AACL Bioflux, 2021, Volume 14, Issue 5.
http://www.bioflux.com.ro/aacl
3145
Suitability index and carrying capacity of
mangrove tourism on Jeflio Island, Indonesia
1
Dwi I. W. Yanti,
2
Carolus P. Paruntu,
2
Rene C. Kepel,
2
Stephanus V.
Mandagi,
1
Roger R. Tabalessy,
1
Melisa C. Masengi
1
Faculty of Agriculture, Papua Christian University, Sorong, West Papua, Indonesia;
2
Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Science, Sam Ratulangi University, Manado, North
Sulawesi, Indonesia. Corresponding author: Dwi I.W. Yanti,
[email protected]
Abstract. Mangroves are very abundant on Jeflio Island, West Papua. Thus, it has the potential to be
developed into a mangrove ecotourism area. This study aims to determine the suitability index and
carrying capacity of the Jeflio mangrove ecotourism area. This study uses the Line Transect Plot Method.
Sampling of mangrove ecosystem with a plot sampling approach was done in a line drawn across the
ecosystem areas. Data includes species density, mangrove thickness, tides, and associated biota collected
from four stations. Our results found that the mangrove densities of all stations (stations 1 to 4) have a
score of 3. The mangrove thickness of stations 1, 2 and 4 has a score of 1, while station 3 has a score of
2. The suitability of mangrove tourism for the category of mangrove species is at a score of 2, as 3 to 5
mangrove species were found. The Mean Sea Level (MSL) is 3.9 m, the Highest High Water Level (HHWL)
is 5.3 m, and the Lowest Low Water Level (LLWL) is 2.7 m. The tidal category has a score of 2, which is
3.9 m. The associated biota objects found include mollusks, fish, crustaceans, birds, and mammals. The
suitability indexes of mangrove tourism were 64 % for Station 1, 62 % for Station 2, 74% for Station 3,
and 62 % for Station 4. Therefore, the suitability indexes of all stations were categorized ‘Appropriate’ for
mangrove tourism and the carrying capacity of the mangrove tourism area was found to be 52
visitors/day. Based on this data, Jeflio mangrove tourism can accommodate 52 visitors/day with an
operational time of 8 working hours/day.
Key Words: Mangrove density, thickness, tides, associated biota, visitors
Introduction. Mangrove forest vegetation in Indonesia has a high species diversity, with
a recorded number of 202 species, consisting of 89 tree species, five palm species, 14
liana species, 44 epiphytic species, and 1 cycad. However, there are only approximately
47 species of mangrove forest-specific plants. One dominant major plant group belongs
to four families: Rhizophoraceae (Rhizophora, Bruguiera, Ceriops),
Sonneratiaceae (Sonneratia), Avicenniaceae (Avicenia) and Meliaceae (Xylocarpus)
(Pieter et al., 2015). Mangroves can grow well in coastal areas with large river mouths
and deltas, where the water flow contains a lot of mud. It is difficult for mangroves to
grow and develop in steep coastal areas and with big waves with strong tidal
currents. This is because it is difficult to form silt in this environment, which is a needed
substrate for mangrove growth (Puspitaningsih, 2012).
Mangroves have significant roles in coastal areas. The physical role of mangrove
vegetation is as a wave absorber and to prevent abrasion. With a stem diameter of more
than 15 cm, a thickness of more than 200 meters, and a density of 30 trees per 100
meters, mangroves can reduce the energy of tsunami waves (Henri & Ardiawati,
2020). Mangroves, bioecologically, have unique aspects compared to other tropical
ecosystems, so they are an attraction factor for tourists. Mangrove ecotourism can be
developed as a form of educational tourism that focuses on human behavior in protecting
the environment in a sustainable manner (Henri & Ardiawati, 2020).
