Management for Tour and Travel of Distance Island Policy Exurtion Study Poncan Gadang Island, Sibolga City-Indonesia

Hamzah Lubis

Government have established the advantages of tour and travel in small islands resources policies by advances management of tour and travel programmes to improve the  prosperity of society in economy,social and culture for Developing Autonomy regional Area.

This research are about implementation of tour and travel in small islands resources policies in Poncan Gadang Island, Sibolga-Indonesia have made by tour and travel stokeholders.Tour and travel Stokeholders are Government of Autonomy Regional Area, the owner of tour and travel agency, domestic and international tourist. 

The Database ofimplementation policy has collected by interview and quetionary method.

 The result of research show that the implementation of management tour and travel in Poncan Gadang Island are unadvantaged of environment management, have not improve the  prosperity of local society yet,  ineffectivity and inefficiency of economy multiplier effects .  It has been implicated by the condition of rocks and coral-reef  which getting worse after Poncan Gadang Island has become tour and travel destination. The uncapability of local citizens have made they can not participate well. Then unrealizedly the local  fisherman has broken the rocks and coral-reef. In addition  the number of hotel has been decreased and house hold sector of local citizen undeveloped. For repair the management of tour and travel in Poncan Gadang Island depend on government policy, is recommended to exchange the tour and travel orientation from mass tourism into special interest tourism depend on nature resources and environment by participating stokeholders of tour and travel.

Keywords:  Management Policies, small island also the breakages of rocks and coral-reef

Indonesia has such a huge potential of tour and travel destination. Firstly Indonesian’s tour and travel has begun by culture tour and travel destination Bali, Yogyakarta and Toraja. In the development of the orientation of tour and travel got a exchangement, from mass tourismin tospecial interest tourism (Tondang, 2007) with the purpose of culture to nature tour and travel (setiono, 2003). This exchangement correspondend to human as trendsetter who get back to nature. Then those kind of tour and travel has developed such as National Park of Giant Lizart. National Park of Bunaken etc.
Indonesia has such a huge potentionin small island tour and travel. As archipelago country,  Indonesia has more than 17.500 island within 81.000 costs lines (Dahuri, 2003). Between more than 17.500 island, those are just five major island and the rest are small island. The development of small island has become a necessity. The economics value of tour and travel of small island has collected income multiplereffects for other economy activityhas been estimated between US$ 0,55 sampai US$ 0,67 (Fauzi, 2005). One of small island has been managed and has become a tour and travel destination is The Rocks and Coral-Reef Poncan Gadang Island, Sibolga-North Sumatera Indonesia.
From the beginning of development of tour and travel of small island are ineffective and inefficiency due to unoptimity of facilities and infrastructure of district area.  defisit fund and budgetary, intrasender or intersender conflict (Mawardi, 2007),   there is  no policy or specific strategy yet for small island development (Apdillah, 2006). The development of small island requires policies and special strategics because a small island has specifics characteristic either tour and travel resources or the local society and to manage them involves the multiparties (Tomboelu, 2000).
Stokeholders of management of tour and travel of small island are government of district area, local enterpreneur and house hold sector(Sekneg, 2009; Depbudpar, 2004, Soekadijo, 2010),  Tauhid (2007),  Ritonga (2012) dan  Wilson (2012) added non government institution and Lubis (2002) added university . Stokeholders’ ceiling define the effectiveness of management of tour and travel of small island.
Govenrment have established management of tour and travel of small island in regulation of cultural of minister no.67/2004 concern about general and standart guidelines of operational of management of tour and travel of small island. Management of tour and travel of small island are the advantages of tour and travel activity to raise the prosperity of society in economy, social culture and district area development. The advantages of tour and travel development are development which able to fulfill the temporary and future necessary of the sustainable tourist. In otherwise the indicator of implementation of management of tour and travel policy are (1) the increasing of  advance management of environment, (2) the increasing of local  (3) the increasing of district area development.

Literature Review
Tour and travel of small island           
The suitable small island for investment area, are the island in navigation area which got potencial nature resources and located in strategic geography area relatively around the central developing economics (Mawardi, 2007). Potencial nature resources are nature resources which support things about tour and travel itself. The Prospect of tour and travel of small island has developed tremendously due to the demand of
coastal tourism either local or international in addition tour and travel of small island has been the most increased tremendously (Dahuri, 1996).
Tour and travel are voluntary and temporarily tour and travel activity from a destination to others of getting fun and happiness (Spillane, 1987) based on the number of tourist tour and travel are differeciated by (individual tour, family group tour, massal tour), based on the settings (pre-arranged tour, package tour, coach tour, optional tour and special arranged tour), based on the actuation (excurtion tour, safari tour, youth tour and marine tour).  special arranged tour such as holiday tour, familiarization, education tour, scientific tour, pileimage tour, special mission tour, special programme tour and hunting tour  (Suwantoro, 2001).

Center of interest of tour and travel destination of small island
According to the Center of interest of tour and travel are differenciated by the attractive nature tour and travel, cultural attractions tour and travel and selves made resources tour and travel. Center of interest of terrestrial nature resources tour and travel (such as: forests, mountains, rivers, lakes and beaches) and ocean and sea nature resources tour and travel
(such as: rocks and coral-reef, caves, and undersea mountains).
Tangible culturheritage holy graves site, palaces and intagibleculturalheritage such as cultural and tradition show.Center of interest of  selves made tour and travel is a hierarcy of human resources ability of make or create somethings to fulfill others necessary directly or undirectly. it can be an object of  an point of view of specific tour and travel, such as shopping and bargaining , educations, sports and theme park.
Terrestrial nature  tour and travel activity is kind of an activity to satisfy themselves by the landscape of the mainland, beach sports.Tour and travel biota . Exploring the forest. Climbing the mountains etc. Ocean and sea nature tour and travel such as snorkeling, diving,parasalling surfing, fishing, water sking, canoewing, sea kayaking etc. And tour and travel based on cultural such as fishing( catching, cooking) and attend on fisherman daily activity, tradition and cultural. Construction arounds etc. (Depbudpar, 2004).
According to the purpose of tour and travel activity has been differenciated by special interest tourism and mass tourism. Special interest tourism is kind of activitiy of tour and travel due to a specific purpose about an object or activity can be found or done of those tour and travel destination.  Within the specific interest tourism the tourist involves any activitiy of those environment or the community visited actively.
Mass tourism is kind of common activities have been done in spare time happily. There is no a specific purpose within the activities of mass tourism, it’s all about fun. Mass tourism try to present something then the number of tourist will increased by using tour and travel resources at highest potencial, it will be more oriented on selves made facilities (Pendit, 1994) and in the management  rather of domestic than local human resources (Pitana, 1999). Because  the main orientation either stokeholders or tourist of tour and travel is about capital income and about fun, then mass tourism probably will brake or event destroy the environment, social and cultural’s citizen (Kusumastuti, 2003).
Concern of the characteristic of small island  that the nature resources breakeage vulnerable and probably happened and especially there is no posstive support, so the development of tour and travel of small island is recommended oriented by special interest tourism (Depbudpar, 2004).

