integrated shoreline management plan volume 1 part a b

8/20/2019 Integrated Shoreline Management Plan Volume 1 Part a B

1/382


2/382

JABATAN PENGAIRAN DAN SALIRAN MALAYSIA

Pelan Pengurusan Persisiran Pantai Bersepadu (ISMP)

bagi Pantai Barat Negeri Sabah (Papar –

Tuaran)

Volume 1 : Main Volume - Part A (Main Report)

PY Konsep Perunding Sdn. Bhd.(150165-U)Lot 15 & 16, 1st Floor, Block C,

Iramanis Centre, Jalan Lintas,

88450 Kota Kinabalu,

Sabah,

Malaysia


3/382


4/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

i

Pelan Pengurusan Persisiran Pantai Bersepadu (ISMP)bagi Pantai Barat Negeri Sabah (Papar – Tuaran)

Volume 1 : Main Volume - Part A (Main Report)


5/382

ii S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

Contents

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1

General ...................................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.2 ISMP Study Objectives and Scope ................................................................................................. 1-1

1.3 Study Sectors .......................................................................................................................................... 1-2

1.3.1

Physical Environment ............................................................................................ 1-2

1.3.2

Biological Environment ......................................................................................... 1-3

1.3.3

Land Use, Tourism and Recreation .................................................................. 1-3

1.3.4 Socio Economics ....................................................................................................... 1-4

1.3.5 Legal, Institutional and Policy Framework ................................................... 1-4

1.3.6 Shoreline Protection and Restoration Options ........................................... 1-4

1.4 Related Studies ...................................................................................................................................... 1-5

1.5 Report Structure ................................................................................................................................... 1-5

1.6 Study Area and Management Units .............................................................................................. 1-6

1.6.1 Coastal Sediment Cells ........................................................................................... 1-6

1.6.1.1

Primary Cells .................................................................................. 1-6

1.6.1.2 Secondary Cells (Subcells) ........................................................ 1-8

1.6.2 Management Units ................................................................................................... 1-9

2 State and ISMP Development Objectives ............................................................................................. 2-1

2.1 Vision ......................................................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.2 Development Goals.............................................................................................................................. 2-1

2.3 Development Objectives ................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.4 ISMP Development Objectives ....................................................................................................... 2-2

3 Findings and Issues...................................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Physical Environment ........................................................................................................................ 3-1

3.1.1 Coastal Morphology ................................................................................................ 3-1

3.1.1.1

Erosion .............................................................................................. 3-1 3.1.1.2 Sedimentation ................................................................................ 3-2

3.1.2 Coastal Protection and Reclamations .............................................................. 3-2

3.1.2.1 Coastal Protection ........................................................................ 3-2

3.1.2.2

Reclamation .................................................................................... 3-3

3.1.3

Coastal Flooding........................................................................................................ 3-3

3.1.4

Dredging ....................................................................................................................... 3-4

3.1.5 Sand Mining ................................................................................................................ 3-4

3.1.6 Water Quality ............................................................................................................. 3-4

3.2 Biological Environment ..................................................................................................................... 3-4

3.2.1 Coastal Habitats ........................................................................................................ 3-4

3.2.2 Coral Reefs ............ .............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ........... 3-5

3.2.3

Seagrass ........................................................................................................................ 3-5

3.2.4

Marine Fauna ............................................................................................................. 3-6

3.2.5 Fishery and Aquaculture ....................................................................................... 3-6

3.3 Land use, Tourism and Recreation ............................................................................................... 3-6

3.4 Socio-economics ................................................................................................................................... 3-7

3.4.1

Economic Background ........................................................................................... 3-7

3.4.2

Demography ............................................................................................................... 3-7

3.4.3

Issues faced by Coastal Communities.............................................................. 3-8

4 Defining Management Objectives and Strategies ............................................................................. 4-1

4.1 Feature Identification ......................................................................................................................... 4-1

4.2 Management Objectives .................................................................................................................... 4-1

4.3 Ranking of Features and Associated Objectives ..................................................................... 4-2

4.3.1

Why is this feature important? ........................................................................... 4-2

4.3.2 Who benefits? ............................................................................................................. 4-3

4.3.3 Is the feature unique? ............................................................................................. 4-3

4.4 Develop Management Strategies ................................................................................................... 4-3


6/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

iii

5 Stakeholders Comments and Inputs ..................................................................................................... 5-1

5.1 KKPG Workshop 1 .......................................................................................................................................................... 5-1

5.2 KKPG Workshop 2 .......................................................................................................................................................... 5-2

6 References ...................................................................................................................................................... 6-1

Figures

Figure 1.1 Study area. .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1-7

Figure 1.2 Defined cell and subcell boundaries. ............................................................................................................................................... 1-8

Figure 1.3 Management units defined for Kimanis Special Cell. ............................................................................................................. 1-11

Figure 1.4 Management units defined for Papar Cell. .................................................................................................................................. 1-12

Figure 1.5 Management units defined for Kota Kinabalu Cell. ................................................................................................................ 1-13

Figure 1.6 Management units defined for Tuaran Cell. ............................................................................................................................... 1-14

Tables

Table 4.1 Some common issues and objectives formulated in response to features found within the study area MUs.4-2

Table 5.1 List of government departments and non-governmental organisations registered at KKPG Workshop 1. . 5-1

Table 5.2 List of government departments and non-governmental organisations registered at KKPG Workshop 2. . 5-2

Appendices

A Changes to SMP 2005 Management Objectives and Strategies

B ISMP Future Land Use


7/382

iv S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

Abbreviations

CD Chart Datum

DHI DHI Water & Environment (M) Sdn Bhd

DID Department of Irrigation and Drainage

DOE Department of Environment

EPD Environment Protection Department

ESRI Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GIS Geographic Information System

HAT Highest Astronomical Tide

HD Hydrodynamic

ISMP Integrated Shoreline Management Plan

IMS Information Management System

JKR Jabatan Kerja Raya

KePKAS Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Environment Sabah

Kg. Kampung

KK Kota Kinabalu

KKIA Kota Kinabalu International Airport

KKIP Kota Kinabalu Industrial Park

KKPG Key Interest Group (Kumpulan Kerja Pengurusan Garispantai)

KKW Kota Kinabalu Wetlands (formerly Kota Kinabalu City Bird Sanctuary)

LAT Lowest Astronomical Tide

MSL Mean Sea Level

MPA Marine Protected Area

MO Management Objective

MU Management UnitNE Northeast

NCES National Coastal Erosion Study

P. Pulau

PY PY Konsep Perunding Sdn Bhd

Sg. Sungai

SMP Shoreline Management Plan

ST Sediment Transport

STB Sabah Tourism Board

STP Sewage Treatment Plant

SW Southwest

TARP Tunku Abdul Rahman Park

Tg. Tanjung

ToR Terms of ReferenceTRPD Town and Regional Planning Department

TSS Total Suspended Sediment

WL Water level


8/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

v

Definitions

Breaker or Surf Zone Zone within which waves are breaking.

Buffer zone A specially designated zone between high water line and coastal

inland area to counter (or slowing) shoreline erosion, or may refer to

vegetation buffer areas which can also act to filter sediment and other

pollution runoff into the sea.

Cell Definition and Delineation It is practical to split the coastline into a number of parcels or cells,

which share common littoral characteristics and are easily

referenced. The cell division follows the following overall criteria:

Primary Cells A primary sediment cell is defined as a section of coast bounded by

morphological features around which there is negligible sediment

bypass, even during extreme events, or bounded by major rivers

where the sediment supply from the river dominates the littoral drift.

Based upon this definition, it follows that coastal construction in one

primary cell will have no influence on the shoreline morphology of

adjacent cells. Pollution and fine sediments may however be

transported by marine currents from one cell to another.

The definition of primary cells is not always straight forward and

clear cut, in particular along Sabah’s Coast which is dominated by

mangroves and where the littoral transport in many places occurs

over wide shallow areas rather than in well-defined surf zones, and

where the transport in some areas may be driven more by tidal and

wind driven currents than waves.

Secondary Cells (Sub-cells) To further facilitate planning, the primary sediment cell is further

subdivided into sub-cells.

