ESTABLISHMENT OF EDUCATIONAL

MANGROVE TRAIL IN UMT

A PROPOSAL

BY

NURUL ADHA BINTI UJANG

UK28913

SUPERVISOR
DR. JARINA MOHD JANI

CO SUPERVISOR
DR. JAMILAH MOHD SALIM

BACHELOR OF APPLIED SCIENCE

(BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT)

SCHOOL OF MARINE AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE

UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA TERENGGANU
2012
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

According to Tlhagale (2004), one of two reasons that result in the environmental
deterioration is the lack of awareness among populations as they engage in activities
that aggravates environmental problems. In order to avoid this problem,
environmental education is necessary to change people attitudes towards the
environment (Caro, 1994).

Educational trails (or known as nature trails, interpretive trails) are one form of non-
formal environmental education that helps in promoting awareness of environmental
issues (Environmental Education and Training Partnership, 2002). It allows people to
engage with the nature thus assist them in developing respect for the environment.
These trails mainly consist of several stations that contain interpretive materials
providing information of surroundings for people to experience (Fazio, 1973). As its
main purpose is to highlight the significance features of an area, educational trail are
usually established in area that contains educational value within it (Ham, 1992). For
example, educational trails can be set in variety of forest ecosystems that featuring the
diversity of flora and fauna within the ecosystems.

University Malaysia Terengganu (UMT) has the environmental settings that have
potential for the establishment of such trails. This university has mangrove ecosystems
that are located within the university. However, the mangrove areas are not managed

1
optimally. The mangrove areas are mostly unattended as there were no proper trails
that provide universal accessibility. Most of the significance features of the mangrove
area in UMT are unknown as a result.

Therefore, this research will be focusing on preparing a trail design for the mangrove
forest in UMT which will highlight the possible interesting mangrove features along
the trail

1.2 Significance of study

University Malaysia Terengganu is always known for its intensive research towards
the sustainability and management of mangroves. Numerous studies have been done
on ecological and organisms of mangrove and yet studies on establishing mangrove
area as a tool for environmental education is lacking. Besides, most of the researches
are conducted at major estuarine mangrove forest, for example, at Setiu district which
are located outside the campus. Due to these reasons, this research is important as it
will serve as the first proposal for the establishment of educational trail within in
UMT. The designed trail will provide a more cost-effective option for coastal
ecosystem education with an overview of the features that exist in the mangroves area.
This research has potential implementation in mangrove education thus contributing
towards increasing biodiversity awareness and instilling environmental stewardship.

1.3 Objectives of study

1. To identify suitable features to be highlighted in the educational mangrove

trail.
2. To propose an educational trail design as a tool for mangrove awareness.

2
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Educational trails as an environment educational tool

As one of environmental interpretation tools, educational trails involves in translating

the technical language of natural sciences into ideas that the general public can easily
understand (Ham, 1992). It aims to convey these scientific concepts to the people so
they can gain knowledge about the environment at the same time help in changing
their perspective towards the nature (Wamsley, 2005).

Dunmire (1994) stated that this type of education provide more entertaining and
interesting education than the usual formal education. As it set at outdoor settings,
educational trails educate people through hands - on experiences. Dorwart et al.
(2009) explained that the elements in the trails allow visitors to smell, see, and hear
the resources which could have an impact to their experiences. These could promote
to a better understanding towards the environment which could lead to a greater
appreciation.

Despite of its goal in educating and changes in behavior, this type of trail always
questioned for its effectiveness. A study done by Knapp and Poff (2001) demonstrate
this trail failure to meet its goal. It has been said that this may due to passive
approaches that mostly aiming to one type of learner such as those who can read
scientific labels (Braus & Ardoin, 2001). Espinoza (2006) shows an interpretive trail
with points that was designated to capture peoples interest able to change peoples
attitude at a small level. Basically, to increase the effectiveness of educational trails, it
must be designed in a way that makes it more attractive.

3
2.2 Educational trails design guidelines

Basically, there are not much of variety between literatures when explaining the
design guidelines and parameters for educational trail. Most of the research and
literature explained almost similar things. These are four common guidelines: length,
layout, safety and sustainability as things that need to be considered when designing a
trail.

Educational trails are usually short ranging between 0.5 km and 2 km. Although there
is a study by (Navrtil & Pcha, 2013) on the impact of the length of the route that
observed visitors preferences that exceed 15 km, it still explained that visitors prefer
shorter routes. As mentioned by Wamsley (2005), shorter trails is suitable to keep
visitors interest at the same time reduce the chances from being fatigue. However, the
shortest trail does not define a better trail. It depends on the content and stopping
points along the trail. If the length is too short, the interpretation station can be
limited. For example, Favero et al. (2005), proposed three different trails design for an
interpretive trail at the Greylock Glen, but at the end choses the longest trail to provide
full access to all the important features within that area.