Special interest tourism of small island.
Special interest tourism of small island are terrestrial, mainland, ocean, and sea nature  tour and travel. Commonly Special interest tourism of small island are supported by sun, sea, and sand (Dahuri, 1993). Special interest tourism which has exploited the nature resources also has  potencial of  the environtment breakeage (Kusumastuti, 2003) but possibly provide the possitive also negative impact to environment, social  and cultural in condition of unenvironment oriented or uncitizen based (eco-tourism)
(Dahuri 1993).
Eco-tourism is kind of activity in nature tour and travel which has main purpose of protect the environment and raise the prosperity of local society. Eco-tourism is kind of activity of tour and travel in nature to keep and protect environment (Smith, 1993), raise the prosperity of economy, social and culture of local society. (Carter, 1994; Lidberg, 1995; Suryadi,2001; Restu, 2002; Zar, 2002; Fitriani, 2004, Sitanggang, 2006; Tuwo, 2011), increase the society participation (Boo, 1992) tourist and visitor education(Fitriani, 2004). Eco-tourism rather oriented of save and rescue than exploitation of local society (Nurfatriani, 2003). The advance eco-torism have to sustainable ecology, economy social and society dimension (Susilo, 2005), Dahuri (2001) added politics and law.
The advantages of environment has become crucial for eco-tourism based on nature resources such as rocks and coral-reef which has sensitive reaction of environment  exchangement (Yudaswara, 2004). Society participation will keep protect, defend the environment breakage and keep the culture and tradition of citizen and also positioning the local society as stockholders of tour and travel (Nurfatriani,2003). Even eco-tourism in small island is kind of evolution of eco-tourism into meta-tuorism which has philosophy and taste purpose
(Tuwo, 2011).
The management of ecotourism based on conglomeration (capitalist) has to replaced  into ecotourism based on partnership(Basuki, 1996) or based on citizen (Pardosi, 2006). Government have decided the management of tour and travel of small island based on local citizen (Permenbudpar, 2004). The management based on local citizen can be camuflate into parternship and citizenship ecotourism. Based on partnership ecotourism vulnerable managed togeteher by desentralisation of responsibility of all the assignment of the stockholders (Basuki, 1996), based on colaboration and harmony elaboration between the conribution of stockholders (Pardosi, 2006). Local citizen of ecotourism are part of the stockholders which have crusial function of ecotourism management (Nurfatriani,2003).  Basuki’s research (1996) sow that partnership running effectively and the citizen have got the good impact.
Based on citizen ecotourism is carried out by and to the society then there is no government intervention (Lamatenggo, 2002). The management is done totally by the local citizen, necessary identification, ability analyses and nature resources supervison (Pardosi, 2006). Based on citizen management more responsible due to the direct contribution of society’s life (Pitana, 1999). There is no successful management of nature resources (rocks and coral-reef) without the citizen intervention (White, 1994).

Management of tour and travel policy
Small island tourism management policy
The Government have establisehed a policy of exploiting the small island Island tour through the regulation of the Minister of culture and tourism No. 67/2004 concerning General guidelines and standart operation for the development of tourism in small island. Small island tourism is a sustainable tourism to improve the prosperity of society in economic, social cultural and development of the region. The advance development of tour and travel Sustainable to fulfill tourist and society necessity
(environmental, economic, social, cultural) in the area of the current destination with keep and increase the future chances and necessity(Permenbudpar, 2004). Then the indocator of management of small island increasing: (1) environmental sustainability,
(2) society, economic, social (3) the community, (4) society and culture integraty (5) increasing regional development.

Tour and travel management strategies of small island
The strategies of management oftour and travel in small island with
spatial planning approach, feasibility approach support power capacity, infrastructure, and environmental management approaches (Depbudpar,2004). Spatial planning approach has begun by small islands clustering according to a basis for the preparation of zoning characteristics (similiar and uniformation of characteristic), clustering as spatial plan, the determination of the allocation of spaces, preparation of  spatial structure is associated with the Center for economic growth, the linkages (linkages) among the cluster of Islands with the mainland and planning (time of planning) short-term, intermediate, and long-term planning.
Support power capacity aproach, Support power capacity tour and travel in small island include: (1) the ecological carrying capacity the maximum level of an islandexploiting, (2) physical carrying capacity is the maximum amount of exploiting or activity that vulnerable accommodate without causing damage or quality loss, and (3) the social carrying capacity is the maximum level limit the number and level exploiting will cause a dessimmination in the level of quality of tourist or visitor experience and satisfaction in small island tourism.
Structur and infrastructure approach, structure and infrastructure in small islands should be through by the analysis of the environmental impacts, the development of tourism facilities and infrastructure does not exceed 30% of the area of the island is reserved for the development of tourism and other technical terms and conditions. environmental management approach, ecotourism in the small islands to be developed sustainably without damaging natural resources and social, but maintained for sustainable utilization.Identification of critical ecosystems (critical ecosystem) as well as the determination of the threshold (carrying capacity) of small islands is very important in the planning and development of tourism with the environment approach and sustainable development.
Environmental approach management in small islands must be planned and developed  in a environment with environment oriented with no damage to the natural and social resources, but is retained for the advance utilization.Identification of critical ecosystems (critical ecosystem) as well as decidement of maximum level (carrying capacity) of small islands is very important to be planned and tourism development with environmental and sustainable development approach.

Protection of environment of tour and travel in small island policies
Environmental intantion management policies
Environmental intantion management policy in the sector has 125 environmental management. These policies include the determination of: a plan of environmental management and protection, carrying capacity and the capacity of the environment, environmental studies ecoregions, strategic, environmental quality standards, criteria for environmental damage to raw, environmental economic instruments, recognition of indigenous and local knowledge.Management policy: coral reefs, mangroves and seagrass, marine water quality for tourism (bathing, swimming and diving). Other policies, applying economic instruments: the environment, natural resources, the balance of the guarantee fund the restoration, pollution prevention funds, levy and environmental subsidies, trade waste/emissions, environmental services payment; insurance environment, eco-label, environmental performance awards, approximate based on environment, environmental risk analyses (Sekneg, 2009a).

Management instation of small island Policy
Intantion has 58 small islands management policies on the management of the sector of small islands. These policies include the determination of: strategic plan of the coastal Regions and Small Islands, Coastal Zoning Plans and Small Islands, Coastal Zone Management Plans and Small Islands, Coastal zone management plan of action and the small islands of Detailed Zoning planned. The local government is obliged to do: increase public awareness, partnerships between the business community and the Government of citizen, environmental policy, prevent degradation of the carrying capacity of small islands, environment-friendly technologies and awards in the field of management of small islands (Sekneg, 2007).
Environment of stockholders tour and travel  policy
Tourism entrepreneurs have 59 obligation in environmental management of tourism destination. Environmental management policy including: conducting environmental impact analyses, environmental risk analysis, environmental audit, environmental assurance function recovery funds, pay for the damage and loss gantai natural resources, paying the cost of restoration; preserving the environment and culture, tourist attractions and tourist destinations. Prohibited from taking coral reefs for building materials, aquarium ornaments, handicrafts, flower corals, sand dredging reclamation do. The availability of facilities such as sanitation, environment intlasi liquid waste management, solid waste management, the conservation of freshwater resources, maintenance of the flora, fauna and corals and biota is not doing the introduction from outside the island (Sekneg, 2009, 2009a, 2007, Depbudpar, 2004).

