
Bryan Higgins
https://www.linkedin.com/in/bryan-higgins-6b761621/
Supervisors: Fred Lukermann and Yi-Fu Tuan & Gerald Vizenor
Address: USA
Supervisors: Fred Lukermann and Yi-Fu Tuan & Gerald Vizenor
Address: USA
less
Related Authors
C. Michael Hall
University of Canterbury/Te Whare Wānanga o Waitaha
David Seamon
Kansas State University
Armando Marques-Guedes
UNL - New University of Lisbon
Martin O'Neill
University of York
Martha Radice
Dalhousie University
Mehmet Penpecioglu
İZMİR INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Filip De Boeck
KU Leuven
Simon Springer
The University of Newcastle
Tamsen Emerson Hert
University of Wyoming
Jerry Diethelm
University of Oregon
InterestsView All (16)
Uploads
Papers by Bryan Higgins
A total of 1023 foreign visitors to Belize were asked to complete a written survey as they waited to leave Belize in the departure lounge at Goldson International Airport in Belize City during the year 2000. All of the surveys were administered by Anna of Orange Walk and Calvin of Belize City. Dr. Bryan Higgins from The International Ecotourism Society trained the surveyors and Dr. Vincent Palacio from the Programme for Belize supervized their work at the Goldson International Airport. The visitor exit surveys were collected during both the high tourism season in March (60% of the total) and the low tourism season of June and July (40% of the total) to assure that the results reflect the character of visitors during both seasons. This survey did not sample visitors who left Belize through any of the border crossings from Belize to Mexico, Honduras or Guatamala. The visitor exit surveys were collected during every day of the week and throughout the entire day to assure that all the departing international flights were proportionally sampled in the process. On each day the survey was conducted, every departing foreign resident was asked to fill out a copy. Based upon the daily reporting of the surveyors as well as two days of independent observation by Dr. Higgins, it is estimated that the response rate for this survey was 90%. Given that the total number of visitors departing Belize was approximately 100,000 for the year, for questions in the survey that simply show the percentage of responses from 0 to 100% the 95 percent confidence level is estimated to be plus or minus 3%. Please note the statistical summaries for individual questions may total over 100% due to rounding.
The present-day Champlain Canal is 60 miles long and runs between the Erie Canal at Waterford in the south and the southernmost point of Lake Champlain at Whitehall to the north. With its inception in 1823 the canal connected previously unconnected drainages – including the Hudson-Mohawk and the Champlain. Organisms thought to have invaded Lake Champlain via this route include sea lamprey, water chestnut, zebra mussel, and white perch. Control efforts associated with 3 of these species in the lake are expected to exceed $16 million for the period 1982-2008. Current knowledge of aquatic nuisance species (ANS) confirms that new species will continue to invade Lake Champlain via the Champlain Canal, by boat trailers, aquarium trade, bait usage, and aquatic plant nursery operations. A diversity of opinions among the many stake holders and opinion leaders exists about the importance of these vectors and the degree of the ANS problem in the Champlain Basin. While many stakeholders expressed concerns over the invasive species issues, some people didn't feel that the canal posed a significant risk as an invasives pathway. Still others didn't feel the canal was the most important pathway relative to boat trailers, bait trade, aquaria/pet trade, and other vectors. Despite these opinions, the available literature argues that the canal represents the single largest known vector of Lake Champlain ANS. While an optimal barrier would be 100% effective at preventing transport through the canal, this should not be the criterion for success. Even an 80% reduction in the probability that a species could enter Lake Champlain via the Champlain Canal represents significant progress in protecting the ecology of the Champlain basin. Six canal barrier ideas were proposed and examined from the standpoint of feasibility. Preliminary costs and benefits were also described. The six ANS barrier ideas were:
Alternative One: Do Nothing (i.e. no change in canal engineering or operations) Alternative Two: Close the Champlain Canal Alternative Three: Physical/mechanical modification of canal and or locks. Modifications would consist of limited hydrologic separation with provisions for overland transport of recreational vessels, and use of graving dock or seasonal lockage restrictions for commercial vessels. Alternative Four: Behavioral fish barriers (electrical, bubble, sound, strobe light - alone and in combinations) Alternative Five: Chemical/Water Quality Barrier Alternative Six: Biological Barrier