Secondary cells divide the primary cells into smaller sections, which

exhibit similar sediment transport characteristics and are bounded

by features around which sediment bypass is small during normal

conditions, although there may be considerable bypass during

extreme events. Based upon this definition, it follows that coastal

construction in one secondary cell will only have a small influence on

adjacent sub-cells.

Coastal Erosion Severity Classification The NCES categorised the eroding shoreline into three (3) main

groups:

Category 1 (Critical Erosion): Areas currently in a state of erosion and

where shore-based facilities or infrastructure, or other recreational

and socio-economic values, are in immediate danger of collapse or

damage.

Category 2 (Significant Erosion): Areas where the shoreline is

eroding at a rate whereby public property and agriculture land of

value will become threatened within 5 to 10 years unless remedial

action is taken.

Category 2 (Acceptable Erosion): For undeveloped eroding shoreline

but with no or minor consequent economic loss if left unchecked.

Coastal Morphology The shape and shaping of shoreline features.


9/382

vi S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

Closure Depth Water depth at the seaward boundary of the littoral zone.

Current Direction Direction towards where the water is flowing.

Down-drift Location relative to the net littoral drift.

Downstream Location relative to the direction of current.

Feature Something tangible that provides a benefit or service to the society in

one way or another

Intertidal Region between high and low tide marks.

Littoral Transport Transport of sediments along the coast by coast parallel currents

(driven by tide, waves and/or wind). Also called long-shore transport

or littoral drift

Littoral Zone Zone where littoral sediment transport takes place.

Managed Retreat In the context of coastal erosion, this means that loss of land due to

erosion will be permitted (as opposed to maintaining the current

shoreline alignment through coastal protection or other measures)

Management Units For the purpose of establishing the shoreline management plan,

which has to take aspects other than littoral transport and

morphology into account sub-cells have further been divided into

Management Units (MUs) that possess coherent features in terms of

physical characteristics and land use.

Sediment supply Source of sediment meant to nourish the shoreline (beach). A deficit

in sediment supply leads to erosion.

Setback A distance measured from the high water line and landward, defining

a zone within which no permanent structure/development is to

occur.

Shoreline Definition and Delineation The shoreline covers a small coherent strip of land and sea. The

landward coverage is defined as approximately 1 km inshore, or to

the landward limit of the coastal mangrove system. In cases where

there is a well-defined coastal road, the landward limit is taken at the

coastal road.

The seaward limit is taken as the limit of the sediment plume

excursions from the main rivers, which typically covers the sea out to

about 3 nautical miles offshore.

Tidal prism Volume or amount of water stored in an estuary between mean high

tide and mean low tide.

Up-drift Location relative to the net littoral drift.

Upstream Location relative to the direction of current.

Water Depth Depth relative to MSL (unless other datum specified).

Wave Direction Direction from where the wave is coming from.

Wind Direction Direction from where the wind is blowing.


10/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

1-1

1 Introduction

1.1

General

Jabatan Pengairan dan Saliran (JPS) or also referred as Department of Irrigation and Drainage

(DID), Malaysia, awarded PY Konsep Perunding Sdn Bhd the study “Pelan Pengurusan Persisiran

Pantai Bersepadu (ISMP) bagi Pantai Barat Negeri Sabah (Papar-Tuaran)” on 20th July 2011. Viz

letter of appointment ref. No: (15)dlm PPS(S)14/11 JLD.2.

The commencement date of this study was set as 1st August 2012 with an original study period

of twelve (12) months and completion by 31 st July 2012, but extended due to issues on primary

and secondary data collection.

The present document is the Draft Final Report for the study and contains all the analyses,

assessments and recommendations made during the course of the study.

1.2 ISMP Study Objectives and Scope

The main aims of the ISMP study are:

Reduce risks to people and property from coastal erosion and/or flooding;

Improve and enhance the quality of recreational beaches;

Assist in the conservation of the coastal environment, historical, archaeological value;

Assist in the planning of land use along the coastal area;

Assist the State Government and the various State Government Agencies/Departments in

making informed decisions with respect to the development in the coastal area.

The ToR outlined the objectives of the study as follow:

Re-appraisal of the erosion status based on the categories set in the National Coastal

Erosion Study 1985 and previous Shoreline Management Plans for the State of Sabah;

Appraisal of coastal erosion control options and the expected impacts of their

implementation to the adjacent areas and environment;

Selection of coastal development management strategies along the shoreline;

Formulation of specific guidelines for development activities along the shoreline

To enhance the use of ICT/GIS within the various State Agencies and the State Government

with an easily accessible depository of ISMP data.

Based on the ToR the study were to include three (3) phases, namely:

Phase 1: Data Collection and Analysis

Phase 1 will cover data collection and analyses and will include the following:

Collection of primary and secondary data

Coastal hydraulic study

Analysis of coastal processes

Environmental assessment

Recreational and tourism assessment

Archaeological and historical assessment

Land use assessment

Legal and institutional assessment

The results obtained from the data that have been collected and analysed are to be presented in

the form of plans, tables, figures, charts and any other suitable means.


11/382

1-2 S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

Phase 2: Setting Management Objectives

Management objectives for the shoreline have been defined on basis of all data that have been

collected and analysed. Some of these objectives may be applicable to the whole shoreline while

others may be more specific. These objectives have been ranked in the order of importance,

after consultation with all the relevant parties that has had relevant opportunities to review andrefine them. These proposed objectives have been finalized and adopted with the concurrence

of the state Government and the relevant authorities.

The appraisal and selection of coastal development management objectives and strategies have

been presented to all KKPG members at meetings to allow for the interest and aspirations of

each party to be understood and taken into consideration in the ISMP. These meetings have

allow the members to be kept informed of all developments, provide opportunity for member

contribution and address any area of conflicting interest during the setting of the management

objectives.

Phase 3: Preparation of Plan

The ISMP concludes Phase 3 and includes the following responsibilities:

Classification of shoreline;

Coastal defence options;

Coastal development management strategies;

An information system comprising of a spatial (GIS based) and a non-spatial information

system

Develop specific guidelines and conditions

Development of GIS coverage for the integrated shoreline management of the coastline from

Papar to Tuaran, Sabah.

Conceptual layouts for beach stabilisation and improvement of water quality for focus areas

to enhance aesthetic and recreational values

1.3 Study Sectors

For integrated shoreline management planning multiple sectors affecting the shoreline zone

have been considered. The sectors are:

Physical environment considering processes affecting shoreline morphology and evolution

and water quality

Biological environment covering environmental aspects such as coastal and marine ecology

Land use, tourism and recreation

Socio-economics in general and on coastal villages in particular

Legal, institutional and policy framework governing for the development of the plan

Shoreline protection and restoration optionsThe scope for each sector is briefly described in subsequent sections.

1.3.1 Physical EnvironmentThe scope of works for the description of the physical environment includes:

Primary surveys and collection of secondary data for analysis of coastal processes.

Catchment modelling:

- Development of catchment and pollution load models to estimate pollution generated

on a catchment basis and to identify main pollutant sources.

Coastal hydraulic modelling:

- Development of detailed near shore wave model for derivation of temporal and spatial

variation of wave characteristics along the shoreline.

-

Development of a detailed local hydrodynamic model capable of resolving the details ofthe near shore tidal and non-tidal water movements along the shoreline and within

estuaries


12/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

1-3

- Development of sediment transport models to describe sediment transport along the

shore and bypass of sediments around headlands (natural or artificial) and across river

mouths

Establishment of littoral sediment budget along the shoreline

Assess the long term morphology evolution due to coastal developments and to determine

the best coastal defence option for problem areas

Estimate coastal flood levels

Assess the spatial and temporal excursion of turbid sediment plumes emanating from the

main riverine sources

Assess the spatial and temporal dispersion of pollutants discharged from rivers and drains

Formulate management strategies and recommendations to minimise pollution levels for

critical areas

1.3.2 Biological EnvironmentThe main objective of the biological-ecological environmental assessment was to identify and

evaluate the importance of the various ecological resources within the study area which would

guide or influence shoreline management strategies and coastal defence options. In order to

achieve this, the following activities were carried out:

Terrestrial/Intertidal Habitat Assessment(including mangroves)

-

Collation of data from relevant authorities and agencies to identify various landforms,

habitats and linkages

-

Mapping of vegetation units based on satellite image analysis and ground truthing.