Environment of tourist policy
There are also 11 obligations of tourists among them respect for religious norms, customs, culture, and values that live in the community, nurturing and preserving the environment, maintain order and security, prevent all forms of acts that violate decency and unlawful activities, preserving the attraction, creating a safe, orderly, clean, polite, well-behaved and maintaining environmental sustainability in tourism destinations (Sekneg, 2009, Depbudpar, 2004).

Environmental of local society policy
Those are 18 local society participation policies in the management of tourism in small island.Partisipsi policy in the form of obligations and prohibitions. These obligations include maintaining and preserving the attraction, creating a safe, orderly, clean, polite, behaves keeping the environmental sustainability of tourism destination, controlling environmental pollution and conserving plasma nuftah. Community bans are: destruction of coral reefs, mangroves, seagrasses and coral reefs take, using explosives and toxic materials, sand mining, mineral mining, construction of the physical environment, cause damage to activities that damage the small coastal Islands (Sekneg, 2009, 2009a, 2007, Depbudpar, 2004).

Prosperity of local society improvement
The construction of coastal communities
Administratively, coastal communities is the community residing in small islands and in district which has the Sea (Sekneg, 2007).Coastal communities is synonymous with poverty. It is characterized by a seedy neighbourhood, low aspirations and access to basic social services such as education and health as well as other social assistance (Depsos, 2005; The Knights, 2002). The powerlessness of the community as a result of the process of dehumanization by various parties (Kartasasmita, 1996). To cope with the enablement (empowerment) in order to be able to break free from poverty, ignorance, underdevelopment in order to strengthen the position of individuals and society in power sturuktur (,2002 Lumbangaol Kartasasmita, 1996).
Tourism development is not just an economic problem (income generation) but also issues of dignity and human dignity (Kusumastanto, 2000). Therefore, development should be% u201Cpedagogi% u201D exemption to enhance dignity and dignity not otherwise demean the dignity and human dignity. Development as a process of awareness (conscientization) to foster critical awareness of the individual and the community about the situation of its environment and its ability to control its environment (Amien, 2005).

 Coastal communities empowerment
Empowering communities serve to increase the ability of communities (Kartasasmita, 1996), with an increased ability to utilize and preserve coastal resources as well as increase economic activity against aksebilitas (butar Butar-,1998). Community capacity-building geared to produce power (power) of the wealth, social status, education, information and skills mastery. For that there must be improvements in public access to natural resources, technology, market and funding (Lumbangaol, 2002).With the empowerment of local communities, then it is no longer an object but became the subject of development. Local communities as the amplifier is not as buttresses of a business establishment (Lumbangaol, 2002).
In the empowerment of coastal communities need to understand the unique characteristics of the fishermen that are ecological and sociological in nature. The social system in coastal communities depend partially or fully on the abundance of coastal and marine resources (Adiwibowo, 1995). Similarly, the ecological sisetem small island vulnerable to environmental damage (Fauzi, 2005).Therefore, it must use fisherfolk empowerment principles of empowerment that fits the characteristics of coastal communities. Tuwo (2011) sets out the principle of employment creation, the source of capital, new technologies, market sources and solidarity as well as collective action community.
Community empowerment will enhance the capacity of the community. In this research, local community capacity is measured in terms of the level of knowledge of local communities, efforts to get the rights of society and the level of environmental awareness of the community with regard to the economy of coastal communities.

Local government empowerment
The local Government has 62 local community empowerment policy.Community empowerment include: granting recognition of the cultural identity of traditional communities and the granting of rights, become workers/laborers, tourism plays a role in the development process, propose/objection against the plan of business/activities, play a role in the management, conduct complaint, championed the environment, play a role in monitoring, delivery of information/reports, filed a lawsuit representation and recognition of indigenous conservation areas. The Community reserves the right to conduct management based on customary law, benefit, may obtain information and obtain redress. Community empowerment in the field gets: the implementation of the management, the implementation of Government policy, the prevention of decrease in the carrying capacity, environmentally friendly technologies, environmental information, provision of appreciation and protection of the rights of indigenous peoples, traditional societies and local wisdom (Sekneg, 2007, 2009, 2009a).

Empowerment by tour and travel stockholders
The role of the tourism entrepreneurs carry out tigaasfek tourism management.Economic aspects to improve the economic welfare of society (economy growth), social asfek to create social welfare (social progress) is a new, asfek culture for introducing arts and culture (cultural progress) community and environmental aspects in order to maintain the balanced and harmonious life (ecological balance) (Soekadijo, 2010) and Spillane (1987) incorporate aspects of the passion for the motherland.

Cultural society empowerment
The Government provides respect for the cultural identity and the rights of traditional communities.The local culture is one attraction of tourism. The preservation and development of culture will increase tourist visits that will directly increase the income of entrepreneurs and people's income. Therefore, tourism entrepreneurs had 3 enhanced capacity of Community obligations of local culture. These obligations are: maintaining and respecting the norms of the istiadad religion, tradition, culture and values of local communities living in the preserve, the natural and cultural environment and the respect of religious values, mores and values in the Society Islands and around the island (Sekneg, 2009, 2009a, 2007, 2007a, Indonesia Depbudpar, 2004).

Coastal communities’ capacity
The low level of community empowerment is correlated with low capacity of the community.Low knowledge related to low education. Low education is associated with lower income (Budhiarta, 1999). Khazali (2002) research shows empowerment through coaching, training and assistance with kerkorelasi positive paartisipasi communities.Community capacity is low shows that the Government's empowerment and entrepreneurs fail. In terms of community capacity is low causes low society partisipsi pula (Kartasasmita, 1996).

Tour and travel in small island and regional development
Tourism development plays an important role in national development and strategic as a producer of foreign exchange, increase employment opportunities, improve the income and living standards and stimulate other sectors (Hatmi, 1993). Tourism is the dominant role in spurring regional development (Suwardi, 2010, Suwantoro, 1997). With the arrival of travelers to tourism will open business opportunities hotels, pensions, restaurants, stalls, hawkers, transportation, sports facilities and services.Tourism is capable of generating economic growth as it can provide jobs, stimulating the various sectors of the economy, as well as directly contributing to the membrikan advances in manufacture and repair of ports, highways, transportation (Pendit, 19950). Tourism is an activity that benefits the dual (multiplier effect) which provides benefits on economic sector are also sectors of transportation, communication, accommodation services, Commerce, business and other sustenance (Sugeng, 2007). In the era of regional autonomy the tourism sector has become a driving force of regional economies (Purba, 2010).

