8436 cave evaluation by knolle GTZ EN

GTZ Visit Tour Phong Nha – Ke Bang National Park and Caves 2009 Report by Dr Friedhart Knolle* Executive Summary The Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park in Quang Binh province, Vietnam, is of central importance for biodiversity and karst conservation in South East Asia and worldwide Tourism in the park, the visitor caves and their surroundings is rising, but must be still sustainable with higher visitor numbers For this reason, this visit tour was planned as the author is experienced interdisciplinary in national park as well as cave tourism Chapters to 5, i.e pages to of this report are general introductory chapters with facts mostly known to the thematically experienced reader New literature was added and speleological, i.e cave research facts amended Up to now, cave management in Hang Tien Son and Hang Phong Nha does not meet international and world heritage standards This problem should be adressed urgently Based on the existing situation in 2009 in the caves and in line with the International World Heritage Karst Guidelines, 12 General Recommendations with more than 70 Action Proposals are given They comprise the following topics: Check-In Terminal at Phong Nha Township, Boat Tour to the Caves, Visitor Center at the Caves, Hang Tien Son (Dry Cave), Hang Phong Nha, New Caves and Adventure Tours, Suoi Nuoc Mooc Spring Eco Trail and other Trails, Park History and Regional Legends and Stories, Research, Marketing and Park Region, General Management and Training, Brand Animal and Priority Recommendations Additional recommendations were given in the author’s presentation at the International Seminar “Sustainable Tourism Development Plan Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Region” in Dong Hoi, March - 5, 2009 (Knolle 2009) Priority should be given to the restoration of the visitor cave Hang Phong Nha and the Tien Son cave, a new LED lighting system and the restoration of the historic temple and the old stairway to Hang Tien Son Parallel, the staff training should be intensified, especially parallel to the restoration work in the caves This is necess ary not only to explain this and the philosophy behind it to the visitors, but also to optimize the group management in the caves in a permanent learning-by-doing process A presentation given at the International Seminar “Sustainable Tourism Development Plan Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Region” in Dong Hoi, March - 5, 2009, gave some ideas and solutions from the Harz National Park and may be seen as an appendix to this report (Knolle 2009) Introduction The Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park is located in central Vietnam at its narrowest part, about 500 km south of Hanoi Its western boundary is on the Lao-Vietnamese border, which is here only o o o o 42 km from the sea The Park lies between 17 20’ to 17 48’ N and 105 46 to 106 24’ E Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park, with the neighbouring Him Namno Biodiversity Conservation Area in Laos, is one of the largest areas of intact forest habitat on limestone karst still found in Indochina The presence of tall lowland forest, which is regionally threatened as a habitat type, increases the area’s conservation value The biodiversity is very rich with many endemic species The Park is situated within the Annamese Lowlands Endemic Bird Area (www.birdlifeindochina.org), a WWF Global 200 Eco-region and a Conservation Internationaldesignated Biodiversity Hotspot The oldest evidences of human occupation of the Phong Nha - Ke Bang area are Neolithic axe heads and similar artefacts found in some of the limestone caves The Phong Nha Cave has long been a site of religious importance and was a place of worship in the ninth and tenth centuries An old Champa era temple was discovered in the cave The Phong Nha-Ke Bang River Cave was first described by Minister and Geographer Duong Van An in 1550, and on one of the dynastic urns at Hué, the site was depicted as one of the great landscapes of Vietnam In 1986, the Phong Nha Cultural and Historical Site was declared (5,000 ha) In 1993, Phong Nha was declared a Nature Reserve and extended to 41,132 in 1991 Out of this protected area, the Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park evolved and was finally established in 2000, incorporating part of the limestone plateau of the Ke Bang Conservation Area 2003, the park was inscribed on the World Heritage List under Natural Criterion viii (UNEP-WCMC 2006) Fig 1: Map of project area- core zone, buffer zone, district and commune boundaries From Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Geology, Karst and Caves Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park in Quang Binh province in the Central Annamite Mountains and its bordering lowlands is one of the most distinctive tracts of complex karst topography in Southeast Asia Its geological sedimentation history is traced back to the Ordovician period 464 million years ago With the neighboring Ke Bang Conservation Area and karst landscapes it consists of a wide deeply dissected plateau of some 200,000 extending into Hin Namno, the mentioned similar area in Laos The limestone is discontinuous, being interbedded with shales and sandstones and capped by schists and apparent granites, rising to a number of unexplored peaks over 1,000 m high The extensive transitional landforms derive from an extremely complex intercalation of limestone massifs and terrigenous terrain which has produced three distinctive types of topography Two-thirds of the site is Cenozoic karst Another main type is old tropical mainly Mesozoic karst A third type is a non-karst landscape of low round-topped mountains with planation surfaces