- Profiling ofvegetation units.

- Evaluation and assessment of important habitats and population. This includes also the

potential threats to the ecological management units

- Formulate management objectives for terrestrial habitats

- Recommend management strategies for ecological units

Marine Resources- Collation of data from relevant authorities and agencies to identify presence and

distribution of sensitive marine habitats and fauna.

- Carry out rapid surveys of selected areas where information on reefs/ seagrass areas is

outdated or lacking.

- Evaluate and assess the distribution of coral reefs and seagrass beds and their health

- Evaluate and assess the presence of aquatic fauna of conservation value, such as turtles

and dolphins

-

Formulate management objectives and strategies for marine habitats

Aquaculture and Fisheries Resources

- Collation of data from relevant authorities and agencies to identify main fishing

grounds and aquaculture activities

-

Assess marine habitats identified above for suitability as fishing breeding and nurserygrounds.

1.3.3 Land Use, Tourism and RecreationThe assessment of the land use included mapping of present (actual) land use, including existing

tourism and recreational facilities, based on satellite imagery analysis, data from relevant

authorities and ground truthing surveys. The following components were assessed during the

shoreline surveys:

Beach Quality Surveys including observations of water clarity, beach width, beach quality

(debris or solid wastes), tranquility as measures of overall suitability for recreation and

tourism.

Survey of all resorts and recreational areas along the study area shoreline


13/382

1-4 S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

Future land use proposals were determined through available Local and District Plans from the

Town and Regional Planning Department and local authorities, and planned future development

activities in particular from the Sabah Development Corridor proposals. These development

proposals were assessed with respect to the findings of the study and existing guidelines on

coastal and waterfront developments. Where possible, the developments have been integrated

with the recommendations of this study, while general guidelines and policies with respect to

development activities in coastal areas have also been formulated.

1.3.4 Socio EconomicsThe socio-economic evaluation covers the following aspects:

Demography. General demographic analysis includes population size, growth, structure and

spatial distribution based on Department of Statistics information.

Economic activities - general economic activities within the study area, including fisheries,

tourism and industries.

A socioeconomic survey was also carried out in order to collection additional information

on the local communities’ perception of environmental conditions, threats such as erosion

and pollution, and their receptiveness to development, such as tourism or other

developments in their localities.

The survey was carried out from late November to mid December 2011 and covered 28 coastal

villages in the districts of Papar, Putatan, Kota Kinabalu and Tuaran.

1.3.5 Legal, Institutional and Policy FrameworkThe scope for the legal, institutional and policy framework covers the following:

Review and evaluation of existing institutional framework for the management of the

shoreline in Sabah and in the districts within the study area.

Review and evaluation of existing legal framework for the control and regulation of

development activities along the shoreline of Sabah and in the coastal districts within thestudy area in particular

Review and evaluate existing State/Federal Government policies on ISMP in general and the

management and development of the Sabah State shoreline, in particular with reference to

the existing Sabah Shoreline Management Plan adopted by the State Cabinet in 2006

Identify and summarise the main issues and problems related to the existing institutional

and legal framework for shoreline management in Sabah

Propose where necessary any requirements for new policies, strategies, legislations,

regulations, guidelines or institutional arrangements for the integrated management of the

shoreline in the study area

Make recommendations for institutional arrangements for the implementation of the

present ISMP and make appropriate recommendations

1.3.6 Shoreline Protection and Restoration OptionsThe scope of works for the relating to shoreline protection and restoration options includes:

Description of advantages and disadvantages of different shoreline protection options

General coastal engineering guidance for design of shoreline protection

Recommendation of shoreline protection or restoration for areas currently facing erosion

Provision of conceptual plan for beautification and restoration of selected stretches of

shoreline by beach nourishment works and any other structural or non-structural measures

to beautify the shoreline.


14/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

1-5

1.4 Related Studies

A number of studies have been or are currently being carried out to address issues on coastal

erosion and water quality with the aim of managing the coastal zone and to enhance the tourism

potential. The studies include:

National Coastal Erosion Study. 1985 (NCES).

West Coast of Sabah SMP, 1997 for Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Environment Sabah by

Environment Protection Department.

East Coast of Sabah SMP and updating of West Coast of Sabah SMP, 2005 for Ministry of

Tourism, Culture and Environment Sabah by Environment Protection Department.

The NCES was a comprehensive study covering all of Malaysia coastline and the first real

appraisal of coastal conditions in Malaysia documented. The scale of the study did not allow for

local elaborations and the Tuaran-Papar section is per definition treated in a descriptive, limited

and verygeneral manner. References to the NCES-conclusions will be made when possible.

Through the “East Coast of Sabah SMP” the Sabah SMP was compiled with an update of shoreline

changes along the west coast over preceding years. The plan was in 2007 approved by the StateCabinet and it has effectively become a tool for informed decisions making with respect to the

development in the coastal area.

Studies currently being carried out include:

Island Management Plan (IMP) for Sabah by Environment Protection Department.

Tourism Masterplan for the Coastal Area between Tuaran and Kota Belud by Institute for

Development Studies Sabah.

The IMP for Sabah is to extend the Sabah SMP to include the islands that were not included in

the study, with the overall objective to prepare an integrated management plan for islands with

tourism potential based on the natural resources or for improving socio-economic activities

through agriculture and fisheries. Further, it is to revisit the island reclamation concept for theLok Kawi tourism cluster first proposed in the late nineties.

The principle objective of the tourism masterplan study is to formulate a plan for the coastal

area between Tuaran and Kota Belud districts with a long-term sustainable growth strategy to

maximise the tourism benefits for Sabah through coastal tourism development.

These two studies have few overlaps with the present study area and it will be ensured that

plans and strategies within these areas are aligned.

1.5 Report Structure

The Draft Final Report is presented in three volumes as follows:

Volume 1 – Main Volume – Summary and MU Objectives and Strategies. This volume

provides general discussion on the main coastal management issues for the shoreline from

Papar to Turan and the broad principles considered in formulating the MU objectives and

strategies. For ease of reference MU objectives and strategies are presented on tabular form.

The earlier SMP was in 2007 endorsed by the State Cabinet and forms today the basis for the

management of the shoreline for the State of Sabah. It is the intention and hope that the present

plan that in greater detail addresses managements issues and detail development strategies

along the stretch of shoreline from Papar to Tuaran, Sabah in due time will become the statutory

plan. For some MUs management objectives and strategies may have changed or amendments

made and for easy reference previous and present management objectives and strategies have

been tabulated and included in an appendix.


15/382

1-6 S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

Volume 2 – Managing the Shoreline from Papar to Tuaran – Challenges and Opportunities.

This volume contains detailed and specific discussions and recommendations on major coastal

management aspects. Issues covered inlcude coastal flooding and tsunami, climate change,

coastal erosion and sedimentation, coastal protection, dredging and sand mining, potential

impacts of proposed coastal developments, water quality, beach beautification and restoration

as well as governance.

Volume 3 – Baseline Report . A significant amount of data has been collected during the course

of the study. This volume describes both primary and secondary and primary data collected as

well as the analyses carried out and the organisation of data into an IMS.

1.6 Study Area and Management Units

The geographic scope of the ISMP covers the area from Kuala Papar in the Papar district up to

Tg. Luok Pisok in the Tuaran district (Figure 1.1), with the approximate shoreline length of 100

km. The extent of the shoreline area to be considered in the study is general 1 km landward and

12 km seaward of the shoreline. There are twelve islands within the study area of which the

islands of Pulau Sulug, Mamutik, Manukan, Sapi and a large portion of P. Gaya are protected

within the Tunku Abdul Rahman Park (TARP). The part of islands within these parks is

considered in the study as a single management unit (protected area unit).

1.6.1 Coastal Sediment CellsThe shoreline within the study area has been sub-divided into three (3) main coastal sediment

cells containing a number of sub-cells. The delineation of cells and sub-cells is based upon

sections of coastline with similar sediment transport and morphological characteristics (see

Figure 1.2).