The concept of ecotourism considers the carrying capacity of tourist areas
(Yulianda & Agus, 2019). Ecotourism utilizes and preserves the conditions of natural
resources and community culture (Yulianda, 2007). Ecotourism is a form of tourism that
AACL Bioflux, 2021, Volume 14, Issue 5.
http://www.bioflux.com.ro/aacl
3146
relies more on the character of natural resources than other resources. The resources for
ecotourism consist of natural resources and human resources that can be integrated for
tourism utilization. Aquatic ecotourism development requires appropriate resources and a
coastal environment that follows the required criteria. The suitability of coastal and
marine resources is aimed at meeting the required characteristics of tourism
resources. Each tourism activity has its own specific resources and environmental
requirements according to the tourism object to be developed (Yulianda, 2019).
The utilization of natural resources and marine services located in the Jeflio
island area is managed directly by the local traditional community. Currently, Jeflio Island
is designated as one of the destinations for marine tourism in Sorong Regency. The
current tourist attraction developed is mangrove tracking tourism. This area ca n be
visited by land by using two-wheeled or four-wheeled vehicles . The distance of the
tourism area is about 10 km from the regency’s capital. In a previous study, Marasabessy
(2021) analyzed the suitability and model of ecotourism activities that were likely to be
applied to Jeflio Island, using satellite image maps Landsat 8, SRTM map, and altimetry
satellite NASATOPEX/Poseidon, Jason 1/Envisat, with the purpose to observe if the
conformity index mangrove ecotourism at Jeflio Island was in the appropriate category.
The model of mangrov e ecotourism activities on Jeflio Island was adjusted with the
geographical location and distribution of natural resources, namely tracking mangroves
and boating. The mangrove ecosystem at Jeflio Island has the potential to be developed
as a mangrove ecotourism area. Still, few studies were conducted to determine whether
the island had tourism potential. The present study aimed to fill in this gap and
determine the suitability and carrying capacity of the Jeflio mangrove tourism area to
support ecotourism development.
Material and Method
Research Site. This study was conducted in Jeflio Island, Sorong Regency, West Papua
Province from March to May 2021 (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Research Site (Jeflio Island)
(Source: Based on Google Earth Image)
AACL Bioflux, 2021, Volume 14, Issue 5.
http://www.bioflux.com.ro/aacl
3147
This study uses the Line Transect Plot Method. Sampling of mangrove ecosystem used
plot sampling approach (Decree of Indonesian Ministry of Environment No. 201 of 2004).
The measurement of parameters included the following steps. 1) The research location
was chosen based on the distribution of mangroves on Jeflio Island. The observation
points are called stations; 2) Station 1 (ST-1) is for existing mangrove tourism (the total
area is 4.04 m
2
), station 2 (ST-2) is for mangrove areas near residential areas (the total
area is 7.45 m
2
), stations 3 (ST-3) is on the right of the main road to Jeflio Island (the
total area is 8.99 m
2
) and station 4 (ST-4) is on the left of the main road to Jeflio Island
(the total area is 4.96 m
2
); 3) at each observation station, a line transect was
determined from the sea to the land (perpendicular to the coastline) along with the
mangrove forest zones; 4) along the line transect, 3 plots were placed randomly in the
form of squares with a size of 10 x 10 meters; 5) in each specified sample plot, each type
of mangrove plant was identified, and then the number of each type and the size of the
trunk circle of each mangrove tree at breast height (more than 4-cm tree diameter with a
height of more than 1 m).
Mangrove Density . Population Density is the number of individuals in the station. The
following formula is used to determine population density (Legendre & Legendre 2012):
Mangrove Thickness . Mangrove thickness was measured based on the length of each
station from the coastal toward the sea line (Sadik et al., 2017).
Sea Tides. For tides calculation, the Admiralty method developed by Doodson was
applied. Observations have produced the main tidal constants, namely M2, S2, N2, K2,
K1, P1, O1, M4, and MS4, using 15 or 29 days of data. The tidal constants were used to
calculate the position of the average water level and the position of the lowest water
level. The type of tide is determined by the frequency of high and low tides every
day. Quantitatively, the tidal type of waters can be determined by comparing the
amplitudes of the main single tidal elements and the main double tidal elements by using
the Formzahl number, which has the same equation (Suhaemi et al., 2018).