Research methods
This research uses descriptive method. The main purpose of using this method to describe the nature of a State that while running at the time the study was conducted and examining the causes of a certain symptom (Seville, 1993). Research location in the city of Sibolga, Indonesia. Research time July 2010% u2013 June 2012. The respondents are the local people (100 people), tourists (30 persons), tourism entrepreneurs (1 person), intansi tourism (1 person), a small island intansi management (1 person) and environmental intansi 1 person. To obtain primary data, done the measurements, quesoner and interviews. The feasibility analysis of the suitability of using nature tourism and the implementation of policies using the mathematical analysis to get the percentage of implementation.

Analysis of research data
Description of research area
Poncan Gadang island administration
Administratively, the island is located at Gadang Poncan Neighborhoods Back Market, district of Sibolga Kota, Sibolga, Indonesia (BPS, 2011). Gadang Poncan island is the largest of the seven islands in the Gulf city of Sibolga, Nauli Buts. Poncan Gadang located at coordinates between 1048% u201900% u201D-1041% u201925% u201D North latitude and between 980 45% u201937% u201D-980 46% u2019 12% u2019% u2019 East longitude. Poncan Gadang area approximately 10.7 Ha.
Poncan Gadang is suitable for tourism investment. Poncan Gadang is located in the Bay of Nauli Buts on the cruise line and the largest port on the West coast of Sumatra island. Available aksebilitas by land, sea and air toward the town of Sibolga. Transportation to the island is available for boat, boat motor and canoe. Tourism resources have in the form of white sandy beaches, crystal clear waters, coral reefs around the island as well as a little mangrove and seagrass as well as springs. Poncan tourism Tower was built in 1984 with the name Poncan Marine Resort, which is just 15 minutes from the city of Sibolga. Poncan Gadang is not populated. A local resident is a resident of the town of Sibolga as many as 84.481 people with unemployment 17.50 percent (BPS, 2011).

Feasibility of natural tourism Poncan Gadang
USU research results-LP (2004), (2006) and Sitanggang Lubis (2009) shows the Poncan Gadang according to coastal and marine tourism. The authors conducted research with a variety of models with assessment results accordingly. Analysis of the suitability of the model Maamena (2003) very appropriate categories, Fitriani model (2004) category is appropriate, the Mof model (2003) according to the category, the model by Erick (2005) categories and corresponding model Tuwo (2011) the category is appropriate. Similarly, an assessment of travellers, 92 percent of travelers said Poncan Gadang natural resource potential is high. The tourism value of the object determines the amount of tourists who will visit. PATA terhadapan research results the reason tourists visiting Asia, showing the location of 59.5 per cent due to the tourist sites (Ritonga, 2011).

Poncan Gadang isloand tourism facilities
Poncan Marine Resort has cottages, wharves, cruise ships, charter boat, footpath, banana boad, jet ski, snorkel, diving equipment, fishing equipment, restaurant, karaoke and gaming room. Bungalow 5 pieces with 8 room, 1 Office buildings, building equipment and 1 restaurant, karaoke room and game room. Other facilities in the form of sea food restaurants, water sport shop, souvenir shop, video games room, billiard room, children playground, fishing tour, ferry service, airport transfer, private car park and km. Nauli Tea Cruise. Poncan Marine Resort at the Poncan Gadang part of tourist Scenic Tourist Hotel chain (city of Sibolga) and resort diving trips in Central Tapanuli, Island Princess with two bungalows and 4 gazebos (PMR, 2010).

Tourism management Poncan Gadang
Results of the research on the management of tourism physical Poncan Gadang gained 52 percent compliance planning, organizing and controlling 48 percent 56 percent object. Management of tourism activities include the management of objects, 52 percent of service accommodation services restaurants 62 percent, 70 percent, service kiosks, 52 percent of eyes cendra management means 58 percent, management of electrical infrastructures of 54 per cent, 62 per cent of fresh water supplies, the management of Pier 56 percent, 62 percent, marine transportation and management of drainage and solid waste infrastructure (40 percent). Align% u2013 align low-key tourism management amounted to 56,92 per cent. Low management correlates with human resources.Results of the study of language ability of employees in United Kingdom 48 percent, other foreign language ability is 40 per cent, 62 per cent in the management of hospitality, professionalism and capability of komuniksai 58 percent 62 percent. Align% u2013 an employees ability to 54 per cent. These Data demonstrate that human resources employees are low causing the tourism management Poncan Gadang is low.

Sustainable environment management policy
Implementation of the environmental policy of local government
Governments city of Sibolga Area does not implement sustainable environmental management policy for tourism Poncan Gadang. Sibolga City Environmental Agency carry out 125 environmental management policy at the Poncan Gadang only 9.60 percent with good Marine Office likewise, fisheries and animal husbandry Sibolga execute 58 small islands management policy at the Poncan Gadang only 10.20 percent.
Environmental policy implementation by the Government of the city of Sibolga low are low indicating the granting authority from Central Government to local governments (Hale, 2000) so that the local government is spearheading the Ministry of tourism (Syahputra, 2010) experienced a failure. The local Government failed to carry out its function as a Ministry and facilitators (Yudaswara, 2004). Decentralization of local government led to the experienced dis-orientation of the welfare and interests of pandapatan enhancement to maintain power. More on the levy policy distortif with high costs, pursuing growth by draining natural resources (Suparmoko, 1997). This condition indicates the policy failure or Government failure that gave birth to the mismanagement of the coastal management (Fauzi, 2005a).

Environmental policy implementation by entrepreneurs of tourism
Tourism entrepreneurs PT. Sibolga Marine Resort to implement environmental management policy is 66 in tourism only amounted to 39,0 percent.The low level of implementation of environmental policy by entrepreneur pariwisatakarena profit-oriented entrepreneurs not oriented environment. Entrepreneurs are just exploiting the tourism (Suparmoko, 1997, Sutiyanti, 2005) not to set aside a portion of profits to repair environmental damage (Kusumastui, 2003). The greed of employers has increased as local governments implement the various economic policies, high-cost dikonpensasikan entrepreneur by extracting natural resources excessively (Fauzi, 2005). Entrepreneur-oriented tourism mass tourism on the island of Bali that only takes into account the number of tourists visit without a care about the environmental and social conditions (Benjamin, 1997).

The implementation of environmental policy by tourists
Tourists do 11 environmental management policy in tourism only 54.5 percent. On the other hand, the acceptance of the right of assessment of travellers 71.40 percent. The acceptance of a right that is not followed by the implementation of high liability is high.According to Sutiyanti (2005) and obligations Soemarwoto (2001) low environmental protection of tourists due to the perception of the environment are low (Kusumastuti, 2003). Whereas the success of ecotourism is measured from the level of consciousness of tourists on the environment (Tuwo, 2011). This Data indicates the pembinaan tourism businessman failed to carry out against the tourists.