1.6.1.1 Primary Cells

A primary sediment cell is defined as a section of coast bounded by morphological featuresaround which there is negligible sediment bypass, even during extreme events, or bounded by

major rivers where the sediment supply from the river dominates the littoral drift.

Based upon this definition, it follows that coastal construction in one primary cell will have no

influence on the shoreline morphology of adjacent cells. Pollution and fine sediments may

however be transported by marine currents from one cell to another.

The three (3) primary cells defined within the study area (cell number in brackets corresponds

to the definition of the Sabah SMP from 2005) are delineated below (south to north) and shown

in Figure 1.2:

1. Papar Primary cell (Cell 5) delineated by Kuala Papar in the south and Tg. Aru headland in

the north

2. Kota Kinabalu Primary Cell (Cell 6) delineated by Tg. Aru headland and Tg. Kaitan

3. Tuaran Primary Cell (Cell 7) delineated by Tg. Kaitan and Tg. Luok Pisok to the north

Kuala Papar is as per the ToR the southern boundary of the study area, but due to the notorious

erosion problems encountered at Pantai Manis immediately south of Kuala Papar the study area

has been extended a few kilometres southward and a special cell has been defined:

Pantai Manis Special Cell (part of Cell 4) covering the coastline parcel of Pantai Manis

bounded by Kuala Papar to the north


16/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

1-7

Figure 1.1 Study area.


17/382

1-8 S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

Figure 1.2 Defined cell and subcell boundaries.

1.6.1.2

Secondary Cells (Subcells)Secondary cells divide the primary cells into smaller sections, which exhibit similar sedimenttransport characteristics and are bounded by features around which sediment bypass is small

during normal conditions, although there may be considerable bypass during extreme events.


18/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

1-9

Based upon this definition, it follows that coastal construction in one secondary cell will only

have a small influence on adjacent subcells.

Papar Primary Cell into three (3) subcells:

-

North-Papar

-

Kinarut and- Tg. Aru

Kota Kinabalu Primary Cell into five (5) subcells:

- KK City

- Likas

- Tarak Tarak

- Sapangar

- Tg. Gaya

Tuaran Primary Cell into two (2) sub-cells:

-

Karambunai and

-

Sabandar Bay

1.6.2

Management UnitsFor each subcell, smaller management units (MUs) which possess coherent features in terms of

physical characteristics and land use have been defined. In some cases, separate sub-

management units or hinterland management units are defined within each management unit

due to their distinct land use or natural feature differ from the main management unit fronting

the shoreline (e.g. in the case of estuaries or mangrove systems which extend some distance

inland and need to be considered under the ISMP yet are not located along the shoreline).

Generally the following factors have been considered while defining the MUs:

Coastal processes (littoral drift, sediment type, etc.)

Erosion threat and coastal protection requirements

Beach quality

Hinterland land use Cadastral and administrative boundaries

Socio-cultural issues

Defined MUs and their code names are as far as possible similar to previous selections made in

the earlier SMP, however, management unit boundaries have been amended which has resulted

in addition or deletion of some MUs along the study area and in total 67 MUs have been defined.

For readers familiar with the earlier SMP Appendix A may be used for cross referencing.

Pantai Manis Special Cell into 2 management units:

-

C4-14: Pantai Manis

-

C4-15: Papar Islamic School

Papar Cell into 22 management units and has 3 sub management units:

-

C5-01: Kuala Papar-

C5-02: Sg. Papar to Sg. Pengalat

- C5-02b: Immediate Hinterland

- C5-03: Sg. Pengalat Estuary

- C5-04: Summer Bay, Melinsung

- C5-04b: Melinsung Mangroves

- C5-05: Tg. Melinsung

- C5-06: Tg. Melinsung to Sg. Kawang

-

C5-07: Sg. Kawang Mangroves

-

C5-08: Sg. Kawang to Kg. Kinarut Laut

-

C5-09: Kg. Kinarut Laut to Sg. Kinarut

-

C5-10: Sg. Kinarut Mangroves

-

C5-11: Palm Beach-

C5-12: Kinarut Beach

-

C5-13: Kg. Karang to Lok Kawi Army Base

- C5-14: Lok Kawi Tourism Cluster Phase I


19/382

1-10 S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

- C5-15: Lok Kawi Tourism Cluster Phase II

- C5-16: Meruntum Lagoon North

- C5-17: Sg. Putatan to Tg. Dumpil

- C5-18: Tg. Dumpil

- C5-19: Tg. Dumpil to Sg. Petagas

-

C5-20: Kota Kinabalu International Airport (KKIA)-

C5-20b: Kota Kinabalu International Airport (KKIA) Runway Extended

-

C5-21: Tanjung Aru Beach

-

C5-22: Pulau Dinawan

Kota Kinabalu Cell into 22 management units and has 3 sub management unit:

- C6-01: Shangri-La’s Tanjung Aru Resort (STAR)

- C6-02: Kg. Tanjung Aru to Sutera Harbour

- C6-03: Sutera Harbour/Sembulan

- C6-04: KK Times Square

- C6-05: Central Bus Station

- C6-06: Kota Kinabalu Waterfront

- C6-07: Kota Kinabalu Port

-

C6-08: Tg. Lipat to Likas Beach-

C6-09: Likas Beach to Anjung Selera

-

C6-09b: Likas Lagoon

-

C6-10: Sg. Inanam Mangroves

-

C6-11: Sg. Inanam to Kg. Layang-Layang

- C6-12: Kg. Tarak-Tarak to Sg. Menggatal

- C6-13: Sg. Menggatal Estuary

- C6-14: UiTM Campus

- C6-15: Sapangar Bay Industrial Area

- C6-16: Sapangar Fish Factory

- C6-17 : Sapangar Naval Base

- C6-18 : Ocean Quarry

- C6-19: Tg. Gaya and Tg. Kaitan

-

C6-20: Pulau Sepangar

-

C6-21: Tunku Abdul Rahman Marine Park (TARP)

-

C6-22: Gaya Island

-

C6-22b : Tg. Logong

-

C6-22c : Gayana Island Resort

Tuaran Cell into 9 management units and has 6 sub management units:

- C7-01: Nexus Karambunai

- C7-02: Kuala Karambunai and Estuaries

- C7-02b: Petronas Complex

- C7-02c: Salut – Mengkabung Estuaries

- C7-02d: Gayang

- C7-03: Shangri-La’s Rasa Ria Resort

-

C7-03b: Estuary between Tg. Badak and Kg. Trayong-

C7-03c: Kg. Trayong

-

C7-04: Kuala Tambalang

-

C7-05: Sabandar Beach

-

C7-05b: Tambalang Estuary Mangroves

-

C7-06: Kuala Tuaran

- C7-07: Mimpian Jadi Resort

- C7-08: Sulaman Estuary

- C7-09: Sulaman Peninsula

Defined MUs and their code names for the Kimanis special cell, Papar, Kota Kinabalu and Tuaran

Cells well as Pantai Manis Special Cell are shown in Figure 1.3 to Figure 1.6. A total of 67

management units are defined for the whole study area.


20/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

1-11

Figure 1.3 Management units defined for Kimanis Special Cell.


21/382

1-12 S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

Figure 1.4 Management units defined for Papar Cell.


22/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

1-13

Figure 1.5 Management units defined for Kota Kinabalu Cell.


23/382

1-14 S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

Figure 1.6 Management units defined for Tuaran Cell.


24/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

2-1

2 State and ISMP Development Objectives

2.1 Vision

The vision for Malaysia is to be a high-income nation by 2020, through the creation of a high-

income, inclusive and sustainable economy. This is mirrored and elaborated in the State of

Sabah’s development vision to be a vibrant, economically successful and liveable state, built

upon the following five attributes (Sabah Development Corridor Vision, SEDIA [1]):

A preferred gateway for trade, investment and leisure for leading businesses and talents

from around the world in key areas

A happy and cohesive community that lives in harmony and prosperity regardless of race,

language or religion

A tech-savvy state that uses and showcases technology in enhancing the quality of daily lif

A place of opportunity where residents and foreign talents find rewarding employment

opportunities; and

Among the most liveable places in Asia with culture, heritage, quality of life and clean

environment.