Formzahl Index (F)
Where :
F = Formzhal number
A = Amplitude
(K1), (O1)= single major daily tidal constant
(M2), (S2)= double main daily tidal constant
The following are the tidal classification:
F< 0.25 = Semi Diurnal
0.25<F<1.5 = Semi-Diurnal Sloping Mix
1.5<F<3.0 = Diurnal Slope Mix
F<F 3.0 = Diurnal
Biota Objects. Biota objects are observed directly on Jelfio Island by taking
pictures/photos of biotas samples which were then identified. Mangrove-related animals
were collected and identified using the Carpenter and Niem’s (1998, 2001) FAO Species
Identification Guide For Fishery Purposes.
AACL Bioflux, 2021, Volume 14, Issue 5.
http://www.bioflux.com.ro/aacl
3148
Data Analysis. The parameters used to determine resource suitability include five
parameters: density, thickness, species, tides, and biota that live in the mangrove
ecosystem. Each parameter is assessed separately against the four categories given. The
determination of the suitability of mangrove tourism is based on the multiplication
between the score and the weight of each parameter. The Tourism Suitability Index
(IKW) is calculated from the suitability value based on the total of all parameters (Table
1).
Determination of the Tourism Suitability Index was done by using the following formula
(Yulianda, 2007):
IKW = Tourism Suitability Index
Ni = Parameter Value to i (Weight x Score)
Nmax = Maximum value of a tourism category.
Table 1
Parameters of Suitability for Mangrove Ecotourism
No. Parameters Weight Category Score
1.
Mangrove
Thickness (m)
5
>500 3
>200-500 2
50-200 1
<50 0
2.
Mangrove
density (100 m
2
)
3
>15-25 3
>10-15:>25 2
10-15 1
<5 0
3.
Mangrove
Species
3
>5 3
3-5 2
1-2 1
0 0
4. Tides (m) 1
0-1 3
>1-2 2
>2-5 1
>5 0
5. Biota Objects 1
Fish, shrimp, crabs, mollusks,
reptiles, birds and unique wildlife /
endemic / endangered animal
3
Fish, shrimp, crab, mollusk 2
Fish, mollusk 1
One of the organisms 0
Source: adapted after Yulianda (2007)
Maximum value (Nmax) = 39
S1 (Very Suitable), if the Tourism Suitability Index (IKW) is 83 – 100%
S2 (Appropriate), if the Tourism Suitability Index (IKW) is 50 - < 83%
N (Not suitable), if the Tourism Suitability Index (IKW) is < 50%.
Regional Carrying Capacity . The area's carrying capacity was calculated to determine
the maximum number of visitors who can physically be accommodated in the available
area at a certain time without causing disturbance to nature and humans. The formula
used in this analysis is shown below and is based on (Yulianda, 2014):
AACL Bioflux, 2021, Volume 14, Issue 5.
http://www.bioflux.com.ro/aacl
3149
Where:
DDK : Regional Carrying Capacity (Person)
K : The ecological potential of visitors per unit area (person)
Lp : Total area (m) that can be utilized
Lt : Unit area for a certain category of mangrove tourism (m
2
or m)
Wt : Time allotted for activities in one day (hours)
Wp : Time spent by visitors for each activity (hours)
The ecological potential of visitors is determined by the conditions of the resources and
types of activities developed. The area used by visitors must pay attention to the ability
of nature to tolerate visitor activity so that authenticity is maintained (Table 2).
Table 2
Visitor Ecological potential (K), area of activity (Lt), time spent by visitors (Wp) and
time allotted for activities in one day (Wt)
No Type of
Activity
K
(∑Visitor
s)
Unit Area
(Lt)
Description Time
spent by
visitors
(Wp)
Time allotted
for activities
in one day
(Wt)
1. Dive 2 2000 m
2
Every 2 people in
200 m x 10 m
2 8
2.
Snorkeling 1 500 m
2
Every 1 person in
100 m x 5 m
3 6
3.
Seagrass
Tourism
1 250 m
2
Every 1 person in 50
m x 50 m
2 4
4.