and abrasion-accumulation terraces along the valleys of the Son and Chay rivers and at the margins of the central limestone massif As a result of tectonic uplift over geological time, seven successive periods of karst formation have created many varying levels of fossil passages, major changes in the routes of underground rivers, once buried and now uncovered palaeokarst, and evidence of changes in the solutional regime, some even by hydrothermal action, i.e hydrothermal karst phenomena are also present (HamiltonSmith 2004) Fig 2: Interpreting the Phong Nha - Ke Bang River Cave From http://dulichvietnam.com.vn From March 1990 on, extensive research and surveys of the cave system were conducted by expeditions under the leadership of the U.K speleologist Howard Limbert from the British Cave Research Association (BCRA), in co-operation with the Faculty for Geology and Geography of Vietnam National University, Hanoi The result is a mapped network of more than 13 major and many smaller explored caves, extending over actually more than 80 km (Limbert 2003 and 2009 press releases) The active river caves are divided into the caves of the Phong Nha system discharging to the Son River, and the caves of the Vom system, discharging to the Chay River Their variety is immense, comprising dry caves, terraced caves, suspended caves, dendritic caves, intersecting caves, giant speleothems and unusual forms such as sub-aerial stromatolites The Phong Nha Cave is the most famous of the system, with a currently surveyed length of 7,7 km (Limbert 2003) Its entrance is the last part of an underground river that connects with the Son River and tour boats penetrate inside to a distance of 1,500 m Other extensive caves include the Vom cave, 15 km long, and the Hang Khe Rhy cave, 18,9 km long Phong Nha - Ke Bang contains the catchment area of many but not all of the streams and rivers that feed the Gianh river Flooding of the valleys occurs between September and November, but in the dry season from February to August almost all the streams dry up Fig 3: Hydrological scetch map of the Phong Nha - Ke Bang cave system of more than 80 km From Limbert (2001) In 1991, the Forest Inventory and Planning Institute (FIPI) surveyed the vegetation cover, flora, fauna and socio-economic characteristics of the area, prior to the preparation of a management plan for the Nature Reserve From 1991 to 1995 a survey of primate species was conducted by a group of scientists from FIPI and Xuan Mai Forestry College From 1996 to 1997 research on the biodiversity of Phong Nha led to a symposium on biodiversity conservation along the LaosVietnam frontier Further surveys of the bird and mammal fauna were conducted by a team of scientists organised by Fauna and Flora International in 1998, to assess the conservation importance and priorities of the National Park The LINC project conducted by WWF in 1999 - 2003 has carried out a systematic review of the biodiversity implications of a linkage with the Hin Namno Conservation Area of Laos In 1999 scientists from the Vietnam-Russia Tropical Centre also conducted zoological and botanical surveys in the Ke Bang area (UNEP-WCMC 2006, Limbert 2003, ZGF 2009) It is astonishing in a biodiversity hotspot like Phong Nha - Ke Bang, that apparently only few biospeleological investigations in the caves of the area were conducted up to now An initial survey on the water environment and aquatic fauna in the rivers and underground lakes of the Phong Nha cave was carried out in 2001 The study method focused on hydro-physical and multi-quantity hydro-chemical factors Aquatic organism samples were collected and bought directly from fishermen and markets The study results showed that in terms of natural condition and water environment, in the rainy season some physio-chemical indicators of river water were higher than in the dry season Opacity of river water was rather high, pH value was alkaline, in particular CNcontent was rather high The aquatic fauna was relatively abundant and had specific features, including 54 phytoplankton species, 39 zooplankton species, 14 shrimp, crab, oyster and snail species, 13 aquatic larval families and 36 fish species Two copepod crustacean species of the new Diaptomidae family were found, in which there was a new strain (Ho Thanh Hai et al 2003) Bat findings in the Phong Nha - Ke Bang caves were published by the Joint Russian-Vietnamese Science and Technological Tropical Centre & Zoological Museum of Moscow M V Lomonosov State University (Borissenko & Kruskop 2003) A research unit was established in 2003 as part of the new management program for the National Park Research on the Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park biodiversity, like the exploration of the cave systems, is continuing, and new species of both flora and fauna are regularly identified Actually, a team of Frankfurt Zoological Society is working in the park Conservation Management At the national level management of the Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park is in the responsibility of the Forest Protection Department of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Direct responsibility for park management lies with the Phong Nha - Ke Bang Management Board, under the jurisdiction of the People’s Committee of Quang Binh Province This was created in 2000 to implement the management plan of the National Park, and supersedes that created for the Nature Reserve in 1993 One section of this Board oversees forest resources and biodiversity protection It also conducts awareness raising and educational programs with the local people and authorities, and implements programs such as rare orchid cultivation to raise the standard of living of people in the buffer zone The conservation of cave systems, historical relict landscapes and the developments of tourist services are entrusted to the Phong Nha historical relict and landscape management board The local people not otherwise participate in the Park’s management In 1998, a Transboundary Biodiversity Protection Plan was initiated between Laos and Vietnam This has the potential to preserve a vast 315,000 area of forested karst Regular meetings are held between the neighbouring provincial authorities of both countries to discuss co-operation in the management of the two adjacent nature reserves The National Park is included in the Master Plan for economic development in Quang Binh Province for 1997 - 2010 The nomination included an Investment Plan which has some of the elements of a management plan but was not very detailed The management plan included maps and classifications of the ten forest types and cultivated land, a geomorphological map, land uses and zoning The three zones are Strictly Protected zone (about 76 % of the area), Ecological Recovery zone (20 %) and Administrative & Service zone (People’s Committee of Quang Binh Province 1999) The recovery zone concerns the regeneration of destroyed forest Protection of the watershed to prevent floods in the coastal plain is also of great importance The Investment Plan for the National Park includes Programs for Protection, Forest and Wildlife Regeneration, Education & Scientific Research, Infrastructure, Tourism & Education and a Socio-economic Program These Programs cover activities such as the construction of a Park Headquarters and guard stations, equipment for staff, reforestation, research on threatened wildlife, training of staff and guides, and resettlement and provision of health and education services to the Ruc and Arem peoples (UNEPWCMC 2006) Tourism in the Phong Nha Cave, the Park and the Province The Phong Nha Cave has long been a site of religious and touristic importance to the people and continues to be one of the most visited destinations in Vietnam Tourist activities were reorganised in 1990 and visitor numbers have since increased each year from 1,000 in 1993 and 5,000 in 1995, including 200 foreign tourists, to 28,000 in 1997, including 1,900 foreign tourists In 1999 there were 80,500 domestic visitors and 900 international visitors The figures from 2003 – 2008 rised as given below Table 1: Visitors to the two caves Phong Nha and Tien Son in the period 2003 - 2005 Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Domestic visitors International visitors 196,227 1,291 329,438 2,241 251,657 4,266 251,652 6,954 228,698 11,795 239,539 8,377 Revenue 4,848,705,000 8,202,555,000 7,210,633,000 9,179,870,000 9,078,597,000 8,957,000,000 Remark 30-10-2008 From: Provincial Project Management Unit of PNKB Region Project (2008) Phong Nha Cave is the principal attraction of the park, with a large team of boatmen taking people into the cave There is accomodation near the Xuan Son ferry where boats leave for the cave Tourism in the area is in the responsibility of the Trading and Tourism Department of Quang Binh province The forest guards of Son Trach commune in Bo Trach district provide tourist security (UNEP-WCMC 2006) A parallel development took place in the park as a whole The visitor numbers in Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park from 1995 – 2003 rised as given below Table 2: Visitors to Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park in the period 1995 - 2003 Year Total No of vistors 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 7,650 13,140 29,588 48,000 80,582 84,482 115,161 157,712 196,227 Foreign visitors 252 470 994 776 822 1015 1427 1291 Annual increase % 71,6 125,17 62,22 67,87 4,83 36,31 36,9 21,4 Revenue (Vietnamese Dong) 129,750,000 225,300,000 503,460,000 766,560,000 1.258,050,000 1.874,550,000 2.617,200,000 3.889,415,000 4.848,705,000 Source: Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park, 2004; from Momberg (2003) According to the Tourism Development Master Plan of Quang Binh Province for the period 2006 2010, by 2010, tourism in Quang Binh shall achieve the following targets: Increase of total tourist numbers from up to 1,2 million arrivals, of which 30,000 are international arrivals; 4,2 million tourist arrivals for the whole period of 2006 - 2010, doubling that of the period 2001 - 2005, with an average growth rate of 17% per annum (People’s Committee of Quang Binh Province 2006) International World Heritage Karst Guidelines The relevant guideline for cave management in World Heritage sites was written and compiled by Prof Paul Williams (IUCN 2008: World Heritage Caves and Karst A Thematic Study - IUCN World Heritage Studies 2, Gland, Switzerland) It comprises a global review of karst World Heritage properties - present situation, future prospects and management requirements Fig 4: IUCN (2008): World Heritage Caves and Karst A Thematic Study - IUCN World Heritage Studies 2, Gland, Switzerland Some relevant quotations shall be given here (structure and bold markings by the author of this study) 6.1 General “Cave management within World Heritage locations must be to international standards and should be a model for commercial tourist caves elsewhere Special skill is required to develop a tourist cave to the standards worthy of a World Heritage location A balance is required between the engineering required to facilitate access and the minimization of engineering for the sake of access In a World Heritage site, this balance must err on the site of conservation: minimization of impact on natural conditions must take precedence over engineering for mass public access Further, to maintain a cave in excellent condition, management is required not just of the cave but also of the area above and around it The main environmental objectives of cave management should be to keep temperature, humidity and atmospheric carbon dioxide conditions within the natural range of variation, to minimize light available for photosynthesis, and to maintain water quality and quantity.” 6.2 Cave Lighting “Natural vegetation conditions must be maintained directly above and around the cave to protect the quality of infiltrating water and the epikarst habitat (i.e no buildings or car parks should be located there) Tourist cave lighting sources should be high efficiency lamps to minimize heat input into the cave atmosphere and to minimize light wavelengths suitable for photosynthesis The duration and spectral quality of lighting should be such as to restrict the development of plant and algal growth (lampenflora) around light sources A green halo around cave lights is a clear indicator of poor environmental management In a World Heritage site, it is more appropriate to reveal natural colours than to impose artificial tints through coloured lights.” 6.3 Tourism Management “Tourist caves are particularly susceptible to damage both during development, when paths and lighting are installed, and during tourist operation Decisions made during the development of the cave and during its operation for tourism should always try to ensure the maintenance of natural hydrological and ecological processes and the preservation of cave values and natural resources If significant variation to measured baseline conditions occurs after tourist visitation commences, then maintenance of World Heritage values must take precedence over tourism, with tourist traffic being modified to reduce human impact to acceptable minimal and sustainable levels, even to the extent of closing the cave A precedent for this is found at Lascaux World Heritage site in France Tourist routes through the cave should be designed to have minimum impact on delicate cave formations (speleothems) and on biological habitats within the cave Cave sediment floors should be protected by raised pathways to preserve their habitat value, fossil record and sediment history Cave entrances may be important archaeological sites, and so require special protection Tourist guides should be aware of these special features, should help protect them, and should explain to visitors the significant features of the cave that led to its inscription on the World Heritage List.” 6.4 Wild Caves “Many natural (or ‘wild’) caves are found in World Heritage properties with abundant karst Park managers need to recognize that even the most experienced, careful, and environmentally conscious cavers inadvertent damage underground, especially in caves with abundant speleothem formations and fossil deposits.” 6.5 Evaluation and Monitoring “To be reassured that management activities have been effective there needs to be a method of evaluating progress Monitoring measures change over time; and it is required to provide objective evidence of the effectiveness of the implementation of management practices …Monitoring is an essential management tool and is designed to provide reliable information on the current situation that can be compared to ‘baseline’ conditions, i.e to the situation that existed before management commenced By monitoring before, during and after developments, changes can be recorded and there is objective evidence of impacts and improvements Sensitive sites and sensitive indicators should be chosen for monitoring In karst, for example, stream-sinks and springs (input and output sites) should be used as water quality monitoring stations Apart from a range of chemical and physical measures (e.g dissolved oxygen, temperature, suspended solids, etc), presence and abundance of sensitive species with a low tolerance to pollution should be monitored For example, at the surface and in caves, endemic snails, arthropods and plants are examples of sensitive species that can be monitored.” (IUCN 2008) 13 General Recommendations with more than 70 Action Proposals The author carried out a literature survey since 2008, took part in the International Seminar “Sustainable Tourism Development Plan Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Region” in Dong Hoi, March - 5, 2009 (Knolle 2009), and subsequently worked as consultant from March - 11, 2009 in Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Region for a study on the development of the tourist use of the cave in Phong Nha Ke Bang National Park In the following sections, the resulting findings, conclusions and recommendations are given The recommendations are in direct line with the International World Heritage Karst Guidelines quoted above in Chapter and broken down to the special Vietnamese circumstances and situation in the area existing in march of 2009 7.1 General Recommendations Recommendation 1: Check-In Terminal at Phong Nha Township The general site of the present visitor center with check-in terminal in the Phong Nha township is suitable and should be kept The current information technique in the visitor center is out-dated It has to be remodified and renewed into a modern and sophisticated information and interpretation center to satisfy UNESCO standards Information on - Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park and its habitats animals - vegetation geology history and also the limestone karst caves and their inventory should be implemented, but just in form of a short pre-information – the main information should be given at the caves themselves Also information on - the UNESCO status and other UNESCO sites should be presented, as well as information on the National Park region: - the buffer zone history of the area people and cultural landscapes around the park what else can I see there? Also information on other National Parks in Vietnam: - where are they and what they protect? how can I get there? Techniques used may be classic information tables, info desks, AV shows and shops It is important to understand that the visitor excitement curve starts here and must be kept up throughout the whole tour to and through the caves All information must be presented in an interesting and touching way so that the visitors are kept by the emotion “This must be an interesting and very precious cave and area I want to learn more about that” Recommendation 2: Boat Tour to the Caves This is step of the Phong Nha caves excitement dramaturgy The general route to the caves is suitable with no alternative The boat tour guides should give more interesting information on the surrounding karst and cultural landscape: villages, life and people, new buildings like the Phong Nha - Ke Bang new headquarter etc The guides probably need additional training on interpretation techniques, especially with foreign visitors The boats are quite loud, an E-motor boat drive should be implemented generally on the long sight Also, the boats are too small for larger non-Asia visitors, the roofs should be higher Headsets could be used, this would offer the opportunity to use more languages than Vietnamese, English and French To prevent headset losses, they should be given out against refund 10 Recommendation 3: Visitor Center at the Caves This is step of the Phong Nha caves excitement dramaturgy At the boat harbour near the entrance of the Hang Phong Nha, there is a good place and potential for an additional and very modern visitor and interpretation center Contents should be the caves and their inventory, more detailed, but easy to understand information on cave geology and genesis, cave water and hydrology, cave life and ecology underground This information has to be given, as the visitors are in the park now The detailed question is raised: What can I see here and how can I organise my visit today in detail: - First: Hang Tien Son (Dry Cave), the upper and older cave generation - Second: Way down to Hang Phong Nha, the new and active river cave generation bringing the water from the Lao border through the limestone massif to the ocean On the way there: a historic temple (10th century), reflecting the old relationship of religion and caves - Third: Boat tour back, when and how? The techniques of this new visitor and interpretation center should be modern and have to bring the information in a very attractive way to the visitors To meet the demand of national and international guestes, the center should use different languages depending on the future guest structure Recommendation 4: Hang Tien Son (Dry Cave) This is step of the Phong Nha caves excitement dramaturgy The way up to the cave via the steps is suitable, but the steps are quite high for elderly and young people – they should be reconstructed Handicapped visitors may leave out this cave and immediately proceed to Hang Phong Nha There is no need for an elevator or cable cars – these constructions would harm the karst landcape and spoil the nature feeling The shops on the way up top the cave are not in line with the UNESCO World Heritage standards, they should be relocated and concentrated at the new visitor and interpretation center near the overground boat harbour The cave itself is not in a good shape There is significant damage, especially at the speleothems on the cave floor It is not too late to restore them, now is the right time before tourism figures will rise stronger The restoration of the excellent speleothems on the cave floor and the walls is no technical problem; a best practice example is the cave group of Gunung Mulu National Park UNESCO World Heritage site A guiding system and fixed routes through the cave need to be installed that are not left by visitors When I visited the cave, the guide used a loudspeaker, but this is not an appropriate technique for a decent visitor cave atmosphere Headsets with different languages could be used Modernising the lighting system using LED technology is important This technique is more appropriate to the cave atmosphere, prevents lamp flora damaging the speleothems, and on the long 11 run also cheaper in terms of energy costs Best practice examples are given e.g in http://www.cavelighting.com There should be a better and more informative interpretation within the cave by the tour guides Recommendation 5: Hang Phong Nha This is step and peak of the Phong Nha caves excitement dramaturgy Stepping down to Phong Nha Cave from Tien Son Cave should run over the old way that is currently closed This way is more suitable and leads via the historic temple The shops on the way down should be concentrated at the visitor center near the boat harbour The cave is generally well preserved at roof and walls, but the speleothems at the cave floors of the dry passages are significantly damaged It is – also in this case – not too late to restore them, now is the right time before tourism figures will rise stronger The restoration of the excellent speleothems on the cave floor and the walls is no technical problem; a best practice example are the caves of Gunung Mulu National Park UNESCO World Heritage site Like proposed for Hang Tien Son, a guiding system and fixed routes through the cave need to be installed that are not left by visitors Headsets with different languages should be used instead of loundspeakers Modernising the lighting system using LED technology is important also in this cave This technique is more appropriate to the cave atmosphere, prevents lamp flora damaging the speleothems, and on the long run also cheaper in terms of energy costs Best practice examples are given e.g in http://www.cavelighting.com Also in this cave, there should be a better and more informative interpretation within the cave by the tour guides May be the biggest problem of Hang Phong Nha is, that it has reached its maximum capacity limit with the actual guiding system The present guiding system was carefully analysed together with collegue Brian D Clark, Gunung Mulu National Park, see separate report (Clark 2009) The system is not appropriate any more for the high and still rising visitor figures The following action packages should be realised: - A: Concentration of the visitor flow on the Cung Dinh and Fairy Cave passages with the spectacular speleothems In combination with the restoration of the floor speleothems which will be a small sized “underground Pamukkale” (confer http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/485) after realisation the psychological effects of this visit will be far better than now - B: Restoration of the Doc Moc passage and development of this part of the cave as an additional interpretation/adventure tour for a higher fee - C, if visitor figures keep on rising and the capacity limit is reached again: Construction of a floating wharf at Doc Moc harbour and a walkway construction from here back to Cung Dinh and Fairy Cave just over the high water mark, so that the way in to Doc Moc harbour is by boat and the way out by feet This gives much more excellent cave inview sights and 12 will maximize the visitor capacity See also detailed plan given in the report of Brian D Clark (Clark 2009) Fig 5: Fiberglass walkway construction in the Herbstlabyrinth, the most recent German visitor cave to be opened in summer 2009 Foto: www.cavelighting.com Recommendation 6: New Caves and Adventure Tours? According to the UNESCO and international National Park policies, new public show caves should not be opened in the Phong Nha - Ke Bang area for the general visitor traffic Spreading visitors to other caves would significantly endanger the living and non-living cave inventory Additionally, this would mean building roads and parking areas, and therefore increase the pressure on the parks protected areas There is a potential to develop high quality and low volume guided tours to Hang Toi, Hang E and/or Hang Thien Duong (Paradise Cave) at much higher fees, e.g persons per group, guided by experienced persons and not more than group in the cave at the same time But we must be aware there is no sustainable tourism in wild caves – every walk in a cave destroys features, especially on the cave floor! So, I would give these tours no priority They start a new ecological problem A compromise could be the realisation of guided tours deeper into the Hang Phong Nha behind Uncle Ho’s Chamber These cave passages are – judging from the cave maps – very interesting for sportive cave tourists Before other caves are opened even for guided tours, there must be a careful inventory of the speleothems and the biology underground to monitor the human impact on the geodiversity and 13 biodiversity of these caves In Hang Thien Duong, an installation of pathways is necessary, otherways the floor formations will be damaged soon A management plan for the cave is also recommended Recommendation 7: Suoi Nuoc Mooc Spring Eco Trail and other Trails The existing Suoi Nuoc Mooc Spring Eco Trail is a good start for environmental education in the field Up to now, the information on the signs is mostly made up of tree names The trail should be enhanced by including more information on animals, the general conservation situation in the park, the karst geology etc This information should also be communicated by well trained guides in the field and not only by sign tables Especially, information on the Suoi Nuoc Mooc Karst Spring, its origin in a large cave, its involvement in the general karst situation in the Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park etc should be given, as the geology is one of the main tasks of the park listing in the World Heritage list A larger trail and hiking tour system should be developed in the park, but without signage Tours of one to three or more days into the park starting at homestays in the buffer zone and leading into interesting parts of the park help to enjoy the geodiversity and biodiversity of the park Overnight stays in the park should be simple with e.g hiking tents There is a good visitor market for trails like that, see the development of hiking tourism in Bach Ma, Sa Pa, Ba Be and Du Lat areas A hiking tour “Experience Vietnamese landscape and life in the buffer zone” should also be developed – there is good potential Recommendation 8: Park History and Regional Legends and Stories The Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park has a big potential of history, legends and stories This potential can be used to make the landscapes and their geodiversity and biodiversity more interesting for visitors In the Harz National Park, we took the Brocken and other mountains and the old stories, tales and legends of the local people on animals, witches, devils, ghosts etc to create the new USP of the “Legendary Mountain Wilderness of the Harz National Park” That works very well even on a national scale The same should be done in Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park There must be a lot of tales on the mountains, on dragons or other features there and many other stories These historical facts, legends and stories should be collected, written down also in English language and implemented in the interpretation work of the park Another very interesting topic is the military history of the Ho Chi Minh Trail There is a market potential for this Many tourists are very interested in visiting these places 14 Recommendation 9: Research According to the UNESCO Paris 1972 conference being the basis of all World Heritage work, inventory work and also subsequent research is a necessary basis for the understanding of the World Heritage Like the biological research overground, an underground biospeleological research campaign should be started to better understand the life in the Phong Nha - Ke Bang caves The information gained thereby could get – together with geological information on the park – the basis of a Vietnamese competence center in this field Recommendation 10: Marketing and Park Region There is not much information for Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park visitors at the starting or pre-arriving points, e.g trains station, bus stops, airport, resorts, guest houses etc A series of information posters disseminated in the area would help on the first run Fig 6: Marketing and media mix of Harz National Park Source: Harz National Park On the routes to the park, there should be more signs in relation to the Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park 15 All routes to the park are running through cultivated land The interaction “cultural landscape around the park” – “natural landscape within the park” should be communicated more intensively A yearly programme “What is happening in the Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park” could improve the public awareness of the park activities A yearly Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park festival or other events with local culture could help to better market the area Fig 7: Junior ranger identification tags and passport of Harz National Park Source: Harz National Park Junior Ranger work of the park should be activated In many protected areas this is a very effective way to help developing a new relationship between park and buffer zone people Fig 8: Junior Ranger activities in the Harz National Park Foto: Harz National Park 16 An advisory board could be installed representing the local stakeholders, especially the local communities, regional NGOs etc Recommendation 11: General Management and Training The Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park is at the turning point from primarily local meaning to more international effects If the park with its caves wants to manage this tourism in a UNESCOlike way, the above mentioned remarks should be implemented Additionally, a permanent and qualified training program must be active in terms of information, interpretation and languages for staff, privateers and stakeholders as well A training handbook – if not existing – should be worked out similar to the according training handbooks of other international parks All general policy should be governed by the park management according to the international National Park and UNESCO standards All private activities must subordinate under these management rules, otherwise a non-controllable situation will come up Recommendation 12: Brand Animal Up to now, the Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park just uses general UNESCO symbols as brand image elements The park should develop a brand or mascot animal that helps bringing the key messages of the park to the people This could be a bat or an other mammal of the park forests Doing this, a far more positive emotional effect could be produced working permanently for the park public relations 7.2 Priority Recommendations Problem Speleothem Damage and New Guiding System The cave itself is not in a good shape There is significant damage, especially at the speleothems on the cave floor It is not too late to restore them, now is the right time before tourism figures will rise stronger The restoration of the excellent speleothems on the cave floor and the walls is no technical problem; a best practice example is the cave group of Gunung Mulu National Park UNESCO World Heritage site A guiding system and fixed routes through the cave need to be installed that are not left by visitors When I visited the cave, the guide used a loudspeaker, but this is not an appropriate technique for a decent visitor cave atmosphere Headsets with different languages could be used Problem Cave Lighting Modernising the lighting system using LED technology is important This technique is more appropriate to the cave atmosphere, prevents lamp flora damaging the speleothems, and on the long run also cheaper in terms of energy costs Best practice examples are given e.g in http://www.cavelighting.com 17 Priorities Priority should be given to the restoration of the visitor cave Hang Phong Nha (steps A and B) and the Tien Son cave, the LED lighting system and the restoration of the historic temple and the old stairway to Hang Tien Son Parallel, the staff training has to be intensified, especially parallel to the restoration work in the caves, not only to explain this and the philosophy behind it to the visitors, but also to optimize the group management in the caves in a permanent learning-by-doing process Literature and Links Batelaan, O., Dusar, M., Masschelein, J, Vu Thanh Tam, Tran Tan Van & Nguyen Xuan Khien, Eds (2004): Trans-KARST 2004, Proceedings of the International Transdisciplinary Conference on Development and Conservation of Karst Regions, Hanoi, Vietnam, 13 - 18 2004 http://homepages.vub.ac.be/~batelaan/publications/Trans-KARST2004Proceedings.pdf BCRA (2009): http://bcra.org.uk BirdLife Indochina (2009): http://birdlifeindochina.org/source_book/pdf/4%20North%20central%20Coast/Phong%20NhaKe%20Bang.pdf Borissenko, A V & Kruskop, S V (2003): Bats of Vietnam and Adjacent Territories - An Identification Manual - Joint Russian-Vietnamese Science and Technological Tropical Centre & Zoological Museum of Moscow M V Lomonosov State University, Biodiversity of Vietnam Series, Moscow http://zmmu.msu.ru/bats/science/fauna/vietnam/vietbats.pdf Clark, B D (2009): A Conceptual Re-Development Plan for the Show Caves of Phong Nha - Khe Bang National Park in the Quang Binh Province, Vietnam - Gunung Mulu National Park, unpublished GermTec (2009): http://www.cavelighting.com Gupta, A., Ed (2005): The Physical Geography of Southeast Asia, Oxford Regional Environments, Oxford University Press Hamilton-Smith, E (2004): Evidence of Complex Speleogenesis at Phong Nha, Vietnam – In: Trans-KARST 2004, Proceedings of the International Transdisciplinary Conference on Development and Conservation of Karst Regions, Hanoi, Vietnam, 13 - 18 2004, Eds O Batelaan, M Dusar, J Masschelein, Vu Thanh Tam, Tran Tan Van, Nguyen Xuan Khien Ho Thanh Hai, Dang Ngoc Thanh, Nhuyen Kiem Son, Phan Van Mach, Le Hung Anh, Nguyen Khac Do & Duong Ngoc Cuong (2003): Initial survey of water environment and aquatic fauna in water bodies of the Phong Nha cave in Quang Binh province - Vietnam Journal of Biology 3/2003, Hanoi http://www.fistenet.gov.vn/details_e.asp?Object=2113515&news_id=15270083 IDM (2009): Phong Nha Literature http://www.idm.gov.vn/Nguon_luc/Xuat_ban/Anpham/Phongnha/T149.htm 18 ISCA (2009): http://www.i-s-c-a.com IUCN (1997): Guidelines for Cave and Karst Protection - Gland, Switzerland http://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/wcpa/wcpa_puball/wcpa_pubsubject/wcpa_cavespu b/ IUCN (2008): World Heritage Caves and Karst A Thematic Study - IUCN World Heritage Studies 2, Gland, Switzerland http://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/wcpa/wcpa_puball/wcpa_pubsubject/wcpa_cavespu b/?2079/World-Heritage-Caves-and-Karst Karstportal (2009): http://www.karstportal.org KfW (2008): http://www.kfwentwicklungsbank.de/DE_Home/Sektoren/Naturressourcen,_Tropenwald/Projektbeispiel_1.jsp Knolle, F (1998): Einflüsse von Umweltbildungseinrichtungen auf Tourismus und Naturschutz in der Nationalparkregion Harz.- In: Nachhaltige Regionalentwicklung – eine Aufgabe für Umweltbildungseinrichtungen? Schriftenr Arbeitsgem Natur- u Umweltbildung 8: 44 - 48, Temmen Knolle, F (2009): Some Ideas from the Harz National Park – Power Point Presentation, International Seminar “Sustainable Tourism Development Plan Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Region” in Dong Hoi, March - 5, 2009 (Seminar CD) Limbert, H (1992a): The caves of Phong Nha & Hang Toi, Quang Binh Province, Vietnam - The International Caver 2: 4-9 Limbert, H (1992b): Vietnam 1992 – Return to the River Caves of Quang Binh - The International Caver 5: 19-25 Limbert, H (1994): Vietnam – A Caver’s Paradise - The International Caver 12: 3-10 Limbert, H (1997): Vietnam 1997 - The International Caver 20: 11-18 Limbert, H & Limbert, D (1999): Vietnam ’99 - Cao Bang & Quang Binh - The International Caver 25: 3-12 Limbert, H (2001): Vietnam 2001 Ha Giang, Cao Bang & Quang Binh Provinces - The International Caver 2001: 60-65 Limbert, H (2003): Vietnam 2003 - The International Caver 2003: 24-37 Meijboom, M & Lanh, H T N (2002): Flora and Fauna of Phong Nha – Ke Bang and Hin Namno – A compilation - WWF Momberg, F (2003): Fact Finding Mission for KfW Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Bufferzone Development - Hanoi People’s Committee of Quang Binh Province (1999): An Investment Plan of Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park, Quang Binh Province - Summary report, Dong Hoi 19 People’s Committee of Quang Binh Province (2006): Decision: Issuance of the Tourism Development Master Plan of Quang Binh Province for the period 2006 – 2010 - Dong Hoi Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park (2009): http://www.phongnhakebang.vn Phongnhawonder (2009): http://www.phongnhawonder.com Provincial Project Management Unit of PNKB Region Project (2008): Input document for seminar on Sustainable Tourism Development Planning - Hoan Lao Speleogenesis (2009): http://www.speleogenesis.info Szentes, G (1987): Karstmorphological and Speleological Observations in Vietnam - The British Caver 101: 1-12 UNEP-WCMC (2006): Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park, Vietnam - http://www.unepwcmc.org/sites/wh/pdf/Phong%20Nha%20Ke%20Bang.pdf UNESCO (1999): http://whc.unesco.org/archive/advisory_body_evaluation/951rev.pdf Wikipedia (2009): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phong_Nha-Ke_Bang Wilken, T., Knolle, F., Steingass, F & Hagen, K (2006): Ein neues Leitbild für die Nationalparkregion Harz im Rahmen der Europäischen Charta für nachhaltigen Tourismus in Schutzgebieten.- In: Reeh, T & Ströhlein, G.: Zu Besuch in Deutschlands Mitte – Natur – Kultur Tourismus.- ZELTForum – Göttinger Schriften zu Landschaftsinterpretation und Tourismus, Bd 3:19-49 http://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/univerlag/2006/ZELT_Bd3.pdf ZGF (2009): Primatenschutz-Programm Vietnam http://www.zgf.de/?id=65&projectId=16&language=de * Author: Dr Friedhart Knolle, Harz National Park, Lindenallee 35, D-38855 Wernigerode, Phone +3943-5502-32, Fax -37, Cell +170-22 09 174, E-Mail knolle@nationalpark-harz.de, Web www.nationalpark-harz.de Goslar, April 25, 2009 20 ... conducted by a team of scientists organised by Fauna and Flora International in 1998, to assess the conservation importance and priorities of the National Park The LINC project conducted by WWF... Fairy Cave just over the high water mark, so that the way in to Doc Moc harbour is by boat and the way out by feet This gives much more excellent cave inview sights and 12 will maximize the visitor... should be enhanced by including more information on animals, the general conservation situation in the park, the karst geology etc This information should also be communicated by well trained guides