Geosites for Geotourism, Geoheritage, and Geoconservation of the Khnefiss National Park, Southern Morocco

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

The submitted manuscript titled „Geosites for Geotourism, Geoheritage, and  Geoconservation of the Khnefiss National Park, Southern Morocco” presents very interesting material. However, it contain numerous flaws, wchich should be improved.

 

1. In my opinion in the chapter „Introduction” Authors should explain the reason for undertaking the presented research and list the goals of investigations. The background of studies should be enlarged, also the information about current state of knowledge would be very valuable.
2. The methodology should be sufficiently described so that the choice of geosites  and their evaluation does not raise doubts. There is lack of information about period of investigations (literature survey, fieldworks and interviews were carried out simultanousely?),

The statement „a geological and biological survey of the most important sites in the Park” (Line 94) should be enlarged (what was the biological survey exactly?).

In my opinion in this chapter several qualitative and quanitative data are lacked:

- Please specify way of conducting field works (a) their character: observations or experiments; (b) numer of observations; (c) their subject: botanical, zoological, geological studies; (d) what exactly was observed?

- Please specify way of conducting interview (a) how many people was questioned, (b) how they were selected, (c) what were they asked

- Please specify way of selection the literature (were they chosen using databases WoS, Scopus etc.? )

Moreover the way of calculation of indexes SV, PEU, PTU, DR should be added.

 

3. In „Results” section I suggest to resign from subchapters devoted to particular geosites, frequently containing very short text. The chapter „Results” should contain references to Tables 4-7 and Figure 12. Moreover, Figures and Tables are not self-explanatory (all abbreviations should be explained in captions).
4. „Discussion” section should be enlarged and should contain interpretation of obtained outcomes using literature of subject.
5. Authors used different modes of reference citing.

Author Response

 

1. In my opinion in the chapter „Introduction” Authors should explain the reason for undertaking the presented research and list the goals of investigations. The background of studies should be enlarged, also the information about current state of knowledge would be very valuable.

 

Abstract: Khnefiss National Park has a very unique advantage of presenting three landscape morphologies of high quality: the coastal band, where the sea, dunes and cliffs mix, the lagoon zone with its multiple interlacing water, algae and sand, and the vastness of the desert with its regs, hamadas, krebs and its dune extensions. This is a unique originality at the world level, for a protected area to retain in a single perimeter these three major ecosystems, which therefore gives this National Park an exceptional quality. Khnefiss National Park faces numerous natural, human-induced, institutional, organizational and legal constraints. Hence, there is a need for a practical tool that would reconcile the imperatives of conservation, the demands of the local population and tourism, and at the same time positively address the constraints that hamper the management of the site. Indeed, we will highlight a reflection that aims at clarifying the sense of this new trajectory in which Morocco is positioned, in terms of sustainable development, regarding the emergence of consumption of natural assets and potentialities phenomenon according to regions. Therefore, all actions are based on values of citizenship, participation, responsibility, ethic, and fairness. Indeed, the geosites have small to large scale characteristics (from tens meters to more than 10 km). The geosite inventory is based on the geoconservation strategy. Qualitative and quantitative assessments were carried out on the basis of geoheritage values of international significance. Geoconservation efforts should be made in all these sites for some reasons, such as education research as well as geotourism in Khnefiss National Park.

Keywords: Geoheritage; Geotourism; Geosites; Geoconservation; and Khnefiss Natioanl Park

 

1. The methodology should be sufficiently described so that the choice of geosites  and their evaluation does not raise doubts. There is lack of information about period of investigations (literature survey, fieldworks and interviews were carried out simultanousely?),

The statement „a geological and biological survey of the most important sites in the Park” (Line 94) should be enlarged (what was the biological survey exactly?).

Table 1. Flora - key species of ecosystems of Khnefiss National Park [20]

 

Endemic species

Rare and threatened species

Hedysarum argentatum (Papilionaceae) Limoniastrum ifniense (Plumbaginaceae) Limonium tuberculatum (Plumbaginaceae) Limonium chrysoptamicum (Plumbaginaceae) Euphorbia echinus (Euphorbiaceae) Suaeda ifniensis (Chenopodiaceae) Traganopsis glomerata (Chenopodiaceae) Atriplex glauca var. ifniensis (Chenopodiaceae) Echiochilon chazaliei (Boraginaceae) Teucrium chardonianum (Lamiaceae) Pentzia hesperidum (Synantheraceae) Aizoon theurkauffii (Aizoaceae) Zygophyllum gaetulum (Zygophyllaceae) Zygophyllum waterlotii (Zygophyllaceae) Frankenia corymbosa var. leucantha (Frankeniaceae

Euphorbia regis jubae   (Euphorbiaceae) Euphorbia echinus    (Euphorbiaceae) Traganum moquinii    (Chenopodiaceae) Chenolea tomentosa    (Chenopodiaceae) Salicornia europaea    (Chenopodiaceae) Atriplex glauca var. ifniensis   (Chenopodiaceae) Suaeda ifniensis    (Chenopodiaceae) Halopeplis amplexicaule   (Chenopodiaceae) Helianthemum canariense   (Cistaceae) Sesuvium portulacastrum   (Aizoaceae) Rhus tripartitum    (Anacardiaceae) Rhus albidum     (Anacardiaceae) Lycium intricatum    (Solanaceae) Tamarix sp. pl.     (Tamaricaceae)

 

Table 2. Fauna- endemic, rare and threatened Mammals of Khnefiss National Park [20]

	Endemic	Rare	threatened
Gazella cuvieri	X	X	X
Canis aureus			X
Vulpes zerda	X
Vulpes vulpes			X
Vulpes rueppellii			X
Melivora capensis			X
Caracal caracal		X	X
Felis silvestris			X
Hepestes ichneumon		X
Atlantoxerus getulus	X
Hystrix cristata		X	X
Crocidura whitakeri	X
Crocidura tarfayensis	X
Elephantilus rozeti	X
Gerbillus occiduus	X		X
Eliomys melanurus			X

                       Table 3. Fauna- endemic, rare and threatened Avifauna of Khnefiss National Park [20]

	Endemic	Rare	threatened
Phalacrocorax carbo maroccanus	X
Platalea leucorodia		X
Phoenicopterus ruber		X
Tadorna ferruginea		X
Aquila chrysaetos		X
Larus genei			X
Larus audouinii	X
Sterna caspia		X
Sterna maxima		X
Sterna hirundo		X
Sterna albifrons		X
Phoenicurus moussieri	X
Scotocerca inquieta		X
Sylvia deserticola	X

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 4. Fauna- endemic, rare and threatened Amphibians and Reptiles of Khnefiss National Park [20]

 

	Endemic	Rare	threatened
Bufo brongersmai	X
Caretta caretta			X
Tarentola mauritanica juliae	X
Saurodactylus brosseti	X
Chamaeleo chamaeleon			X
Acanthodactylus busacki	X
Acanthodactylus aureus	X
Sphenops sphenopsiformis	X
Spalerosophis diadema		X
Lytorhynchus diadema		X
Naja haje			X
Cerastes vipera			X
Bitis arietans			X

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In my opinion in this chapter several qualitative and quanitative data are lacked:

- Please specify way of conducting field works (a) their character: observations or experiments; (b) numer of observations; (c) their subject: botanical, zoological, geological studies; (d) what exactly was observed?

- Please specify way of conducting interview (a) how many people was questioned, (b) how they were selected, (c) what were they asked

- Please specify way of selection the literature (were they chosen using databases WoS, Scopus etc.? )

Field exploration data provide information on the location and range validation of geosites that exist in the Study Area. Baseline data were obtained from studies elaborated by multidisciplinary reports, composed of public institutions and scientific and academic research on the basis of Scopus, Google Scholar, MDPI and Researchgate databases.

The results of this literature review (biological, ecological and geological) were used to evaluate the additional data to be collected in the field from September to December 2019: by direct interviews with the specific administrative departments, interviews with the local population and tourists on a random basis, or direct observations on the selected geosites.

Moreover the way of calculation of indexes SV, PEU, PTU, DR should be added.

The evaluation of Geosites and Geodiversity sites consists of four parts with different criteria for each component: scientific value (SV), potential educational use (PEU), potential tourism use (PTU), and risk of degradation (DR). The number of criteria in the quantitative assessment should be limited as a high number does not necessarily imply a more relevant and effective result. In this assessment there is no final ranking as the parties are assessed and presented separately [29, 6]. Data collected may be easily rectified and improved according to sites changes or land use plans [31, 32].

Scientific value (SV) is valued by seven criteria: Representativeness (R), key locality (Kl), scientific knowledge (Sn), integrity (I), geological diversity (Gd), rarity (R) and limits of use (Ul). Each criterion is punctuated by the values 0, 1, 2 and 4 (value 3 is not used) and is also weighted by percentage (Table 5) [6].

The potential educational use (PEU) is valorized with 12 criteria based on the vulnerability (V), accessibility (A), use limitations (Ul), safety (S), logistics (L), density of population (Dp), associations with other values (Av), scenery (Sc), uniqueness (U), observation conditions (Oc), didactic potential (Dp), and geological diversity (Gd). In this case, vulnerability (V) is understood as the existence of elements of geodiversity that can be destroyed by visitors [33, 6]. Each criterion is punctuated with values 0 to 4 and also weighted according to percentage (Table 5).

The potential touristic use (PTU) is valorized with 13 criteria. Eight of these criteria are equal to those used in the PEU (V, A, Ul, S, L, Dp, Av, Sc, U, Oc) plus three new criteria: interpretative potential (Ip), economical level (El), and proximity to recreational areas (Pr). In the same way as the PEU, each criterion is punctuated by values 0 to 4 and also weighted according to percentage (Table 5).

The concept of Degradation Risk (DR) is a combination of other factors such as accessibility, size, proximity to human settlements, public influx and current or potential threats [33]. In this research, evaluated using five criteria [6] is based on the deterioration of geological elements (Dg), proximity of activities to a potential cause of degradation (Pa), legal protection (Lp), accessibility (Ac), and Density of population (Dpp). Each criterion is punctuated by values 0 to 4 and also weighted by percentage (Table 5). In the case of the DR, Ac and Dpp criteria are similar to those used in the PEU and PTU, but here in a negative sense.

The thresholds used in each part of the valorization are: 0-25 low, 26-50 moderate, 51-75 high and 76-100 very high. In this research, when a Site of Geological Interest reaches an SV value greater than 75, it is considered a geosite (GS).

Similarly, when a Site of Geological Interest reaches a value in the PEU or PTV greater than 75, it is considered to be a site of geodiversity. In the case of very high values in SV but also in PEU and/or PTU, the term geosite has prevailed, although the site may also be used as a geodiversity site for educational and tourism purposes.

 

1. In „Results” section I suggest to resign from subchapters devoted to particular geosites, frequently containing very short text. The chapter „Results” should contain references to Tables 4-7 and Figure 12. Moreover, Figures and Tables are not self-explanatory (all abbreviations should be explained in captions).

 

The site is located in the northern part of the "Tarfaya-Laayoune Coastal Basin". Bordered to the North by the anti atlas, to the South by the Mauritanides chain and to the East by the dorsale of Rguibat. This basin consists of a Precambrian-age basement, outcropping at the level of the Saharan hinterland, and a coastal Meso-cenozoic sedimentary cover (Miocene sands surmounted by a Quaternary Moghrebian slab) consisting of calcareous sandstone. The thickness of the Quaternary "platform", where the Khnefiss site is excavated, reaches several metres (up to 40 m) [24].  

The sites of the Khnefiss National Park (KNP) are declined below along the National Road N°1 coming from the North towards the South (Figure 11).

 Akhfennir Sinkhole

Locally called "Aàjb Allah", and sometimes called the "devil's hole", this abyss , about 30 meters deep, is both a natural curiosity and a real risk of accident, a few dozen meters from the roadside (Figure 2).

Akhfenir Cliff.

The entire coast is overhung by steep cliffs over 50 meters height, and then stops to give way for sandy beaches. This site, therefore, has a double attraction, ornithological and for artisanal fishing (Figure 3)

 Naїla Lagoon.

The bay (or lagoon) is in the form of a long inlet cut into a sandstone limestone plateau (Moghrebian) resting on marls (Cretaceous), in the form of a sinuous channel leading to a vast salt depression [4, 34].  A string of vived sandy dunes, interspersed between the lagoon and the ocean, causes a narrowing of the channel and extends southwards along the western shore of the lagoon [35, 36] (Figure 4).

The lagoon is dominated to the East and South by a long cliff, 25 to 35 m high, cut into the rocky plateau [4]. The channel, known as Foum Agwitir, is about 100 m wide and 5-6 m deep, ensuring the circulation of a large volume of water; the hydrology of the lagoon is thus almost exclusively determined by the tide gauge rhythm [15, 36]. 

The marine water penetrates the mainland through a wide channel, which gradually narrows towards the south and then splits into several small narrow channels that flow between a formation of halophytes. This water flow is accompanied by strong hydrodynamics, particularly in the northern half of the lagoon [18, 19].