The Sabah Development Corridor (SDC) was launched on January29, 2008 to accelerate the

growth of Sabah’s economy, promote regional balance and bridge the rural-urban divide while

ensuring sustainable management of the state’s resources. The SDC is part of the five economic

corridors inspired by the former Prime Minister YAB Dato’ Seri Abdullah Haji Ahmad Badawi

and is in line with the key thrusts and objectives of the Halatuju Pembangunan dan Kemajuan

Negeri Sabah, launched in 2004 by YAB Datuk Seri Panglima Musa Aman, Chief Minister of

Sabah, which outlines the direction of the state’s development.

2.2 Development Goals

As outlined in the Halatuju, the economic agenda or vision for the State of Sabah focuses on

three thrust sectors, namely, Agriculture, Tourism and Manufacturing. The aim for development

in Sabah is to be based on its existing strengths, most notably its rich natural resources. These

broad goals are further elaborated in the SDC blueprint, which outlines the following goals:

1 Leverage Sabah’s geographic location, natural resources, cultural heritage and biodiversity

for balanced growth

2 Build high-margin services sector in tourism and logistics

3

Empower rural participation and enhance agricultural yield

4

Increase value capture of Sabah’s Resources in downstream manufacturing activities5 Develop infrastructure and people as key enablers for Sabah’s growth

6

Improve income distribution and living standards of the people

7

Conserve and protect the environment for future generations

8 Plan and implement Sabah’s growth through good corporate practices.

2.3 Development Objectives

The SDC covers the whole of Sabah and is divided into three sub-regions, namely the Western,

Central and Eastern Sub-region. The present ISMP Study Area falls within the Western Sub-

Region, which is earmarked as Sabah’s industrial zone and tourism gateway. The objective is to

transform Kota Kinabalu into a world-class city by strengthening infrastructure and logistics to

support industries, improve access to tourism destinations and expand shipping logistics.

Economic initiatives under the SDC are aligned into six key focus areas or sectors as follows [2]:


25/382

2-2 S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

Tourism

Palm Oil

Agriculture

Oil, Gas and Energy

Education

Manufacturing & Logistics

In order to achieve the development goals, the SDC has identified25Entry Point Projects (EPPs)

with 72 individual projects(sub-projects) to boost investments. Within the study area, the EPPs

primarily fall within the Greater Kota Kinabalu EPPs, Tourism EPPs, and Manufacturing and

Logistics EPPs. These EPPs are concentrated within the Kota Kinabalu and Tuaran Districts,

with two Manufacturing and Logistics EPPs in KK (KKIP and Sapangar Bay Container Port

expansion) and one EPP focusing on Coastal Tourism Development in the Tuaran area.

The objective for the Greater KK area (including KK City, Penampang and Putatan towns) is to

leverage on KK as the gateway to Sabah’s tourism attractions and to promote liveability in the

city, focusing on public safety, transportation and healthcare as enablers for economic activities.

This is in line with DBKK’s Structure Plan 2030 to make Kota Kinabalu a Nature and Maritim ecity by 2030. In particular, the development objectives are:

To promote KK as a world-class tourist destination

To provide good and efficient infrastructure facilities

To promote environmentally sustainable design

To promote maritime-related business and industries

To upgrade local living standards.

In all, eleven EPPs have been identified for the Greater KK area to achieve the above objectives.

2.4 ISMP Development Objectives

The state vision, local plans and proposed development plans have, where appropriate, been

considered in the formulation of objectives and strategies for the management of the shoreline.

However, other factors considered are:

Environmental sustainability

Need for conservation of environmentally sensitive areas

To facilitate and enhance the enjoyment and appreciation by the public of the natural

beauty of the coastline through improving and extending opportunities for recreational,

educational, sporting and tourism activities that draw on, and are consistent with the

conservation and protection of their natural beauty;

Livelihood of fishermen

Welfare, social and cultural needs of existing and future coastal population

Planning and protection of developments in areas vulnerable to coastal hazards such aserosion, flooding and water pollution.


26/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

3-1

3 Findings and Issues

The baseline report findings from the various sectors have formed the basis for the

development of the ISMP with particular attention given to areas with development potential

(achieved in a sustainable manner)and areas where critical issues have been identified. To give a brief

overview important findings and critical issues have been summarised by sectors:

Physical environment (coastal morphology (erosion and sedimentation), coastal flooding,

coastal protection, water quality)

Biological environment (terrestrial and marine habitats, fisheries and aquaculture)

Land use, tourism and recreation

Socio-economics

3.1 Physical Environment

The physical environment sector covers several aspects including coastal morphology, coastal

flooding, coastal protection, dredging, reclamation, sand mining and water quality. The issues

identified in relation hereto are summarised below.

3.1.1 Coastal MorphologyThe coastal stretch from Papar to Tuaran is characterised by its diversity and features a variety

of coastal environments that may roughly be divided into two main categories:

Regulated or artificial coastlines.

Natural unspoiled coastal landscapes.

The coastline in and near Kota Kinabalu is made up by a significant fraction of regulated and

artificial coastlines:

i.

The regulated coastlines consists of harbours, ports, marinas, land reclamations, water

(stilt) villages, seawalls as well as coastal protection structures ranging from provisional to

massive protection schemes

ii.

The developed part of the coastline facilitates a great number of tourism spots with lower-

end to world-renowned hotel/resorts, recreational facilities, waterfronts and also features

housing areas, industries and governmental zones

The coastal stretches towards Papar and Tuaran features unspoiled coastlinelandscape with

intermittent developments including housing areas/coastal villages, resorts and recreational

facilities. The coastal landscape varies significantly with littoral beaches (especially north ofKota Kinabalu towards Tuaran), rocky headlands, river mouths, deltas, lagoons, estuaries, mud

flats, sand spits and mangrove swamps.

3.1.1.1 ErosionMore than 50 km of coastline within the study area is undergoing erosion and without

protection (or upgrade of existing protection) property, infrastructure or other values will

potentially be lost. The eroding coastline has been categorised based on the definitions by the

NCES.

Category 1 – Critical erosion with immediate danger for damage or loss of values:

i.

Pantai Manis Beach south of Kuala Papar

ii.

Kg. Kinarut Lautiii. JKR Complex at near Sg. Putatan river mouth

iv. Kg. Contoh along beach at and south of Sg. Petagas

v. Nexus Residential Villa


27/382

3-2 S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

Category 2 – Significant erosion with loss of values with a 5 to 10 years period unless protected:

i. Palm Beach Villa

ii. Tg. Aru Beach at Prince Phillip Park

iii. Nexus Resort at Karambunai

iv. Karambunai Beach near Sg. Menkabung/Sg. Salut

v.

Tuaran Beach Resortand private housing at Sabandar Beach

vi.

Kuala Tuaran

Category 3 – Acceptable erosion with no or minor loss of value if not protected

i.

Kg. Bundusan Papar between Sg. Papar to Sg. Pengalat

ii.

Northern Beringgis Beach close to Sg. Kawang

iii.

Sabandar Beach except area of Tuaran Beach Resort, private housing and areaimmediately

south of Kuala Tuaran

For basically all areas under Category 1 and 2 some coastal protection has been constructed, but

since failed due to inadequate design of the protection structure.

The coastal erosion adjacent to Sg. Papar and Sg. Turan river mouths (Pantai Manis Beach, Kg.

Bundusan Papar and Sabandar Beach) may in part be ascribed to sand mining in the rivers.

3.1.1.2 SedimentationSedimentation is a common problem for the river mouths within the study area and for most

rivers within the study area it is not possible to navigate through the river mouths with a small

boat and for some rivers there is also an increased risk of flooding. The increasing problem of

river mouth sedimentation may generally be ascribed to a combination of higher sediments

loads due to increased soil erosion in the river catchment following land clearing and reduction

in the flushing capacity through the river mouthas the tidal prism of the river is reduced by land

reclamation.

At Sg. Petagas river mouth the sedimentation has further increased following the reclamation

for the KKIA runway extension, causing the sediments transported along the shoreline (from Tg.Dumpil and northward) to be trapped at the southern end of the reclamation.