Mangrove
Tourism
1 50 m
Track length, every 1
person along 50 m
2 8
5.
Recreational
Beach
1 50 m
1 person per 50 m
long beach
3 6
6.
Sports Tour 1 50 m
1 person per 50 m
long beach
2 4
Source : Yulianda (2007)
Results and Discussion
Mangrove Density . The total mangrove density value at station 1 was 1,600 ind ha
-1
(16 ind 100 m-
2
), at station 2 was 1,966 ind ha
-1
(19.66 ind 100m-
2
), at station 3 was
2,000 ind ha
-1
(20 ind 100 m-
2
) and at station 4 was 1,966 ind ha
-1
(19.66 ind 100 m-
2
). The density of mangrove vegetation on Jeflio Island at station 1, station 2, station 3
and station 4 were in the dense criteria, namely ≥ 1,500 ind ha-1 (Yanti et al., 2021).
According to the tourism suitability parameters in Table 1, the suitability of areas for
mangrove tourism for the category of mangrove density at Station 1, Station 2, Station 3
and Station 4 has a score of 3. Score 3 means that the mangrove density is between 15-
25 ind 100 m
-2
(Table 3). To find out the area’s suitability for mangrove ecotourism, the
value of each category is entered in the table of parameter analysis of the suitability of
mangrove tourism (Table 8).
AACL Bioflux, 2021, Volume 14, Issue 5.
http://www.bioflux.com.ro/aacl
3150
Table 3
Mangrove Density
Station Species Density (ind/100 m
2
) Criteria*
1
Avicennia alba 1.00
Rhizophora mucronate 6.34
Bruguiera gymnorrhiza 3.33
Xylocarpus granatum 5.33
Total 16.00 Score 3
2
Avicennia alba 1.66
Rhizophora mucronate 6.33
Bruguiera gymnorrhiza 5.67
Xylocarpus granatum 6.00
Total 19.66 Score 3
3
Avicennia alba 0
Rhizophora mucronate 9.00
Bruguiera gymnorrhiza 9.67
Xylocarpus granatum 1.33
Total 20.00 Score 3
4
Avicennia alba 0.00
Rhizophora mucronate 9.00
Bruguiera gymnorrhiza 10.00
Xylocarpus granatum 0.66
Total 19.66
Score 3
* Criteria according Yulianda (2007) (Table 1)
Mangrove thickness . Mangrove thickness was measured based on the length of the roll
meter stretch at each station perpendicularly from the land boundary to the sea
boundary (Table 4). Based on the results of the study, the highest mangrove thickness
was at Station 3 with a thickness of 274.5 m and the lowest mangrove thickness was at
Station 4, which was 131.8 m. Mangrove density correlates with mangrove thickness,
when mangrove density is "rare" then the mangrove thickness is smal l. Conversely, if the
mangrove density is "very dense" then t he mangrove thickness will be large
(Marasabessy, 2021). According to the tourism suitability parameters in Table 1, the
suitability of mangrove tourism for the mangrove thickness category for Station 1 has a
score of 1, Station 2 has a score of 1, Station 3 has a score of 2 and S tation 4 has a
score of 1. A score of 2 means that the thickness of the mangrove is more than 200 m,
while a score of 1 means that the thickness of the mangrove is in the range of 50-200 m.
To find out the suitability of the area for mangrove ecotourism, t he value of each
category is entered into the table of parameter analysis of the suitability of mangrove
tourism (Table 8).
Table 4
Mangrove Thickness
No. Location Thickness (m) Criteria*
1. Station 1 119.4 Score 1
2. Station 2 128.3 Score 1
3. Station 3 274.5 Score 2
4. Station 4 131.8 Score 1
* Criteria according Yulianda (2007)(Table 1)
Mangrove type . The species of mangroves were Avicenia alba, Rhizopora mucronata,
Bruguiera gymnorrhiza, and Xylocarpus granatum (Table 5). Four species were found at
Station 1 and Station 2, and three were found at Station 3 and Station 4. Previous
research found four types of mangroves, namely Rhizophora apiculata, Rhizophora
AACL Bioflux, 2021, Volume 14, Issue 5.
http://www.bioflux.com.ro/aacl
3151
stylosa, Avicennia alba, and Avicennia lanata (Marasabessy et al., 2021). The discrepancy
in species found were due to differences in area of observation stations and the numb er
of transects and plots used. According to the tourism suitability parameters in Table 1,
the suitability index of mangrove tourism for the category of mangrove species has the
score of 2, as 3-5 mangrove species were found (Yulianda , 2007). To determine the
suitability of mangrove ecotourism, the value of each category is entered in the table of
parameter analysis of the suitability of mangrove tourism (Table 8).
Table 5
Types of Mangroves
Station Species Criteria*
1
Avicennia alba
Rhizophora mucronate a
Bruguiera gymnorrhiza
Xylocarpus granatum
Total no of mangrove types 4
Score 2
2
Avicennia alba
Rhizophora mucronate a
Bruguiera gymnorrhiza
Xylocarpus granatum
Total no of mangrove types 4
Score 2
3
Rhizophora mucronate
Bruguiera gymnorrhiza
Xylocarpus granatum
Total no of mangrove types 3
Score 2
4
Rhizophora mucronate
Bruguiera gymnorrhiza
Xylocarpus granatum
Total no of mangrove types 3
Score 2
* Criteria according Yulianda (2007)(Table 1)
Sea tides. Tidal data was taken based on secondary da ta from the Hydrographic and
Oceanographic Center, Indonesian Navy for March 2021. Based on the calculation of the
Formzahl number for March 2021, which was 0.89. Tidal Harmonic Analysis was
conducted using the Admiralty method. The value of the amplitude and phase of the main
tidal components were M2, S2, K1, 01, MS4, M4, K2, and P1 from the measurement
results for 29 days of observation, as shown in Table 6.
Table 6
Value the amplitude and phase of the main tidal components M2, S2, K1, 01, MS4, M4,
K2 and P1 from the measurement results for 29 days of observation
So M2 S2 N2 K2 K1 O1 P1 M4 MS4
A cm 396.6 17.0 33.7 8.4 7.8 21.4 23.6 7.0 7.0 3.9
G 304.4 185.4 34.9 185.4 202.2 208.7 202.2 276.3 173.3
Legend:
A: Amplitude; g (0): Deceleration phase; So: Average sea level (Mean Sea levels); M2: Harmonic constant by
month; S2: Harmonic constant by sun; N2: Harmonic constant by Moon Distance change ; K2: Harmonic
constant by Sun Distance change ; O1: Harmonic constant by Moon declination; P1: Harmonic constant by
declination of the sun; K1: Harmonic constant by declination of the Moon and Sun ; MS4: Constants of
interaction harmonics between M2 and S2 ; M4: Double harmonic constant M2.
AACL Bioflux, 2021, Volume 14, Issue 5.
http://www.bioflux.com.ro/aacl
3152
Therefore, it can be seen that the tidal type in Sorong waters is a mix tide prevailing
semidiurnal. Mixed type double slope is a tide that occurs twice a day and two low tides
and the shape of the first tidal wave is not the same as the second tide (asymmetrical)
with a semi-diurnal inclined shape (Fadilah, 2014). The mix tide prevailing semidiurnal is
found on the southern coast of Java and eastern Indonesia (Wyrtki, 1961). Forecast tidal
charts can be seen in Figure 2. The Mean Sea Level (MSL) 3.9 m, the Highest High
Water Level (HHWL) 5.3 m, and the Lowest Low Water Level (LLWL) 2.7 m (Figure
2). According to the tourism suitability parameters in Table 1, the suitability of mangrove
tourism for the tidal category has a score of 2, which is more than 2 m. To find out the
suitability of mangrove ecotourism, the value of each category is entered in the table of
parameter analysis of the suitability of mangrove tourism (Table 8).
Figure 2. Tides Observation Chart
(Source : authors’ elaboration)
Biota object. Table 7 shows biota objects found at the stations. Mollusks, Fish,
Crustaceans, birds, and mammals were found. The mollusks found included Ellobium
aurimisdae, Neritina violacea, Telescopium telescopium, Cymatium pileare, Terebralia
sulcate, and Polymesoda expans a. The fish found included chopstick fish ( Toxotes
sp.) and glodok fish (Peroipthalmus sp). The crustaceans found were mangrove crabs
(Scylla sp.) and rebon shrimp (Acetes sp.). Bats (Macroglossus minimus), were also
found, along with lizards and birds.
Table 7
Associated Biota
No. Mangrove Biota Family Species Discovery of each Station
Station
1
Station
2
Station
3
Station
4
1.
Mollusk
Ellobidae Ellobium aurimisdae V V - V
2. Neritidae Neritina violacea V V - -
3. Potamididae Telescopium telescopium V V V V
4. Rannelidae Cymatium pileare V V - -
5. Potamididae Terebralia sulcate V - - -
6. Cyrenidae Polymesoda expansion V - V V
7.
Fish
Toxotidae Toxotes sp. V V - -
8. Gobiidae Peroipthalmus sp V - - -
8. Crustaceans Arthropods Scylla sp. V V - -
Acetes sp. V V - -
10 . Mammals (Bats) Pteropodidae Macroglossus minimus V - - -
11 . Bird Passeridae Passer montanus V V V V
1 2 . Reptile Scincidae Emoia atrocostata V V V V
Score 3 2 2 2
AACL Bioflux, 2021, Volume 14, Issue 5.
http://www.bioflux.com.ro/aacl
3153
The picture of the associated biota in the mangrove ecosystem can be seen in Figure 3.
The object of mangrove ecosystem biota can be observed directly and can satisfy visitors
and add value for the mangrove ecotourism area (Nelly et al., 2020). To determine the
suitability of mangrove ecotourism, the value of each category is entered in the table of
parameter analysis of the suitability of mangrove tourism (Table 8).
Figure 3. The associated biota in the mangrove ecosystem
(Source: Mollusk, Crustacean, Glodok Fish, Bird based on personal documentation), bat
based on Pixel-mixer/Pixabay, reptile based on
https://www.ecologyasia.com/verts/lizards/mangrove_skink.htm, Toxotes Sp based on
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Toxotes)
Analysis of the suitability of mangrove tourism . Values for all parameters of each
station are then entered in the table for analysis of the area for the suitability of
mangrove tourism (Table 8). This study revealed that the suit ability index
of mangrove tourism on Jelfio Island are as follows: 64 % at Station 1, 62 % at station 2,
74% at station 3 and 62 % at station 4. All of the stations are categorized as
"Appropriate" for mangrove tourism. Determination of the area for a tourist attraction
should be based on an assessment of certain parameters to ensure that the area is
worthy of becoming a sustainable tourist attraction (Mas’ud, 2020).
Mollusk Crustaceans
Fish
Bat Reptile Bird
AACL Bioflux, 2021, Volume 14, Issue 5.
http://www.bioflux.com.ro/aacl
3154
Table 8
Analysis of Parameters Mangrove Tourism Suitability
N
o.
Parameter
We
igh
t
Category
(Station
1)
Sco
re
Category
(Station 2)
Sco
re
Category
(Staion 3)
Sco
re
Category
(Station
4)
Sco
re
1.
Mangrove
Thickness
(m)
5 50-200
1 50-200 1 >200-500 2 50-200 1
2.
Mangrove
Density
(100 m2)
3 > 10-15
3 > 10-15 3 > 10-15 3 > 10-15 3
3.
Mangrove
type
3 3 - 5
2 3 – 5 2 3 – 5 2 3 - 5 2
4. Tides (m) 1 > 1-2 2 > 1-2 2 > 1-2 2 > 1-2 2
5.
Biota
object
1
fish,
shrimp,
crab,
mollusk,
birds,
bat
3
fish,
mollusks, shri
mps, reptile,
birds
2
fish,
mollusks, rept
ile, bird
2
fish,
mollusks,
reptile,
birds
2
Total Score 25 24 29 24
Tourism Suitability Index (IKW) of
Mangrove Tourism
64
%
62
%
74
%
62
%
Carrying capacity. The carrying capacity of a tourist area is an analysis used
to determine the number of visitors that can be accommodated in a tourist area . The
Jeflio mangrove tourism area has a tracking length in the ecotourism area of 648.5 m
based on calculations using the polyline Arcgi. The DDK mangrove tour is 52
visitors / day (Table 9). Based on this data, it was calculated that the Jeflio mangrove
tourism could accommodate 52 visitors/day with an operational time of 8 working hours
per day. This amount is used as a reference in limiting the number of visitors. This is
done to reduce the negative impact of ecotourism areas (Sukuryadi et al., 2020).
Table 9
Carrying Capacity of the Jeflio Mangrove Tourism Area
Regional Carrying Capacity Parameters Data obtained Carrying Capacity
Ecological potential of visitors per unit area
(person)
1
52 people/day
The area (m) that can be tracking mangrove
(Tracking mangrove is the path is in the form of
a wooden platform located in the middle of a
mangrove forest)
648.5 m
Area unit for a certain category (m
2
or m) 50 m
Time allotted for activities in one day (hours) 8 hours
Time spent by visitors on each activity (hours) 2 hours
Conclusion. Analysis of the suitability of the area for mangrove tourism at station 1 was
64 %, station 2 was 62 %, station 3 was 74% and station 4 was 62 %, which showed
that all stations were within the appropriate criteria. Based on the research, stations 1, 2,
3, and 4 are within the "Appropriate" criteria for mangrove tourism. The carrying capacity
of the Mangrove Tourism Area is also 52 visitors/day. Based on this data, Jeflio mangrove
tourism can accommodate 52 visitors/day with an operational time of 8 working
hours/day.
Conflict of Interest. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
AACL Bioflux, 2021, Volume 14, Issue 5.
http://www.bioflux.com.ro/aacl
3155
References
Carpenter K. E., Niem V. H., 2001 FAO Species Identification Guide for Fishery Purposes:
The Living Marine Resources of the Western Central Pacific. Vol 6. Bony Fishes Part 4
(Labridae to Latimeriidae), estuarine crocodiles, sea turtles, sea snakes, and marine
mammals. FAO, Rome. 3381 -4218.
Carpenter K. E., Niem V. H., 1998 FAO species identification guide for fishery purposes.
The living marine resources of the Western Central Pacific. Volume 2. Cephalopods,
crustaceans, holothurians and sharks. Rome, FAO. 687-1396.
Fadilah, Suripin, Sasongko D. P., 2014 Determining the Types of Tides and Water Level
Planned for Marine Waters in Cent ral Bengkulu Regency Using the Admiralty
Method. Maspari 6:1–12.
Henri H., Ardiawati S., 2020 Ecotourism Development of Munjang Mangrove Forest and
Conservation Efforts Based on Community Approach. BIOLINK (Journal of Health
Industry Environmental Biology) 7:106–
116. https://doi.org/10.31289/biolink.v7i1.2952
Marasabessy, Ilham, Maepauw N. J. B. M., 2021 Determination of Compatibility Index
And Model Of Mangrove Tourism Activity In Jeflio Island, Mayamuk District, Sorong
Regency. Enggano 6(1):80–98 [ In Indonesian]
Mas'ud R. M., Yulianda F., Yulianto G., 2020 Compatibility and Supporting Capacity of
Mangrove Ecosystems for Eco-Tourism Development in Pannikiang
Island, Barru Regency, South Sulawesi. J. Tropical Marine Science and
Technology 12:673–686.
Nelly C., Rasnovi S., Zumaidar Z., 2020 Mangrove Ecosystem Suitability for Ecotourism
Management Rec ommendation in Iboih Village - Sabang. E3S Web of
Conferences, 151:1-6. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/2015101060
Pieter O., Matan M., Marsono D., 2015 Diversity and Patterns of Mangrove Forest
Community in Andai, Manokwari Reg ency. Jurnal Biologi Ekologi 3:36–53 [In
Indonesian].