 Sand Dune

From the cliff to the lagoon of Naїla extends a cordon of living dunes all along the coast, surrounding certain large beaches, and thus, participating in the favourable aesthetics of potential seaside tourists, while constituting the privileged habitat of a specific fauna, in particular the fennec or sand fox [37]. (Figure 5).

 Steady dunes.

In addition to the numerous dune cords formed by living dunes, there are two fixed and stabilized dunes, which the locals call the red dunes and the twin dunes [15]. These dunes take on a bright red color at certain times of the day, depending on the angle of exposure to the sun (Figure 6).

Tenoucha Daya

Dayas (Daїa) are low-amplitude depressions, which in the endorheic regions of the Maghreb, dot the rigid surface of plateaus protected by lacustrine limestone or soil crust[38].Tenouchad is a daya of about ten hectares located in the middle of the desert zone in the Khnefiss National Park.When arriving on the plateau, towards the pink dunes detectable on the horizon; the daya, hidden beyond the southern edge of the plateau, is marked by the tops of its tamarisk trees [39] (Figure 7).

Tazgha Salt flats

The Naїla Lagoon extends inland into a huge salt depression, the Sebkha of Tazgha, glowing white in the middle of the surrounding reddish-brown lands. During the highest tides, seawater overflows southwards and spreads out over the vast salt plain of Tazgha Salt flats, which dries out quickly under the effect of insolation and constitutes a salt accumulation field, exploited[1] without recourse to any kind of development [40] (Figure 8).

Khaoui Naàm Wadi.

The Khaoui Naam waterfall is one of the remarkable sites of the Khnefiss National Park and deserves a day trip, but it is only accessible to all-terrain vehicles. In its upstream part, the wadi and its micro-affluents have deeply cut the plateau into multiple ramifications, but the valleys are still quite wide. The wadi has narrowed and formed a magnificent waterfall several tens of metres high, which is totally unexpected in this desert environment. 

Downstream of the waterfall, a first Guelta of about ten meters long flows into a second one, which in turn flows down in a series of cascades into the wadi surrounded by rocks and halophilic plants [4] (Figure 9). 

Echguiguen Site

Afew hundred meters south of the red dunes rises the Echgiguen plateau. Dotted with tumulus, this plateau is bordered by a long paved alley of about five hundred meters, which some authors attribute to the remains of a road or a wall, even making reference to a city built nearly two millennia ago [41] (Figure 10).

 

Figure 2: Akhfenir Sinkhole            Figure 3 Akhfenir Cliff.                                                  Figure 4: Naїla Lagoon

 

 

Figure 5 : Sand dunes                                       Figure 6: Steady dunes.                                                  Figure 7: Tenoucha Daya

Figure 8 : Tazgha Salt flats                             Figure 9: Khaoui Naàm Wadi                Figure 10 : Echguiguen Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 11. Geological Card of selected geosites in “Knefiss National Park”.

 

Table 6. Sites of geological interest (Geosites and Geodiversity sites).

Site nombre	Site name	Commune/ Toponymie	Site code	Site Type	Coordon GPS
1	Akhfennir Sinkhole	Akhfennir	AS	Speleology	28°10N 12°03W
2	Akhfénir Cliff	Akhfennir	AC	Geomorphologie	28°09N 12°04W
3	Naїla Lagoon	Akhfennir	NL	Hydrogeology	28°03N 12°16W
4	Sand Dunes	Akhfennir	SD	Geomorphologie	28°09N 12°06W
5	Steady Dunes	Akhfennir	STD	Geomorphologie	28°03N 12°16W
6	Tenouchad Daya	Akhfennir	TD	Hydrology	28°04’N 12°07’W
7	Tazgha Salt Flats	Akhfennir	TSF	Mineralogy	27°54’N 12°20’W
8	Khaoui Naàm Wadi	Akhfennir	KNW	Hydrogeology	27°40’N 12°13’W
9	Echguiguen Site	Akhfennir	ES	Archeology	27°98N 12°16W

Site-nombre	Site code	SV	(R)	(KI)	(Sn)	(I)	(Gd)	(R)	(UI)
1	AS	78,8	30,0	10,0	1,3	15,0	5,0	7,5	10,0
2	AC	78,8	30,0	10,0	1,3	7,5	5,0	15,0	10,0
3	NL	80,0	30,0	10,0	2,5	7,5	5,0	15,0	10,0
4	SD	72,5	30,0	10,0	2,5	7,5	5,0	7,5	10,0
5	STD	78,8	30,0	5,0	1,3	15,0	2,5	15,0	10,0
6	TD	78,8	30,0	5,0	1,3	15,0	2,5	15,0	10,0
7	TSF	78,8	30,0	10,0	1,3	7,5	5,0	15,0	10,0
8	KNW	73,8	30,0	5,0	1,3	15,0	5,0	7,5	10,0
9	ES	75,1	30,0	10,0	1,3	3,8	5,0	15,0	10,0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 7. Recommendations and advising for each category SV.

 

 

 

 

 

 

           Table 8.  Recommendations and advising for each category PEU.            

Site- Nmb	Site code	PEU	(V)	(A)	(UI)	(S)	(L)	(DP)	(Av)	(Sc)	(U)	(Oc)	(Dp)	(Gd)
1	AS	88,8	10,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	3,8	2,5	5,0	5,0	5,0	10,0	20,0	7,5
2	AC	81,3	7,5	10,0	5,0	7,5	5,0	2,5	5,0	1,3	5,0	10,0	15,0	7,5
3	NL	89,4	7,5	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	3,0	3,8	5,0	5,0	10,0	20,0	10,0
4	SD	75,0	10,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	2,5	5,0	5,0	5,0	10,0	5,0	7,5
5	STD	85,8	5,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	0,8	5,0	5,0	5,0	10,0	20,0	10,0
6	TD	83,8	10,0	10,0	5,0	7,5	3,8	2,5	5,0	5,0	5,0	10,0	10,0	10,0
7	TSF	79,0	7,5	10,0	5,0	7,5	5,0	0,2	5,0	1,3	5,0	10,0	15,0	7,5
8	KNW	74,6	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	3,8	0,8	5,0	5,0	5,0	10,0	10,0	10,0
9	ES	80,5	5,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	0,5	5,0	2,5	5,0	10,0	20,0	7,5

Table 9.  Recommendations and advising for each category PTU

Site Nmb	Site Code	PTU	(V)	(A)	(UI)	(S)	(L)	(DP)	(Av)	(Sc)	(U)	(Oc)	(IP)	(El)	(Pr)
1	AS	86,4	10,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	3,8	2,5	5,0	15,0	10,0	5,0	10,0	1,3	3,8
2	AC	77,5	7,5	10,0	5,0	7,5	5,0	2,5	5,0	7,5	5,0	5,0	10,0	2,5	5,0
3	NL	86,4	7,5	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	3,8	3,8	15,0	10,0	5,0	10,0	1,3	5,0
4	SD	82,6	10,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	2,5	5,0	15,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	1,3	3,8
5	STD	85,1	5,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	3,8	5,0	15,0	10,0	5,0	10,0	1,3	5,0
6	TD	75,1	10,0	10,0	5,0	7,5	3,8	2,5	5,0	7,5	10,0	5,0	5,0	1,3	2,5
7	TSF	77,5	7,5	10,0	5,0	7,5	5,0	2,5	5,0	7,5	5,0	5,0	10,0	2,5	5,0
8	KNW	80,2	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	3,8	3,8	5,0	15,0	10,0	5,0	7,5	1,3	3,8
9	ES	73,8	5,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	2,5	5,0	7,5	10,0	5,0	10,0	1,3	2,5

Table  10. Recommendations and advising for each category DR

Site Nmb	Site Code	DR	(Dg)	(Pa)	(Lp)	(Ac)	(Dpp)
1	AS	48,8	8,8	10,0	10,0	15,0	5,0
2	AC	53,8	8,8	5,0	20,0	15,0	5,0
3	NL	79,0	26,5	20,0	10,0	15,0	7,5
4	SD	43,8	8,8	5,0	10,0	15,0	5,0
5	STD	61,3	8,8	20,0	10,0	15,0	7,5
6	TD	43,8	8,8	5,0	10,0	15,0	5,0
7	TSF	53,8	8,8	5,0	20,0	15,0	5,0
8	KNW	65,0	17,5	15,0	10,0	15,0	7,5
9	ES	62,5	17,5	5,0	20,0	15,0	5,0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 11.  Detailed scoring of the nine sites of geological interest selected key-case including.

Site nombre	Site name	Site code	SV	PEU	PTU	DR
1	Akhfennir Sinkhole	AS	78,8	88,8	86,4	48,8
2	Akhfénir Cliff	AC	78,8	81,3	77,5	53,8
3	Naїla Lagoon	NL	80,0	89,4	86,4	79,0
4	Sand Dunes	SD	72,5	75,0	82,6	43,8
5	Steady Dunes	STD	78,8	85,8	85,1	61,3
6	Tenouchad Daya	TD	78,8	83,8	75,1	43,8
7	Tazgha Salt Flats	TSF	78,8	79,0	77,5	53,8
8	Khaoui Naàm Wadi	KNW	73,8	74,6	80,2	65,0
9	Echguiguen Site	ES	75,1	80,5	73,8	62,5

 

Figure 12. Histograms respresentation of the DR,SV, PEU and PTU.

 

 

 

 

                      

1. „Discussion” section should be enlarged and should contain interpretation of obtained outcomes using literature of subject.

 

Khenifiss National Park (KNP) presents strong threats of degradation processes with important habitats.  However, care must be taken to prevent any disturbance that could, in the long term, affect its biological and heritage quality. The lagoon and its associated ecosystems represent the main heritage of Khenifiss National Park (KNP) and it should be maintained in an optimum ecological state as much as possible.

The Naїla lagoon, despite some number of constraints, remains the only lagoon at the national level, in comparison with other Atlantic and Mediterranean lagoons, which still evolves in a natural way except at the level of sebkha Tazgha [22]. The act of geoconservation must be understood as a static conception from a dynamic and innovative point of view, in which one seeks above all to safeguard a "geological identity and heritage" that generates some number of potentialities.

Geoconservation will then become an act of coherence and consultation, capable of combining contradictory imperatives and promoting a vision and a message on the scale of future generations in order to guarantee real sustainability. Geoconservation will be carried out as a coherent act of concerted action. It is capable of combining contradictory imperatives, promoting a vision and drawing up a message for future generations, in order to guarantee real sustainability.

This synthesis values the quality of the park's geosite and geodiversity, the sharing of geoconservation standards, best practices in geotourism development, the exchange of expertise and support for geoheritage preservation [42, 43, 44].

On the other hand, this synthesis makes it possible to present the geosites with a notion of responsibility and at the same time to valorize the quality of the geodiversity of the selected ones.   

First of all, the scientific, educational and/or tourist value of the geological heritage is highlighted [6, 25]. Secondly, the risk of degradation of the selected sites must also be quantified. Indeed, the result obtained will give the political and technical leaders of the park to prepare actions and strategies of geoconservation [45,46].

The quantitative assessment carried out in the framework of the Khnefis National Park (KNP) study provided nine inventoried sites. Calculations were made according to recent methodologies from the literature [26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 6, 25]. Standard thresholds were used in each part of the valuation (0-25 low, 26-50 moderate, 51-75 high, 76-100 very high). The thresholds (low and moderate) were not found and the high threshold is very noticeable among the proposed sites. Geosites (GS) and Geodiversity (GD) were defined when a Site of Geological interest has reached a Scientific value (SV), Potential Educational Use (PEU) or Potential Touristic Use (PTU) value greater than 75. The thresholds obtained are suggested for guidance (Table 5).

The quantitative approach used for the individual geosites and confirmed the positive qualities attributed to the region. As a consequence, the Scientific value (SV) obtained is very high in 6 of the proposed sites (Table 7; Fig. 12). The Potential Educational Use (PEU) is very high in 7 sites of which 3 cases are more than 85 (Table 8, fig 12), while the Potential Touristic Use (PTU) is very high in 7 cases of which 2 cases are more than 85 % (Table 9; Fig. 12). On the other hand, the Degradation Risk (DR) was calculated as moderate or high in most cases (table 10; figure 12), being moderate in 3 sites, high in 5 cases and very high only in Naїla Lagoon (table 11; figure 12). These data prove that the geodiversity of the area is relevant enough to be used for scientific, educational and/or tourism purposes, as well as for preservation plans (Table 12).

