping
Logging
Mining
Oil/gas exploration and extraction
Paragliding and similar
Recreational use – motorized (e.g. all terrain vehicles, off-road vehicles)
Recreational use- non-motorized (e.g., mountain biking)
Rock climbing/mountain climbing
Sacred/religious uses
Scientific research/collecting specimens
Scuba diving/snorkelling/swimming
Skiing
Snowmobiling
Water extraction/Power generation
Wildlife observation/photography
Other
Other
 
What are the principal impacts on the following park resources?
Air
Aquatic organisms
Fauna
Geological resources
Historic resources
Landscape/ visual/ aesthetic quality
Soil
Vegetation
Water
Other
There are not impacts
 
Do you have established procedures to control or mitigate impacts on the above-mentioned elements?
 Yes  No 
 
How does the park dispose of the following wastes?
Human waste  Park Facilities  Contractors  Landfill 
Solid waste Park Facilities  Contractors  Landfill 
Wastewater Park Facilities  Contractors  Landfill 
 
Do you keep records of how many visitors the park has on an annual (or seasonal) basis?
 Yes  No 
 
Approximately how many visitors/year come to the park?
 
Do you monitor the impacts resulting from park use by visitors?
 Yes  No 
 
What aspects of visitor use are monitored?
Access routes
Actions taken to control visitor impacts
Conflicts among users groups
Conflicts with wildlife
Number of trips/length of stay
Number of visitors
Places visited
Type and intensity of impacts resulting from specific activities of visitors
Type of impacts per for specific activities
Other
 
Which of the following information from businesses or tourism operators would be useful for park management purposes?
Access routes
Actions taken to control impacts
Conflicts with other users
Environmental information provided to clients
Intensity of impacts
Number of clients
Number of trips
Places visited
Safety information provided to clients
Type of impacts
Other
 
Is there coordination between park staff and business owners or tourism operators regarding control of environmental impacts from their operations?
 Yes  No 
 
What is needed to improve coordination with business or tourism operators?
 
Do transboundary impacts pose a threat to the park?
 Yes  No 
 
Please give examples of the most significant transboundary impacts affecting the park.
 
Please indicate briefly the different units in which park operations are organized.
 
MONITORING AND AUDITING
 
Which of the following aspects are monitored through indicators at the park or regional level?
Please check the checkbox if there are targets or benchmarks defined.
Atmosphere/air quality Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Climate/ climate change Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Contribution of the park to the regional economy  Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Ecological integrity/ Ecosystem structure or function Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Harvesting of natural resources Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Hydrology/hydrological processes Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Impacts from human activities in the region surrounding the park Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Maintenance of administrative buildings Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Maintenance of infrastructure for visitors Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Other economic factors in the region Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Other illegal uses Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Other impacts from park operations or facilities Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Poaching Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Regional demographics Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Restoration /Reclamation Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Restoration or reclamation activities Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Road maintenance Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Socio-economic factor in the region Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Solid Waste disposal Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Species: occurrence Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Species: population dynamics or ecology Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Stakeholder satisfaction Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Toxic or hazardous materials Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Trail maintenance Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Transboundary threats or processes Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Use of fuels Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Use of other toxic or hazardous materials Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Use of vehicles Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Visitor impacts Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Visitor satisfaction Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Waste water release into streams or lakes Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Other    Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
Other    Park  Region  Both       Targets/Benchmarks
 
There is currently no monitoring. Click here to continue.
 
Comment
 
What are the major factors that make it difficult to set targets for the indicators used for monitoring programs?
 
What is the main purpose of these monitoring programs?
Collecting information on threats to the park and its resources
Compliance with regulations
Contribution to knowledge of the biology or ecology of species or groups of species
Contribution to knowledge of the functioning and structure of ecosystems
Other
Comment
 
Approximately what percentage of monitoring programs has been designed specifically to provide information for managing the park?
None
1 to 25%
26 to 50%
51 to 75%
76 to 99%
100%
 
Does monitoring include measures specifically designed to evaluate management effectiveness?
 Yes  No 
 
Are the procedures or protocols for monitoring documented?
 Yes  No 
 
Are these procedures or protocols audited?
 Yes  No 
Comments
 
Who is in charge of monitoring and auditing those procedures or protocols?
Academics
Local, state or provincial government
Non-Governmental Organizations
Park Staff
Staff of other agencies
Other
 
Who participates in audit teams?
Consultants
Park and agency staff and consultants
Park staff
Staff from other agencies
Other
Comment
 