Environmental policy implementation by local communities
Local communities implement policies for environmental management at the Poncan Gadang only 15.90 percent. Local communities implement low environmental management because of the low level of community development conducted by local government and tourism entrepreneurs. Low empowerment leads to community capacity is low. Community capacity is low led to participation in environmental management are also low.
Due to the low implementation of environmental protection policies tourism Poncan Gadang conducted the Government city of Sibolga, businessmen, tourists and tourism society causing environmental damage. For example coral reefs cover conditions become good tourism attraction in the tourism area and around Poncan Gadang suffered damage. Coral reefs cover tourism in 2008 only 25.0 per cent and diperairan Poncan Gadang only 20.0 percent. Whereas in 1997tutupan a coral reef in a tourism of 27.83 percent and amounted to diperairan Gadang Poncan 22,86 per cent.

Policy of improving the welfare of local communities
Local community empowerment
Community development by the Government of the city of Sibolga
Community development policy, the Government only amounted to Sibolga low 40.30 percent while tourism entrepreneurs empowerment 80 percent.The low level of local community empowerment and empowerment tourism entrepreneurs in height according to Kusumastui (2003) due to the different interests of local government. The orientation of local government is the economy by maximizing the economic benefits in the form of retribution and oriented towards capital intensive. Local communities do not have the capital and only a few contribute in levy County, the local community was not finally got attention (Yudaswara, 2004).

Empowerment of communities by tourism employers
Community economic improvement
The implementation of policies for economic development of local communities according to local people's evaluation of the 3 main issues with the placement of the company's workforce, local craft marketing in ecotourism and capital assistance for local communities only 10.30 percent. This Data is correlated with the results of research in Sitanggang (2006) city of Sibolga indicates that the cause of developing local communities difficult because no businessman who acted as a local community business partners.Another intensive search Beyda (2000) in Pandan (20 km from the Poncan Gadang) that local governments and tourism entrepreneurs are not concerned with the increased efforts of small entrepreneurs.
Improvement of local community social
The implementation of public social policies by increasing local tourism entrepreneurs Poncan Gadang local community assessments of topics with community involvement in tourism planning, involvement in Eia/Ukl-UPL and involvement in the management of tourism only 9.0 percent said both. Increased community control and low social cause tourism negatively impact local community social life (Dahuri, 1993).

An increase in popular culture
Implementation of local community development cultural policy with the issue of the utilization of local art on things just fine. 41.40 percent stated This Data showed that tourism entrepreneurs fail to update the local culture to tourism (Tauhid, 2009) whereas foreign tourists enjoyed seeing the appearance of the local culture (Sutiyanti, 2005). The community has a distinctive culture, a melting pot of ethnic cultures, Karo Batak Toba, Angkola, Mandiling, Pakpak, Nias, Melayu, Minangkabau, Aceh bore% u201CMasyarakat Pesisie% u201D (Beydha, 2000). The community has a specific language pesisie language% u201CBaiko% u201D baiko-or language-% u201CMunak% u201D munak as a combination of various local languages, has a coastal arts like% u201CSikambang% u201D, typical foods like% u201CSambam% u201D Pacak and other cultures.Tourism entrepreneurs Poncan Gadang fails to make the preservation of language and culture with tourism interests mengemasnyauntuk (Tauhid, 2009).

The capacity of local communities Poncan Gadan
The low level of implementation of community development by the local government (40.30 per cent) and the low level of community empowerment by tourism entrepreneurs (10.30 percent economic, social cultural and 9 percent 41.40 percent) led to the low level of community capacity.The capacity of the community in the form of public knowledge just 35 percent.Low knowledge related to low education. Low education is associated with lower income (Budhiarta, 1999). Low knowledge correlated with courage to get right (18 percent) according to the legislation and concern for the environment Poncan Gadang by 15 percent. Khazali (2002) research shows empowerment through coaching, training and assistance with kerkorelasi positive paartisipasi communities.Community capacity is low shows that the Government's empowerment and entrepreneurs fail. In terms of community capacity is low causes low society partisipsi pula (Kartasasmita, 1996).

The participation of local communities Poncan Gadang
The participation of the local communities against environmental management protective Poncan Gadang low tourism only 15.90 percent while the public perception of environmental protection high reach 74,50 percent. A high perception of undue followed by the high participation (Lumbangaol, 2002). The cause of the occurrence of a high perception of low participation because people are not able to participate in the environmental management of tourism activities Poncan Gadang due to the inability of communities and environmental conditions that do not suit (Dipokusumo, 1999). Kusumastuti (2003) research in the thousand islands shows the same thing.
The low level of community participation correlates with the high society's role in the destruction of coral reefs. Destruction of coral Poncan Gadang by 90 percent caused by the fishing community only 10 percent as a result of waste and domestic waste. Tampering with poisoning 30 percent, 30 percent mining, bombing of 15 persden, anchors the 5 percent, 5 percent and net bubu by 5 percent (Lubis, 2009). Although coral reefs bombings illegal turns out to get the maximum income for fishermen because it had no other choice (Soede, 2000).Error may not be fully charged on fishing communities (Sitanggang, 2006). Local government and tourism entrepreneurs are instrumental in doing to raise awareness and empowerment of community capacity that would result in a high participation.

An increase in regional development
The presence of tourism at the Poncan Gadang does not give significant impact the development of regional development.It is characterized by increased real business not directly related to tourism, such as the number of hotels and restaurants or activities not directly related to tourism such as indusgtri craft and souvenir sales.The number of the hotel and the number of hotel rooms in the city of Sibolga, in 2008 there were 28 hotels with 806 rooms while in 2011 live 27 hotels with 624 rooms. The development of restaurants and eating houses just went up a little bit from 435 restaurant and eating house in 2008 into a 159 restaurant and eating house in 2011. Likewise crafts business community did not flourish, local arts and cultural activities are not increased.At Gadang Poncan tourism city of Sibolga does not become the prime mover of economic regions.

(1) Natural resources Poncan Gadang has its suitability for nautical tourism and beach tourism. Its management has yet to implement a sustainable environmental policy. Sibolga City environmental agency that plays a role in environmental management, Department of Marine Affairs and fisheries city of Sibolga, which plays a role in managing the Poncan Island Gadang, tourism entrepreneurs PT. Sibolga Marine Resort is directly responsible for environmental management in tourism, tourists who enjoy also the obligation in environmental protection in tourism and local communities whose lives are related to the conservation of natural resources to implement policies for sustainable management of the environment is very low.The implication of environmental conditions are broken, for example coral reefs cover (attraction of snorkel and diving) at the Poncan Gadang better before it managed to become tourist attraction when compared after becoming tourist attractions.
(2) Tourism management Poncan Gadang has yet to improve the economic well-being of local communities ' socio-cultural-. This is due to the empowerment of communities by the Government of the city of Sibolga is still low as well as empowering communities by entrepreneurs of tourism for economic, social and local culture is very low. As a result of low capacity of the community in the form of knowledge, action to obtain people's rights and concern for the environment is very low. A very low capacity to lead community participation in environmental management are very low anyway. Its implications, among them that the damage to the coral reefs in the waters of the dominant Poncan Gadang conducted local communities.
(3) The presence of tourism at the Poncan Gadang has yet to give the real impact the development of regional development. It is characterized by increasing business tangible not associated directly or which are not directly related to tourism businesses.The number of the hotel and the number of hotel rooms is dropping, restaurant and dining experience a little increase in ruma, home industry and handicrafts did not develop.