Table 12. Advising for each category (SV, PTU, PTE, and DR) according to the four thresholds (low, moderate, high, and very high).

hresholds category	Low	Moderate	High	Very High
Scientific value	Not applicable	Not applicable	Echguiguen Site Khaoui Naàm Wadi Sand Dunes	Naїla Lagoon Akhfennir Sinkhole Akhfénir Cliff Steady Dunes Tenouchad Daya Tazgha Salt Flats
Potential Educational Use	Not applicable	Not applicable	Khaoui Naàm Wadi Sand Dunes	Naїla Lagoon Akhfennir Sinkhole Steady Dunes Tenouchad Daya Echguiguen Site Akhfénir Cliff Tazgha Salt Flats
Potential Touristic Use	Not applicable	Not applicable	Tenouchad Daya Echguiguen Site	Naїla Lagoon Akhfennir Sinkhole Steady Dunes Sand Dunes Khaoui Naàm Wadi Akhfénir Cliff Tazgha Salt Flats
Degradation Risk	Not applicable	Tenouchad Daya Akhfénir Cliff Sand Dunes	Khaoui Naàm Wadi Echguiguen Site Steady Dunes Tazgha Salt Flats Akhfennir Sinkhole	Naїla Lagoon

 

The result shows the priority given to the various actions of each programme according to four strategies: communication, environment to education, equipment and management. It should be noted, however, that the execution of certain results is especially important for the implementation of the Programme.

- Communication strategy: This strategy aims to ensure the efficiency of communication tools. Below is a presentation of some principles [47].on which this orientation is based. These actions are:

• The publication program: the creation of a Mapguides [48], the trail brochures or leaflets and the website;
• The interpretation program: Equipment of the reception centre within Naїla Lagoon.

- Environment to Education Strategy: Because of the influence that children and young people can have on their family environment, their education is fundamental to improving environmental conditions and promoting substantial change [49].The educational system is the most adequate structure for the implementation of extracurricular environmental education activities. These actions are:

• The environmental education programme: Development of educational and teaching materials.
• The training program: Training of field staff in monitoring.

- Equipment strategy: A strategy for the management of protected areas aims to facilitate the contemplation and interpretation of a panoramic view or singular element of the landscape [50]. These actions are:

• The Equipment program: The creation of an Ecomuseum is essential for the promotion of ecotourism, road and trail development;
• The Signage Program: all signage actions have priority for development.

- Management strategy: A series of critical parameters have been selected for follow-up that are assessed using previously established indicators [51]. The methodology has been defined on the basis of the availability of personnel exclusively assigned to the collection of fundamental information, this being ensured by the guides and personnel in charge of monitoring or control whose training is provided for in the corresponding programmes. The action is:

• The management and maintenance programme: Elaboration of annual reports on the progress of the development programmes.

In addition to all these constraints, those related to unregulated and wilderness tourism, non respectful of the environment and those which mainly benefits foreign promoters, are major constraints on the destruction and disruption (negative impacts) of the environment.

It is a site that is easy to sell to investors and to market despite the serious damage caused by tourists, especially foreign tourists, who are heavy consumers and disruptive to landscapes and the environment.

The stated strategies have been translated into action programmes, which in turn have been translated into concrete projects or actions. The present work defines the strategies and programmes, and establishes the criteria for the development of these projects and actions. It should be pointed out that although the relationship between strategies and actions is obvious, in some cases a project will materialise in accordance with the principles of geoconservation.

 

1. Authors used different modes of reference citing.

References

1. BENKADA, A, BELOUCGI.M, LALLOUCHEN.A, ESSARSAR. M: Regional financial governance: a lever for change for advanced regionalization in Morocco. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research. (2018).
2. Ólafsdóttir Rannveig . Geotourism. Geosciences .(2019), MDPI 9, 48; doi:10.3390
3. Reynard E., Pica A., Coratza P., Urban geomorphological heritage. An overview. Quaestiones Geographicae 36(3), Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Poznań, (2017): pp. 7–20.
4. Fahd, S. ; Ater, M. ; Pleguezuelos, J.-M. ; Feriche, M. & Geniez, P.. Diagnostic herpétologique : Khnefiss . Programme GEF des Aires Protégées du Maroc. Rapport Final. Haut Commissariat aux Eaux et Forêts et à la Lutte contre la Désertification. (2006).
5. Lazzarini, M. & Aloia, A. Geoparks, Geoheritage and Geotourism: Opportunities and Tools in Sustainable Development of the Territory. GeoJ. Tour. Geosites. (2014).13, 8–9.
6. Brilha J. Inventory and Quantitative Assessment of Geosites and Geodiversity Sites: a review. Geoheritage. (2016). 8: 119–134. DOI: 10.1007/s12371-014-0139-3.
7. Carcavilla, L.; Durán, J.J.; López-Martínez, J. Geodiversidad: Concepto y Relación con el Patrimonio Geológico. Geo-Temas, (2008). 10, 1299–1303.
8. Carcavilla, L.; Durán, J.J.; Garcia-Cortés, A.; López-Martínez, J. Geological heritage and geoconservation in Spain: Past, present and future. Geoheritage,(2009). 1, 75–91.
9. Alexandre Poiraud & Grégory Dandurand. De la géoconservation au géotourisme : Un glissement de paradigme. ANNALES DE GÉOGRAPHIE, (2017). N° 717 Pp 625-653
10. Duval, M. & Gauchon, C. Tourisme, géosciences et enjeux de territoires : actualités du géotourisme. Téoros, (2010).29 (2), pp 3–14.
11. Maria Helena Henriques & Rui Pena dos Reis & José Brilha & Teresa Mota: Geoconservation as an Emerging Geoscience. Geoheritage (2011) 3: pp:117–128.
12. El Hadi, H., Tahiri, A., Brilha, J., El Maidani, A., Baghdad, B. and Zaidi, A. Geodiversity Examples of Morocco: From Inventory to Regional Geotourism Development. Open Journal of Ecology, (2015). 5, 409-419.
13. S & BENMLIH. A: The Sustainable Development of Oued Noun Oases through the Integration in the Biosphere Reserve Oasis of Southern Morocco. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR). Volume 7 Issue 11. (2018).Pp 1211-1218.
14. Ibn Tattou, M. Park National de Khnefiss : programme de suivi de la végétation. Programme GEF des Aires Protégées du Maroc. Rapport Final. Haut Commissariat aux Eaux et Forêts et à la Lutte contre la Désertification. (2008).
15. H Morphodynamique des barkhanes Etude des dunes du Sud-Ouest Marocain. (2005).Docteur de l’Universit´e Paris VII. UNIVERSIT´E DENIS DIDEROT.
16. Idardare Z., Chiffoleau J. -F., Moukrim A., Ait Alla A., Auger D., Lefrere L. & Rozuel E. Metal concentrations in sediment and Nereis diversicolor in two Moroccan lagoons: Khnefiss and Oualidia. Chemistry and Ecology, (2008). 24: 329 – 340.
17. Lefrere L., Ouassas M., Guillois B., Gillet P., Moukrim A. Macrobenthic community structure of soft-bottom sediments in the Khnefiss lagoon, South of Morocco. Mater. Environ. Sci. (2015). 6 (11) 2226-2236.
18. Lakhdar Idrissi J., Sarf F., El Mossaoui N., Orbi A. & Hilmi K.: Étude pluridisciplinaire de la lagune de Khnefiss (Sud du Maroc). Rapport Travaux Documentaires, (2000). 108 114 p.
19. Mimouni R., Yacoubi B. & Eddabra R. Etude de la qualité microbiologique et physico-chimique de la lagune de Khnefiss . Rapports Scientifiques du Programme LagMar, (2005). Maroc, 1: 67-73.
20. Knefiss National Park Administration: Development and management plan (2013-2018). recensement des faunes et flores du Park (2013).
21. HAFID M., TARI G., BOUHADIOUI D., ELMOUSSAID I., ECHARFAOUI H., AIT SALEM A., NAHIM M., DAKKI M.: Atlantic Basins. In : Michard A., Saddiqi O., Chalouan A., Frizon de Lamotte D.(Eds.), Continental Evolution : The Geology of Morocco. Springer, (2008) LNES 116, 303-329.
22. BENDAANOUN M., – Etude botanique et analyse écologique de la végétation du SIBE/Park National de Khnifiss. Projet GEF sur les Aires Protégées - Maroc / HCEFLCD. (2004) 30p.
23. ABOULABES– Diagnostic thématique en Hydrogéologie au SIBE de Khnifiss. Projet GEF sur les Aires Protégées - Maroc / HCEFLCD. ,(2004 )34p.
24. DAKKI M., QNINBA A., EL AGBANI MA., BAYED A & FEKHAOUI M. :  Fiche descriptive sur les zones humides (FDR). Baie de Khnifiss. (2003)11p.
25. Aoulad-Sidi-Mhend.A, Maaté. Amri.L, Hlila.R, Chakiri.S, Maaté.S & Martín.MM: The Geological Heritage of the Talassemtane National Park and the Ghomara coast Natural Area (NW of Morocco) Geoheritage (2019).11:1005–1025.
26. Bruschi VM, Cendrero A Direct and parametric methods for the assessment of geosites and geomorphosites. In: Reynard E, Coratza P, Regolini-Bissig G (eds) Geomorphosites. (2009). Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil, München. Section II, pp 73–88
27. Reynard E The assessment of geomorphosites. In: Reynard E, Coratza P, Regolini Bissig G (eds) Geomorphosites. Verlag Dr. (2009). Friedrich Pfeil, Munchen, pp 63–71
28. Pereira P, Pereira DI Methodological guidelines for geomorphosite assessment. Géomorphol Relief, Processus, Environ. (2010). 16(2):215–222
29. Bruschi VM, Cendrero A, Albertos JAC A statistical approach to the validation and optimisation of geoheritage assessment procedures. Geoheritage. (2011). 3(3):131–149
30. Pereira P & Pereira DI. Assessment of geosites tourism value in geoparks: the example of Arouca Geopark (Portugal). Proceedings of the 11th European Geoparks Conference, Arouca: (2012).231–232.
31. Bollati I, Smiraglia C, Pelfini M: Assessment and selection of geomorphosites and trails in the Miage Glacier area (Western Italian Alps). (2013)  Environ Manag 51:951–967
32. Bollati I, Crosa Lenz B, Zanoletti E, PelfiniM: Geomorphological mapping for the valorization of the alpine environment. A methodological proposal tested in the Loana Valley (Sesia Val Grande Geopark, Western Italian Alps). (2017) .J Mt Sci 14(6):1023–1038
33. Fuentes-Gutiérrez I, Fernández-Martínez E: Mapping geosites for geoheritage management: a methodological proposal for the regional park of Picos de Europa (León, Spain). Environ Manag (2012) 50:789– 806
34. Bergier, P. & Thévenot, M. Bibliographie ornithologique du Sahara Atlantique marocain - 2. Go-South Bull. (2011). 8 : 53-60. [en ligne] : http:// go-south.org.
35. Dakki M. & de Ligny W. The Khnefiss lagoon and its surrounding environment (Province of La’youne, Morocco). Travaux Institut Scientifique de Rabat, (1988), Hors-série. 172pp.
36. Qninba, A. ; El Agbani, M.A. ; Benhoussa, A. ; Rguibi Idrissi, H. & Thévenot, M. Diagnostic Ornithologique. Khnefiss . Programme GEF des Aires Protégées du Maroc. Rapport Final. Haut Commissariat aux Eaux et Forêts et à la Lutte contre la Désertification. (2005).
37. El Agbani M.A., Fekhaoui M., Bayed A. & Schouten J.R. The Khnefiss Lagoon and adjacent waters: hydrology and hydrodynamics. In: Dakki & de Ligny W. The Khnefiss  Lagoon and its surrounding environment (Province of La’youne, Morocco). Travaux Institut Scientifique Rabat, hors-série. (1988). pp 17-26.
38. Agabi, « Daya », in Gabriel Camps (dir.), 15 | Daphnitae – Djado, Aix-en-Provence, Edisud

(« Volumes », no 15) , (1995).