What best defines the elements addressed by indicators that are used in monitoring?
Compound indicators or indices
Inputs
Outputs
Performance
Policy or management responses
Pressures on the environment/resources
State of the environment/resources
Other
 
Are the results of monitoring linked to, and contrasted with, the objectives and targets of the management plan?
 Yes  No 
 
What types of audits are carried out in the park?
Environmental
Facilities
Financial
Social or cultural
Other
Comments
 
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA)
 
1
Are EIAs a legislated requirement for protected areas in your country?
 Yes  No 
 
How is it decided if a project or activity requires an EIA?
By legislated / government mandate
By public demand
Case by case
Consulting lists of activities that require assessments (i.e. as stated in regulations)
Other
 
Who decides on the need for an environmental assessment?
Advisory group
Park agency or government authorities
Park manager/staff
Stakeholders advisory boards or other advisory councils
Other
 
Who participates in the study?
Aboriginal peoples, First Nations, and/ or local communities
Academics
Consultants
Park staff
Staff from other governmental agencies
Volunteers
Other
 
If staff participates in the assessments, how are they involved?
They carry out part of the field/research work
They collaborate in securing funding
They collaborate in the analysis
They collaborate in the production of the final report
They provide information
They review the final report
Other
Comment
 
Is the evaluation of cumulative effects an explicit requirement for EIAs?
 Yes  No 
 
Do the assessments explicitly evaluate cumulative effects for multiple activities and for multiple temporal and spatial scales?
None
Spatial scales only
Temporal scales only
Yes, both
Comment
 
What do you consider to be the main limitations when carrying out environmental assessments and evaluating cumulative effects?
Complex legal requirements
Inadequate staff skills
Insufficient expertise of consultants or researchers involved
Insufficient knowledge about species or ecosystems and their response to disturbances
Insufficient knowledge about the characteristics of the projects or the levell of human use potentially affecting the park
Lack of funding
Lack of staff availability
Lack of stakeholders’ support
Limited access to technology
Limited collaboration or support from park or agency upper authorities
Other
Other
Comments
 
Who decides which mitigation measures should be implemented?
Agency authorities
Other agencies
Park staff
Proponent of the project
Other
 
Approximately, what percentage of the mitigation measures from an environmental assessment are implemented and followed up?
None
1 to 25%
26 to 50%
51 to 75%
76 to 99%
100%
 
In general, how often are recommendations of environmental assessment reports incorporated into management plans or decision-making for the project, the park, or the study area?
Never
1 to 25% of the time
26 to 50% of the time
51 to 75% of the time
76 to 99% of the time
100% of the time
 
What are the main reasons for not implementing mitigation measures or recommendations?
Funding is insufficient or unavailable
Implementation of mitigation measures are not required in the authorization or program
Inadequate access to technology
It is not specified who is going to be responsible for implementing the measures
Lack of support or involvement of stakeholders
Limited staff availability
Political reasons
Recommendations or measures are considered as inappropriate or inadequate to control impacts
Recommendations or measures are not economically feasible
Recommendations or measures are not specific enough
Recommendations or measures are not technically feasible
Staff are not sufficiently skilled
The party responsible for implementation do not comply fully or effectively
Other
Comments
 
What are the main reasons for not having follow-up for mitigation measures?
Follow-up is not required in the authorization or program
Inadequate access to technology
Insufficient funding
Insufficient staff
It is not specified who should do the follow up
It is responsibility of the proponent or other agency
Staff are not sufficiently skilled
Other
Comments
 
Are there formal feedback mechanisms in place to incorporate results from follow-up into decision-making?
 Yes  No 
 
Are there specific procedures or protocols for follow-up of mitigation measures?
 Yes  No 
 
How often have the results of follow up influenced management decisions or objectives?
Never
1 to 25% of the time
26 to 50% of the time
51 to 75% of the time
76 to 99% of the time
100% of the time
 
Do you think that Environmental Impact Assessment and Cumulative Effects Assessment have been effectively used to improve management of the park and the natural resources of the surrounding region?
Yes, both in the park and the region
Only in the park
No
Comments
 
What would you suggest to improve the efficiency of environmental assessments as a management tool?
 
Please use this space if you have additional comments or if you would like to comment on any aspect that you think is related to this topic and was not covered by this questionaire.
 
Please, use this link if you would like to give me some feedback on this questionnaire