Likas Bay is gradually becoming shallower due to discharge of sediments into the bay from

monsoon drains and primarily Sg. Inanam. The high sediment concentrations also affect the

quality of the beach.

3.1.2 Coastal Protection and ReclamationsThere are a large number of coastal structures along the shoreline of the study area. In and near

Kota Kinabalu developments have mainly occurred on reclaimed land protected by revetments

and seawall, whereas at other locations developments originally located at some distance from

the shorelinehave become at risk due to erosion and coastal protection has been

constructed.Some of the coastal protection structure and reclamations are listed in thefollowing.

3.1.2.1 Coastal ProtectionCoastal protection structures identified varies from revetments (rubble mounds), seawalls

(masonry, reinforced concrete or gabions) and groynes:

i.

Along Pantai Manis Beach precast concrete Labuan blocks have been installed in attempt to

arrest erosion, but blocks have overturned due to scour and wave action.

ii. Long stretches of the shoreline within the study area are protected by rock revetments

(many of these structures are characterised by lack of engineering design and are more

rubble mounds):

a.

Rock revetmentsin general good condition are found at Pantai Manis School southof Sg. Papar, Beringgis Resort south of Sg. Kawang, Borneo Paradise and Langkah

Syabas Resorts along Kinarut Beach, Kota Kinabalu – Papar Highway at Lok Kawi,

Bay View Villa at Tg. Dumpil, Kota Kinabalu International Airport (KKIA), Tg,


28/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

3-3

Lipatnorth of the old Kota Kinabalu Port, jetty belonging to University Malaysia

Sabah (UMS) and within Sapangar Bay

b. Rock revetments in poor condition (failed or failing) are found at Palm Beach

Housing Estate at Sg. Kinarut river mouth, JKR Complex north of Sg. Putatan, beach

south of Kg. Contoh, and Tuaran Beach Resort south of Sg. Tambalang

iii.

Shorter stretches of the shoreline within the study are protected by seawalls (concrete or

gabions):

a.

Concrete and gabion seawalls in general good condition are found south of Sg.

Kawang, Bay View Villa at Tg. Dumpil, Tg. Lipat north of the old Kota Kinabalu Port

and Likas Beach, Nexus Resort at Karambunai and at Tuaran Beach Resort.

b.

Conctrete or masonry seawalls in poor condition (failed or failing) are found at Kg.

Kinarut Laut, Kg. Contoh, Tg. Aru Beachand Nexus Residental Villa at Karambunai

iv.

Provisional shoreline protection of tires and concrete pile stubs are found at Kg. Contoh

near Sg. Petagas river mouth.

v. Groins are only found at Likas Beach where they function as terminal structures to prevent

loss of sand from the beach

The failing coastal protection structures are all found in areas subject to erosion and it appears

evident that these structures have been constructed without due consideration of coastalengineering aspects..

3.1.2.2 ReclamationLand has mainly been reclaimed around Kota Kinabalu with larger part of the city centre

developed on reclaimed land. Among the more significant or recent are:

i. The extension of the runway for Kota Kinabalu International Airport (KKIA), which has

caused significant sedimentation at Sg. Petagas river mouth and slightly accelerated erosion

rates at the southern part of Tg. Aru beach. During construction problems with erosion was

noticeable at Kg. Contoh (southern bank of the river mouth), but this ascribed to illegal

activities by contractor

ii.

The development of Jesselton Residences near Jesselton Point. Given that the Kota Kinabaluwaterfront is already protected and with no littoral transport the development will not

cause any morphological impacts and merely streamlines the water front

iii.

At Sapangar Bay land have been reclaimed for industrial and port development, but with no

significant morphological impacts owing to the limited wave exposure and lack of littoral

zone

iv. The development of the Naval Base for the Royal Malaysian Navy. Land has been reclaimed

over reefs and a causeway constructed from the main land to P. Udar Kechil. Following the

construction of the causeway sedimentation has occurred on the northeastern shore of the

island

v. The Kota Kinabalu City Waterfront (KKCW)development at the city centre with a minor

reclamation on an already protected waterfront

vi. Magellan Sutera Resort and Pacific Sutera Hotel developed on reclaimed peninsular (island)

south of Kota Kinabalu city centre

vii.

Bay View Villa housing estate between Tg. Dumpil and Sg. Putatan

viii.

Reclamation fronting Kg. Karang to be part of the Lok Kawi Tourism Cluster. The

reclamation has created a narrow and shallow lagoon now partly closed at the southern end

due to trapping of sediments transported along the shore

Most of the reclamations have been protected by revetments and only at some of the recent

developments in Kota Kinabalu city centre seawalls have been used

3.1.3 Coastal FloodingCoastal flooding is not a common problem within the study area but do occur:

i.

At Karabunai (Nexus Resort) coastal flooding has been reported, although not reaching theresort buildings


29/382

3-4 S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

ii. Relatively frequent flooding has been reported at Palm Beach Housing Estate at Sg. Kinarut

river mouth, this being due to a too low platform level for the development combined with

insufficient setback and poor design of coastal protection

3.1.4

DredgingHigher loads of fine sediments and weak currents result in shallow river mouths with limited

flood conveyance and not navigable with even small boats. Dredging has for these reasons been

carried out or is being considered for some of the river mouths:

i.

Sg. Papar and Sg. Putatan river mouths have recently been dredged to improve navigability

ii. Dredging is currently being considered to improve flood conveyance and navigability

through the river mouth of Sg. Petagas

3.1.5 Sand MiningSand mining or extraction is carried out at numerous locations in Sg. Papar and Sg. Tuaran.

Information on the quantities of sand extracted is not available, but morphological changes

(erosion) near the river mouths indicate that mining results in a deficit in sediment supply tothe shoreline.

3.1.6 Water QualityThe coastal and marine water quality varies significantly with the coastal and hinterland land

use and as such over the study area. Around Kota Kinabalu the high intensity land use for

residential, commercial and industrial purpose result in high pollutant loads in rivers and drains

discharging into the sea. For the lower intensity land use towards Papar and Tuaran pollutant

loads are significantly lower. The data collected for the present study indicates that the

discharges from land-based activities here are a far greater risk to the environment than

pollution from marine activities.

The major pollutants of concern are disease-causing microorganisms (e.g. E-coli), nutrients,toxic contaminants, debris and sediments that may adversely impact marine flora and fauna,

fisheries and recreational beaches. The loads and the dispersion of pollutants vary with the

monsoon seasons and in comparison to the Malaysian Marine Water Quality Criteria and

Standard the present study reveals that:

iii. High total ammonia nitrogen concentrations exceeding Class 2 requirement are found along

the shoreline of Pantai Manis, North-Papar, Kinarut, Tg. Aru, Likas and Sabandar sub-cells.

iv. Phosphate and nitrate concentrations around Sg. Kinarut, Sg. Putatan and Sg. Menggatal

river mouths and Likas and Tarak-Tarak sub-cells exceeds for longer periods the Class 2

requirements

v. High faecal coliform concentrations are found relatively close to drains and river mouths

and concentrations exceeding Class 2 are observedaround Sg. Papar river mouth and the

sub-cells of Kinarut, Tg. Aru, Likas and Sabandar. Only coastal waters within Pantai Manis,

Sapangar, Tg. Gaya and Karambunai sub-cells comply with Class 2 standards

3.2 Biological Environment

3.2.1 Coastal HabitatsCoastal vegetation within the study area includes beach vegetation, grassland, lowland forests

and mangrove forests. Beach forests and woodlands are concentrated mainly within the Tuaran

and Papar districts, as the Kota Kinabalu city area extending down to the Putatan district is

mostly built-up, and comprises disturbed or artificial habitats such as open grasslands and

landscaped areas. Even in the more vegetated areas, the invasive Acacias are very commonwithin the beach forests, indicating previously disturbed habitats. Common beach flora includes

coconuts, Aru and Acacias. Less disturbed coastal forests are generally found on the islands,

such as P. Gaya, P. Sapangar, as well as on rocky headlands along the coastline.