Alternative Three is seen as the most effective at stemming the flow of canal-borne invasives. This alternative offers the best protection against all types of ANS. Behavioral barriers (sound, bubble, electrical, light – alone or in combination) represent a good second choice, though no protection against plants and invertebrates will be realized. Sound decisions as to the fate of any Champlain Canal ANS barrier will require further analysis. Well designed socio-economic surveys are needed to better understand current canal usage and importance. Surveys of this type should also enable decision makers to formulate “what-if” scenarios relative to boat traffic impacts caused by ANS barriers and/or canal operational changes. Engineering studies are needed to predict the physical viability and costs associated with physical and behavior barriers. The construction of graving docks, boat hoists, behavior barriers, feeder canal diversions, etc. would require significant new investment in the
4 NYS Canal System. The costs associated with such new infrastructure need to be detailed before any serious deliberation on the problem of canal/ANS could begin. By their very nature, canals serve as unnatural watershed connections. Global trade and 21
st
century travel and tourism will combine to deliver many new invasive species across several watersheds to Lake Champlain in future decades. If no action is taken, the future will see new invasive fish, plant, and invertebrate colonizations in Lake Champlain.
A total of 1023 foreign visitors to Belize were asked to complete a written survey as they waited to leave Belize in the departure lounge at Goldson International Airport in Belize City during the year 2000. All of the surveys were administered by Anna of Orange Walk and Calvin of Belize City. Dr. Bryan Higgins from The International Ecotourism Society trained the surveyors and Dr. Vincent Palacio from the Programme for Belize supervized their work at the Goldson International Airport. The visitor exit surveys were collected during both the high tourism season in March (60% of the total) and the low tourism season of June and July (40% of the total) to assure that the results reflect the character of visitors during both seasons. This survey did not sample visitors who left Belize through any of the border crossings from Belize to Mexico, Honduras or Guatamala. The visitor exit surveys were collected during every day of the week and throughout the entire day to assure that all the departing international flights were proportionally sampled in the process. On each day the survey was conducted, every departing foreign resident was asked to fill out a copy. Based upon the daily reporting of the surveyors as well as two days of independent observation by Dr. Higgins, it is estimated that the response rate for this survey was 90%. Given that the total number of visitors departing Belize was approximately 100,000 for the year, for questions in the survey that simply show the percentage of responses from 0 to 100% the 95 percent confidence level is estimated to be plus or minus 3%. Please note the statistical summaries for individual questions may total over 100% due to rounding.
The present-day Champlain Canal is 60 miles long and runs between the Erie Canal at Waterford in the south and the southernmost point of Lake Champlain at Whitehall to the north. With its inception in 1823 the canal connected previously unconnected drainages – including the Hudson-Mohawk and the Champlain. Organisms thought to have invaded Lake Champlain via this route include sea lamprey, water chestnut, zebra mussel, and white perch. Control efforts associated with 3 of these species in the lake are expected to exceed $16 million for the period 1982-2008. Current knowledge of aquatic nuisance species (ANS) confirms that new species will continue to invade Lake Champlain via the Champlain Canal, by boat trailers, aquarium trade, bait usage, and aquatic plant nursery operations. A diversity of opinions among the many stake holders and opinion leaders exists about the importance of these vectors and the degree of the ANS problem in the Champlain Basin. While many stakeholders expressed concerns over the invasive species issues, some people didn't feel that the canal posed a significant risk as an invasives pathway. Still others didn't feel the canal was the most important pathway relative to boat trailers, bait trade, aquaria/pet trade, and other vectors. Despite these opinions, the available literature argues that the canal represents the single largest known vector of Lake Champlain ANS. While an optimal barrier would be 100% effective at preventing transport through the canal, this should not be the criterion for success. Even an 80% reduction in the probability that a species could enter Lake Champlain via the Champlain Canal represents significant progress in protecting the ecology of the Champlain basin. Six canal barrier ideas were proposed and examined from the standpoint of feasibility. Preliminary costs and benefits were also described. The six ANS barrier ideas were:
Alternative One: Do Nothing (i.e. no change in canal engineering or operations) Alternative Two: Close the Champlain Canal Alternative Three: Physical/mechanical modification of canal and or locks. Modifications would consist of limited hydrologic separation with provisions for overland transport of recreational vessels, and use of graving dock or seasonal lockage restrictions for commercial vessels. Alternative Four: Behavioral fish barriers (electrical, bubble, sound, strobe light - alone and in combinations) Alternative Five: Chemical/Water Quality Barrier Alternative Six: Biological Barrier
Alternative Three is seen as the most effective at stemming the flow of canal-borne invasives. This alternative offers the best protection against all types of ANS. Behavioral barriers (sound, bubble, electrical, light – alone or in combination) represent a good second choice, though no protection against plants and invertebrates will be realized. Sound decisions as to the fate of any Champlain Canal ANS barrier will require further analysis. Well designed socio-economic surveys are needed to better understand current canal usage and importance. Surveys of this type should also enable decision makers to formulate “what-if” scenarios relative to boat traffic impacts caused by ANS barriers and/or canal operational changes. Engineering studies are needed to predict the physical viability and costs associated with physical and behavior barriers. The construction of graving docks, boat hoists, behavior barriers, feeder canal diversions, etc. would require significant new investment in the
4 NYS Canal System. The costs associated with such new infrastructure need to be detailed before any serious deliberation on the problem of canal/ANS could begin. By their very nature, canals serve as unnatural watershed connections. Global trade and 21
st
century travel and tourism will combine to deliver many new invasive species across several watersheds to Lake Champlain in future decades. If no action is taken, the future will see new invasive fish, plant, and invertebrate colonizations in Lake Champlain.
The argument of the presentation is that Yellowstone National Park has been misrepresented as the world’s first national park (Bogd Khan Mountain park in Mongolia has been noted as an earlier case) and glorified as a nationalist treasure of nature in the United States. Taking a political ecology perspective, this presentation argues that Yellowstone is better understood as an American theme park, since the image, operation and “bottom line” of Yellowstone has actually been driven and manipulated by private tourism businesses for the past 150 years and the “Anschutz empire” in its current phase. Furthermore, the geopolitical basis of this Yellowstone theme park is a vision of the global American Empire that has been shaped by the European invasion of the Americas and the intensive involvement of the United States War Department and related geopolitical notions. This includes the usually hidden removal of American Indians, complete disregard for the significance of the pristine myth in the creation of the Yellowstone landscape, the design and construction of tourism infrastructure and tourism management policies by the US War Department as well as an amazing manipulation of what nature actually is in this American empire theme park.
A total of 1023 foreign visitors to Belize were asked to complete a written survey as they waited to leave Belize in the departure lounge at Goldson International Airport in Belize City during the year 2000. All of the surveys were administered by Anna of Orange Walk and Calvin of Belize City. Dr. Bryan Higgins from The International Ecotourism Society trained the surveyors and Dr. Vincent Palacio from the Programme for Belize supervized their work at the Goldson International Airport. The visitor exit surveys were collected during both the high tourism season in March (60% of the total) and the low tourism season of June and July (40% of the total) to assure that the results reflect the character of visitors during both seasons. This survey did not sample visitors who left Belize through any of the border crossings from Belize to Mexico, Honduras or Guatamala. The visitor exit surveys were collected during every day of the week and throughout the entire day to assure that all the departing international flights were proportionally sampled in the process. On each day the survey was conducted, every departing foreign resident was asked to fill out a copy. Based upon the daily reporting of the surveyors as well as two days of independent observation by Dr. Higgins, it is estimated that the response rate for this survey was 90%. Given that the total number of visitors departing Belize was approximately 100,000 for the year, for questions in the survey that simply show the percentage of responses from 0 to 100% the 95 percent confidence level is estimated to be plus or minus 3%. Please note the statistical summaries for individual questions may total over 100% due to rounding.