Sustainable Tourism II 341

Estimation of the tourist carrying capacity of

the Natural Reserve Mombacho Volcano,
Granada, and the Natural Reserve
Datanlí-El Diablo, Jinotega, Nicaragua
M. Somarriba-Chang, M. Garnier & V. Laguna
Universidad Nacional Agraria, Nicaragua

Abstract
The study was undertaken in the Natural Reserve Mombacho Volcano (NRMV),
Granada and the Natural Reserve Cerro Datanlí-El Diablo (NRDE), Jinotega.
The main objectives of this research were to analyze the current tourism
management in the sites, to determine the visitor carrying capacity for the
walking trails and give recommendations for managing visitors in the sites.
The visitor carrying capacity (VCC) works as a potential strategy to reduce
recreational impacts in Natural Protected Areas [5]. Visitor carrying capacity is
considered at three consecutive levels: physical carrying capacity (PCC), real
carrying capacity (RCC) and effective carrying capacity (ECC) [3]. The PCC
was estimated based on the dimension of each trail, the space needed for each
visitor and the time required to walk it. The RCC involves correction factors
such as distance between groups, soil erodability, difficulty to walk, and others.
The ECC includes the Management Capacity (MC), which is given by the
existence of appropriate personnel, equipment and facilities in the protected area
[3]. The MC of the NRMV estimated was 74.24%. If the MC increases to 80%
because of improvement in any of its components; the ECC would increase in
the same proportion. According to Fundación Cocibolca, the organization
managing the NRVM, scholar visitors show a different behaviour than
ecotourism visitors. This rationale was considered in the calculation of the
correction factors. This gave a much lower ECC for students. Therefore the
maximum number of visits registered exceed the ECC calculated for students but
not for ecotourists. If the trend of visits continues to increase in the following
years, it will be necessary to restrict the number of visits during the top periods.
On the other site, the peak El Gobiado, North sector of the NRDE has 3
defined walking trails: El Congo, El León and Campanero. The MC was 62.34%
of the optimum. The scenario of MC at 80% would increase the ECC even more
than in the NRMV case. It is suggested that this research could be used by the
Ecotourism Project, funded by PNUD and further developed by PAGJINO
applying the recommendations for visitor management on the walking trails,
fauna species indicators for impact monitoring in the site, and training local
tourist guides for visitor management.
Keywords: protected areas, ecotourism, visitor carrying capacity, physical
carrying capacity, management capacity, real carrying capacity, effective
carrying capacity, MARENA, SINAP, Fundación Cocibolca and PAGJINO.

WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol 97, © 2006 WIT Press
www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line)
doi:10.2495/ST060321
342 Sustainable Tourism II

1 Introduction
Protected areas in Nicaragua embrace 18% of the national territory [7]. The
management plans approved by SINAP in MARENA contemplate the possibility
of low impact tourism activities in the protected areas, such as Ecotourism. This
is considered a type of alternative tourism, characterized as an experience to visit
natural areas in order to understand its natural history and local culture, with the
support of environmental interpretation and education [1].
The main forms of ecotourism activities developed in Nicaragua are: agro
tourism, research or scientific tourism; and nature tourism. The activities
happening on these modalities consist of visits to terrestrial landscapes and
various types of ecosystems; and visits to volcanic, marine, coastal and insular
landscapes. All of them involve the interaction between the setting and cultural-
natural environments [9].
In order to determine the tourism carrying capacity (TCC) of a specific site, it
is necessary to know the relationship between the management parameters of the
area and the dynamic of the impacts caused by the activities that are developed in
the area. In this way, it is possible to take decisions regarding TCC. This works
as a potential strategy to reduce the impacts of recreation caused by the visitors
in natural protected areas [5].

2 General objective
To provide recommendations to the managers of the sites based on the visitor
carrying capacity for the walking trails in the Natural Reserves Mombacho
Volcano, Granada; and Datanlí - El Diablo, Jinotega, Nicaragua.

3 Methodology
3.1 Location of the two natural reserves

The NRMV is located in the department of Granada 10 km from Granada city

and 50 km from Managua (Figure 1). The geographic coordinates are 11º 50’
North and 85º 59’ West, the highest elevation is 1,345 masl. The area of this
reserve is approximately 578 hectares [4]. This area is under the system of co-
management; Fundación Cocibolca is a NGO in charge of co-managing this
reserve along with the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources
(MARENA).
The NRDE is located in the department of Jinotega in the North- Central
region of Nicaragua (Figure 1). It has an area of 5,849 hectares (58.49 km2). The
geographic coordinates are 13º 04' 42.1" and 13º 10' 10.7" North and 85º 49'
49.4" and 85º 54' 58.6" West, the highest elevation is 1,650 meters above sea
level (masl) [7]. The NRDE has 145 land owners who have different types of
land use on their farms. MARENA is in charge of guiding them to accomplish
the appropriate practices in accordance with the management plan of the NRDE
approved.

WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol 97, © 2006 WIT Press
www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line)
 Sustainable Tourism II 343

3.2 Main climatic characteristics in the two protected areas

3.2.1 Natural Reserve Mombacho Volcano

The mean annual precipitation ranges from 1,200 to 1,800 mm. It varies
according to the altitude. Precipitation can be in form of mist that is maintained
during the day, especially during the rainy season. The mean annual temperature
at the base of the volcano is around 27ºC and goes down approximately 1ºC for
every 150 m of elevation [4].

3.2.2 Natural Reserve Datanlí-El Diablo

The mean annual precipitation goes from 1,650 in the north zone, to 2,500 mm in
the southern part of the reserve. Like the NRMV the main rainy season lasts
from May to November, but all year long some rain occurs (MARENA et al. [6,
7]). The mean annual temperature varies according to altitude, at 1,000 masl it is
around 20ºC; in the zone with the highest elevation, which is about 1,600 masl it
is 12.5ºC. There are very small differences over the year; it varies up to 2ºC from
the hottest to the coolest months [6].

NRDE

NRMV

Figure 1: Protected areas in Nicaragua and location of the Natural Reserves

Mombacho Volcano (NRMV), Granada and Datanlí-El Diablo
(NRDE), Jinotega (source: SINIA, 2004).

WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol 97, © 2006 WIT Press
www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line)
344 Sustainable Tourism II

3.3 Natural vegetation and current land uses in the protected areas

3.3.1 Natural Reserve Mombacho Volcano

The elf forest is located between 1,200 and 1,344 masl. This forest borders on
the cloud or misty forest, which is observed from 860 to 1,200 masl. At a lower
altitude the Semi deciduous forest, which ranges from 590 masl up to 900 masl
takes over. The dry forest is found at the lowest elevation of the volcano [4].
The main economic activity is agriculture. Basically, coffee plantations under
different agro forestry systems are found. This ranges from rustic shade coffee to
specialized shade. Another major activity is stock-cattle which are taking place
mostly in the lowest parts of the volcano hillsides [4].

3.3.2 Natural Reserve Datanlí-El Diablo

The reserve is classified as a cloud or misty forest. But because the area has been
subject to different type of land uses, the forest cover varies as follows: 58% is
actually covered by forest (3,400 ha). Dense forest occupies 49% of the area
(2,860 ha) and the so-called “open forest” comprises 9% (545 ha) of the territory.
However, forest cover has suffered different kinds of degradation, fragmentation
and perturbation. They may be reduced to very small areas eventually [6].
There are four land use types, besides forest areas. They are: coffee
plantations, pastures, annual crop areas and fallow areas. Coffee plantations have
an area of 816 ha, pastures 610 ha, fallow areas 460 ha and annual crop areas
556 ha (staple crops and vegetables). Most of the land is privately owned, with
the exception of the territory that holds a military base in the southern part of the
NRDE, which belongs to the government [6].

3.4 Brief description of the walking trails in the two natural reserves

3.4.1 Natural Reserve Mombacho Volcano

“El Crater”: This is the most popularly visited in the site. It has a length of
1,500 meters; it can be hiked by tourists without a park ranger or tourist guide,
because it has interpretative signals along it. The major attractive features are the
tunnel and the fumaroles; it offers great appreciation of elf forest and a variety of
bromeliads.
“El Puma”: The trail has an extension of 4,000 meters. It has four magnificent
viewers: La Roca, Los Vientos, La Avalancha and La Cueva. This is the most
difficult trail to hike because of steep slopes. The entrance to this trail is only
allowed with a tourist guide, who has been requested by the tourist to the
administrators of the NRMV in advance.
“El Cafetal”: This is the only walking trail located at the foot of the volcano,
right at the parking area. The main attractions of this trail are to watch birds and
butterflies.