39. Zadane, Y. ; Qninba, A. ; Ibn Tattou, M. & Bergier, P. La daya de Ténouchad, un site de reproduction des Anatidés dans le Park National de Khnefiss . Go-South Bull. (2009).6 : pp 107-112.
40. I, Chikhaoui. El Filali.M.F, Abbassi.A, Banaoui.A and Kaaya.A Production in Cell Biomass and Carotenoids under the Effect of a Saline Stress in Microalgae Dunaliella spp. isolated from Moroccan Saharian Saline. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences (2017). Volume 6 Number 8.
41. Yves & Christine Gauthier Monuments à alignement du Sahara occidental et leur place dans le contexte saharien. 2005. in .Researchgate, (2015). XXXVI 147 – 190.
42. Henriques, M.H.; Pena dos Reis, R.; Brilha, J.; Mota, T.S. Geoconservation as an emerging geoscience. Geoheritage, (2011). 3, 117–128.
43. Reynard, E., C. (Eds) Geoheritage: assessment, protection and management, Elsevier; Amsterdam.2018.pp. 1–450.
44. John E. Gordon, Roger Crofts and Enrique D´ıaz-Mart´ınez: Geoheritage Conservation and Environmental Policies. Chapter in Geoheritage( 2018). pp. 213-236. ·
45. Paúl C.M, Gricelda H.F, Josué Briones, Pablo Caldevilla, María J.D.C and Edgar Berrezueta Geotourism and Local Development Based on Geological and Mining Sites Utilization, Zaruma-Portovelo, Ecuador. Geosciences (2018), MDPI. 8, 205.
46. Pierluigi Brandolini, Francesco Faccini, Guido Paliaga, Pietro Piana: Urban geomorphology in coastal environment: Man-made morphological changes in a seaside tourist resort (Rapallo, Eastern Liguria, Italy). Quaestiones Geographicae, Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Poznań (2017), 36(3),, pp. 97–110. 15 figs.
47. Tilden, F. Interpreting our heritage (4th ed.). Chapel Hill, NCThe University of North Carolina Press. . (2007).
48. Keith Bosak, Bynum Boley, Kyla Zaret: Deconstructing the ‘Crown of the Continent’: Power, politics and the process of creating National Geographic's Geotourism Mapguides. Tourism Geographies. (2010), Volume 12, - Issue 3.
49. Annette Viel, « Essentielle convergence de pensées entre Écologie, Interprétation, Muséologie et Patrimoine », Éducation relative à l'environnement, (2019), Volume 15 – 1.
50. Junta Andalucia y Alto Comisariado de Aguas y Bosques y Lucha contra la Desertificación del Reino de Marruecos. Prorgama de uso pùblico de parque national de Talassemntane (Marreucos) 2010.
51. National Park of Canada, management plan. (2007). Cat. no.: R63-350/2-2007F

 

 

Submission Date

02 July 2020

Date of this review

08 Jul 2020 13:02:04

 

 

[1] The saltworks (geosite) of Sebkhat Tazgha is a public domain (Order of 1914; BO: 10/7/1914, page 529), managed by the Ministry of Equipment and Public Works. Its exploitation is governed by the Dahir of 30 November 1918, relating to temporary occupation. (BO: 20/1/1919, page 37)

 

1. In my opinion in the chapter „Introduction” Authors should explain the reason for undertaking the presented research and list the goals of investigations. The background of studies should be enlarged, also the information about current state of knowledge would be very valuable.

 

Abstract: Khnefiss National Park has a very unique advantage of presenting three landscape morphologies of high quality: the coastal band, where the sea, dunes and cliffs mix, the lagoon zone with its multiple interlacing water, algae and sand, and the vastness of the desert with its regs, hamadas, krebs and its dune extensions. This is a unique originality at the world level, for a protected area to retain in a single perimeter these three major ecosystems, which therefore gives this National Park an exceptional quality. Khnefiss National Park faces numerous natural, human-induced, institutional, organizational and legal constraints. Hence, there is a need for a practical tool that would reconcile the imperatives of conservation, the demands of the local population and tourism, and at the same time positively address the constraints that hamper the management of the site. Indeed, we will highlight a reflection that aims at clarifying the sense of this new trajectory in which Morocco is positioned, in terms of sustainable development, regarding the emergence of consumption of natural assets and potentialities phenomenon according to regions. Therefore, all actions are based on values of citizenship, participation, responsibility, ethic, and fairness. Indeed, the geosites have small to large scale characteristics (from tens meters to more than 10 km). The geosite inventory is based on the geoconservation strategy. Qualitative and quantitative assessments were carried out on the basis of geoheritage values of international significance. Geoconservation efforts should be made in all these sites for some reasons, such as education research as well as geotourism in Khnefiss National Park.

Keywords: Geoheritage; Geotourism; Geosites; Geoconservation; and Khnefiss Natioanl Park

 

1. The methodology should be sufficiently described so that the choice of geosites  and their evaluation does not raise doubts. There is lack of information about period of investigations (literature survey, fieldworks and interviews were carried out simultanousely?),

The statement „a geological and biological survey of the most important sites in the Park” (Line 94) should be enlarged (what was the biological survey exactly?).

Table 1. Flora - key species of ecosystems of Khnefiss National Park [20]

 

Endemic species

Rare and threatened species

Hedysarum argentatum (Papilionaceae) Limoniastrum ifniense (Plumbaginaceae) Limonium tuberculatum (Plumbaginaceae) Limonium chrysoptamicum (Plumbaginaceae) Euphorbia echinus (Euphorbiaceae) Suaeda ifniensis (Chenopodiaceae) Traganopsis glomerata (Chenopodiaceae) Atriplex glauca var. ifniensis (Chenopodiaceae) Echiochilon chazaliei (Boraginaceae) Teucrium chardonianum (Lamiaceae) Pentzia hesperidum (Synantheraceae) Aizoon theurkauffii (Aizoaceae) Zygophyllum gaetulum (Zygophyllaceae) Zygophyllum waterlotii (Zygophyllaceae) Frankenia corymbosa var. leucantha (Frankeniaceae

Euphorbia regis jubae   (Euphorbiaceae) Euphorbia echinus    (Euphorbiaceae) Traganum moquinii    (Chenopodiaceae) Chenolea tomentosa    (Chenopodiaceae) Salicornia europaea    (Chenopodiaceae) Atriplex glauca var. ifniensis   (Chenopodiaceae) Suaeda ifniensis    (Chenopodiaceae) Halopeplis amplexicaule   (Chenopodiaceae) Helianthemum canariense   (Cistaceae) Sesuvium portulacastrum   (Aizoaceae) Rhus tripartitum    (Anacardiaceae) Rhus albidum     (Anacardiaceae) Lycium intricatum    (Solanaceae) Tamarix sp. pl.     (Tamaricaceae)

 

Table 2. Fauna- endemic, rare and threatened Mammals of Khnefiss National Park [20]

	Endemic	Rare	threatened
Gazella cuvieri	X	X	X
Canis aureus			X
Vulpes zerda	X
Vulpes vulpes			X
Vulpes rueppellii			X
Melivora capensis			X
Caracal caracal		X	X
Felis silvestris			X
Hepestes ichneumon		X
Atlantoxerus getulus	X
Hystrix cristata		X	X
Crocidura whitakeri	X
Crocidura tarfayensis	X
Elephantilus rozeti	X
Gerbillus occiduus	X		X
Eliomys melanurus			X

                       Table 3. Fauna- endemic, rare and threatened Avifauna of Khnefiss National Park [20]

	Endemic	Rare	threatened
Phalacrocorax carbo maroccanus	X
Platalea leucorodia		X
Phoenicopterus ruber		X
Tadorna ferruginea		X
Aquila chrysaetos		X
Larus genei			X
Larus audouinii	X
Sterna caspia		X
Sterna maxima		X
Sterna hirundo		X
Sterna albifrons		X
Phoenicurus moussieri	X
Scotocerca inquieta		X
Sylvia deserticola	X

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 4. Fauna- endemic, rare and threatened Amphibians and Reptiles of Khnefiss National Park [20]

 

	Endemic	Rare	threatened
Bufo brongersmai	X
Caretta caretta			X
Tarentola mauritanica juliae	X
Saurodactylus brosseti	X
Chamaeleo chamaeleon			X
Acanthodactylus busacki	X
Acanthodactylus aureus	X
Sphenops sphenopsiformis	X
Spalerosophis diadema		X
Lytorhynchus diadema		X
Naja haje			X
Cerastes vipera			X
Bitis arietans			X

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In my opinion in this chapter several qualitative and quanitative data are lacked:

- Please specify way of conducting field works (a) their character: observations or experiments; (b) numer of observations; (c) their subject: botanical, zoological, geological studies; (d) what exactly was observed?

- Please specify way of conducting interview (a) how many people was questioned, (b) how they were selected, (c) what were they asked

- Please specify way of selection the literature (were they chosen using databases WoS, Scopus etc.? )

Field exploration data provide information on the location and range validation of geosites that exist in the Study Area. Baseline data were obtained from studies elaborated by multidisciplinary reports, composed of public institutions and scientific and academic research on the basis of Scopus, Google Scholar, MDPI and Researchgate databases.

The results of this literature review (biological, ecological and geological) were used to evaluate the additional data to be collected in the field from September to December 2019: by direct interviews with the specific administrative departments, interviews with the local population and tourists on a random basis, or direct observations on the selected geosites.

Moreover the way of calculation of indexes SV, PEU, PTU, DR should be added.

The evaluation of Geosites and Geodiversity sites consists of four parts with different criteria for each component: scientific value (SV), potential educational use (PEU), potential tourism use (PTU), and risk of degradation (DR). The number of criteria in the quantitative assessment should be limited as a high number does not necessarily imply a more relevant and effective result. In this assessment there is no final ranking as the parties are assessed and presented separately [29, 6]. Data collected may be easily rectified and improved according to sites changes or land use plans [31, 32].

Scientific value (SV) is valued by seven criteria: Representativeness (R), key locality (Kl), scientific knowledge (Sn), integrity (I), geological diversity (Gd), rarity (R) and limits of use (Ul). Each criterion is punctuated by the values 0, 1, 2 and 4 (value 3 is not used) and is also weighted by percentage (Table 5) [6].

The potential educational use (PEU) is valorized with 12 criteria based on the vulnerability (V), accessibility (A), use limitations (Ul), safety (S), logistics (L), density of population (Dp), associations with other values (Av), scenery (Sc), uniqueness (U), observation conditions (Oc), didactic potential (Dp), and geological diversity (Gd). In this case, vulnerability (V) is understood as the existence of elements of geodiversity that can be destroyed by visitors [33, 6]. Each criterion is punctuated with values 0 to 4 and also weighted according to percentage (Table 5).

The potential touristic use (PTU) is valorized with 13 criteria. Eight of these criteria are equal to those used in the PEU (V, A, Ul, S, L, Dp, Av, Sc, U, Oc) plus three new criteria: interpretative potential (Ip), economical level (El), and proximity to recreational areas (Pr). In the same way as the PEU, each criterion is punctuated by values 0 to 4 and also weighted according to percentage (Table 5).

The concept of Degradation Risk (DR) is a combination of other factors such as accessibility, size, proximity to human settlements, public influx and current or potential threats [33]. In this research, evaluated using five criteria [6] is based on the deterioration of geological elements (Dg), proximity of activities to a potential cause of degradation (Pa), legal protection (Lp), accessibility (Ac), and Density of population (Dpp). Each criterion is punctuated by values 0 to 4 and also weighted by percentage (Table 5). In the case of the DR, Ac and Dpp criteria are similar to those used in the PEU and PTU, but here in a negative sense.

The thresholds used in each part of the valorization are: 0-25 low, 26-50 moderate, 51-75 high and 76-100 very high. In this research, when a Site of Geological Interest reaches an SV value greater than 75, it is considered a geosite (GS).

Similarly, when a Site of Geological Interest reaches a value in the PEU or PTV greater than 75, it is considered to be a site of geodiversity. In the case of very high values in SV but also in PEU and/or PTU, the term geosite has prevailed, although the site may also be used as a geodiversity site for educational and tourism purposes.

 

1. In „Results” section I suggest to resign from subchapters devoted to particular geosites, frequently containing very short text. The chapter „Results” should contain references to Tables 4-7 and Figure 12. Moreover, Figures and Tables are not self-explanatory (all abbreviations should be explained in captions).

 

The site is located in the northern part of the "Tarfaya-Laayoune Coastal Basin". Bordered to the North by the anti atlas, to the South by the Mauritanides chain and to the East by the dorsale of Rguibat. This basin consists of a Precambrian-age basement, outcropping at the level of the Saharan hinterland, and a coastal Meso-cenozoic sedimentary cover (Miocene sands surmounted by a Quaternary Moghrebian slab) consisting of calcareous sandstone. The thickness of the Quaternary "platform", where the Khnefiss site is excavated, reaches several metres (up to 40 m) [24].  

The sites of the Khnefiss National Park (KNP) are declined below along the National Road N°1 coming from the North towards the South (Figure 11).

 Akhfennir Sinkhole

Locally called "Aàjb Allah", and sometimes called the "devil's hole", this abyss , about 30 meters deep, is both a natural curiosity and a real risk of accident, a few dozen meters from the roadside (Figure 2).

Akhfenir Cliff.

The entire coast is overhung by steep cliffs over 50 meters height, and then stops to give way for sandy beaches. This site, therefore, has a double attraction, ornithological and for artisanal fishing (Figure 3)

 Naїla Lagoon.

The bay (or lagoon) is in the form of a long inlet cut into a sandstone limestone plateau (Moghrebian) resting on marls (Cretaceous), in the form of a sinuous channel leading to a vast salt depression [4, 34].  A string of vived sandy dunes, interspersed between the lagoon and the ocean, causes a narrowing of the channel and extends southwards along the western shore of the lagoon [35, 36] (Figure 4).

The lagoon is dominated to the East and South by a long cliff, 25 to 35 m high, cut into the rocky plateau [4]. The channel, known as Foum Agwitir, is about 100 m wide and 5-6 m deep, ensuring the circulation of a large volume of water; the hydrology of the lagoon is thus almost exclusively determined by the tide gauge rhythm [15, 36]. 

The marine water penetrates the mainland through a wide channel, which gradually narrows towards the south and then splits into several small narrow channels that flow between a formation of halophytes. This water flow is accompanied by strong hydrodynamics, particularly in the northern half of the lagoon [18, 19].

