Análise dos parques naturais de Canela/RS com ênfase nas atividades de educação

Authors

  • Leonardo Francisco Stahnke Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, RS
  • Vânia Medianeira Flores Costa Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, RS

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5902/223613082785

Keywords:

Parks, Canela, Environmental Education

Abstract

The present article was analyzed the environmental education activities performed in theNatural Paks of Canela/RS, including its relationship with the Sustainable Tourism. Thus, initiallywere identified the parks with relevant natural characteristics and developed a questionnaire thatwas answered through email by their administrators. The questionnaire is composed of 15questions which aimed to assess broad and restricted issues about the area of the parks, likelocation and premises, management, public, conservational aspects, social relations andenvironmental education practices. Of the 17 national parks listed, 10 completed thequestionnaire. From this study it was found that there is a much unpreparedness in relation to theadministration of the parks on their conservation and management. There is also evidence of lackof knowledge about the abiotic, biotic and socioeconomic facts of the parks, which most don’thave any management plan. There is a deep unpreparedness of the directors in relation to theconcepts of sustainable tourism and to their own environmental education practices, making useof these terms indiscriminately as green-marketing.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

BRASIL. Lei Federal nº 9.985, de 18 de julho de 2000. Dispõe sobre o Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/Leis/L9985.htm. Acesso em: 1 jul. 2010.

BRASIL. Lei Federal nº 11.428, de 22 de dezembro de 2006. Dispõe sobre a utilização e proteção da vegetação nativa do Bioma Mata Atlântica, e dá outras providências. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2004-

/2006/lei/l11428.htm. Acesso em: 18 mai. 2010.

CANELA. Lei Municipal nº 1.879, de 18 de julho de 2002. Dispõe sobre o ordenamento estrutural dos órgãos Administração Municipal de Canela e dá outras providências.

CAPRA, F. A Teia da Vida: Uma nova compreensão científica dos seres vivos. São Paulo: CULTRIX, 1996. 256p.: il.

DIAS, G. F. Pegada Ecológica e sustentabilidade humana. São Paulo: Gaia, 2002. 264 p.

_________. Educação Ambiental: princípios e práticas. 9. ed. São Paulo: Gaia, 2004. 551 p.

_________. Atividades interdisciplinares de educação ambiental: práticas inovadoras de educação ambiental. 2. ed. rev., ampl. E atual. São Paulo: Gaia, 2006. 224 p.

FONTES, E. O.; LAGE, C. S. Apropriação do espaço pelo turismo em Sauípe e seu impacto no desenvolvimento local. In: CORIOLANO, L. N. M. T.; LIMA, L. C. (Org.). Turismo Comunitário e Responsabilidade Socioamiental. Fortaleza: EDUECE, 2003. p. 92-101.

GEOPROSPEC. Plano de Manejo Parque Ecológico Vale da Ferradura. Canela, julho de 2007.

GRUMBINE, E. The University of the wilderness. Journal of Environmental Education, n. 14, p. 3-7, 1988.

HAM, S. H. Interpretacion Ambiental: Uma Guia Pratica para Gente com Grandes Ideas y Presupuestos Pequeños. Colorado, USA: North. Am. Press, 1992. 473p.

INSTITUTO BRASILEIRO DE GEOGRAFIA E ESTATÍSTICA. IBGE Cidades: Estimativa da População 2009. Disponível em:

http://www.ibge.gov.br/cidadesat/topwindow.htm?1. Acesso em: 10 jun. 2010.

MORALES, J. Classificacion de los Medios Interpretativos. In: Manual para la Capacitación del Personal de Áreas Protegidas. Moore, A Ed. National park Service, USA, 1992.

MORIN, E. Os sete saberes necessários à educação do futuro. 8. ed. São Paulo: Cortez; Brasília, DF: UNESCO, 2003. 118p.

MYERS, N.; MITTERMEIER, R. A.; MITTERMEIER, C. G.; FONSECA, G. A. B.; KENT, J. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature. n. 403, p. 853-858, 2000.

PRIMACK, R. B.; RODRIGUES, E. Biologia da Conservação. Londrina: E. Rodrigues, 2001.

QUINTAS, J. S. Introdução à Gestão Ambiental Pública. Brasília: IBAMA, 2002.

SCHWARTZ, G. M. A arte no contexto da Educação Física. Rio Claro: Motriz, v. 5, n. 1, p. 49-52, Junho de 1999.

VASCONCELLOS, J. M. de O. Educação e Interpretação Ambiental em Unidades de Conservação. Cadernos de Conservação. Ano 03. nº 04. Dezembro de 2006. Fundação O Boticário de Proteção à Natureza. Curitiba. 86 p.

VIVER SERRA RS 2005/2006. RBS Publicações. Agosto 2005. Porto Alegre. 215 p.

Downloads

Published

2011-03-31

How to Cite

Stahnke, L. F., & Costa, V. M. F. (2011). Análise dos parques naturais de Canela/RS com ênfase nas atividades de educação. Monografias Ambientais, 2(2), 320–334. https://doi.org/10.5902/223613082785

Issue

REMOA, V. 2, N. 2, MAR., 2011

Section

ARTICLES

License

Declaration

Available here

Ethical guidelines for journal publication

The REMOA is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles. 
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.

In particular, 

Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.

Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.