There are types of trails alignment: loop, spur, and linear. Loop is the most used type
of trail when designing a trail. Steinholtz & Vachowski (2007) define loop trail as a
closed circuit trail that connecting a number of points of interest. The trail returns the
visitors to the starting point. This type of configuration has a connecting midpoint that
allows visitors to choose for different distance, routes and destinations (McPeake et
al., 2011). Another type of alignment is the linear trails. Linear trails usually account
for long distance trail. It is also done as an alternative when the area of development is
too narrow for a loop trail (McPeake et al., 2011). Favero et al (2005) describe spur
trails as trails that go off from a main trail and take visitors to the point of interest. As
spur trails have less volume, it usually designs to allow access to sensitive area.

Trail designs require safety measures. Before planning a trail, there are several
features that need to be emphasize and took as a greater caution. The water bodies,
geology features, and topography are among of these features. Dunmire (1994)
reminded to take note on the water edges as that area is the most fragile due to
seasonal change water levels especially at wetland area. However, he proposed any
planner to consider a platform to be constructed at these edges as that is the most

4
favourable sites of the visitors. But Harkins and Megalos (2003) have different
opinion. They advised to avoid any area that requires bridges and culvert. Asides of
focusing on water bodies, areas with erosive soils, steep slopes, cliffs and ledges also
should be avoided for safety and environmental reasons.

One should consider sustainability when designing a trail. As educational trail aim to
help in increasing awareness towards environment, the development of this trail
should not cause a greater damage to the ecosystem. In order to create a sustainable
educational trail design, wildlife and sensitive species sustainability need to be
prioritized. The access to specific areas of sensitive species, critical habitat patches,
and fragile or rare vegetation should be avoided or limited (McPeake et al., 2011
;Harkins & Megalos, 2003). Apart from that, sustainability design also includes
anything that can save time and cost in the future. It requires a design that can
minimize future maintenance. This involve in optimizing the existing trails. Areas that
require excessive clearing of heavy vegetation and weed controls should be avoided to
reduce any heavy future maintenance (McPeake et al., 2011;Harkins & Megalos,
2003)

2.3 Interpretation in educational trails

Educational trails approach its audience/visitors using some interpretation within the
area. It offers knowledge about some features that need to be highlighted. This is most
crucial part where decisions have to be made and methods to deliver this knowledge
need to be considered.

As stated by Ham (1992), a site that has trail potential is the one that can bring
important features and environment to those who are walking the trail. These features
include plants, animal, geologic and cultural history. However, not all of these
features can be highlighted at once; it depends on the site itself. For example, an
undisturbed mangrove area may only focus on the plants and animal features, whereas
and old growth forest can highlight all the features all at once (Ziaco et al., 2012).
Although there is a temptation to introduce all the features exists, there are couples of
factors that need to be deliberated.

5
The features should be selected according to certain kind of theme for it to be
effective. Ham (2007) stated that, it is easy for distraction to occur in visitors
attention, making it difficult to consider highlighting all the features. Thus, in order to
make a successful trail, it needs to be organized for easy processing. This shows the
importance of having some themes in this educational trail. Besides its significant in
catching visitors attention, it also could benefit in short term impacts on visitors
attitude.

The type of audience also should be considered in selecting features for the trail. The
audience should not be broad as it will make the interpretation become too general.
According to Dunmire (1994), narrowing a target audience can help in making the
interpretation more focused. If the interpretation is too broad, the trail will lose its
interest.

Basically, there is not much variety on the method of interpreting. The used of signage
and brochure are the most common ways that involves in interpreting the element
along the trails. Although there always a debate about which medium is the best,
studies only shows each method both have it pros and cons (Dunmire,1994).

Recent research of educational trail mostly focuses on the effectiveness and other
impacts of such trail into the environment. There is not much on the new innovation of
educational trail design or invention on how the elements can be interpreted. This gap
in research shows that much of the literature is still using the older interpretive
method. Even there is a more creative method for interpretation; it does not come out
as a peer reviewed articles.

2.3 Educational mangrove trail

Mangrove ecosystem is one of the unique ecosystems that exist. It consists of certain
species that has unique characterization: pneumatophores (speial roots) of Avincennia,
and the viviparous seedling of Rhizophora (Sulong & Mohd Lokman, 2010) The
function of mangroves in providing environment security (protection against tidal
wave), ecological sustainability and genetic diversity shows the importance of
mangrove which makes it valuable (Sandilayan & Thiyagesan, 2010). All of these
features make mangrove forest as a strong potential site for an educational trail.

6
However, there has not much literature about conducting and designing process in
establishing an educational trail specifically within mangrove area. Only certain
guidelines have been written on planning a trail within a wetland area (Dunmire,
1994; Steinholtz & Vachowski, 2007). These guidelines are not much difference from
the general guidelines in designing educational trail.

Examples of educational mangrove trail in Malaysia that can be seen are the Kuala
Selangor Nature Park, located in Selangor, Tanjung Piai, National Park located in
Johor and Matang Mangrove Forest Reserve located in Perak.

7
 CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Site Location

This study will be carried out at a mangrove area located within the Universiti
Malaysia Terengganu. There are two large mangrove areas in UMT, but only one area
is selected. This area is selected as it is wider than the other one. It may have more
interesting features in the selected mangrove area. It will provide more option in
selecting an interpretive theme and designing the trail.