Puspitaningsih, 2012. Knowing Marine and Coastal Ecosystems. Science library. Bogor.
84 pp [In Indonesian].
Sadik M., Muhiddin A. H., Ukkas M., 2017 The Suitability of Mangrove Ecotourism Judging
from the Biogeophysical Aspect of the Gonda Beach Area in Laliko Village,
Campalagian District, Polewali Mandar Regency. Journal of Marine Science
SPERMONDE 3:25–33. https://doi.org/10.20956/jiks.v3i2.3004
Suhaemi, Raharjo S., Marhan, 2018 Determination of the Type of Tidal Waters in the
Manokwari Shipping Line by using the Admiralty Method. Indopacific Journal of
Aquatic Resources 2:57–64.
Sukuryadi, Harahab N., Primyastanto M., Semedi B., 2020 Analysis of suitability and
carrying capacity of mangrove ecosystem for ecotourism in Sheet Vill age, West
Lombok District, Indonesia. Biodiversity 21 :596-
604. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d210222.
Yanti D. I. W., Paruntu C. P., Kepel R. C., Mandagi S. V., Tabalessy R. R., 2021
Community structure of mangrove in Jeflio Island, Sorong Regency, West Papua,
Indonesi. AACL Bioflux 14:2181–2191.
Yulianda F., 2007 Marine Ecotourism as an Alternative Utilization of Conservation-Based
Coastal Resources (Presented at the Science Semi nar on February 21, 2007).
Department of Aquatic Resources Management. Bogor Agricultural Institute. Bogor
[In Indonesian].
Yulianda F., Wardiatno Y., Nurjaya I. V., Herison A., 2014 Coastal Conservation Strategy
using Mangrove Ecology System Approach. Asian Journal of Scientific Research
7:513-524.
Yulianda F., 2019 Aquatic Ecotourism. IPB Press. Bogor. 87 pp [In Indonesian].
Wyrtki K., 1961 Physical oceanography of Southeast Asian waters. Dragon
reports. University of California. La Lolla, 226 pp.
*** 2004 Ministerial Decree of Environment No. 201 of Year 2004 [In Indonesian].
AACL Bioflux, 2021, Volume 14, Issue 5.
http://www.bioflux.com.ro/aacl
3156
Received: 26 August 2021. Accepted: 28 October 2021. Published online: 30 October 2021.
Authors:
Dwi I. W. Yanti, Papua Christian University, Faculty of Agriculture, Indonesia, West Papua, Sorong 98416, Jln.
F. Kalasuat Malanu, e-mail: indahwidyayanti83@gma il.com
Carolus Paulus Paruntu, Sam Ratulangi University, Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Science Unsrat, Indonesia,
North Sulawesi, Manado 95115, Jln. Kampus Unsrat Bahu, e-mail: [email protected]
Rene Charles Kepel, Sam Ratulangi University, Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Science Unsrat, Indonesia, North
Sulawesi, Manado 95115, Jln. Kampus Unsrat Bahu, e -mail: [email protected]
Stephanus Vianny Mandagi, Sam Ratulangi University, Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Science Unsrat,
Indonesia, North Sulawesi, Manado 95115, Jln. Kampus Unsrat B ahu, e-mail: [email protected]
Roger R. Tabalessy, Papua Christian University, Faculty of Agriculture, Indonesia, West Papua, Sorong 98416,
Jln. F. Kalasuat Malanu, e-mail: [email protected]
Melisa C. Masengi, Papua Christian University, Faculty of Agriculture, Indonesia, West Papua, Sorong 98416,
Jln. F. Kalasuat Malanu, e-mail: [email protected]
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source
are credited.
How to cite this article:
Yanti D. I. W., Paruntu C. P., Kepel R. C., Mandagi S. V. Tabalessy R. R., Masengi M. C., 2021 Suitability Index
and Carrying Capacity of Mangrove Tourism on Jeflio Island, Indonesia. AACL Bioflux 14(5):3145-3156.