 Sand Dune

From the cliff to the lagoon of Naїla extends a cordon of living dunes all along the coast, surrounding certain large beaches, and thus, participating in the favourable aesthetics of potential seaside tourists, while constituting the privileged habitat of a specific fauna, in particular the fennec or sand fox [37]. (Figure 5).

 Steady dunes.

In addition to the numerous dune cords formed by living dunes, there are two fixed and stabilized dunes, which the locals call the red dunes and the twin dunes [15]. These dunes take on a bright red color at certain times of the day, depending on the angle of exposure to the sun (Figure 6).

Tenoucha Daya

Dayas (Daїa) are low-amplitude depressions, which in the endorheic regions of the Maghreb, dot the rigid surface of plateaus protected by lacustrine limestone or soil crust[38].Tenouchad is a daya of about ten hectares located in the middle of the desert zone in the Khnefiss National Park.When arriving on the plateau, towards the pink dunes detectable on the horizon; the daya, hidden beyond the southern edge of the plateau, is marked by the tops of its tamarisk trees [39] (Figure 7).

Tazgha Salt flats

The Naїla Lagoon extends inland into a huge salt depression, the Sebkha of Tazgha, glowing white in the middle of the surrounding reddish-brown lands. During the highest tides, seawater overflows southwards and spreads out over the vast salt plain of Tazgha Salt flats, which dries out quickly under the effect of insolation and constitutes a salt accumulation field, exploited[1] without recourse to any kind of development [40] (Figure 8).

Khaoui Naàm Wadi.

The Khaoui Naam waterfall is one of the remarkable sites of the Khnefiss National Park and deserves a day trip, but it is only accessible to all-terrain vehicles. In its upstream part, the wadi and its micro-affluents have deeply cut the plateau into multiple ramifications, but the valleys are still quite wide. The wadi has narrowed and formed a magnificent waterfall several tens of metres high, which is totally unexpected in this desert environment. 

Downstream of the waterfall, a first Guelta of about ten meters long flows into a second one, which in turn flows down in a series of cascades into the wadi surrounded by rocks and halophilic plants [4] (Figure 9). 

Echguiguen Site

Afew hundred meters south of the red dunes rises the Echgiguen plateau. Dotted with tumulus, this plateau is bordered by a long paved alley of about five hundred meters, which some authors attribute to the remains of a road or a wall, even making reference to a city built nearly two millennia ago [41] (Figure 10).

 

Figure 2: Akhfenir Sinkhole            Figure 3 Akhfenir Cliff.                                                  Figure 4: Naїla Lagoon

 

 

Figure 5 : Sand dunes                                       Figure 6: Steady dunes.                                                  Figure 7: Tenoucha Daya

Figure 8 : Tazgha Salt flats                             Figure 9: Khaoui Naàm Wadi                Figure 10 : Echguiguen Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 11. Geological Card of selected geosites in “Knefiss National Park”.

 

Table 6. Sites of geological interest (Geosites and Geodiversity sites).

Site nombre	Site name	Commune/ Toponymie	Site code	Site Type	Coordon GPS
1	Akhfennir Sinkhole	Akhfennir	AS	Speleology	28°10N 12°03W
2	Akhfénir Cliff	Akhfennir	AC	Geomorphologie	28°09N 12°04W
3	Naїla Lagoon	Akhfennir	NL	Hydrogeology	28°03N 12°16W
4	Sand Dunes	Akhfennir	SD	Geomorphologie	28°09N 12°06W
5	Steady Dunes	Akhfennir	STD	Geomorphologie	28°03N 12°16W
6	Tenouchad Daya	Akhfennir	TD	Hydrology	28°04’N 12°07’W
7	Tazgha Salt Flats	Akhfennir	TSF	Mineralogy	27°54’N 12°20’W
8	Khaoui Naàm Wadi	Akhfennir	KNW	Hydrogeology	27°40’N 12°13’W
9	Echguiguen Site	Akhfennir	ES	Archeology	27°98N 12°16W

Site-nombre	Site code	SV	(R)	(KI)	(Sn)	(I)	(Gd)	(R)	(UI)
1	AS	78,8	30,0	10,0	1,3	15,0	5,0	7,5	10,0
2	AC	78,8	30,0	10,0	1,3	7,5	5,0	15,0	10,0
3	NL	80,0	30,0	10,0	2,5	7,5	5,0	15,0	10,0
4	SD	72,5	30,0	10,0	2,5	7,5	5,0	7,5	10,0
5	STD	78,8	30,0	5,0	1,3	15,0	2,5	15,0	10,0
6	TD	78,8	30,0	5,0	1,3	15,0	2,5	15,0	10,0
7	TSF	78,8	30,0	10,0	1,3	7,5	5,0	15,0	10,0
8	KNW	73,8	30,0	5,0	1,3	15,0	5,0	7,5	10,0
9	ES	75,1	30,0	10,0	1,3	3,8	5,0	15,0	10,0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 7. Recommendations and advising for each category SV.

 

 

 

 

 

 

           Table 8.  Recommendations and advising for each category PEU.            

Site- Nmb	Site code	PEU	(V)	(A)	(UI)	(S)	(L)	(DP)	(Av)	(Sc)	(U)	(Oc)	(Dp)	(Gd)
1	AS	88,8	10,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	3,8	2,5	5,0	5,0	5,0	10,0	20,0	7,5
2	AC	81,3	7,5	10,0	5,0	7,5	5,0	2,5	5,0	1,3	5,0	10,0	15,0	7,5
3	NL	89,4	7,5	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	3,0	3,8	5,0	5,0	10,0	20,0	10,0
4	SD	75,0	10,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	2,5	5,0	5,0	5,0	10,0	5,0	7,5
5	STD	85,8	5,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	0,8	5,0	5,0	5,0	10,0	20,0	10,0
6	TD	83,8	10,0	10,0	5,0	7,5	3,8	2,5	5,0	5,0	5,0	10,0	10,0	10,0
7	TSF	79,0	7,5	10,0	5,0	7,5	5,0	0,2	5,0	1,3	5,0	10,0	15,0	7,5
8	KNW	74,6	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	3,8	0,8	5,0	5,0	5,0	10,0	10,0	10,0
9	ES	80,5	5,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	0,5	5,0	2,5	5,0	10,0	20,0	7,5

Table 9.  Recommendations and advising for each category PTU

Site Nmb	Site Code	PTU	(V)	(A)	(UI)	(S)	(L)	(DP)	(Av)	(Sc)	(U)	(Oc)	(IP)	(El)	(Pr)
1	AS	86,4	10,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	3,8	2,5	5,0	15,0	10,0	5,0	10,0	1,3	3,8
2	AC	77,5	7,5	10,0	5,0	7,5	5,0	2,5	5,0	7,5	5,0	5,0	10,0	2,5	5,0
3	NL	86,4	7,5	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	3,8	3,8	15,0	10,0	5,0	10,0	1,3	5,0
4	SD	82,6	10,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	2,5	5,0	15,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	1,3	3,8
5	STD	85,1	5,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	3,8	5,0	15,0	10,0	5,0	10,0	1,3	5,0
6	TD	75,1	10,0	10,0	5,0	7,5	3,8	2,5	5,0	7,5	10,0	5,0	5,0	1,3	2,5
7	TSF	77,5	7,5	10,0	5,0	7,5	5,0	2,5	5,0	7,5	5,0	5,0	10,0	2,5	5,0
8	KNW	80,2	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	3,8	3,8	5,0	15,0	10,0	5,0	7,5	1,3	3,8
9	ES	73,8	5,0	10,0	5,0	5,0	5,0	2,5	5,0	7,5	10,0	5,0	10,0	1,3	2,5

Table  10. Recommendations and advising for each category DR

Site Nmb	Site Code	DR	(Dg)	(Pa)	(Lp)	(Ac)	(Dpp)
1	AS	48,8	8,8	10,0	10,0	15,0	5,0
2	AC	53,8	8,8	5,0	20,0	15,0	5,0
3	NL	79,0	26,5	20,0	10,0	15,0	7,5
4	SD	43,8	8,8	5,0	10,0	15,0	5,0
5	STD	61,3	8,8	20,0	10,0	15,0	7,5
6	TD	43,8	8,8	5,0	10,0	15,0	5,0
7	TSF	53,8	8,8	5,0	20,0	15,0	5,0
8	KNW	65,0	17,5	15,0	10,0	15,0	7,5
9	ES	62,5	17,5	5,0	20,0	15,0	5,0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 11.  Detailed scoring of the nine sites of geological interest selected key-case including.

Site nombre	Site name	Site code	SV	PEU	PTU	DR
1	Akhfennir Sinkhole	AS	78,8	88,8	86,4	48,8
2	Akhfénir Cliff	AC	78,8	81,3	77,5	53,8
3	Naїla Lagoon	NL	80,0	89,4	86,4	79,0
4	Sand Dunes	SD	72,5	75,0	82,6	43,8
5	Steady Dunes	STD	78,8	85,8	85,1	61,3
6	Tenouchad Daya	TD	78,8	83,8	75,1	43,8
7	Tazgha Salt Flats	TSF	78,8	79,0	77,5	53,8
8	Khaoui Naàm Wadi	KNW	73,8	74,6	80,2	65,0
9	Echguiguen Site	ES	75,1	80,5	73,8	62,5

 

Figure 12. Histograms respresentation of the DR,SV, PEU and PTU.

 

 

 

 

                      

1. „Discussion” section should be enlarged and should contain interpretation of obtained outcomes using literature of subject.

 

Khenifiss National Park (KNP) presents strong threats of degradation processes with important habitats.  However, care must be taken to prevent any disturbance that could, in the long term, affect its biological and heritage quality. The lagoon and its associated ecosystems represent the main heritage of Khenifiss National Park (KNP) and it should be maintained in an optimum ecological state as much as possible.

The Naїla lagoon, despite some number of constraints, remains the only lagoon at the national level, in comparison with other Atlantic and Mediterranean lagoons, which still evolves in a natural way except at the level of sebkha Tazgha [22]. The act of geoconservation must be understood as a static conception from a dynamic and innovative point of view, in which one seeks above all to safeguard a "geological identity and heritage" that generates some number of potentialities.

Geoconservation will then become an act of coherence and consultation, capable of combining contradictory imperatives and promoting a vision and a message on the scale of future generations in order to guarantee real sustainability. Geoconservation will be carried out as a coherent act of concerted action. It is capable of combining contradictory imperatives, promoting a vision and drawing up a message for future generations, in order to guarantee real sustainability.

This synthesis values the quality of the park's geosite and geodiversity, the sharing of geoconservation standards, best practices in geotourism development, the exchange of expertise and support for geoheritage preservation [42, 43, 44].

On the other hand, this synthesis makes it possible to present the geosites with a notion of responsibility and at the same time to valorize the quality of the geodiversity of the selected ones.   

First of all, the scientific, educational and/or tourist value of the geological heritage is highlighted [6, 25]. Secondly, the risk of degradation of the selected sites must also be quantified. Indeed, the result obtained will give the political and technical leaders of the park to prepare actions and strategies of geoconservation [45,46].

The quantitative assessment carried out in the framework of the Khnefis National Park (KNP) study provided nine inventoried sites. Calculations were made according to recent methodologies from the literature [26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 6, 25]. Standard thresholds were used in each part of the valuation (0-25 low, 26-50 moderate, 51-75 high, 76-100 very high). The thresholds (low and moderate) were not found and the high threshold is very noticeable among the proposed sites. Geosites (GS) and Geodiversity (GD) were defined when a Site of Geological interest has reached a Scientific value (SV), Potential Educational Use (PEU) or Potential Touristic Use (PTU) value greater than 75. The thresholds obtained are suggested for guidance (Table 5).

The quantitative approach used for the individual geosites and confirmed the positive qualities attributed to the region. As a consequence, the Scientific value (SV) obtained is very high in 6 of the proposed sites (Table 7; Fig. 12). The Potential Educational Use (PEU) is very high in 7 sites of which 3 cases are more than 85 (Table 8, fig 12), while the Potential Touristic Use (PTU) is very high in 7 cases of which 2 cases are more than 85 % (Table 9; Fig. 12). On the other hand, the Degradation Risk (DR) was calculated as moderate or high in most cases (table 10; figure 12), being moderate in 3 sites, high in 5 cases and very high only in Naїla Lagoon (table 11; figure 12). These data prove that the geodiversity of the area is relevant enough to be used for scientific, educational and/or tourism purposes, as well as for preservation plans (Table 12).