(1)To get the management of tourism sustainable Poncan Gadang requires changes in the orientation of tourism of mass tourism to the special interest tourism resources involving all types of ecotourism for tourism stokeholders Poncan Gadang. That it required re-planning management of tourism Poncan Gadang which involves local communities and the main orientation is the preservation of the utilization.
(2) Improve the welfare of local communities (economic, social and cultural) is a necessity for the sustainability of small island tourism businesses. Therefore, improving the welfare of local communities began with local community empowerment by the local government and tourism entrepreneurs to increase the capacity of the community, involving community participation in tourism management and making the community a part of tourism managers Poncan Gadang.
(3) Poncan Gadang tourism will boost the development of the city of Sibolga in entrepreneur orientation of tourism merobah tourism to environmental preservation and the well-being of local communities. Improve environmental sustainability as a tourist attraction and socio-cultural sustainability as supporting tourism attraction, will increase the satisfaction of tourists that will want to pay top dollar, increase profits, employers increase the State revenue, the continued efforts of tourism and increasing the welfare of society and the development of regional development.

Apdillah, D. 2006.  Pengelolaan Pulau Kecil Terluar Di Perbatasan Indonesia –Malaysia: Studi Kasus Pulau Karimun Kecil, Kepulauan Riau. Tesis. Sekolah Pascasarjana Insitut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor. 

Amien,A.M. 2005. Kemandirian Lokal: Konsepsi Pembangunan, Organisasi dan Pendidikan Dari Perspektif Sains Baru. Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Jakarta.

Adiwibowo, S. 1995. Adaptasi Ekologi Masyarakat di Wilayah Pesisir. Kursus Pelatihan Integrated Coastal  Zone Planning and Management Angkatan-I, 3 April – 9 September 1995. Kerjasama ADB, Bakosurtanal,  PPLH-IPB. Bogor.

Boo, E. 1992.  The Ecotourism  In The Boom. WHN Technical Paper-2. WWF. Washington DC.

Basuki, R. Victor, P.H.N. Komanajemen  Sumberdaya Antara Pemerintah Desa, Lemb aga Adat dan Masayarakat : Kasus Kawasan Pantai Desa Jungut Batu, Nusa Penida, Bali. 1996. Jurnal Penelitian Perikanan Indonesia. Vol.2 No.1 tahun 1996. Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Perikanan, Departemen  Pertanian-Ri. Jakarta.

Beller, W.  D’ Ayala, Hein, P. 1990. Sustainable Development and  Environmetal  Management of Small Islands. UNESCO. Paris

Butar-Butar, M. 1998. Pengembangan  Pengelolaan  Sumberdaya Wilayah Pesisir  Laut di Daerah. Konferensi Nasional-I Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Pesisir  tanggal 10-20 Maret 1998.  Institut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor .

BPS,  2011. Sibolga Dalam Angka 2011.  Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Sibolga dan Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Kota Sibolga, Sibolga.

Beydha, I. 2000. Pengembangan Wilayah Daerah Tujuan Wisata Pandan dan Pengaruhnya Terhadap Peningkatan Pendapatan Masyarakat di Kecamatan Sibolga, Kabupaten Tapanuli Tengah. Tesisi. Sekolah Pascasarjana, Universitas Sumatera Utara. Medan.

Benyamin, I.M. 1997. Proses Pengembangan Wisata Alam dan Dampaknya Pada Lingkungan Terutama Pada Asfek Sosial dan Ekonom: Studi Kasus Pantai Bali. Disertasi. Sekolah Pascasarjana Insitut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor.

Budhiartha, A.A. G. 1999. Kajian Pengembangan Pariwisata Bahari Pengaruhnya Terhadap Kesejahteraan Masyarakat Pesisir di Nusa Lembangon Bali,Tesis Program Pascasarjana, Insitut Pertanian Bogor, Bogor.

Carter,E and G. Lowman. 1994. Ecotourism: A Sustainable Option. John Wiley & Soons. New York.

Dahuri, R. 1993. Daya Duk.ung  Lingkungan dan Pengembangan Pariwisata Bahari Berlekanjutan. Seminar  Nasional  Manajemen  Kawasan Pesisir Untuk Ekotourisme Dalam Rangka Dies Natalis ke-30 Insitut Pertanian Bogor.  Program Studi Magister  Manajemen, Insitut Pertanian Bogor, Bogor.

Dahuri,R. 2003. Pradigma Baru  Pembangunan Indonesia Berbasis Kelautan. Orasi Ilmiah Guru Besar Tetap Bidang Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Pesisir dan Lautan, Fakultas Perikanan dan Ilmu Kelautan, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor

Dahuri, R.  J. Rais. S.P. Ginting. M.J. Sitepu. 2001. Pengelolaan Sumberdaya  Wilayah Pesisir dan Lautan Secara Terpadu. Pradnya Paramita. Jakarta
Dahuri, R. 1996. Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Wilayah Pesisir dan Laut Terpadu. Pratnya Paramita. Jakarta.

Depbudpar, 2004. Peraturan Menteri Kebudayaan dan Pariwisata Nomor : km.67/um.001/MKP/2004  Tentang  Pedoman Umum Pengembangan Pariwisata di Pulau-Pulau Kecil. Menteri Kebudayaan dan Pariwisata. Jakarta.

Depsos, 2005. Panduan Oprasional Program Pemberdayaan Fakir Miskin di Wilayah Pesisir Pantai. Departemen Sosial-RI. Jakarta.

Dipokusumo, B.  1999. Analisis Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Pada Pemukiman  Lahan Kering di Provinsi Nusatenggara Barat. Tesis. Program Pascasarjana Institut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor.

Dephut, 2003. Keriteria  Penilaian dan Pengembangan Obyek dan Daya Tarik Wisata Alam. Bogor: Dirjen PHKA  Departemen Kehutanan RI. Jakarta.

Efendi, Y.,  Indrawadi.,  Imam, S.,  Yennafri.,  Samsuardi., Yunaldi., Ofrijohan., Yan, S., Ferry, E.,  Abror., Era, S. 1997. Laporan Penelitian Studi Kondisi Fisik dan Penyebaran Terumbu Karang di Pantai Barat Sumatera Utara. Bappeda Provinsi Sumatera Utara – Posteri Puslitbang Oseanologi – LIPI, Medan.

Fauzi, A. 2005. Kebijakan Perikanan dan Kelautan: Isu, Sintesis dan Gagasan.  Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Jakarta.