30/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

3-5

The main mangrove areas within the study area are primarily associated with riverine and

estuarine systems, whereas coastal fringing mangroves are not a prominent feature within the

study area. Historically, the shoreline of Kota Kinabalu supported fringing mangrove habitats;

however, these were lost due to expansion of the city area through reclamation since the early

20th century.

The study findings indicate an estimated mangrove area of approximately 5,073 ha within the

ISMP project area. The most extensive distribution is found in the Sulaman and Mengkabung

bays. The Mengkabung and Sulaman mangroves are relatively intact with Sulaman mangrove

protected as a Mangrove Forest Reserve. Most mangrove areas within the study site are

however affected to some extent by conversion for road construction, residential development,

or other development. Other clearings were for conversion to agriculture and aquaculture

activities. When comparing the current mangrove extent to the distribution recorded in 2004,

there has been a loss of approximately 91.4 ha (2.4 %) of mangroves within the study area over

the approximately 7 year period.

Given the disturbed nature of the terrestrial vegetation in the study area, faunal habitats are

restricted primarily to mangrove areas and the coastal forests on headlands. Although nostudies have been carried out to determine the fauna of the study area, secondary data indicates

that the mangrove areas are highly diverse with different species of mammals, reptiles,

amphibians and birds, with a high proportion of species of high conservation value.

3.2.2 Coral ReefsCoral reef distribution within the study area is concentrated in the central region, from

Kinarut/Lok Kawi in the south up to Tg. Kaitan (bounding Sapangar Bay) in the north.The coral

reefs in Sabah in general as well as in the study area have been rapidly and adversely impacted

by human activities in the past decades and the impacts are continuing today. Along the west

coast of Sabah, live coral cover has declined due to fish bombing, sedimentation, and effluent

run-off from mainland or nearby islands.

Despite the above threats, a number of areas of good quality reefs remain, namely, south of Sg.

Kinarut (although current status is uncertain), around P. Dinawan, the reefs of the Tunku Abdul

Rahman Park and around P. Sapangar. It is therefore proposed that these areas are prioritised

for conservation.

P. Dinawan should be conserved as a protected area due to the good quality coral reefs found

during the recent surveys. The fringing reefs of the southern part of the island have good coral

cover while reefs along other parts of the range in quality from poor to good. This island has

good potential as a tourist destination due to its location near the state capital. In view of the

quality of the reefs in the area, dive tourism should be explored in the area.

P. Sapangar has good potential as a tourist destination due to its location near the state capital,

Fair reef conditions and generally good water quality. The data basis in this area is however2007 and hence some updates would be required. Due to its proximity to UMS, this site would

be ideal as a research station for the Borneo Marine Research Institute (BMRI). Dive tourism

could also be promoted to further protect this site and also to help reduce some of the pressure

on the reefs within TARP due to high visitor numbers.

3.2.3 SeagrassExtensive seagrass beds are found in the large estuaries on the West Coast of Sabah, such as the

Mengkabung and Sulaman estuaries, while a number of other areas support smaller, patchy

seagrass beds such as on the southeastern side of P. Dinawan, around P. Gaya, northeast of P.

Sapangar, within Sapangar Bay, Salut, and the Mengkabung and Sulaman estuaries as mentioned

above.

Threats to the seagrass habitats within the study area include high sediment and nutrient

loading, where recent observations show stress due to sedimentation and algal epiphytic cover


31/382

3-6 S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

in areas such as Meruntum lagoon, Sapangar Bay and P. Gaya. The seagrass in Sapangar Bay is

also threatened by potential reclamation and expansion of industrial activities in the area.

3.2.4 Marine Fauna

The marine mega fauna found within the waters of Sabah is highly diverse with species of highconservation value. Numerous sightings of marine mammals within the study area have been

recorded with the most recent occurrence on 10 January 2012 when a Pygmy killer whale

(Feresa attenuata) was found stranded on the Tg. Aru beach.

Large amounts of krill flowing out from the Mengkabung and Sulaman estuaries attract whale

sharks to the area. Whale sharks are one of the most common megafauna sighted within Kota

Kinabalu area where whale sharks are reportedly sighted at TARP by resort operators and

divers each year. In 1997, three (3) whale sharks were tagged in Usukan Island for a satellite

tracking study. The tagged whale sharks show that the whale sharks remains quite close to

shore, travelling from Usukan, going into Mengkabung Bay, TARP and to Pulau Tiga. It is

deduced that the whale sharks do not remain in one area and have a widespread movements

where they remain close to Borneo and Philippine Islands as they make their way to South

China Sea.

There are not many reported sightings and reports available of dolphins between Tuaran and

Papar waters except for occasional sightings by divers especially near TARP. Dugongs however

have been reported within the Sulaman Bay area, where seagrass beds are recorded.

Marine turtlescan be observed within the TARP area. No nesting beaches are reported along the

mainland shorelines. The most recent report turtle nesting was of a Hawksbill turtle found

laying eggs in P. Mamutik, TARP in 2009.

3.2.5

Fishery and AquacultureThe coastline along essentially the entire study area, from Sapangar Bay down to Kimanis Bay is

classified as a fisheries area. In addition, the mangrove lined estuaries of Sulaman Bay,Mengkabong Bay, Salut Bay and Pulau Gaya also support fisheries and aquaculture activities.

In Sabah, there are 16 Fisheries Districts, in which the study area is located within the Tuaran,

Kota Kinabalu and Papar fisheries districts. According to the Department of Fisheries Malaysia,

in 2007 a total of 2,565 fishermen were recorded from the three fishing districts, where a slight

increase in number of fishermen was recorded from 2007 to 2010. Between 2007 and 2010, the

highest number of registered fishermen was recorded in Kota Kinabalu, followed by Papar and

Tuaran.

A range of commercial and traditional fishing gears is used to harvest a large variety of species

within these fisheries zone. Types of fisheries resources landed within the waters of Sabah are

diadromous fish, marine fish (both demersal and pelagic), crustaceans and molluscs.

Miscellaneous resources like sea urchins and jellyfish are also part of the Sabah marine fish

resources.

The Department of Fisheries (DOF) Malaysia has designated numerous areas around Malaysian

waters for Aquaculture Industrial Zone for High Impact Projects . Under this programme, marine

aquaculture in Sabah is carried out using cage system, clam farming, seaweed farming and

hatchery activities. Two areas within the ISMP study area have been designated under this

programme, namely P. Gaya for cage system and Tg. Badak in Tuaran for hatchery activities.

3.3 Land use, Tourism and Recreation

The land use within the study area (1 km from the shoreline, and in some places further inlandin consideration of the inland limit of mangroves) comprises vegetated areas (27%), open space

(24%) and built up areas (30%), typically consisting of commercial, residential, institutional,

recreational and industrial land uses. Wetlands cover a further 16% of the study area.


32/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

3-7

Villages are scattered along the shoreline of the study area with a total of 35 villages recorded.

The highest number of coastal villages is found in the Tuaran District with a total of 15 villages,

followed by Kota Kinabalu (13 villages) and Papar (5 villages). Putatan has the least number of

coastal villages with only 2 reported.

The total area of alienated land within the study area is 7,017 ha (53%). The study area in Paparhas about 40% alienated land including in the foreshore reserve and nearshore (i.e. water

space) areas. Similarly, in the Putatan District there are also numerous land titles stretching into

the foreshore reserve and nearshore areas. There are several land titles issued in the marine

waters within the proposed tourism reclamation cluster extending from Tg. Dumpil down to Lok

Kawi, including titles issued along the Meruntum lagoon sand spit which has since been lost to

erosion. About 82% of the study area in the Kota Kinabalu District comprises alienated land

while in the Tuaran district, only around 19% of the coastal area is alienated land, the rest being

state land or forest reserves.

A total of 155 lodgings of various categories of hotels and resorts can be found along the Papar

to Tuaran stretch. Of these, 26 of the hotels and resorts are either sited on the shoreline or

reclaimed coastal land with seafront view. From the total of 21 accommodations within Papar toTuaran along the shoreline, 12 hotels and resorts were star rated, three (3) were orchid rated

and 6 were not rated as of reported by Sabah Tourism up to date.