3.4.2 Natural Reserve Datanlí-El Diablo

“El Leon”: This trail has a distance of 1,722 meters and is connected to the
walking trail El Congo a few meters away from the fall creek having a common

WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol 97, © 2006 WIT Press
www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line)
 Sustainable Tourism II 345

exit to both trails. At the beginning of this trail the “love stone” is located. The
stone is connected with a legend told by the locals. There is also an eye-catching
view of the Apanas Lake at this place. Furthermore there is a great variety of
vegetation, birds, butterflies, and different small and medium mammals that can
be watched walking along this trail. The name was given by the residents,
because a “lion” moves around in this site.
“El Congo”: This trail has a distance of 2,575 meters, including the segment that
is common to the trail El Leon, makes a total of 3.66 Km. This path allows for
horse-back riding. The farmers offer this service because during the rainy season
some sections of the trail can be very difficult to hike.
Throughout this trail the Apanas Lake and Gobiado La Peña are visible. One
may find medicinal plants, trees of ecological interest, orchids, ferns, and a
variety of vegetation. Watching fauna is also promising and the name of the trail
is actually given from the local name of the howler monkey (Alluatta palliate).
“Campanero”: This is the shortest trail in the site; it reaches 1600 meters
starting at the foot of El Gobiado. The name is given because of the presence of a
bird, commonly known as Campanero o Jilguero (Procnias trinculatta). This
path is the easiest to hike, in comparison with the other two trails. Lots of birds,
butterflies and other small animals can also be seen here. The vegetation,
especially trees, is described for the local guides in terms of their uses and
significance for the ecosystem.

3.5 Visitor carrying capacity methodology

The calculation of the visitor carrying capacity considers three levels: the
physical carrying capacity (PCC), the real carrying capacity (RCC), and the
effective carrying capacity (ECC). Each level constitutes a corrected estimation
of the previous one based on the specific factors involved in each case studied.
The relationship can be represented as follows: PCC > RCC ≥ ECC [2].
In order to estimate of the above parameters, the following assumptions were
made:
• Visitors go in one direction around the walking trail, completing a circuit.
• A person requires a minimum space to move freely, this is 1 lineal meter.
• The mean time needed to walk each trail in the NRMV, is as follows:
• El Puma: 4 hours • El Crater: 1.5 hours
• El Cafetal: 0.75 hour
• The mean time needed to walk each trail in the NRDE is:
• El Congo: 3.5 hours • El Leon: 2 hours
• Campanero: 1 hour
• The open hours to visitors in NRVM are from 8:00 to 16:00 hrs. This means
that there are 8 hours available each day. In NRDE, they have
established visitor hours from 7:00 to 17:00 hrs, 10 hours available each
day.

WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol 97, © 2006 WIT Press
www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line)
346 Sustainable Tourism II

3.5.1 Calculating the physical carrying capacity (PCC)

The physical carrying capacity is the maximum number of visits that is possible
to admit during a day. The figure is given by the relationship between the
available space in the walking trail and the number of hours available to visit the
site. A very simple equation is used:
PCC = S/sp *NV
where S is available surface, sp is the area used per person and NV number of
times the site can be visited in a given day. This is calculated with: NV = Hv/tv.
Where: Hv: Open hours, tv: required time to walk every trail.

3.5.2 Calculating the real carrying capacity (RCC)

The real carrying capacity is the maximum number of visits that is possible after
applying a series of correction factors to the FCC. These factors are defined
according to the particular characteristics of the site, considering physical,
ecological, social and managerial variables [2].
The correction factors considered for this study were:
• Social Factor (FCsocial)
• Erodability (FCero)
• Accessibility (FCacc)
• Inundated sections (FCane)
• Temporal closing (FCctem)
The general equation applied was:
RCC = PCC * Fcx
Each correction factor was calculated applying the next equation:
Fcx = 1 – Mlx
Mtx
where Fcx is Correction Factor of variable “x”, Mlx is Limiting magnitude of
variable “x” and Mtx is Total magnitude of variable “x”.
To determine each of the factors field surveys were accomplished. For
instance, for the soil erodability factor length and slope degree of all segments in
the trails were measured in order to identify slopes higher than 10% and 15% [2].

3.5.3 Calculating the management capacity (MC) of the reserve

The management capacity is defined as the possibilities the administrators of a
protected area have to develop the activities and be able to reach the objectives
of the management plan. It is calculated as the mean value provided from the
condition of the infrastructure, the equipment and the personnel. The MC is
presented as a percentage of the optimum management capacity. The equation
used was:
MC = Infrastructure + Equipment + Personnel * 100
3
where MC is the management capacity of the protected area.
For the estimation of the management capacity variables such as legal frame,
policies, equipment, competence of the staff, funding, infrastructure, and existing

WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol 97, © 2006 WIT Press
www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line)
 Sustainable Tourism II 347

facilities are included. The variables considered for this study (infrastructure,
equipment and personnel) were selected based on the priorities of the
Management Plans of the two Natural Reserves [4, 6].

3.5.4 Calculating the effective carrying capacity

The effective carrying capacity is the maximum number of visits that should be
allowed according to the capacity to manage them in the area [2, 3].
The equation used was
ECC = RCC * MC
where ECC is Effective Carrying Capacity, RCC is Real Carrying Capacity, and
MC is Management Capacity of the protected area.

Figure 2: Tourists on the walking trail El Puma, RNMV, Granada,

Nicaragua.

4 Results and discussion

4.1 Natural Reserve Mombacho Volcano
The Effective carrying capacity for the trail El Crater was estimated to be 442
visits/day, while in the trail El Puma it is only 93 visits/day (Table 1). The main
constrain for the RCC is the Social factor. This factor reduces the PCC up to
87% in the trail El Crater and up to 95% in El Puma (Table 1). This difference is
caused by the need to have more space between groups of visitors and less

WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol 97, © 2006 WIT Press
www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line)
348 Sustainable Tourism II

people by group, because the trail is more difficult to hike. On the other hand the
trail El Cafetal shows the biggest carrying capacity of the three trails. However
this trail was established with the purpose of giving an alternative to the tourists
while they waited to be taken up the volcano (to the nucleus zone); where the
two main walking trails are located. So it is not of much interest for the tourist
to visit this trail.
To determine if the estimated tourism carrying capacity in this study was
exceeded by the current visitation to Mombacho, the number of tourism visits
actually taken (from site records of Fundación Cocibolca) was compared to
estimated tourism carrying capacity calculations. This permits one to provide
appropriate recommendations to tourist management so the number of site visits
can be brought in line with ECC.
We found that the estimated carrying capacity had not yet been exceeded. But
the pattern showed for the visitors to the Natural Reserve indicates a tendency
for the number of visitors per day in peak periods to increase. For example
March 2002 with 366 visits/day and June 2003 with 305 visits/day were the peak
records, compared to the most visited days in 2001 and 2000, that did not exceed
280 visits/ day. Furthermore the ECC for students is only 236 visits/day; the
current total number of visitors goes beyond this. For this reason it is
recommended to the administrators of the reserve to take this factor in
consideration when students are visiting.

Table 1: Tourism carrying capacity for the walking trails El Crater, El Puma
and El Cafetal. Natural Reserve Mombacho Volcano, Granada.
CARRYING CAPACITY SENDERO SENDERO SENDERO EL
(visits/day) EL CRÁTER EL PUMA CAFETAL

PHYSICAL (FCC) 8000 8000 9067

Correction Factors Eco Students
tourists
Factor Social: FCsocial 0.1304 0.0698 0.0476 0.1304

Erodability: FCero 0.8187 0.8187 0.6248 1.0000

Accessibility: FCacc 0.8187 0.8187 0.6248 1.0000

Inundated sections: FCane 0.9993 0.9930 0.9859 1.0000

Temporal closing: FCctem 0.8571 0.8571 0.8571 0.8571

REAL (CCR) 599 318 126 1014

MANAGEMENT CAPACITY 74.24%
(MC)
EFECTIVE CARRYING 442 236 93 753
CAPACITY (ECC)

WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol 97, © 2006 WIT Press
www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line)
 Sustainable Tourism II 349

Figure 3: Tourists with guides in the walking trail El Leon, RNDE, Jinotega,
Nicaragua.

Table 2: Tourism carrying capacity for the walking trails, Fila El Gobiado,
Natural Reserve Datanlí-El Diablo, Jinotega.

CARRYING CAPACITY SENDERO EL SENDERO SENDERO EL

(visits/day) CONGO EL LEON CAMPANERO
PHYSICAL (FCC) 7358 8611 7846
Correction Factors
Factor Social: FCsocial 0.167 0.167 0.230
Erodability: FCero 0.3607 0.4302 0.5803

Accessibility: FCacc 0.3607 0.4302 0.5803

Inundated sections: FCane 0.9900 0.9600 0.9900

Precipitation: FCprecip 0.7700 0.7700 0.7700

Fauna: FCfauna 0.5200 0.4600 0.5000

REAL (CCR) 64 92 235

MANAGEMENT CAPACITY 62.34%
(MC)
EFFECTIVE CARRYING 40 57 146
CAPACITY (ECC)

WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol 97, © 2006 WIT Press
www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line)
350 Sustainable Tourism II

4.2 Natural Reserve Datanlí-El Diablo

The effective carrying capacity for the trail El Leon was estimated to be 57
visits/day, while in the trail El Congo it should be limited to 40 visits/day
(Table 2). The main constrain for the RCC is the Social factor. This factor
reduces the PCC up to 83% in these two trails and 77% in the Campanero trail
(Table 2). This difference is caused by the need to have more space between
groups of visitors and less people by group, because the trails are more difficult
to hike. Therefore, the accessibility and soil erodability factors are less restrictive
in the trail Campanero. These are the reasons why this trail shows the biggest
effective carrying capacity of the three trails. It has lower slope gradients and is
easier to walk than the other two.

5 Conclusions
5.1 General and methodological

The number of visitors estimated with this methodology should not be used as a
definitive restriction, but as an approximate appraisal that lets us know if it is
desirable to slow down the visitor flow. The figure can also be used to support
administrative decisions to decrease the number of visitors per day that are
admitted to a site. This is especially pertinent when there are certain pressures for
allowing many more visitors than the site should handle.
Visitor carrying capacity in a protected area varies according to the particular
physical and ecological conditions, as well as the management capacity of the
area. Therefore, if the management capacity of a particular area is improved it
would increase its visitor carrying capacity. This allows flexibility to try new
visitor management strategies.
The social factor has the main effect in reducing the RCC in all the walking
trails. Another factor that influences the RCC is the accessibility within a trail.
This is an indication of the relevance of these two factors and should be
considered in the planning of the walking trails and for a discussion of the kind
of visitors the ecotourism business is aiming for.

5.2 Specifics for the two sites evaluated

In the case of Natural Reserve Mombacho Volcano, if the trend of increasing

visitation continues, it is recommended to more stringently structure the number
of visitors per day, specially the students. This strategy will avoid excess use of
the walking trails, and their consequent deterioration effects on the habitat.
In the case of Natural Reserve Datanlí-El Diablo it is recommended to follow
the ECC figure as a reference. This is because the characteristics of the trails, and
the fact they are not covered with any protective material (like they are in
Mombacho), make the site more susceptible to deterioration when visitation
numbers surpass the suggested thresholds.
Management capacity can be improved in both reserves, if the appropriate
infrastructure and equipment were to be acquired. Also it is contingent upon

WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol 97, © 2006 WIT Press
www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line)
 Sustainable Tourism II 351

those personnel who are managing the visitors, to receive general and specific
training that improves their competence in the topics they have to deal with.
Establishment of a monitoring system to follow up the conditions in the
reserves is recommended. This will allow for avoidance of degradation of the
natural resources to a point where it will be too expensive (calculated as time and
money) to try to recover them.

References
[1] Buitelaar, R. M. Clusters ecoturísticos en América Latina: Conclusiones de
una conferencia internacional. Comisión Económica para América Latina
(CEPAL), Santiago, Chile. 2001.
[2] Cifuentes, M.; Mesquita, C.; Méndez, J. Capacidad de Carga Turística de las
Áreas de Uso Publico del Monumento Nacional Guayabo, Costa Rica.
WWF-Centroamérica. 75 p, 1999.
[3] Cifuentes, M. Determinación de Capacidad de Carga Turística en Áreas
Protegidas. WWF-CATIE. Costa Rica. 26 p, 1992.
[4] Fundación Nicaragüense para la Conservación, Fundación Cocibolca
(FUNCOC). Plan de Manejo Reserva Natural Volcán Mombacho Granada,
Nicaragua. 204 p, 2003.
[5] Kuss, F.; Graefe, A.; Vaske, J. Visitor Impact Management. National Parks
and Conservation Association. 256 p, 1990.
[6] MARENA. Plan de Manejo de la Reserva Natural Cerro Datanlí –El Diablo.
Ministerio del Ambiente y Recursos Naturales. MARENA. Sistema
Nacional de Áreas Protegidas. SINAP. Managua, Nicaragua. 124 p, 2002.
[7] MARENA. Zeas Maura, M.; Quintero, B.; Sánchez, M.; Motas, S.
Ministerio del Ambiente y Recursos Naturales. Informe Nacional de Áreas
Protegidas. Managua, Nicaragua. 35 p, 2002.
[8] SINIA. Sistema Nacional de Información Ambiental Nicaragua. Web page:
http://www.sinia.net.ni/index.asp. Interactive maps: Mapa de areas
protegidas, 2004. Managua, Nicaragua.
[9] Somarriba, M. Parra. O.; Acuña, A. Potenciales impactos ambientales de
actividades eco turísticas en áreas protegidas en Nicaragua. Una revisión.
Becas Keizo Obuchi – UNESCO. Universidad Nacional Agraria, Nicaragua
y Universidad de Concepción, Chile. 33 pp, 2002.

WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Vol 97, © 2006 WIT Press
www.witpress.com, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line)