Table 12. Advising for each category (SV, PTU, PTE, and DR) according to the four thresholds (low, moderate, high, and very high).

hresholds category	Low	Moderate	High	Very High
Scientific value	Not applicable	Not applicable	Echguiguen Site Khaoui Naàm Wadi Sand Dunes	Naїla Lagoon Akhfennir Sinkhole Akhfénir Cliff Steady Dunes Tenouchad Daya Tazgha Salt Flats
Potential Educational Use	Not applicable	Not applicable	Khaoui Naàm Wadi Sand Dunes	Naїla Lagoon Akhfennir Sinkhole Steady Dunes Tenouchad Daya Echguiguen Site Akhfénir Cliff Tazgha Salt Flats
Potential Touristic Use	Not applicable	Not applicable	Tenouchad Daya Echguiguen Site	Naїla Lagoon Akhfennir Sinkhole Steady Dunes Sand Dunes Khaoui Naàm Wadi Akhfénir Cliff Tazgha Salt Flats
Degradation Risk	Not applicable	Tenouchad Daya Akhfénir Cliff Sand Dunes	Khaoui Naàm Wadi Echguiguen Site Steady Dunes Tazgha Salt Flats Akhfennir Sinkhole	Naїla Lagoon

 

The result shows the priority given to the various actions of each programme according to four strategies: communication, environment to education, equipment and management. It should be noted, however, that the execution of certain results is especially important for the implementation of the Programme.

- Communication strategy: This strategy aims to ensure the efficiency of communication tools. Below is a presentation of some principles [47].on which this orientation is based. These actions are:

• The publication program: the creation of a Mapguides [48], the trail brochures or leaflets and the website;
• The interpretation program: Equipment of the reception centre within Naїla Lagoon.

- Environment to Education Strategy: Because of the influence that children and young people can have on their family environment, their education is fundamental to improving environmental conditions and promoting substantial change [49].The educational system is the most adequate structure for the implementation of extracurricular environmental education activities. These actions are:

• The environmental education programme: Development of educational and teaching materials.
• The training program: Training of field staff in monitoring.

- Equipment strategy: A strategy for the management of protected areas aims to facilitate the contemplation and interpretation of a panoramic view or singular element of the landscape [50]. These actions are:

• The Equipment program: The creation of an Ecomuseum is essential for the promotion of ecotourism, road and trail development;
• The Signage Program: all signage actions have priority for development.

- Management strategy: A series of critical parameters have been selected for follow-up that are assessed using previously established indicators [51]. The methodology has been defined on the basis of the availability of personnel exclusively assigned to the collection of fundamental information, this being ensured by the guides and personnel in charge of monitoring or control whose training is provided for in the corresponding programmes. The action is:

• The management and maintenance programme: Elaboration of annual reports on the progress of the development programmes.

In addition to all these constraints, those related to unregulated and wilderness tourism, non respectful of the environment and those which mainly benefits foreign promoters, are major constraints on the destruction and disruption (negative impacts) of the environment.

It is a site that is easy to sell to investors and to market despite the serious damage caused by tourists, especially foreign tourists, who are heavy consumers and disruptive to landscapes and the environment.

The stated strategies have been translated into action programmes, which in turn have been translated into concrete projects or actions. The present work defines the strategies and programmes, and establishes the criteria for the development of these projects and actions. It should be pointed out that although the relationship between strategies and actions is obvious, in some cases a project will materialise in accordance with the principles of geoconservation.

 

1. Authors used different modes of reference citing.

References

1. BENKADA, A, BELOUCGI.M, LALLOUCHEN.A, ESSARSAR. M: Regional financial governance: a lever for change for advanced regionalization in Morocco. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research. (2018).
2. Ólafsdóttir Rannveig . Geotourism. Geosciences .(2019), MDPI 9, 48; doi:10.3390
3. Reynard E., Pica A., Coratza P., Urban geomorphological heritage. An overview. Quaestiones Geographicae 36(3), Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Poznań, (2017): pp. 7–20.
4. Fahd, S. ; Ater, M. ; Pleguezuelos, J.-M. ; Feriche, M. & Geniez, P.. Diagnostic herpétologique : Khnefiss . Programme GEF des Aires Protégées du Maroc. Rapport Final. Haut Commissariat aux Eaux et Forêts et à la Lutte contre la Désertification. (2006).
5. Lazzarini, M. & Aloia, A. Geoparks, Geoheritage and Geotourism: Opportunities and Tools in Sustainable Development of the Territory. GeoJ. Tour. Geosites. (2014).13, 8–9.
6. Brilha J. Inventory and Quantitative Assessment of Geosites and Geodiversity Sites: a review. Geoheritage. (2016). 8: 119–134. DOI: 10.1007/s12371-014-0139-3.
7. Carcavilla, L.; Durán, J.J.; López-Martínez, J. Geodiversidad: Concepto y Relación con el Patrimonio Geológico. Geo-Temas, (2008). 10, 1299–1303.
8. Carcavilla, L.; Durán, J.J.; Garcia-Cortés, A.; López-Martínez, J. Geological heritage and geoconservation in Spain: Past, present and future. Geoheritage,(2009). 1, 75–91.
9. Alexandre Poiraud & Grégory Dandurand. De la géoconservation au géotourisme : Un glissement de paradigme. ANNALES DE GÉOGRAPHIE, (2017). N° 717 Pp 625-653
10. Duval, M. & Gauchon, C. Tourisme, géosciences et enjeux de territoires : actualités du géotourisme. Téoros, (2010).29 (2), pp 3–14.
11. Maria Helena Henriques & Rui Pena dos Reis & José Brilha & Teresa Mota: Geoconservation as an Emerging Geoscience. Geoheritage (2011) 3: pp:117–128.
12. El Hadi, H., Tahiri, A., Brilha, J., El Maidani, A., Baghdad, B. and Zaidi, A. Geodiversity Examples of Morocco: From Inventory to Regional Geotourism Development. Open Journal of Ecology, (2015). 5, 409-419.
13. S & BENMLIH. A: The Sustainable Development of Oued Noun Oases through the Integration in the Biosphere Reserve Oasis of Southern Morocco. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR). Volume 7 Issue 11. (2018).Pp 1211-1218.
14. Ibn Tattou, M. Park National de Khnefiss : programme de suivi de la végétation. Programme GEF des Aires Protégées du Maroc. Rapport Final. Haut Commissariat aux Eaux et Forêts et à la Lutte contre la Désertification. (2008).
15. H Morphodynamique des barkhanes Etude des dunes du Sud-Ouest Marocain. (2005).Docteur de l’Universit´e Paris VII. UNIVERSIT´E DENIS DIDEROT.
16. Idardare Z., Chiffoleau J. -F., Moukrim A., Ait Alla A., Auger D., Lefrere L. & Rozuel E. Metal concentrations in sediment and Nereis diversicolor in two Moroccan lagoons: Khnefiss and Oualidia. Chemistry and Ecology, (2008). 24: 329 – 340.
17. Lefrere L., Ouassas M., Guillois B., Gillet P., Moukrim A. Macrobenthic community structure of soft-bottom sediments in the Khnefiss lagoon, South of Morocco. Mater. Environ. Sci. (2015). 6 (11) 2226-2236.
18. Lakhdar Idrissi J., Sarf F., El Mossaoui N., Orbi A. & Hilmi K.: Étude pluridisciplinaire de la lagune de Khnefiss (Sud du Maroc). Rapport Travaux Documentaires, (2000). 108 114 p.
19. Mimouni R., Yacoubi B. & Eddabra R. Etude de la qualité microbiologique et physico-chimique de la lagune de Khnefiss . Rapports Scientifiques du Programme LagMar, (2005). Maroc, 1: 67-73.
20. Knefiss National Park Administration: Development and management plan (2013-2018). recensement des faunes et flores du Park (2013).
21. HAFID M., TARI G., BOUHADIOUI D., ELMOUSSAID I., ECHARFAOUI H., AIT SALEM A., NAHIM M., DAKKI M.: Atlantic Basins. In : Michard A., Saddiqi O., Chalouan A., Frizon de Lamotte D.(Eds.), Continental Evolution : The Geology of Morocco. Springer, (2008) LNES 116, 303-329.
22. BENDAANOUN M., – Etude botanique et analyse écologique de la végétation du SIBE/Park National de Khnifiss. Projet GEF sur les Aires Protégées - Maroc / HCEFLCD. (2004) 30p.
23. ABOULABES– Diagnostic thématique en Hydrogéologie au SIBE de Khnifiss. Projet GEF sur les Aires Protégées - Maroc / HCEFLCD. ,(2004 )34p.
24. DAKKI M., QNINBA A., EL AGBANI MA., BAYED A & FEKHAOUI M. :  Fiche descriptive sur les zones humides (FDR). Baie de Khnifiss. (2003)11p.
25. Aoulad-Sidi-Mhend.A, Maaté. Amri.L, Hlila.R, Chakiri.S, Maaté.S & Martín.MM: The Geological Heritage of the Talassemtane National Park and the Ghomara coast Natural Area (NW of Morocco) Geoheritage (2019).11:1005–1025.
26. Bruschi VM, Cendrero A Direct and parametric methods for the assessment of geosites and geomorphosites. In: Reynard E, Coratza P, Regolini-Bissig G (eds) Geomorphosites. (2009). Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil, München. Section II, pp 73–88
27. Reynard E The assessment of geomorphosites. In: Reynard E, Coratza P, Regolini Bissig G (eds) Geomorphosites. Verlag Dr. (2009). Friedrich Pfeil, Munchen, pp 63–71
28. Pereira P, Pereira DI Methodological guidelines for geomorphosite assessment. Géomorphol Relief, Processus, Environ. (2010). 16(2):215–222
29. Bruschi VM, Cendrero A, Albertos JAC A statistical approach to the validation and optimisation of geoheritage assessment procedures. Geoheritage. (2011). 3(3):131–149
30. Pereira P & Pereira DI. Assessment of geosites tourism value in geoparks: the example of Arouca Geopark (Portugal). Proceedings of the 11th European Geoparks Conference, Arouca: (2012).231–232.
31. Bollati I, Smiraglia C, Pelfini M: Assessment and selection of geomorphosites and trails in the Miage Glacier area (Western Italian Alps). (2013)  Environ Manag 51:951–967
32. Bollati I, Crosa Lenz B, Zanoletti E, PelfiniM: Geomorphological mapping for the valorization of the alpine environment. A methodological proposal tested in the Loana Valley (Sesia Val Grande Geopark, Western Italian Alps). (2017) .J Mt Sci 14(6):1023–1038
33. Fuentes-Gutiérrez I, Fernández-Martínez E: Mapping geosites for geoheritage management: a methodological proposal for the regional park of Picos de Europa (León, Spain). Environ Manag (2012) 50:789– 806
34. Bergier, P. & Thévenot, M. Bibliographie ornithologique du Sahara Atlantique marocain - 2. Go-South Bull. (2011). 8 : 53-60. [en ligne] : http:// go-south.org.
35. Dakki M. & de Ligny W. The Khnefiss lagoon and its surrounding environment (Province of La’youne, Morocco). Travaux Institut Scientifique de Rabat, (1988), Hors-série. 172pp.
36. Qninba, A. ; El Agbani, M.A. ; Benhoussa, A. ; Rguibi Idrissi, H. & Thévenot, M. Diagnostic Ornithologique. Khnefiss . Programme GEF des Aires Protégées du Maroc. Rapport Final. Haut Commissariat aux Eaux et Forêts et à la Lutte contre la Désertification. (2005).
37. El Agbani M.A., Fekhaoui M., Bayed A. & Schouten J.R. The Khnefiss Lagoon and adjacent waters: hydrology and hydrodynamics. In: Dakki & de Ligny W. The Khnefiss  Lagoon and its surrounding environment (Province of La’youne, Morocco). Travaux Institut Scientifique Rabat, hors-série. (1988). pp 17-26.
38. Agabi, « Daya », in Gabriel Camps (dir.), 15 | Daphnitae – Djado, Aix-en-Provence, Edisud

(« Volumes », no 15) , (1995).