There are many tourism and recreational attractions along the Papar to Tuaran coastal stretch,

with the most frequented recreational spots by either locals or foreigners being the beaches,

which is evidenced by the many resorts found strategically located at beachfront or on

waterfront property.

Tg. Aru Beach and Tg. Lipat in Kota Kinabalu are popular public beaches with facilities available

to the public. Tg. Aru is crowded over the evenings and weekends with locals and tourists, while

Tg. Lipat Beach adjacent to Likas Bay attracts locals for recreational activities and post picnic

swims over the weekend. Both of these locations hold Sabah’s annual events such as Dragon

boat races as well as Yacht Sailing Regatta competitions.

Papar has a few public beaches to name, Pantai Manis and a small stretch of Melinsung Beach,

where it not as crowded but still visited by nearby locals. The Kinarut area, also located in the

Papar district hosts a couple of popular beach stretches with small to moderate scale resorts

such as Langkah Syabas and Beringgis Beach Resort. Other tourism attractions apart from the

public and tourist beaches include historical/cultural sites, retail and dining outlets primarily

concentrated in Kota Kinabalu.

3.4 Socio-economics

3.4.1

Economic BackgroundSabah’s tourism sector is the 6th highest contributor to the State’s economy, and Sabah’s

coastline is one of the major attractions for tourists. In particular in the study area, tourism

remains a strong economic component, with KK City being the State’s entry point and numerous

attractions in the vicinity such as the Tunku Abdul Rahman Park, beaches and beach resorts in

Tuaran and Kinarut.

Industrial activities also occur within the study area, concentrated primarily in Sapangar Bay

and around the Salut estuary in the Kota Kinabalu Industrial Park (KKIP) area.

3.4.2 DemographyThe study area comprising of the Kota Kinabalu, Tuaran, Papar and Putatan Districts had a total

population of 752,696 in 2010, representing 23.5% of the total population of Sabah. Among thefour areas, Kota Kinabalu had the highest population, followed by Papar, Tuaran and Putatan.


33/382

3-8 S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

According to a survey conducted in December 2011, the shoreline population within the study

area was 95,592, which was 12.7% of the whole population of the study area.

The State of Sabah is the most diverse state in Malaysia in terms of ethnicity with more than 30

ethnic groups. The main ethnic groups comprise of Kadazan/Dusun, Baja and Murut. Other

groups are Malay, Other Bumiputera (e.g. Kedayan, Bisaya, Irranun, Rungus, Kimarang, Kwijau,Lundayeh, Ubian, Binadan, Orang Sungai, Tatana, Tagaas, Brunei, Suluk, etc.), Chinese, Indians

and others. Within the study area, the ethnic composition can be summarised as follows:

The Chinese community is the largest ethnic group in Kota Kinabalu, followed by Bajau and

Kadazan/Dusun;

The Kadazan/Dusun and Bajau ethnic groups are dominant in Tuaran District;

In Papar District, the Malay community is the largest ethnic group with slightly smaller

groups of Kadazan/Dusun and Bajau;

In Putatan District the Bajau community is the largest ethnic group with slightly smaller

groups of Malay and Kadazan/Dusun.

In 2010, the employment profile in the Kota Kinabalu and Penampang districts was dominated

by service workers and shop and market sales workers, while in Tuaran most employed persons

worked as skilled agricultural and fisheries workers. This was not the case in Papar, where most

of the employed persons worked in elementary occupations.

3.4.3 Issues faced by Coastal CommunitiesA survey within the study area was conducted between December and November 2011, mainly

to determine the socio-economic issues within the study area. Twenty-eight (28) villages were

covered during the survey, located mostly within 1 km radius from the shoreline. Reported

serious issues facing these coastal communities included erosion and flooding (inundation),

pollution and deterioration of natural resources. Exposure to natural hazards such as erosion

and flooding was in particular highlighted in the District of Tuaran, followed by Papar, KotaKinabalu and Putatan.

The main highlighted pollution problem was that of household garbage, indicating that the local

people are well aware of the issue but are faced by lack of waste management infrastructure or

services. This was a reported issue in all districts within the study area.

Most of the surveyed villages are agreeable to making their areas as tourist destinations,

especially in Tuaran, followed by Kota Kinabalu, Papar and Putatan.


34/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

4-1

4 Defining Management Objectives and Strategies

Management objectives and strategies for each MU (defined in Section 1.6) has been derivedfollowing the methodology outlined below, while the methodology applied for the individual

steps is given in the following subsections:

Identify and describe features

Develop management objectives

Rank features/objectives

Develop management strategies that fulfil the objectives for the feature.

4.1 Feature Identification

The baseline report findings from the various sectors have been used in an integrated manner to

assist in the identification of the key features or benefits for each of the MUs. A feature is

something tangible that provides a benefit or service to the society in one way or another.

Shoreline features can relate to the following ‘themes’ or sectors:

Ecology/ Natural environment

Landscape

Recreation/ tourism

Commercial and agricultural property

Villages/ residential areas

Infrastructure (ports, roads, pipelines, etc.)

Heritage

Examples of specific features along the study area shoreline may include:

Tourism developments

Mangrove swamp

Forested headland

Heritage site

Fish landing site

Examples of aspects that do not constitute a feature include:

A seawall that protects a tourist resort area (the resorts are the feature).

‘Coastal processes’ do not constitute a feature, e.g. sediment transport maintaining a beach

that provides a recreational amenity is not a feature; instead the feature would be the beachwith the benefit of providing recreation values to society.

In addition to the listing of the features, a summary of the issues or threats related to the feature

have alsobeen provided for each MU. Issues that may occur for example are where the feature is

at risk from flooding/erosion/accretion or where future development may impact upon a

feature.

4.2 Management Objectives

For each feature, specific objectives which can be used in shoreline management planning have

been defined based on the issues and the benefits provided by that feature. Examples of generic

objectives that have been considered for certain features and issues that have been identified ina number of MUs throughout the study area are given in Table 4.1


35/382

4-2 S1030-Vol-1a-2-4

Table 4.1 Some common issues and objectives formulated in response to features found within the study area MUs.

Feature Issues associated with feature Generic Objectives

Recreation and

tourist facilities

Potential loss of tourist and recreational sites

due to erosion

Potential deterioration of tourist and

recreational sites due to water pollution

Prevent loss of tourist /recreational facilities

due to erosion

Maintain viability of tourist sites

Maintain or improve water quality in affected

areas

Avoid locating tourism sites in incompatible

areas

Jetties and fish

landing sites

Potential loss of facilities due to sedimentation

Potential loss of facilities due to erosion

Maintain access to beach/sea

Maintain landing sites in the area.

Prevent loss/damage to facilities due to

erosion

Infrastructure Potential damage to roads due to erosion Maintain existing access

Beach and

foreshore

Potential deterioration in condition and

appearance of beach due to erosion

Potential deterioration in condition and

appearance of beach due water pollution

Maintain a beach suitable for recreation

purposes

Coral reefs Potential for proposed coastal development

works to impact on the corals

Water pollution from nearby industries

Sedimentation from rivers

Prevent damage to coral reefs

4.3

Ranking of Features and Associated Objectives

The objectives may conflict and hence the objectives will need to be ranked, such that the

management strategy will be based on the highest ranking objective(s).

In order to carry out such a ranking and prioritisation exercise, particularly where stakeholder

feedback is to be sought, a transparent method of prioritising the objectives has been applied.

Hence an evaluation matrix has been developed where, for each MU, the features and issues

which have been listed as part of the baseline phase are then considered and the following key

questions are asked to assess their importance:

4.3.1 Why is this feature important?This should identify the actual tangible benefits of the feature. The type of benefits may includebut not be limited to the following:

Human/property/community value

Critical habitat/conservation importance

Historical value

Landscape value

Provision of economic growth opportunities (ports/marinas/tourism/recreation/industry).

The importance of the feature should also reflect the scale at which this feature is important, for

example whether it is important on a local, regional, national or international level.


36/382

S1030-Vol-1A-2-4

4-3

4.3.2 Who benefits?The beneficiaries or stakeholders should be identified, for example:

Individuals (i.e. not organisations)

Local residents or people from the immediate catchment area (fishermen, businesses, et

integrated shoreline management plan volume 1 part a b

Documents