Fauzi, A. Suzi, A. 2005a. Pemodelan Sumber Daya Perikanan dan Kelautan Untuk Analisis Kebijakan. Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Jakarta.

Fitriani,L. 2004.  Kajian Pengembangan Ekowisata Pulau-Pulau Kecil Kawasan Bungus , Teluk Kabung Kota Padang. Tesis. Program Pascasarjana Institut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor.

Hale, L.Z.. 2000. Achieving Integration in Coastal Management the Challenge of Linking National dan Local Levels of Government.  Indonesian Journal of Coastal and Marine Resources. Vol.3 No. 1, 2000.Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies,  Institut Pertanian Bogor, Bogor.

Hatmi,S. 1993. Analisa Pengembangan Daerah Pariwisata Desa Pantai Sialang Buah Kecamatan Teluk Mengkudu. Tesis. Sekolah  Pascasarjana, Insitut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor.

Holthus,  P. 2000. Sustainable Management of Oceans and Coasts: The Rule of The Private  Sector.  Indonesian Journal of Coastal and Marine Resources Vol.3 No. 1, 2000. Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies,  Institut Pertanian Bogor, Bogor.

Kamal, M. 2011. Pengaruh Kebudayaan Terhadap Kegiatan Usaha Kepariwisataan. Jurnal Ilmiah Pariwisata. Vol.7  No. 1 Juni  2011.  Akademi Pariwisata Medan. Medan Hal.99-107

Kartasasmita, G. 1996. Pembangunan Untuk Rakyat, Memadukan Pertumbuhan dan Pemerataan. CIDES. Jakarta

Kusumastuti,D.S.R.2003. Peranserta Masyarakat Dalam Pengelolaan Lingkungan Pulau-Pulau Kecil di TNL. Kepulauan Seribu. PSL-Universitas Indonesia. Jakarta.

Kusumastanto,T. 2000. Perencanaan dan Pengembangan Pulau-Pulau Kecil. Proseding Temu Pakar Penyusunan Konsep Tata Ruang Pesisir. Departemen Kelautan dan Perikanan. Jakarta

Khazali, M.;  Dietriech, G.B. ;  Victor, P.H.N.  2002. Kajian Partisipasi Masyarakat Dalam  Pengelolaan Mangrove: Studi Kasus di Desa Karangsong, Kecamatan Indramayu, Kabupaten Indramayu, Provinsi Jawa Barat. Indonesian Journal of Coastal and Marine Resources. Vol. 4  No. 3, 2002.Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies,  Institut Pertanian Bogor, Bogor.

Lubis, H. 2002.  Pengelolaan Ekowisata Bahari di Pulau Unggas, Tapanuli Tengah. Tesis. Sekolah Pascasarjana, Universitas Sumatera Utara. Medan.

Lubis, M.R.K. 2009. Analisis Pengelolaan Terumbu Karang Untuk Pengembangan Ekowisata Bahari di Pulau Poncan Kota Sibolga, Provinsi Sumatera Utara.Sekolah Pascasarjana Institut Pertanian Bogor, Bogor.

Lindberg, K and D.E. Hawkins. 1995. Ecotourism.North Bennington. The Ecotourism Sciety.

Lumbangaol, R. 2002. Kajian Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Pulau-Pulau Kecil: Studi Kasus Kepulauan Tobea Kabupaten Muna Provinsi Sulawesi Tenggara.Tesis. Institut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor.

Lamatenggo,YN.2002.   Kajian  Potensi Dan Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Pulau-Pulau Kecil Secara Berkelanjutan (Studi Kasus Pulau Gag Kabupaten Sorong –Papua).Tesis. Sekolah Pascasarjana, Insitut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor.
LIPI – Coremap. 2008.  Tapanuli Tengah Baseline Ekologi. Critc baseline - Coremap LIPI, Jakarta

 LP-USU. .2004. Studi Potensi Pengembangan Wisata Bahari di Pantai Barat Sumatera Utara. Dinas Perikanan dan Kelautan Provinsi Sumatera Utara, Medan.

Mawardi, I. 2007. Urgensi Keterpaduan Lintas Sektoral dan Daerah Dalam Pengembangan dan Pemamfaatan Pulau-Pulau Kecil. Jurnal Pesisir dan Lautan, Volume 8  Nomor 1  tahun 2007.

Maamena, M. 2003. Model Pemanfaatan  Pulau-Pulau Kecil Studi Kasus di Gugus Pulau Pari Kepulauan Seribu. Disertasi.  Sekolah Pascasarjana Institut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor

Nurfatriani,F. Elvida,Y.S.2003. Pengelolaan Ekowisata Berbasis Masyarakat Lokal. Buletin Penelitian dan Pengembangan Kehutanan, Volume 4  Nomor 1 Tahun 2003.

Pendit, N.S. 1994. Ilmu Pariwisata Sebuah Pengangtar Perdana. Pradnya Paramita. Jakarta

Pendit, N.S. 1995. Ilmu Pariwisata Sebuah Pengantar. Pradnya Paramita. Jakarta

Pitana, I.Gde. 1999: Community Management Dalam pembangunan Pariwisata. Jurnal Analisis Pariwisata. Vo.2.No.2  Program Studi Pariwisata Universits Udayana, Denpaasar.

Pardosi,J.h. 2006. Pembangunan  Pariwisata Kerakyatan: Suatu Pradikma Baru. Jurnal Ilmiah Pariwisata. Vol.2  No. 1 Juni    2006.  Akademi Pariwisata Medan. Medan.

Purba, I.M. 2010. Studi Potensi Pariwisata Kawasan Pesisir di Kabupaten Serdang Bedagai. Jurnal Ilmiah Pariwisata. Vol.6 No. 1 Juni 2010.  Akademi Pariwisata Medan. Medan.

Poncan Marine Resort, 2010.  Escape to Paradise in The Indian Ocean, Marine Resort.Sibolga Marine Resort. Sibolga.

Ritonga, A.K. 2012. Potensi Obyek Wisata Aceh Selatan. Vol. 8  No. 1 Juni 2012.  Jurnal Ilmiah Pariwisata . Akademi Pariwisata Medan. Medan. 

Restu, W. 2002.  Kajian Pengembangan Wisata Mangrove di Taman Nasional Hutan Raya I Gusti Ngurah Rai. Tesis. Sekolah Pascasarjana Intstitut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor.

Setiono, J. Sujatno. Rukman,D. 2003. Rencana Pengembangan Pariwisata Alam Nasional di Kawasan hutan.  Bogor:  Dirjen PHKA Dephut

Soekadijo, R.G. 2010.Anatomi Pariwisata: Memahami Pariwisata Sebagai Syatemic Linkage. Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Jakarta.

Spillane, J.J. 1987. Ekonomi Pariwisata. Kanisius. Yokyakarta.

Suwantoro,G. 2001.  Dasar – Dasar Pariwisata. Andi. Yokyakarta.