39. Zadane, Y. ; Qninba, A. ; Ibn Tattou, M. & Bergier, P. La daya de Ténouchad, un site de reproduction des Anatidés dans le Park National de Khnefiss . Go-South Bull. (2009).6 : pp 107-112.
40. I, Chikhaoui. El Filali.M.F, Abbassi.A, Banaoui.A and Kaaya.A Production in Cell Biomass and Carotenoids under the Effect of a Saline Stress in Microalgae Dunaliella spp. isolated from Moroccan Saharian Saline. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences (2017). Volume 6 Number 8.
41. Yves & Christine Gauthier Monuments à alignement du Sahara occidental et leur place dans le contexte saharien. 2005. in .Researchgate, (2015). XXXVI 147 – 190.
42. Henriques, M.H.; Pena dos Reis, R.; Brilha, J.; Mota, T.S. Geoconservation as an emerging geoscience. Geoheritage, (2011). 3, 117–128.
43. Reynard, E., C. (Eds) Geoheritage: assessment, protection and management, Elsevier; Amsterdam.2018.pp. 1–450.
44. John E. Gordon, Roger Crofts and Enrique D´ıaz-Mart´ınez: Geoheritage Conservation and Environmental Policies. Chapter in Geoheritage( 2018). pp. 213-236. ·
45. Paúl C.M, Gricelda H.F, Josué Briones, Pablo Caldevilla, María J.D.C and Edgar Berrezueta Geotourism and Local Development Based on Geological and Mining Sites Utilization, Zaruma-Portovelo, Ecuador. Geosciences (2018), MDPI. 8, 205.
46. Pierluigi Brandolini, Francesco Faccini, Guido Paliaga, Pietro Piana: Urban geomorphology in coastal environment: Man-made morphological changes in a seaside tourist resort (Rapallo, Eastern Liguria, Italy). Quaestiones Geographicae, Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Poznań (2017), 36(3),, pp. 97–110. 15 figs.
47. Tilden, F. Interpreting our heritage (4th ed.). Chapel Hill, NCThe University of North Carolina Press. . (2007).
48. Keith Bosak, Bynum Boley, Kyla Zaret: Deconstructing the ‘Crown of the Continent’: Power, politics and the process of creating National Geographic's Geotourism Mapguides. Tourism Geographies. (2010), Volume 12, - Issue 3.
49. Annette Viel, « Essentielle convergence de pensées entre Écologie, Interprétation, Muséologie et Patrimoine », Éducation relative à l'environnement, (2019), Volume 15 – 1.
50. Junta Andalucia y Alto Comisariado de Aguas y Bosques y Lucha contra la Desertificación del Reino de Marruecos. Prorgama de uso pùblico de parque national de Talassemntane (Marreucos) 2010.
51. National Park of Canada, management plan. (2007). Cat. no.: R63-350/2-2007F

 

 

 

[1] The saltworks (geosite) of Sebkhat Tazgha is a public domain (Order of 1914; BO: 10/7/1914, page 529), managed by the Ministry of Equipment and Public Works. Its exploitation is governed by the Dahir of 30 November 1918, relating to temporary occupation. (BO: 20/1/1919, page 37)

 

Reviewer 2 Report

The article needs major revisions due to following aspects:

In general: The article needs a sound structuring. Fundamentals like geology, geoheritage, tourism in general, etc. of the region are missing.

The selection and the assessment of the geosites is not explained.

The programmes and strategy mentioned in the conclusion are not presented.

Sometimes technical terms are not applied correctly and sometimes french terms are integrated.

The references do not always match to the citations.

The abstract does not match with the title of the article. Neither geotourism nor geoheritage and geoconservation are mentioned.

The article needs a thorough language polishing. Sometimes technical terms are not used correctly, like environmental morphologies in line 13/14; sometimes phrases are not understandable like 39-41.

Arabic terms need explanations like krebs (line 45) or daya.

The citations do not fit sometimes like number 6 and 7.

Line 65: what is plastic quality?

Line 68: What is meant by middle relief?

Chapter 2 lacks statements to geology, geotourism, tourism in general and strenghts, weaknesses and opportunities of geotourism in this region

All figures are without mentioning of sources.

Figure 1: Add Marrakech for orientation

Chapter 3: Clarify the research question

Line 102: Tableau is french. 

Subdivision of table 1 recommended to clarify which indicators belong to which parts.

Chapter 4:

Missing: Introduction to geology in general and geoheritage. No description how the selection of geosites had been done.

Description of selected geosites is only touristic and sometimes biological; all geological information is missing.

Line 138: Explain daya

Line 139: Knefiss or Knifiss? Two versions within the article.

147: How is exploitation possible, if the geosite is within a national park?

Figure 4: Behind Steady add dunes

Figure 11: Consistent terms: Geosites in the labelling of the figure, points in the legend; correct english terms: eocene, quaternary moderne (?)

Table 2: Combine with description of geosites.

Table 3: Explanation for the assessment is lacking.

Table 4: Labelling partly in French (Sécurité, ...). No explanation for the assessment.

Line 218: There is no synthesis, to value the quality of the park's geodiversity. The citations are not fitting as the cited articles refer on geotourism and geoheritag in general and not especially n Knefiss national park.

Line 232: Who defined the threshold of greater than 75? Citation missing.

Line 235: First time georoutes are mentioned! They need to be described and explained before.

Line 247: No strategies and actions programs had been mentioned before!

Line 255: Various actions of each programme - phrase is not understandable, as actions and programmes had not been explained before.

Line 257: What does "Execution of certain results" mean?

Line 261: Contradiction to Line 264. Is there an Ecomusée or not?

All fundamentals are missing to understand this part of the article. Information about tourism in general and geotourism is absolutely necessary. Are there so many tourists to endanger the geosites, ...

Line 281: Instead of environments ecosystems.

References: Some cited articles do not match with the presented article, like 4-7.

 

 

Author Response

 

1. The abstract does not match with the title of the article. Neither geotourism nor geoheritage and geoconservation are mentioned.

. Indeed, the geosites have small to large scale characteristics (from tens meters to more than 10 km). The geosite inventory is based on the geoconservation strategy. Qualitative and quantitative assessments were carried out on the basis of geoheritage values of international significance. Geoconservation efforts should be made in all these sites for some reasons, such as education research as well as geotourism in Khnefiss National Park.

2. The article needs a thorough language polishing. Sometimes technical terms are not used correctly, like environmental morphologies in line 13/14; sometimes phrases are not understandable like 39-41.

Landscape morphologies

3. Arabic terms need explanations like krebs (line 45) or daya.

Dayas (Daїa) are low-amplitude depressions, which in the endorheic regions of the Maghreb, dot the rigid surface of plateaus protected by lacustrine limestone or soil crust[38]

Krebs: It offers sections showing the complexity of the hamada's geological formations and the rapid facies variations typical of continental deposits. J. Riser, « Guir », in Gabriel Camps (dir.), 21 | Gland – Hadjarien, Aix-en-Provence, Edisud  1999 (« Volumes », no 21) ,

4.The citations do not fit sometimes like number 6 and 7.

Tourist activities have a direct impact on both the local population and the natural landscape. A better match between Men and Biosphere has a good synchronization according to the tourist context and the offer of products specific to each region.

5. Line 65: what is plastic quality?

Ecological quality

Line 68: What is meant by middle relief?

Relief

Chapter 2 lacks statements to geology, geotourism, tourism in general and strenghts, weaknesses and opportunities of geotourism in this region

The region is part of the coastal basins that mark the flexure between Paleozoic structures and the coast. The lithostratigraphic setting is represented by a series of neogene cover at the level of the Atlantic plain, which varies slightly between north and south as far as the town of Dakhla. The deposition of the prograding series is well expressed in the distal part of the immense coastal basin of Tarfaya [21]. The formations show interlocking levels from the midpiocene to the marine quaternary. With the drilling data, the dominant formations are as follows:

- Secondary formations of marl, sandstone and limestone from the upper Jurassic to the upper Cretaceous.The latter occupy almost the entire basin of the Khaouii naàm wadi and along the lower El Waer Wadi. The cornice escarpments (Kreb) constitute the limits between this formation and that of the limestones of the Hamada (plateau) [22].

- A Plio Quaternary limestone formation of the pliocene hamada.This formation occupies the entire interior of the area known as Gaada (plateau) [23].

- The Mogrebian sandstones and limestones of the coastal platform this area extends from the coast and stops at the level of the inland cliffs [24].

- The dunes consolidated in sandstone of the ancient quaternary age ranges also. This formation includes deposits in the form of hydraulic dunes of progradation whose thicknesses vary between 5 and 20 metres. This formation exists only locally along the coast near the outlet of the El Waer wadi [4].

-The sharp cliffs of the recent quaternary which are linked to the current coastal dynamics.These are dunes that sometimes evolve into small barkhanes whose orientation is NE. These morphological units are located in the Naïla zone [4].

The Geotourism: The proximity of the Khnefiss National Park to the major tourist centres and its location in a region with strong natural potential, make this site a place of attraction if excellence for the region.  The Khnefiss National Park is a natural site that contrasts with the Saharan and anti-atlasic landscape, added to the palette of resources of the southern Moroccan domain, it will be able to enrich the offers by an exceptional geotouristic product. Once developed, this park will position itself with a geotourism activity that takes in this territory its full dimension in terms of:

- Destination with strong contrasted, diversified and singular biogeographical richness in the Saharan provinces of south-west Morocco in direct transition with the Atlantic coast;

- A territory with a landscape, archaeological, cultural and historical heritage to be promoted.

- Traditions and a social mode of a nomadic people with transhumance in a particular Saharan region where the populations have adapted to fishing, breeding and handicrafts.A way of life in harmony between the local population and its natural environment.

Finally, a SWOT analysis highlights Khnefiss National Park's internal strengths and weaknesses in terms of geotourism development.

- A fragility of the most visited ecosystems in the absence of any preservation and safeguarding actions on the scale of the region.

- A risk of silting up and desertification without any measures to protect any heritage, further accentuated by strong tourist pressure at Naїla lagoon.

- A consequent degradation of biodiversity and a threat of irreversible loss of certain components of this ecosystem.

- An exceptional natural site that requires the enhancement and protection of its geomorphosites according to the rules imposed by sustainable and responsible tourism.

Through this approach, the site calls on tourism stakeholders to make a real partnership effort with local authorities and communities, for a responsible and participatory management for the development of sustainable tourism in the region. Actions are to be undertaken according to the founding principles of geotourism, which are to promote the most viable and sustainable development for the tourism industry in the Park and its surroundings.

1. All figures are without mentioning of sources.

Figure 1: Add Marrakech for orientation

Figure 1 Location of the study area “Knefiss National Park”

Chapter 3: Clarify the research question

Two evaluation approaches are adopted for the development of this article: A qualitative approach, which gives particular attention to the geographic and geological heritage values for classification and description.A quantitative approach which aims to assess the geosites and its geoheritage value to establish development strategies.

1. Line 102: Tableau is french. 
2. Subdivision of table 1 recommended to clarify which indicators belong to which parts.

Parts	Criteria (scored 0 to 4)*	Weighting (%)
Scientific value (SV)	Representativeness (R) Key locality (Kl) Scientific knowledge (Sn) Integrity (I) Geological diversity (Gd) Rarity (R) Use limitations (UI)	30 20 5 15 5 15 10
Potential Educational Use (PEU)	Vulnerability (V) Accessibility (A) Use limitations (Ul) Safety (S) Logistics (L) Density of population (Dp) Associations with other values (Av) Scenery (Sc) Uniqueness (U) Observation conditions (Oc) Didactic potential (Dp) Geological diversity (Gd)	10 10 5 10 5 5 5 5 5 10 20 10
Potential touristic use (PTU)	Vulnerability (V) Accessibility (A) Use limitations (Ul) Safety (S) Logistics (L) Density of population (Dp) Associations with other values (Av) Scenery (Sc) Uniqueness (U) Observation conditions (Oc) Interpretative potential (Ip) Economic level (El) Proximity recreational areas (Pr)	10 10 5 10 5 5 5 15 10 5 10 5 5
Degradation risk (DR)	Deterioration geological elements (Dg) Proximity activities cause of degradation (Pa) Legal protection (Lp) Accessibility (Ac) Density of population (Dpp)	35 20 20 15 10

Two evaluation approaches are adopted for the development of this article: A qualitative approach, which gives particular attention to the geographic and geological heritage values for classification and description.A quantitative approach which aims to assess the geosites and its geoheritage value to establish development strategies.

The evaluation of Geosites and Geodiversity sites consists of four parts with different criteria for each component: scientific value (SV), potential educational use (PEU), potential tourism use (PTU), and risk of degradation (DR). The number of criteria in the quantitative assessment should be limited as a high number does not necessarily imply a more relevant and effective result. In this assessment there is no final ranking as the parties are assessed and presented separately [29, 6]. Data collected may be easily rectified and improved according to sites changes or land use plans [31, 32].

Scientific value (SV) is valued by seven criteria: Representativeness (R), key locality (Kl), scientific knowledge (Sn), integrity (I), geological diversity (Gd), rarity (R) and limits of use (Ul). Each criterion is punctuated by the values 0, 1, 2 and 4 (value 3 is not used) and is also weighted by percentage (Table 5) [6].

The potential educational use (PEU) is valorized with 12 criteria based on the vulnerability (V), accessibility (A), use limitations (Ul), safety (S), logistics (L), density of population (Dp), associations with other values (Av), scenery (Sc), uniqueness (U), observation conditions (Oc), didactic potential (Dp), and geological diversity (Gd). In this case, vulnerability (V) is understood as the existence of elements of geodiversity that can be destroyed by visitors [33, 6]. Each criterion is punctuated with values 0 to 4 and also weighted according to percentage (Table 5).

The potential touristic use (PTU) is valorized with 13 criteria. Eight of these criteria are equal to those used in the PEU (V, A, Ul, S, L, Dp, Av, Sc, U, Oc) plus three new criteria: interpretative potential (Ip), economical level (El), and proximity to recreational areas (Pr). In the same way as the PEU, each criterion is punctuated by values 0 to 4 and also weighted according to percentage (Table 5).

The concept of Degradation Risk (DR) is a combination of other factors such as accessibility, size, proximity to human settlements, public influx and current or potential threats [33]. In this research, evaluated using five criteria [6] is based on the deterioration of geological elements (Dg), proximity of activities to a potential cause of degradation (Pa), legal protection (Lp), accessibility (Ac), and Density of population (Dpp). Each criterion is punctuated by values 0 to 4 and also weighted by percentage (Table 5). In the case of the DR, Ac and Dpp criteria are similar to those used in the PEU and PTU, but here in a negative sense.