Site location

Figure 1. Location of the study area within the red box.

8
3.1 Research Subject Matter.

All subject related to the unique features and highlight of mangroves ecosystem will
be done. Previous models or design of different mangrove boardwalk and trails will be
studied to make a selective interpretive theme. Interview with experts will be done to
help in identifying the possible features to be included in the trail (United States of
Forest Service, 1964).

3.2 Location Evaluation.

Field Reconnaissance will be done to explore the area. The subject area will be
walked over to find existing trails and natural open area. Approximate location of
other features such as water bodies, major land used type topography and geology
features for potential hazards, and the interpretive points will be marked and recorded.
Different colors of tape (vinyl flagging ribbon) will be used to mark the main trail,
control points and features (Richards, 2010). The length of the trail will be measured
using open reel fibre glass measuring tape. A compass will be used to find the bearing
of each feature.

3.3 Trail design

A design of the trail will be done on a base map and it will follow these criteria:
context, connectivity and safety. The form of trail: loop, linear, and spurs, will be
decided. The design will follow a certain theme and the features that need to be
highlighted will be decided.

9
 CHAPTER 4

EXPECTED OUTCOMES

Educational trail of mangrove area around UMT will be highlighting the mangrove
features based on an interpretive theme. This will contribute towards a development of
a full proposal for the universitys first educational trail.

10
 REFERENCES

Braus, J. & Nicole, A. 2001. Biodiversity Education and Botanical Gardens: A Perfect
Fit. In Reaching Out to the Garden Visitor: Informal Learning and Biodiversity.
Kennett Square, PA: American Association of Botanical Gardens and Arboreta.

Caro, T., Borgerhoff, M. M. & Moore, M. (2003). Effects of conservation education

on reasons to conserve biological diversity. Biological Conservation 114(1):
143-152.

Dorwart, C. E., Moore, R. L., & Leung, Y. F. 2009. Visitors' perceptions of a trail
environment and effects on experiences: A model for nature-based recreation
experiences. Leisure Sciences 32(1): 33-54.

Dunmire, K. M. 1994. The Coburg Wetland self-guided interpretive trail: a case study
in environmental interpretation planning. Master dissertation. The Geoscience
Department.

Environmental Education and Training Partnership (EETAP).2002. Educational Use

of Nature Trails.

Espinoza, G. 2006. Investigating the effectiveness of interpretive trail guides in a

university setting: attitudes and education on conservation biology. Doctoral
dissertation. DePauw University.

Favero, E., Meserve, S. & Segretto, R. 2005. Interpretive Trail Design.

Fazio, J. R.1973. Nature Trails: Guides to environmental understanding. New York

State College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.

Ham, S. H. 1992. Environmental interpretation: A practical guide for people with big
ideas and small budgets. Fulcrum Publishing.

11
Ham, S. H. 2007. Can interpretation really make a difference? Answers to four
questions from cognitive and behavioral psychology. Proceedings of
Interpreting World Heritage Conference hlm. 25-29.

Harkins, L. & Megalos, M. A. 2003. Recreational Forest Trails: Plan for Success.
North Carolina.

Knapp, D. & Poff, R. 2001. A qualitative analysis of the immediate and short-term
impact of an environmental interpretive program. Environmental Education
Research 7(1): 55-65.

McPeake, R., Schuler, J. & Bartlow, K. 2011. Nature Trail Development on Small
Acreages. University of Arkansas.

Navrtil, J. & Pcha, K. 2013. Factors influencing the imposition of a charge on the
entrance to the interpretive trails in the large protected areas. Acta Universitatis
Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis 61(4): 1041-1049.

Richards, B. 2007. Pathways to Trail Building. Tennessee.

Sandilyan S & Thiyagesan K .2010. Mangrovesthe oceanic woodland. Sci India

13:1114

Steinholtz, R. T. & Vachowski, B. 2007. Wetland Trail Design and Construction. Ed.
Washington, D.C.

Sulong, I. & Mohd Lokman, H. 2012. Mangrove of Terengganu. 2ndEd. Terengganu:

Penerbit UMT.

Tlhagale, M. P. 2004. Environmental education as a strategy towards sustainable

living for rural communities. Doctoral dissertation. University of Pretoria.

United States of Forest Service. 1964. Developing the self-guiding trail in the national
forests. Virginia.

Wamsley, M. 2005. Learning through experience: an interpretive trail design for

Nasami Farm. Master dissertation. University of Massachusetts

12
Ziaco, E., Alessandrini, A., Blasi, S., Di Filippo, A., Dennis, S. & Piovesan, G. 2012.
Communicating old-growth forest through an educational trail. Biodiversity and
Conservation 21(1): 131-144

13
 APPENDIX

Gantt Chart

Years 2012 2013

No. Activies \ Months Sept Oct Nov Dis Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Registration of Final Year

1
Project (FYP)
Proposal presentation &
2
submission
3 Sampling

4 Research Subject Matter

5 Design Trail
6 Thesis writing
Final draft thesis
7 submission & final thesis
presentation

14