Sutiyanti,  S.  M. 2005. Pengharuh Wisatawan Dalam Menjaga Kelestarian Obyek Wisata . Jurnal Ilmiah Pariwisata. Vol.1  No. 2 Desember   2005.  Akademi Pariwisata Medan. Medan .

Suryadi, I. 2001. Pengembangan Kawasan Timbulan  di Kabupaten Pesisir Selatan Sebagai Obyek Ekoturisme Dalam Rangka Menghadapi Otonomi Daerah. Tesis. Sekolah Pascasarjana, Insitut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor.

Smith, R.A. 1993. Planning and Management for Coastal Ecotourism in Sout East Asia. Seminar Nasional: Manajemen Kawasan Pesisir Untuk Ekoturisma. Program Studi Magister Manajemen, Institut Pertanian Bogor.  Bogor.

Sitanggang,L.P.2006. Studi Pemamfaatan Ruang Untuk Pengembangan Pariwisata di Kawasan Pesisir Sibolga. Tesis. Sekolah Pascasarjana, Insitut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor.

Susilo, S.B. 2005. Keberlanjutan Pembangunan Pulau-Pulau kecil : Studi Kasus Kelurahan Pulau Panggang dan Pulau Pari, Kepulauan Seribu, DKI Jakarta. Jurnal Teknologi Perikanan dan Kelautan Maritek. Vol.5 No.2. 2005. Departemen Kelautan dan Perikanan. Jakarta.

Syahputra,M.H.I;  Mohammad, H.  2010. Analisis Hubungan Penerapan Standar Kopetensi Kerja Nasional Indonesia Terhadap Kinerja Karyawan Housekeeping Pada Hotel Bintang 3 di Kota Prapat. Jurnal Ilmiah Pariwisata. Vol.6 No. 1 Juni 2010.  Akademi Pariwisata Medan. Medan.

Satria,  A. 2002. Karakteristik Sistem Sosial Masyarakat Pesisir. PKSPL-IPB. Bogor

Sevilla, C.G.;  Ochave, J.A.; Punsalan, T.G.; Regala, B.P.; Uriarte, G.G. 1993. Pengantar Metoda Penelitian. Universitas Indonesia. Jakarta.

Suparmoko, M. 1997. Ekonomi Sumberdaya Alam dan Lingkungan. BPFE-UGM, Yokyakarta.

Soede, C.P .; H.S.J. Cesar; J.S. Pet. 2000. Economic Issues Relatedto Blast Fising on Indonesian Coral reefs.  Indonesian Journal of Coastal and Marine Resources. Vol.3  No. 2, 2000.Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies,  Institut Pertanian Bogor, Bogor.

Soebagio.2005.  Analisis  Kebijakan  Pemanfaatan  Ruang Pesisir  dan  Laut  Kepulauan Seribu Dalam Meningkatkan Pendapatan  Masyarakat Melalui Kegiatan Budidaya Perikanan Dan Parawisata. Disertasi. Sekolah Pascasarjana, Insitut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor.

Sugeng,K.W; Ngatemin.   2007. Potensi dan Prospek Industri  Pariwisata Kota Sabang. Jurnal Ilmiah Pariwisata. Vol.3  No. 2 Desember   2007.  Akademi Pariwisata Medan. Medan.

Suwardi. Wilson,J.  2010. Studi Pengembangan Lingkungan Obyek Pantai Sialang Buah di Kecamatan Teluk Mengkudu Kabupaten Serdang Bedagai. Jurnal Ilmiah Pariwisata. Vol.6 No. 1 Juni 2010.  Akademi Pariwisata Medan. Medan. 
Soemarwoto,O.2001.Atur Diri Sendiri: Pradigma Baru Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup. Gajah Mada University Press. Yokyakarta.

Sekneg, 2007. Undang-Undang Nomor 27 tahun 2007 tentang Pengelolaan Wilayah Pesisir dan   Pulau-Pulau Kecil. Sekretariat Negara. Jakarta.

..........., 2007a. Undang-undang Nomor  40 Tahun 2007 Tentang Perseroan Terbatas. Sekretariat Negara. Jakarta.

………, 2009, Undang-undang Nomor 10 tahun 2009 tentang Kepariwisataan. Sekretariat Negara. Jakarta

..........., 2009a. Undang-undang Nomor 32 tahun 2009 tentang Perlindungan dan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup. Sekretariat Negara. Jakarta.

Tondang, B.  2007. Nias Island Pusat Wisata Minat Khusus. Jurnal Ilmiah Pariwisata. Vol.3  No. 1 Juni    2007.  Akademi Pariwisata Medan. Medan.

Tauhid, B.  2007. Akuntabilitas Pariwisata Sumatera Utara. Jurnal Ilmiah Pariwisata. Vol.3  No. 1 Juni    2007.  Akademi Pariwisata Medan. Medan.

Tuwo, A. 2011.  Pengelolaan Ekowisata Pesisir dan Laut. Brilian Internasional, Jakarta.

Tomboelu,N. 2000.  Analisis Kebijakan Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Terumbu Karang di Kawasan Bunaken dan Sekitarnya, Sulawesi Utara. Jurnal Pesisir dan Lautan. Volume 3 Nomor 1 Tahun 2000. Bogor. 

Wilson, J.  2012. Potensi Wisata Minat Khusus Kabupaten Aceh Selatan Kecamatan Tapak Tuan: Sebuah Pendekatan Pengembangan Pariwisata Berbasis Masyarakat dan Ekonomi Kreatif. Jurnal Ilmiah Pariwisata.  Vol. 8  No. 1 Juni 2012.  Akademi Pariwisata Medan. Medan. 

White, A.T.  Hale, Y. Renard and L.Cortesi.  Eds. 1994.  Collarobative and Community Based Management of Coral Reefs: Lessons From Experience. Kumarian Press. Inc. West Hartford, USA.

Yudaswara,GA. 2004. Analisa Kebijakan Pengembangan Wisata Bahari Dalam Pengelolaan Pulau-Pulau Kecil Secara Berkelanjutan (Studi Kasus  Pulau Menjangan Kabupaten Buleleng,Bali). Tesis.  Sekolah Pascasarjana, Insitut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor.

  Zar,M.T.  Dietriech,G.B.  Daniel,R.M. 2002. Policy Analisys of Coastal Ecotourism Development on Muara Angke Mangrove Ecosystem, Jakarta bay,Indonesia.  Jurnal Pesisir dan Lautan.  Vomue 4 Nomor 2 Tahun 2002. Insitut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor.

            *Indian Journal of Applied Research, Volume:3, Isse: 9, September 2013, pp.19-26

        **Hamzah Lubis, Lecturer Medan Instutute of   Technology /    Doctoral Graduate Student in  Natural    Resources and Environmental Management Faculty North Sumatera University;  B.Segli, Professor,  Natural Resources and Environmental Management Faculty North Sumatera University; Zulkifli Nasution, Professor,  Natural Resources and Environmental Management Faculty North Sumatera; Chalida Fachruddin, Professor,  Natural Resources and Environmental Management Faculty North Sumatera University

No comments:

Post a Comment