The thresholds used in each part of the valorization are: 0-25 low, 26-50 moderate, 51-75 high and 76-100 very high. In this research, when a Site of Geological Interest reaches an SV value greater than 75, it is considered a geosite (GS).

Similarly, when a Site of Geological Interest reaches a value in the PEU or PTV greater than 75, it is considered to be a site of geodiversity. In the case of very high values in SV but also in PEU and/or PTU, the term geosite has prevailed, although the site may also be used as a geodiversity site for educational and tourism purposes.

Chapter 4: Missing: Introduction to geology in general and geoheritage. No description how the selection of geosites had been done.

The site is located in the northern part of the "Tarfaya-Laayoune Coastal Basin". Bordered to the North by the anti atlas, to the South by the Mauritanides chain and to the East by the dorsale of Rguibat. This basin consists of a Precambrian-age basement, outcropping at the level of the Saharan hinterland, and a coastal Meso-cenozoic sedimentary cover (Miocene sands surmounted by a Quaternary Moghrebian slab) consisting of calcareous sandstone. The thickness of the Quaternary "platform", where the Khnefiss site is excavated, reaches several metres (up to 40 m) [24].  

 

1. Description of selected geosites is only touristic and sometimes biological; all geological information is missing.

The sites of the Khnefiss National Park (KNP) are declined below along the National Road N°1 coming from the North towards the South (Figure 11).

 Akhfennir Sinkhole

Locally called "Aàjb Allah", and sometimes called the "devil's hole", this abyss , about 30 meters deep, is both a natural curiosity and a real risk of accident, a few dozen meters from the roadside (Figure 2).

Akhfenir Cliff.

The entire coast is overhung by steep cliffs over 50 meters height, and then stops to give way for sandy beaches. This site, therefore, has a double attraction, ornithological and for artisanal fishing (Figure 3)

 Naїla Lagoon.

The bay (or lagoon) is in the form of a long inlet cut into a sandstone limestone plateau (Moghrebian) resting on marls (Cretaceous), in the form of a sinuous channel leading to a vast salt depression [4, 34].  A string of vived sandy dunes, interspersed between the lagoon and the ocean, causes a narrowing of the channel and extends southwards along the western shore of the lagoon [35, 36] (Figure 4).

The lagoon is dominated to the East and South by a long cliff, 25 to 35 m high, cut into the rocky plateau [4]. The channel, known as Foum Agwitir, is about 100 m wide and 5-6 m deep, ensuring the circulation of a large volume of water; the hydrology of the lagoon is thus almost exclusively determined by the tide gauge rhythm [15, 36]. 

The marine water penetrates the mainland through a wide channel, which gradually narrows towards the south and then splits into several small narrow channels that flow between a formation of halophytes. This water flow is accompanied by strong hydrodynamics, particularly in the northern half of the lagoon [18, 19].

 Sand Dune

From the cliff to the lagoon of Naїla extends a cordon of living dunes all along the coast, surrounding certain large beaches, and thus, participating in the favourable aesthetics of potential seaside tourists, while constituting the privileged habitat of a specific fauna, in particular the fennec or sand fox [37]. (Figure 5).

 Steady dunes.

In addition to the numerous dune cords formed by living dunes, there are two fixed and stabilized dunes, which the locals call the red dunes and the twin dunes [15]. These dunes take on a bright red color at certain times of the day, depending on the angle of exposure to the sun (Figure 6).

Tenoucha Daya

Dayas (Daїa) are low-amplitude depressions, which in the endorheic regions of the Maghreb, dot the rigid surface of plateaus protected by lacustrine limestone or soil crust[38].Tenouchad is a daya of about ten hectares located in the middle of the desert zone in the Khnefiss National Park.When arriving on the plateau, towards the pink dunes detectable on the horizon; the daya, hidden beyond the southern edge of the plateau, is marked by the tops of its tamarisk trees [39] (Figure 7).

Tazgha Salt flats

The Naїla Lagoon extends inland into a huge salt depression, the Sebkha of Tazgha, glowing white in the middle of the surrounding reddish-brown lands. During the highest tides, seawater overflows southwards and spreads out over the vast salt plain of Tazgha Salt flats, which dries out quickly under the effect of insolation and constitutes a salt accumulation field, exploited[1] without recourse to any kind of development [40] (Figure 8).

Khaoui Naàm Wadi.

The Khaoui Naam waterfall is one of the remarkable sites of the Khnefiss National Park and deserves a day trip, but it is only accessible to all-terrain vehicles. In its upstream part, the wadi and its micro-affluents have deeply cut the plateau into multiple ramifications, but the valleys are still quite wide. The wadi has narrowed and formed a magnificent waterfall several tens of metres high, which is totally unexpected in this desert environment. 

Downstream of the waterfall, a first Guelta of about ten meters long flows into a second one, which in turn flows down in a series of cascades into the wadi surrounded by rocks and halophilic plants [4] (Figure 9). 

Echguiguen Site

Afew hundred meters south of the red dunes rises the Echgiguen plateau. Dotted with tumulus, this plateau is bordered by a long paved alley of about five hundred meters, which some authors attribute to the remains of a road or a wall, even making reference to a city built nearly two millennia ago [41] (Figure 10).

2. Line 138: Explain daya

Dayas (Daїa) are low-amplitude depressions, which in the endorheic regions of the Maghreb, dot the rigid surface of plateaus protected by lacustrine limestone or soil crust [38].

3. Line 139: Knefiss or Knifiss? Two versions within the article.

Knefiss

4. 147: How is exploitation possible, if the geosite is within a national park?

[1] The saltworks (geosite) of Sebkhat Tazgha is a public domain (Order of 1914; BO: 10/7/1914, page 529), managed by the Ministry of Equipment and Public Works. Its exploitation is governed by the Dahir of 30 November 1918, relating to temporary occupation. (BO: 20/1/1919, page 37)

5. Figure 4: Behind Steady add dunes
6. Figure 11: Consistent terms: Geosites in the labelling of the figure, points in the legend; correct english terms: eocene, quaternary moderne (?)

 

Table 2: Combine with description of geosites.

Table 3: Explanation for the assessment is lacking.

Table 4: Labelling partly in French (Sécurité, ...). No explanation for the assessment.

(Chapter 3)

 

Figure 11. Geological Card of selected geosites in “Knefiss National Park

6. Line 218: There is no synthesis, to value the quality of the park's geodiversity. The citations are not fitting as the cited articles refer on geotourism and geoheritag in general and not especially n Knefiss national park.

Khenifiss National Park (KNP) presents strong threats of degradation processes with important habitats.  However, care must be taken to prevent any disturbance that could, in the long term, affect its biological and heritage quality. The lagoon and its associated ecosystems represent the main heritage of Khenifiss National Park (KNP) and it should be maintained in an optimum ecological state as much as possible.

The Naїla lagoon, despite some number of constraints, remains the only lagoon at the national level, in comparison with other Atlantic and Mediterranean lagoons, which still evolves in a natural way except at the level of sebkha Tazgha [22]. The act of geoconservation must be understood as a static conception from a dynamic and innovative point of view, in which one seeks above all to safeguard a "geological identity and heritage" that generates some number of potentialities.

Geoconservation will then become an act of coherence and consultation, capable of combining contradictory imperatives and promoting a vision and a message on the scale of future generations in order to guarantee real sustainability. Geoconservation will be carried out as a coherent act of concerted action. It is capable of combining contradictory imperatives, promoting a vision and drawing up a message for future generations, in order to guarantee real sustainability.

7. Line 232: Who defined the threshold of greater than 75? Citation missing.
8. Line 235: First time georoutes are mentioned! They need to be described and explained before.
9. Line 247: No strategies and actions programs had been mentioned before!
10. Line 255: Various actions of each programme - phrase is not understandable, as actions and programmes had not been explained before.

The result shows the priority given to the various actions of each programme according to four strategies: communication, environment to education, equipment and management. It should be noted, however, that the execution of certain results is especially important for the implementation of the Programme.

- Communication strategy: This strategy aims to ensure the efficiency of communication tools. Below is a presentation of some principles [47].on which this orientation is based. These actions are:

• The publication program: the creation of a Mapguides [48], the trail brochures or leaflets and the website;
• The interpretation program: Equipment of the reception centre within Naїla Lagoon.

- Environment to Education Strategy: Because of the influence that children and young people can have on their family environment, their education is fundamental to improving environmental conditions and promoting substantial change [49].The educational system is the most adequate structure for the implementation of extracurricular environmental education activities. These actions are:

• The environmental education programme: Development of educational and teaching materials.
• The training program: Training of field staff in monitoring.

- Equipment strategy: A strategy for the management of protected areas aims to facilitate the contemplation and interpretation of a panoramic view or singular element of the landscape [50]. These actions are:

• The Equipment program: The creation of an Ecomuseum is essential for the promotion of ecotourism, road and trail development;
• The Signage Program: all signage actions have priority for development.

- Management strategy: A series of critical parameters have been selected for follow-up that are assessed using previously established indicators [51]. The methodology has been defined on the basis of the availability of personnel exclusively assigned to the collection of fundamental information, this being ensured by the guides and personnel in charge of monitoring or control whose training is provided for in the corresponding programmes. The action is:

• The management and maintenance programme: Elaboration of annual reports on the progress of the development programmes.

11. Line 257: What does "Execution of certain results" mean?

The result shows the priority given to the various actions of each programme according to four strategies: communication, environment to education, equipment and management. It should be noted, however, that the execution of certain results is especially important for the implementation of the Programme.

12. Line 261: Contradiction to Line 264. Is there an Ecomusée or not?

Yes. It is the ecomusee. But, line 261 is reception centre 

13. All fundamentals are missing to understand this part of the article. Information about tourism in general and geotourism is absolutely necessary. Are there so many tourists to endanger the geosites, ...

It is a site that is easy to sell to investors and to market despite the serious damage caused by tourists, especially foreign tourists, who are heavy consumers and disruptive to landscapes and the environment.

14. Line 281: Instead of environments ecosystems.

On the other hand, the Park's diversity of exceptional landscapes predisposes it to play an important role in geotourism, which must respect their geosites as well as the environment by geoconservation strategy.

15. References: Some cited articles do not match with the presented article, like 4-7.

 

[1] The saltworks (geosite) of Sebkhat Tazgha is a public domain (Order of 1914; BO: 10/7/1914, page 529), managed by the Ministry of Equipment and Public Works. Its exploitation is governed by the Dahir of 30 November 1918, relating to temporary occupation. (BO: 20/1/1919, page 37)

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors

In my opinion the made corrections contributed to great improvement of manuscript. I have no more suggestions for eventually changes.

Author Response

Je serai digne de votre confiance. Merci pour votre soutien et votre compréhension.

I will be worthy of your trust. Thank you for your support and understanding.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The revised version is much better than the first one and could now be printed with some minor changes - see list below:

Before printing a native speaker should check the english language.

Abstract: The new part "geosites" should be better connected to the rest of the text.

Page 2: The definition of krebs is still not clear

Page 3: Eliminate all the lists of endangered plants and animals. This might be quite interesting and shows the high ecological value, but the article deals with geotourism and geosites. Therefore these lists are not necessary.

Line 103: midpliocence

Line 120: Eliminate The before Geotourism.

Line 121: makes instead of make; if excellence? if might be not the right word.

Line 123: atlantic

Line 129: Clarify social mode

Figure 1: Localise Knefiss National Park in the small card of Morocco

Line 529: Change Annette and Viel. Annette is the first name; Viel is the family name

Author Response

1) Abstract: The new part "geosites" should be better connected to the rest of the text.

The geosite inventory is based on the geoconservation strategy. Qualitative and quantitative assessments were carried out on the basis of geoheritage values of international significance. Geoconservation efforts should be made in all these geosites for many reasons, such as valorization of academic research, preservation of natural resources and promotion of geotourism in Khnefiss national park.

2) Page 2: The definition of krebs is still not clear

Krebs: are typical cliffs (escarpment) of the arid zone. It offers sections showing the complexity of the hamada's geological formations and the rapid facies variations typical of continental deposits. J. Riser, « Guir », in Gabriel Camps (dir.), 21 | Gland – Hadjarien, Aix-en-Provence, Edisud  1999 (« Volumes », no 21).

 

3) Page 3: Eliminate all the lists of endangered plants and animals. This might be quite interesting and shows the high ecological value, but the article deals with geotourism and geosites. Therefore these lists are not necessary.

4) Line 103: midpliocence

5) Line 120: Eliminate The before Geotourism.

6) Line 121: makes instead of make; if excellence? if might be not the right word.

7) Line 123: atlantic

8) Line 129: Clarify social mode

Lifestyle

9) Figure 1: Localise Knefiss National Park in the small card of Morocco

10) Line 529: Change Annette and Viel. Annette is the first name; Viel is the family name

Viel Annette

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf