abstract volume swiss geoscience...

Abstract Volume8th Swiss Geoscience MeetingFribourg, 19th – 20th November 2010

Department ofGeosciences

20. Geotopes and Geoparks

348Sy

mp

osi

um

20:

Geo

top

es a

nd

Geo

par

ks

Platform Geosciences, Swiss Academy of Science, SCNATSwiss Geoscience Meeting 2010

20. Geotopes and Geoparks

Jean-Pierre Berger, Emmanuel Reynard, Pierre-Yves Jeannin, Markus Felber

Swiss Working Group on Geotopes (Platform Geosciences, SCNAT)

20.1 BergerJ.-P.etal.:Geotopesofnationalsignificance:report2010

20.2 MartinS.&GhiraldiL.:Staticanddynamicmappingofgeosites

20.3 MorardS.,StaubA.,OggierP.:GeomorphologyandgeologyintheRegionalNaturePark(RNP)Pfyn-Finges(Valais):identification,assessment,educationalandtouristicpromotio

20.4 PerretA.,GuyomardA.,CoutterandS.,ReynardE.,DelannoyJ.-J.:GlacialheritageoftheChablaisarea(FR-CH):understandingglacierf lowsandidentifyinggeosites

20.5 Regolini-BissigG.,MartinS.:Qualityassessmentofnaturalheritagetrails

20.1

Geotopes of national significance : report 2010

Groupedetravail“Geotopesd’importancenationale”,coord.BergerJean-Pierre1

1 Dept. Geosciences-Earth Sciences, chemin du Musée 6, 1700 Fribourg ([email protected])

Startingin2006,therevisionoftheinventoryofGeotopesofnationalsignificance(seeBergeretal.2008)comestothelaststep.Wepresentherethelastreport,whichwillbesubmittedtotheBAFUattheendofthisyear.Thanktothecollaborationofseveralswissearthscientists,thisversionwillbeconsideredasthefirststablelistongeo-topesofnationalimportance,includingabout350sites.Thepresentcontributionwilldiscussthegenerallistwithsometypicalexamplesofproblemsoccurringduringthereali-zationofthereport.Wewillalsotaketheopportunitytodiscussthepresentlistaswellasthedifferentaspectsconcerningthefutureofthisreport:itisclearthatthisprocessneedaregularupdate,concerningforexamplethefollowingtopics:

• procedureforaddingnewgeotopes• procedureforcancellinggeotopesalreadylisted(becauseofdestruction,forexample)• databaseupdating• creationofaseparatedatabaseconcerninggeotopesdiscussedbutfinallyremovedofthelistduringtheyears2005-2010• publication(s)oftheresultsinlocaltointernationalpublic• futureoftheWorkingGroup

Wehopetoseealotofcolleaguestoparticipatetothediscussion.

SpecialthankstotheBAFUandSCNATforfinancialsupportandtoallthecolleagueswhohelpustocompileandchoicepaleontologicalsites.

REFERENCESBergerJ.-P.,ReynardE.,BissigG.,ConstandacheM.,DumasJ.,FelberM.,HäuselmannP., JeanninP.Y.,SchneiderH.2008 :Révisionde la listedesgéotopesd’importancenationale : rapportdugroupedetravail2006-2007.–GroupedeTravailpourlesGéotopesenSuisse,22p.

349

Sym

po

siu

m 2

0: G

eoto

pes

an

d G

eop

arks


20.2

Static and dynamic mapping of geosites

MartinSimon1,GhiraldiLuca2

1 Université de Lausanne, Institut de géographie, Anthropole, Quartier Dorigny, CH-1015 Lausanne ([email protected])2 Museo regionale di Scienze Naturali, Sezione di Mineralogia, Petrografia e Geologia, Via Giolitti 36, I-10100 Torino ([email protected])

Theuseofmapsinthefieldofgeoheritageresearchandpromotionisgrowing.Severalattemptstoformalizethemappingprocess–especiallyforgeotouristmaps–havebeenproposedtheselastyears(Coratza&Regolini-Bissig,2009;Martin&Reynard,2009;Regolini-Bissig,2010).Untilnow,theyarelimitedtotraditional,staticmaps.However,dynamictoolssuchasweb-mappingandweb-GIShavebeenusedtopublishandcommunicateinformationaboutgeosites.

Threedifferentmapsarepresentedandcompared:astaticmapshowingtheSwissgeositesofnationalsignificance,aweb-mappingtoolbasedonthesameinventory,andageotouristandinterpretivemapofTanaroValley.Thespecificadvan-tagesofbothstaticanddynamicmapsareexposed,accordingtoCartwright&Peterson (1999)andMeng (2003).

FollowingRegolini-Bissig (2010),geositemapsareclassified inthreecategoriesaccordingtotheirobjectives: inventorymaps,geotouristmapsandinterpretivemaps(tab.1).

Map type ObjectivesInventory maps to localize sites; compare attributes (values)Geotourist maps to inform the public about tourist facilities and services and communicate geo-

scientific informationInterpretive maps to visually transfer geoscientific knowledge between specialists and the public

Table1.Typologyofmapsinthefieldofgeoheritageresearchandpromotion.

Thefirstcategoryisnotwelldeveloped.Mostlystaticmapscanbefound,usedassynthesistoolspresentingthesites’lo-calizationandsometimesafewattributesofthese.Asamatteroffact,GISarepoorlyusedtomanagegeositeinventoriesandassessment,despitethefundamentalspatialdimensionoftheobjects.

Wehavecarriedoutaweb-mappingprojectbasedontheSwissinventoryofgeositesofnationalsignificance.Comparedwiththestaticmap,thisprojectexemplifiestheadvantagesofadynamicandinteractivemap.Whilekeepingtheobjectivesofabasicinventorymap,italsobecomesaquerytool,allowingspatialandthematicrequests.Dynamicallybasedonadatabase,theweb-mapis,thereby,notonlyastoragetool,butalsoanexplorationandpublicationtool.Theinterfaceallowstheusertochoosewhichtaskhewantstoperform.Itisanattempttodesignatoolintendedforbothspecialistsandamateurs.

Thetwolastcategoriesaredesignedforanon-specialistpublic.Geotouristmapsaimtoinformthereaderwhereasinter-pretivemapstendtocommunicateamessageandexplainalandscape’sspecificities.

Thethirdexampleisabird’s-eyeviewmapwithtwosides.InthefrontthereisgeotouristinformationonTanaroValleyregion(Italy),whilethebackismoreinterpretive,andexplainsthelandscape’sevolutionusingaseriesofdrawingssup-portedbysynthetictextexplanations.Thisexampleshowsthatastaticmapcanalsomeetseveralobjectivesandillustra-testheimportanceoffocusingononethemeonly.

Asaconclusion,someperspectivesaredrawnfortheuseofdynamictoolstosupportgeotouristandinterpretivemaps.Interactivemapsallowtheuserstoselectthecontentaccordingtotheirinterestsandcompetence,orthetimetheywanttospendonit.Alongwithmultimedia,interactivitygivestheopportunitytodynamicallyshowprocessesandtheevolu-tionof landscape.Finally,dynamicmapscanbeagoodalternativetothefrontal-teachingaspectsoftraditionalmaps,allowingtheusertobuildhisownknowledgeofatheme.

REFERENCESCartwright,W.,&Peterson,M.P.1999:Multimediacartography.W.Cartwright,M.Peterson&G.Gartner:Multimedia

cartography,1-10.Berlin:Springer.Coratza,P.,&Regolini-Bissig,G.2009:Methodsformappinggeomorphosites.E.Reynard(ed.):Bookongeomorphosites,

89-103.München:Pfeil.Martin, S., &Reynard, E. 2009:How can a complex geotouristmap bemademore effective? Popularisation of the

Tsanf leuronheritage (Valais, Switzerland). Bayerisches Landesamt fürUmwelt (ed.): 6th EuropeanCongress onRegionalGeoscientificCartography and Information Systems: Earth andMan. Proceedings, 2, 261-264.München:LandesamtfürVermessungundGeoinformation.

Meng,L.2003:Missingtheoriesandmethodsindigitalcartography.21stInternationalCartographicConference,Durban:InternationalCartographicAssociation.

Regolini-Bissig,G. 2010:Mappinggeoheritage for interpretivepurpose.Definition and interdisciplinarity approach.G.Regolini-Bissig&E.Reynard(eds.):Mappinggeoheritage.Geovisions,35,1-13.Lausanne:IGUL.

350Sy

mp

osi

um

20:

Geo

top

es a

nd

Geo

par

ks


20.3

Geomorphology and geology in the Regional Nature Park (RNP) Pfyn-Finges (Valais): identification, assessment, educational and touristic promotion

MorardSébastien1,StaubAlexandra2&OggierPeter2

1 Geography Unit, Department of Geosciences, Chemin du Musée 4, CH-1700 Fribourg ([email protected])2 Pfyn-Finges Naturpark Wallis, CH-3970 Salgesch

TheRegionalNaturePark(RNP)Pfyn-FingesprojectislocatedincentralValaisandcoversasurfaceofabout250km2fromtheBishornsummitintheTurtmannvalleytothePlaineMorteglaciernorthoftheRhoneriver.TheRNPperimeteralsocrossesthethreemaingeologicaldomainsoftheSwissAlps(Austroalpine,Penninic,Helveticnappesandcrystallinebase-ment).

DuringthefirstphaseoftheRNPprojectin2008,ageneralinventoryoflandformswasrealized.Duetothewiderangeofaltitudinalzones(500to4’000m.a.s.l.)andthegeologicaldiversity,numerousvariousgeomorphiclandformsandpro-cesseswereidentified.AdatabaseofscientificpublicationsandthematicmapsaboutgeomorphologyandgeologyinthePfyn-Fingesregionwasalsoperformed.

Themulti-thematicmethodforlandscapeassessmentdevelopedbytheFederalOfficeofEnvironmentwasthenusedtoevaluatethevalueofthegeomorphicandgeologicallandforms.Severalofthemhaveobtainedahighnotation,liketheIllgrabenscarp,thewildRhone,theSidersBergsturzandtheglacialvalleyofTurtmann.Otherswelldevelopedandpre-servedfeaturesliketheuphill-facingscarpsmorphologyintheFäsilalpü,thepyramidsoftheRaspille,thenarrowgorgeofFeschelincisedintheHelvetikumlimestonenappes,thenumerousrockglaciersofTurtmanntalorthehydro-karsticsystemsoftheRussubrunnuareofparticularinterest.Someoftheselandformsarealsoimportantintermofmarketing:theIllgrabenforinstanceisnowconsideredasthemaingeomorphichotspotandoneofthemainvisualidentitiesoftheRNPPfyn-Finges.

Onthebasisofthisassessment,severalprojectsofeducationalandtouristicpromotionweredeveloped.Thepanelofofferstodiscovergeomorphologyandgeologywasimprovedsinceafewyears.Inadditiontoguidedexcursionsandinformation’sf lyers, a geological gardenwith36different rocks from theRNPwas realized in theNature andLandscapeCenter inSalgeschduringsummer2010.ObjectivesofthispermanentexpositionaretoshowthelonggeologicalhistoryoftheAlpsandtobeusedaseducational tool forschools.Anotherproject initiatedthissummerconcernsthedevelopmentofaneducationalplaceincollaborationwiththethreegravelcompanieslocatedinthewildRhonearea.ItwillhostanIllgrabenmodel (inorder tocreateartificialdebris f lows)andothersdidacticalactivities (rocks identification,understandingofaquifers…)forschoolclasses.Inthenextyears,thediversificationandtheimprovementofthegeotouristicoffersisoneofthemainobjectivesoftheRNPPfyn-Finges.

351

Sym

po

siu

m 2

0: G

eoto

pes

an

d G

eop

arks


20.4

Glacial heritage of the Chablais area (FR-CH): understanding glacier flows and identifying geosites

PerretAmandine1,2GuyomardAnne3,CoutterandSylvain2,ReynardEmmanuel2&DelannoyJean-Jacques1

1 Laboratoire EDYTEM, UMR 5204 du CNRS, Pôle Montagne, Campus scientifique, FR-73376 le Bourget-du-Lac ([email protected])2 Institut de Géographie, Université de Lausanne, Dorigny – Anthropole, CH-1015 Lausanne3 Syndicat Intercommunal d’Aménagement du Chablais, Square Voltaire, Rue des Allobroges 2, FR-74201 Thonon-les-Bains

TheChablaisareapossessesaveryinterestingglacialheritage.Itisconsideredasoneofthecradlesofglaciology,theoryelaboratedwithdifficultybutwidelyacceptedsincethemiddleoftheXIXthcentury(DeCharpentier1841).Sincethen,severalgenerationsofresearchershavefocusedonthisregionwithvariousapproacheslikegeology,hydrogeology,geomorphology,geophysics,etc.Today,theterritoryshowsstrongglacialcharacteristics,ofwhichknowledgeremainsparadoxicallyincomplete,becausemostofthestudiesareverylocalized(Perret2010)withoutaglobaloverviewofthesystem(RhoneandDranseglaciers).

Withintheframeworkofaterritorialprojectincludingthecreationofaregionalgeopark,anitinerantexhibitionandaninventoryofnaturalsites,wehaveamandatetocompletetheknowledgeontheregionalQuaternarypalaeogeography,andtopresentacoherentglacialhistorytothepublic,througharegionalinventoryofgeosites.

Tobetterunderstandthecurrentindicatorsoftheformerglaciers,itisnecessarytoreconstructthef lowsofice,whichfollowedeachotherinthisarea(Fig.1).Itwillthenbepossibletoexplainthevisibleelementsinthelandscapeandtoidentifykeysitesoftheglacialhistory.Thisstageofreconstructionincludesthestudyandmappingoftheglacialandassociatedmorphologies,throughageomorphologicalapproachcoupledwithamoregeologicalapproach(studyofnatu-ralandartificialcuttings).Althoughwearenotlookingtoestablishanabsolutechronologyoftheevents,itisalsoplan-nedtodatesomelandformssuchaserraticblocks.

Theobjectiveofpromotinggeologythroughaterritorialproject(geopark)guidedthechoiceofanapproachbygeositesaswellastheconstitutionofaninventory.Inthisway,weselectparticularlyrepresentativeorraresites(Grandgirard,1997),withastrongintegrity,inordertopresentthemoststrikingobjects(Fig.2)tothepublicbutwetryalsotoapproachawidepaneloflandformscapableofreportingalltheglacialprocesseswhichoperatedintheregion.

Figure1.MapofthelastwidthglacialextensionintheChablaisarea,afterS.Coutterand,2010.

352Sy

mp

osi

um

20:

Geo

top

es a

nd

Geo

par

ks


Figure2.The“PierreàMartin”(Ballaison,FR),erraticblock,potentialgeositeintheFrenchChablais.

REFERENCESCoutterand,S.2010:EtudegéomorphologiquedesfluxglaciairesauPléistocènerécentdanslesAlpesNord-occidentales.Du

maximumdeladernièreglaciationauxétapesdeladéglaciation.Thesis.UniversityofSavoie,LaboratoryEDYTEM.DeCharpentier,J.1841 :Essaisurlesglaciersetsurlesterrainserratiquesdubassinlémanique.Lausanne:M.Ducloux,363p.Grandgirard,V. 1997 :Géomorphologie, protectionde lanature et gestiondupaysage. Thesis.University of Fribourg,

GeographyInstitute.210p.Perret, A. 2010: Les glaciations quaternaires dans le Chablais, synthèse bibliographique. Lausanne, Chambéry.

Unpublishedreport.

20.5

Quality assessment of natural heritage trails

Regolini-BissigGéraldine1,MartinSimon1

1 Université de Lausanne, Institut de géographie, Anthropole, Quartier Dorigny, CH 1015 Lausanne ([email protected]) ([email protected])

Naturalheritagetrailsandeducationalpanelsareawidespreadformofscientificcommunication.Commissionedbypu-blicentitiesaswellasbyprivateassociations,theyconcernbothlocalpeculiaritiesandinternationallyknownfeatures.Whilesomeprojectsinventorythetrailsinagivenregiontomoreefficientlyspreadtheinformationamongthepublic(e.g.www.randonature.ch)otherworksanalysethescientifictopicshighlightedbytrails(Cayla,2009).Uptonow,nome-thodhasbeendevelopedtoassesstheirscientificandeducationalvalue.However,evaluationisimportanttoguaranteeproductsofqualityandofhighinterestforthepublic(Martinetal.,submitted).

In2010,thenaturalsciencessocietyofValais(La Murithienne)launchedaprojecttocertifyproductsaboutnaturalheritageinValais,Switzerland.Alabel–MarqueValais–willbeattributedtoproductsofhighscientificqualityandasignificantsocio-economic impactwithina sustainabledevelopmentmodel.Theassessmentof the socio-economic impactwill becarriedoutbytheInstituteofEconomics&TourismofHES-SOValaisandisnotsubjectofthiscontribution.

Considering the directives of the awarding committee (Bernard& Kunz, 2009) – improvement of the product qualitythroughaconsultingserviceandlabialisation–fiveevaluationcategories(Fig.1)weretakenintoaccountforthedevelop-

353

Sym

po

siu

m 2

0: G

eoto

pes

an

d G

eop

arks


mentoftheassessmentmethodpresentedhere.Theyregardthedomainsindividuatedasimportantforguidingtheim-plementationprocessofavalorisationproduct(Martinetal.,submitted).Eachofthesecategoriesiscomposedofasetofcriteria(Tab.1)withexplicitlyformulatedscoresinordertoreducesubjectivityasmuchaspossibleand,therefore,diffe-rencesofappreciationamongevaluators(Bruschi&Cendrero2005).Sixevaluatorstestedthemethodbeforeapplyingitatalargescale(250naturalheritagetrails,ofwhich80havealreadybeenassessedasapriority).Theirremarkshelpedustoreformulatesomeambiguouscriteriaandtoadaptthemethodtopracticalconsiderationsofevaluationinthefield.

Figure1.Evaluationcategoriesfortheassessmentofthescientificandeducationalqualityofnaturalheritagetrails.

Table1.Evaluationcategoriesandcorrespondingassessmentcriteria.

TheanalysisoftheobtainedresultswillprovideanoverviewoftheglobalvalueofproductsinValaisandhelptodeveloptheconsultingservice.Moreover,thepresentedassessmentmethodcouldbemodifiedtofittheevaluationofproductsotherthantrails.

REFERENCESBernard,R.&KunzP.2009:Nature&Tourisme.Projet2010-2011.Sion.Bruschi,V.M.&CendreroA.2005:Geositeevaluation;canwemeasureintangiblevalues?IlQuaternario,18/1,291-304.Cayla,N. 2009: Lepatrimoine géologiquede l’arc alpin.De lamédiation scientifique à la valorisationgéotouristique.

Thèsededoctorat,LeBourget-du-Lac,UniversitédeSavoie.Martin,S.,Regolini-Bissig,G.,Perret,A.&Kozlik,L. (submitted):Elaborationetévaluationdeproduitsgéotouristiques.

Propositionsméthodologiques.Téoros,Revuederechercheentourisme.

http://www.randonature.ch(consulted26.8.2010)

abstract volume swiss geoscience...

Documents