Landscape Capacity Report - Otepaa, Estonia by jwesenlund

Landscape Capacity

Otep채채, Estonia

Rania Tzalla, Julia Wesenlund, Frank Hoffmann, Piret Ainsaar, Arno Saar, Merit Mutso & Anastasia Vidrikson

Capacity Analysis

Introduction

‘Many Landscape Character Assessments will be used to help indecisions about the ability of an area to accommodate change, either as a result of new development, or some other form of land use change, such as the introduction of new features, or major change in land cover such as new woodland planting. In these circumstances judgements must be based on an understanding of the ability of the landscape to accommodate change without significant effects on its character. Criteria for what constitutes significant change need to be identified in planning policies or landscape strategies, and will usually be informed by potential effects on character and/or particular features and elements.’ In this report we are using the Landscape Character Assessment as a tool for calculating tourism and recreation capacity in Otepää, Estonia. A number of criteria have been identified to be used in conjunction with the landscape value outcomes of the character assessment. The Landscape value is concerned with the relative value that is attached to different landscapes whereas landscape capacity refers to the degree to which a particular landscape character type or area is able to accommodate change without significant effects on its character, or overall change of landscape character type. The follow pages explain our approach to calculating capacity. In order for the assessment and its subsequent use as a design tool to be accountable the rationale behind our judgements and calculations has been clarified. Our capacity calculation was based on the following equation: Sensitivity + Pressure = Capacity In the case of Otepää, Estonia, the capacity results are used to determine each area’s suitability for development of tourism and recreation. Our calculations for sensitivity and pressure were established using information previously collected and analysed including landscape value, landscape basics, culture, recreation, wildlife and conservation and tourism statistics.

Capacity Analysis

Methodology Data Used

Step 1:

Step 2:

Step 3:

r Step 1:

Step 2:

s Step 3:

Identify Criteria Score each Criteria Apply a Score for Measureing between 1 and 5 Pressure

Step 4:

Identify Criteria Score each Criteria Apply a Score for Measureing between 1 and 5 Sensitivity

Step 5:

Calculate the Calculate Ranges Avergae and Add to Apply a Weighting to Sensitivity to and certain Criteria Create Map

Step 4:

Step 5:

Calculate the Avergae and Add Weighting to certain Criteria

Calculate Ranges to Apply a Pressure to and Create Map

Step 1:

Step 2:

Step 3:

Step 4:

Step 5:

Create Matrix Using Sensitivity and Pressure Results

Represent Information on a Capacity Map

Define Capacity Levels

Identify Suitability Criteria

Document Capacity and Suitability of Each Area

Calculations

Capacity Analysis

Sensitivity: Step 1 & 2 Sensitivity Criteria Landscape Quality Special Management Zones

Soil

Hydrology

Topography

Landcover

Sensitivity Criteria and Initial Scoring

Special Protection Areas

Protected Species

Protected Single Species

Initial Sensitivity Scores: This table shows the initial scores given to the above criteria. These categories were picked due to their role in defining the sensitivty of the Otep채채 landscape. Along with ecological and geophysical elements the Landscape Quality which was a result of the Landscape Character Assessment and the potentially sensitive cultural sites were also considered. Whilst the Landscape Quality and the Geophysical criteria were given a mark from one to five as agreed by the group. The remaining categories were calculated by their actual number within the areas. This scoring system is summarise in the table below.

Area 1a 1b 1c 1d 1e 1f 2a 2b 2c 2d 2e 3 4 5a 5b 5c 5d 6a 6b 6c 6d 6e 6f 6g 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12a 12b 12c 13a 13b 13c 13d 14 15 16 17 18

Landscape Quality 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 2 4 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 1 5 1

Soil Sensitivity

Topography

Water Features 2 4 3 3 2 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 2 4 4 3 2 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 4 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 5 3 4

3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 2 2 2 3 1 2 3 2 3 1 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 1 1 1 5 5 1 4 1

Special Management Zones

Landcover 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 3 2 5 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 1 4 1

3 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 1 2 1

Cultural Sites

Special Protection Protected Single Protected Species Areas Species 4 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0

11 3 26 27 5 0 48 18 2 2 12 4 9 1 1 4 2 2 16 3 2 5 0 0 2 8 0 3 3 2 2 9 0 16 4 3 10 2 7 0 1 2

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0

Cultural Sites 3 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 3 1 0 0 4 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 1

Capacity Analysis

Mensitivity S ägestiku : Step 3 & 4

Following the previous table a system was devised to ensure that each category had a score from one to five. These four table show how we calculated this

Sensitivity Tables Consolidated

Ecological Sensitivity

In order to consolidate our data we split our criteria into four key areas: Ecology, Geophysical, Landscape Quality and Cultural.

Ecology Scoring Criteria Area Special Management Zones 1a 1b 1c 1d 1e 1f 2a 2b 2c 2d 2e 3 4 5a 5b 5c 5d 6a 6b 6c 6d 6e 6f 6g 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12a 12b 12c 13a 13b 13c 13d 14 15 16 17 18

The ecological and geophysical data are shown here and an overall average between one and five has been calculated for each landscape area. We considered the ecology of Otepää considerably more sensitive than our other criteria particularly when considering the effects of recreation and tourism development on the habitats of protected species. In order to represent this in our final results we multiplied it’s value by a factor of four to give ecology a higher weighting.

Geophysical Sensitivity

Otepää Sensitivity Analysis

5 1 3 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 2 1 2 1 3 1 3 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 1

Special Protection Areas

1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 1

Protected Species

2 1 3 3 1 1 5 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Protected Single Species

Ecology Average Ecology Weighted (x4) 1 2.25 9 1 1 4 1 2 8 1 2.75 11 1 1 4 1 1 4 1 2.5 10 1 1.5 6 1 1 4 1 1 4 1 1.5 6 1 1 4 3 1.5 6 1 1 4 1 1.5 6 1 1 4 1 2 8 1 1 4 1 1.5 6 1 1 4 1 1 4 1 1 4 1 1 4 1 1 4 3 2 8 1 1.25 5 1 1 4 1 1.25 5 5 2 8 1 1.25 5 1 1 4 3 2 8 1 1 4 1 1.75 7 1 1.25 5 1 1 4 1 1.25 5 5 2.25 9 3 1.75 7 1 2 8 1 2 8 1 1 4

Geophysical Scoring Criteria Area Soil Sensitivity 1a 1b 1c 1d 1e 1f 2a 2b 2c 2d 2e 3 4 5a 5b 5c 5d 6a 6b 6c 6d 6e 6f 6g 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12a 12b 12c 13a 13b 13c 13d 14 15 16 17 18

2 4 3 3 2 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 2 4 4 3 2 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 4 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 5 3 4

Topography

4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 3 2 5 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 1 4 1

Water Features Geophysical Landcover Total Average 3 33 3 3.5 3 2 33 2 33 2 2.75 3 2 3.25 3 2 3.25 5 2 3.25 5 1 53 1 53 2 3.25 5 1 1.5 1 3 2.25 2 1 1.75 1 1 1.5 1 2 12 2 2.5 1 2 2.75 2 3 2.75 2 1 22 2 2.75 2 3 23 2 2.5 2 3 2.75 2 1 3.25 4 3 2.75 2 4 2.5 2 3 3.25 2 4 3.5 2 4 34 4 3.5 3 4 34 4 3.25 3 3 3.5 4 1 2.75 4 1 2.75 4 1 2.75 4 5 3.5 3 5 3.75 4 1 12 4 3.25 2 1 1.75 1

Otepää

Capacity Analysis

Sensitivity: Step 5

Otepää Sensitivity Analysis

Sensitivity Results All the scores from the previous tables are consolidated here in a final calulation of Sensitivity. The is done by taking the average score for each area. After which the highest score is subtracted from the lowest score to get the range. The range is then divided by five, which is how many different sensitivity types we have created (Very low, Low, Medium, High and Very High) to give the ranges required for each one.

High Sensitivity Range Sensitivity Average 1.9 -‐ 2.48 2.49 -‐ 3.07 3.08 -‐ 3.66 3.67 -‐ 4.25 4.26 -‐ 4.8

Low 4.8

Pressure Very Low Low Medium High Very High High

Pressure Range Pressure Average 2 -‐ 3.6 3.7 -‐ 5.3 5.4 -‐ 7 7.1 -‐ 8.7 8.8 -‐ 10.4

Difference Increment Value 1.9 2.9 0.58

Low 10

Sensitivity Very Low Low Medium High Very High

Difference 2

Increment Value 8

1.6

Sensitivity Matrix Area Ecology Geophysical Culture Landscape Quality 1a 9 3 2 1b 4 3.5 1 1c 8 3 1 1d 11 3 1 1e 4 2.75 1 1f 4 3.25 1 2a 10 3.25 1 2b 6 3.25 1 2c 4 3 1 2d 4 3 1 2e 6 3.25 1 3 4 1.5 1 4 6 2.25 1 5a 4 1.75 1 5b 6 1.5 2 5c 4 2 1 5d 8 2.5 1 6a 4 2.75 1 6b 6 2.75 2 6c 4 2 1 6d 4 2.75 1 6e 4 3 1 6f 4 2.5 1 6g 4 2.75 1 7 8 3.25 1 8 5 2.75 1 9 4 2.5 1 10 5 3.25 5 11a 8 3.5 1 11b 5 4 1 12a 4 3.5 1 12b 8 4 1 12c 4 3.25 1 13a 7 3.5 1 13b 5 2.75 1 13c 4 2.75 1 13d 5 2.75 1 14 9 3.5 1 15 7 4.5 1 16 8 2 1 17 8 3.25 1 18 4 1.75 1

4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 2 4 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 1 5 1

Total average 4.5 3.125 4 4.75 2.9375 3.0625 4.8125 3.8125 3.25 3.25 3.8125 2.125 3.3125 2.1875 2.875 2.25 3.375 2.6875 3.4375 2.5 2.6875 2.75 2.625 2.6875 3.8125 2.6875 2.375 4.0625 4.125 3.5 3.375 4.5 3.3125 4.125 3.4375 3.1875 3.4375 4.375 4.375 3 4.3125 1.9375

Result Very High Medium High Very high Low Low Very High High Medium Medium High Very Low Medium Very Low Low Very Low Medium Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low High Low Very Low High High Medium Medium Very High Medium High Medium Medium Medium Very High Very High Low Very High Very Low

The Sensitivity Map Using the previous table this map was created. Each area has a chart within that indicates the score from the previous table. These help to immediately pick out what might be the most sensitive element of that area. Overall the map has shown a lot of what we expect. Lake P체haj채rv has very high sensitivty and areas with many protected species and Special Management Zones also rank quite highly. The Very Low sensitivity areas tend to be those that are intensively farmed such as in the far south.

Capacity Analysis

Pressure: Step 1 & 2 Pressure Criteria Recreation

Initial Pressure Scores: This table shows the initial scores given to the above criteria. These categories were picked due to their role in adding pressure to the Otep채채 landscape. Whilst the Landscape Quality and the Geophysical

Accommodation

criteria were given a mark from one to five as agreed by the group. The remaining categories were calculated by their actual number within the areas.

Cultural Sites

Settlement

Communications

This scoring system is summarise in the table below.

Area 1a 1b 1c 1d 1e 1f 2a 2b 2c 2d 2e 3 4 5a 5b 5c 5d 6a 6b 6c 6d 6e 6f 6g 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12a 12b 12c 13a 13b 13c 13d 14 15 16 17 18

Recreation

Accommodation 3 2 5 1 3 1 2 1 4 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 4 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 5 5 1 5 5 1 3 2 1 2 5 3 3 1 1

0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 125 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 30 115 0 0 40 150 0 0 205 15 250 170 40 0 140 0 5 45 0 0 165 0 0 40 15

Cultural Sites Settlement Communications 3 2 2 0 2 1 0 2 2 2 2 2 0 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 1 1 2 3 2 3 3 1 2 2 0 3 2 3 3 3 1 2 2 0 3 3 0 2 2 4 2 3 0 2 2 0 3 3 2 3 2 0 2 2 0 3 3 0 1 1 0 3 3 0 4 3 10 5 5 1 5 4 1 2 2 0 2 2 0 3 3 0 2 1 0 1 3 0 1 1 2 1 2 0 1 2 0 2 2 2 2 2 0 1 1 2 3 3 1 3 2

Capacity Analysis

Pressure: Step 3 & 4 Pressure Table Consolidated Here we established a way to score Accommodation using our one to five scoring system as shown in the small table below. We also weighted both recreation and accomodation as we felt that their influence on the pressure of an area was significantly more than that of Cultural Sites, Settlement and Communications. Recreation was multiplied by a factor or four and accomodation by a factor of three. Recreation is higher because the use of recreation facilities is not solely for those that use accomodation and the footprint of the these facitlities extends across larger spaces.

Pressure Table Showing Weighted Values Area 1a 1b 1c 1d 1e 1f 2a 2b 2c 2d 2e 3 4 5a 5b 5c 5d 6a 6b 6c 6d 6e 6f 6g 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12a 12b 12c 13a 13b 13c 13d 14 15 16 17 18

Recreation

3 2 5 1 3 1 2 1 4 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 4 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 5 5 1 5 5 1 3 2 1 2 5 3 3 1 1

Recreation Weighted x 4

12 8 20 4 12 4 8 4 16 4 4 4 4 12 4 4 12 4 16 4 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 20 20 4 20 20 4 12 8 4 8 20 12 12 4 4

Accommodation

1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 5 1 1 3 5 1 1 5 3 5 5 3 1 5 1 1 3 1 1 5 1 1 3 3

Accommodation Weighted x 3

3 3 3 9 3 3 3 3 15 3 3 3 3 3 3 9 3 9 15 3 3 9 15 3 3 15 9 15 15 9 3 15 3 3 9 3 3 15 3 3 9 9

Cultural Sites

2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Settlement

2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 1 3 4 5 5 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 3

Communications

2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 1 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 1 3 3 5 4 2 2 3 1 3 1 2 2 2 2 1 3 2

Capacity Analysis

Pressure: Step 5

Otepää Pressure Analysis

Pressure Results High

Low

Difference Increment Value AllSensitivity the scores from the previous tables here of Range 4.8 are consolidated 1.9 2.9in a final calulation 0.58 Pressure. The is done by taking the average score for each area. After which the

highest score is subtracted from the lowest score to get the range. The range is then Sensitivity Average Pressure

1.9 -‐ 2.48 Very many Low different Pressure types we have created (Very divided by five, which is how 2.49 -‐ 3.07 3.08 -‐ 3.66 3.67 -‐ 4.25 4.26 -‐ 4.8

Low Medium High Very High

low, Low, Medium, High and Very High) to give the ranges required for each one.

High Pressure Range Pressure Average 2 -‐ 3.6 3.7 -‐ 5.3 5.4 -‐ 7 7.1 -‐ 8.7 8.8 -‐ 10.4

Low 10

Sensitivity Very Low Low Medium High Very High

Difference 2

Increment Value 8

1.6

Pressure Matrix Area Recreation Cultural Sites 1a 12 1b 8 1c 20 1d 4 1e 12 1f 4 2a 8 2b 4 2c 16 2d 4 2e 4 3 4 4 4 5a 12 5b 4 5c 4 5d 12 6a 4 6b 16 6c 4 6d 4 6e 8 6f 4 6g 4 7 4 8 8 9 4 10 20 11a 20 11b 4 12a 20 12b 20 12c 4 13a 12 13b 8 13c 4 13d 8 14 20 15 12 16 12 17 4 18 4

2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Accommodation

3 3 3 9 3 3 3 3 15 3 3 3 3 3 3 9 3 9 15 3 3 9 15 3 3 15 9 15 15 9 3 15 3 3 9 3 3 15 3 3 9 9

Settlement

2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 1 3 4 5 5 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 3

Communications

2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 1 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 1 3 3 5 4 2 2 3 1 3 1 2 2 2 2 1 3 2

Average 4.2 3 5.6 3.6 3.8 2.4 3 2 7.2 2 2.6 2.8 2.4 4.2 3 3.6 4.4 3.6 7.6 2.4 2.8 4.6 4.8 2.8 2 6 4.2 10 9 3.6 5.6 8.4 2.2 4 4 2.2 3 8 4 3.6 4 3.8

Pressure Low Very Low Medium Very Low Low Very Low Very Low Very Low High Very Low Very Low Very Low Very Low Low Very Low Very Low Low Very Low High Very Low Very Low Low Low Very Low Very Low Medium Low Very High Very High Very Low Medium High Very Low Low Low Very Low Very Low High Low Very Low Low Low

The Pressure Map Using the previous tabble this map was created. Each area has a chart within that indicates the score from the previous table. These help to immediately pick out what might be the most pressurised element of that area. Again the map has shown roughly what was expected. The areas that contain Otep채채 and surrounding recreational hubs are under the most pressure. Areas where there is very little tourism and recreation show as having very low pressure.

Capacity Analysis

Mhe T ägestiku Capacity Map In combining the Sensitivity and Pressure maps we were able to come up with the matrix below to determine the capacity of an area. The Table demonstrates the outcome for each area and the map was created for a more coherent visual. These results will be analysed in the context o each individual area for the remainder of this report.

Area 1a 1b 1c 1d 1e 1f 2a 2b 2c 2d 2e 3 4 5a 5b 5c 5d 6a 6b 6c 6d 6e 6f 6g 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12a 12b 12c 13a 13b 13c 13d 14 15 16 17 18

Sensitivity Very High Medium High Very high Low Low Very High High Medium Medium High Very Low Medium Very Low Low Very Low Medium Low Medium Low Low Low Low Low High Low Very Low High High Medium Medium Very High Medium High Medium Medium Medium Very High Very High Low Very High Very Low

Capacity Very Low Medium Low Very Low High High Very Low Low Medium Medium Low Very High Medium High High Very High Medium High Medium High High High High High Low High High Very Low Very Low Medium Medium Very Low Medium Low Medium Medium Medium Very Low Very Low High Very Low High

Capacity Analysis

Capacity & Suitability C

a p a c i t y

I n d i c a t or

a p a c i t y

a t e g or y

Description

Capacity Analysis

Mägestiku Sensitivity: Very High Ecology: 11 Protected Species, 4 SMZs Geophysical: Topography is most sensitive aspect Culture: Cemetary “Kabelimägi”, Settlement Site and Äidu manor Landscape Quality: High Pressure: Low Recreation: Maraton Ski Track, Maraton Cyling Track, Hiking Trail, Estonian Cup Track Culture: Cemetary “Kabelimägi”, Settlement Site and Äidu manor Accommodation: None Settlement: Low Density Communication: Low Density

Capacity: Very Low This area is only suitable for low impact soft recreation such as swimming, road cycling on existing roads networks, hiking on existing trails and in low numbers. This is mainly due to the high number of Special Management Zones and Protected Species in the area. Any tourism development and accommodation should be kept out of this particular area. Outside of the Special Management Zones there is potential for small scale attractions such as picnic areas or small campsites.

Sihva Sensitivity: Medium Ecology: 3 Protected Species Geophysical: Soil and Topography are most sensitive aspects Culture: None Landscape Quality1: High Pressure: Very Low Recreation: Pühajärve Hiking Trail, Otepää Kääriku Sports Trail Culture: None Accommodation: None Settlement: Low Density Communication: Very Low Density

Kääriku/ Sihva/ Märdi

Sensitivity: High Ecology: 26 Protected Species, 3 SMZs Geophysical: Topography is most sensitive aspect Culture: None Landscape Quality: High Pressure: Medium Recreation: Maraton Ski Track, Estonian Cup Track, Kekkose Skiing -Hiking Trail, Kääriku Running Trail, Elion Hiking Trail, Otepää Kääriku Sports Trail Culture: None Accommodation: None Settlement: Low Density Communication: Low Density

Capacity: High There is a potential for sub-centre development in a smaller scale due to the small size of the open land and woodland. Activities such as adventure parks, multi-use sports fields, smaller sports and cultural events can be suggested. Cross country skiing, snowtubing and sledging could be a winter alternative. The tourism development and accommodation can include family holiday cabins with facilities for children & parents. Due to the low number of Special Management Zones in the area, visible changes can be made without dominating the existing landscape.

Capacity: Low Due to the high sensitivity this place is limited to hard recreation and attractions. Due to the high number of Special Management Zones and Protected Species in the area, low impact soft recreation such as swimming, road cycling on existing roads networks, hiking on existing trails and in low numbers. The topography favour downhill skiing and ski jambing. Outside of the Special Management Zones there is potential for small scale attractions such as picnic areas or small campsites.

Nüpli/ Vidrike/ Pilkuse/ Truuta Sensitivity: Very High Ecology: 27 Protected Species, 1 SMZ, 1 SPA Geophysical: Topography is most sensitive aspect Culture: Hobusemägi hill, Marjamägi slalom slopes, archaeological monument, Cemetery Landscape Quality: High

Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: Hobusemägi hill, Marjamägi slalom slopes, archaeological monument, Cemetery Accommodation: None Settlement: Low Density Communication: Low Density

Capacity Analysis Capacity: Very Low This area is only suitable for low impact soft recreation such as swimming, road cycling on existing roads networks, hiking on existing trails and in low numbers. This is mainly due to the high number of Special Management Zones and Protected Species in the area. Any tourism development and accommodation should be kept out of this particular area. Outside of the Special Management Zones there is potential for small scale attractions such as picnic areas or campsites. Here, the focus should be on managing the existing amenities for long term sustainability.

Vidrike/ Kassiratta/ Toütsi Sensitivity: Low Ecology:5 Protected Species Geophysical: Topography is most sensitive aspect Culture: None Landscape Quality: High Pressure: Low Recreation: Maraton Ski Track, Maraton Cycling Track, Elion Estonian Cup Track, Elion Hiking Trail

Culture: None Accommodation: None Settlement: Very Low Density Communication: Low Density

Kolgü

Sensitivity: Low Ecology: No protected Species, SMZs and SPAs Geophysical: Topography is most sensitive aspect Culture: Koigu manor Landscape Quality: High Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: Koigu Manor Accommodation: None Settlement: Low Density Communication: Low Density

Capacity: High There is a high potential for hard sub-centre recreation. The big area of open land and woodland lets the development of activities such as adventure parks, multi-use sports fields, smaller sports and cultural events. Here, is also essential, the management of the existing amenities for long term sustainability. Motorcross could take place here, or a large adventure trail.,including high ropes course, climbing wall and mountain biking. Concerning the accommodation, family holiday cabins with facilities for children & parents are suggested.

Capacity: High This area is suitable for high development and recreation. More specific the topography allows the winter recreation consisted of downhill skiing , snow tubing and cross country skiing. Moreover the absence of protected areas allows the network development such as roads, hiking and running tracks. Accomodation should be enhanced in the area with family holiday cabins with facilities for children & parents.

Pedajamäe/ Kostalatsi/ Vana-Otepää Sensitivity: Very High Ecology: 48 Protected Species, 2 SMZs Geophysical: Topography and soil are medium sensitive aspects Culture: Stronghold “Uandamägi, Käpa Munamägi” Landscape Quality: Very High Pressure: Very Low Recreation: Maraton Running Track, Maraton Cyling Track Culture: Stronghold “Uandamägi, Käpa Munamägi” Accommodation: None Settlement: Very Low Density Communication: Low Density

Capacity Analysis Capacity: Very Low This area is only suitable for low impact soft recreation due to the very high sensitivity.R oad cycling on existing roads networks, hiking on existing trails and in low numbers is suggested. This is mainly due to the high number of Special Management Zones and Protected Species in the area. Any tourism development and accommodation should be kept out of this particular area. Outside of the Special Management Zones there is potential for small scale attractions such as picnic areas or small campsites.

Pedajamäe Sensitivity: High Ecology: 18 Protected Species, 1 Special Management Zone Geophysical: High Density Forest, Landscape Quality and Landcover have very high sensitivity Culture: None Landscape Qualitiy: Very High Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: None Accommodation: None Settlement: Very Low Density Communication: Very Low Density

Nüpli Area

Sensitivity: Medium Ecology: 2 Protected Species Geophysical: High Density Forest, Landscape Quality and Landcover have very high sensitivity Culture: None Landscape Quality: Very High Pressure: High Recreation: Apteekri Hill, Apteekri Hiking Trail, Apteekri hill 3,4km running trail, Apteekri hill 6,2km running trail, Old Roller Skiing Road Culture: None Accommodation: c. 125 beds Settlement: Very Low Density

Capacity: Low Because of the very high landscape quality there is the possibility to create smaller wild camping areas or little accommodation spots. Based on the high sensitivity low intensity activities such as hiking, cycling or fishing are okay. Furthermore the impact in this area should be minimal. 18 protected species and one special management zone indicates Pedajamäe area to a natural site.

Capacity: Medium The Nüpli Area is well connected and has many trails. The basics such as the number of beds or the number of recreation possibilities shows clearly the medium capacity. The existing landscape can be updated by visible changes in a good relation to the very high landscape quality. Health tracks might be ok but paintballing or Disc golf should be avoid.

Capacity Analysis

Pilkuse Sensitivity: Medium Ecology: 2 Protected Species Geophysical: High Density Forest, Landscape Quality and Landcover have very high sensitivity Culture: None Landscape Quality: Very High

Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: None Accommodation: None Settlement: Very Low Density Communication: Very Low Density

Capacity: Medium The area of Pilkuse has also a very high landscape quality. Due to this smaller wooden cabins or campsites with facilites are quite ok. In relation to the two protected species as well as the very high sensitivity of the landcover there can be crossCountry Skiing or similar activities. Impacts which are higher in visitors and recreational things should be avoided.

Märdi/ Kassiratta/ Töutsi Sensitivity: High

Ecology: 12 Protected Species, 1 Special Management Zone Geophysical: High Density Forest, Landscape Quality and Landcover have very high sensitivity Culture: Ilmajärve Manor Landscape Quality: Very High

Pressure: Very Low

Recreation: Kekkose Skiing/ Hiking trail, Elion Estonian Cup Track (50km), Running Trail (5km), Tartu Maraton Cycling Track (89km), Tartu Maraton Skiing Track Culture: As above Accommodation: None Settlement: Low Density

Capacity: Low The possibilities for active recreation are really good. Again the landscape quality has a very high sensitivity. 12 protected species and one special management zone gives the opportunity for little settlements such as wild camping areas. Additional sport activities should be in relation to the site. Canoeing or fishing gives a minimal change to the natural surroundings.

Communication: Medium Density

Kastolatsi

Sensitivity: Very Low Ecology: 4 Protected Species Geophysical: Undulating Agricultural Land, Landscape Quality, Soil and Topography have low sensitivity Culture: Kastolatsi Manor, Kastolatsi Church Landscape Quality: Low Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: As above Accommodation: None Settlement: Medium Density Communication: Medium Density

Capacity: Very High 4 protected species and two cultural aspects can be found in the Kastolatsi area. The low landscape quality and the not existing accommodation can be used for larger infrastructure like Spa’s. Famous activities such as Motocross or Golf won’t impact the ecological potential of this area. The updated site can be used for national or international events. The fact that there can be found no recreational infrastructure makes this area also interesting for further investments.

Capacity Analysis

Vana-Otep채채 Sensitivity: Medium Ecology: 9 Protected Species, 1 Protected Single Species Geophysical: Wooded Mosaic with Arable land and Open Fields, Landscape Quality has high sensitivity, Water features has medium sensitivity Culture: Cemetery Landscape Quality: High Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: As above Accommoadation: None Settlement: Low Density Communication: Low Density

Capacity: Medium The high landscape quality is also based on the various water bodies, 9 protected species and one protected single species. No existing accommodation gives the chance to build scattered wooden cabins in relation to the existing landscape which is to be complemented. Mountain Biking, hiking trails or health tracks are good activities in this area.

Capacity Analysis

Pedajamäe Sensitivity: Very Low Egology: 2 Protected Species, 1 SMZ Geophysical: Topography is most sensitive aspect Culture: None Landscape Quality: Low Pressure: Low Recreation: Maraton Running Track, Maraton Cyling Track, Elion Hiking Trail, Elion Estonian Cup Track, Andu Holiday Centre Culture: None Accommodation: c. 3 beds Settlement: Medium Density Communication: Low Density

Capacity: High Sports which require hilly landscapes are not in favour here. At the moment there are mostly cycling and running actvities taking place. There is potential for adventure parks, multi use sports fields and smaller cultural events. For future development creating accomodation places, like cabins with facilities for families.

Vana-Otepää /Otepää Sensitivity: Low Egology: 2 Protected Spicies, 3 SMZ Geophysical: Topography is most sensitive aspect Culture: II WW memorial, School, Soldiers Village Landscape Quality: Low Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: II WW memorial, School, Soldiers Village Accommodation: None Settlement: Medium Density Communication: Medium Density

Pilkuse

Sensitivity: Very Low Egology: 2 Protected Spicies, 1 SMZ Geophysical: Topography is most sensitive aspect Culture: Männiku hill Landscape Quality: Low Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: Männiku hill Accommodation: c. 15 beds Settlement: Low Density Communication: Low Density

Capacity: High Landscape is rather smooth, so preferable activities are hiking, cross country skiing, running, cycling and other which do not require hilly landscapes. Low sensitivity allows development of some harder recreational activities, and the low pressure indicates that there might be a unused potential there, waiting to be discovered. Another bonus is the closeness of Otepää town, allowing quick and easy access for non local people to find new places in that area.

Capacity: Very High Pressure and sensitivity are both very low, which indicates the big unused potential of the area to be used as a place for recreational activities. Very high capacity shows that this area can be used by many different sports activities or even be built big sports centres, although the distance from Otepää could be a disadvantage. It is also possible to have bigger infrastructure and buildings, like spas, hotels, but again, distance from Otepää has to be considered.

Capacity Analysis

Märdi /Sihva Sensitivity: Medium Egology: 2 Protected Species, 1 SMZ Geophysical: Soil is most sensitive aspect Culture: None Landscape Quality: Low Pressure: Low Recreation: Sihva Sports Trail, Otepää Sports Road, Maraton Ski/ Cycling Track, Elion Estoian Cup Track, Elion Hiking Trail Culture: None Accommodation: None Settlement: Medium Density Communication: Medium Density

Capacity: Medium Sports such as mountain biking, cross country skiing, health trails, zip wires and disc golf are suitable for this medium capacity area. These kind of activities could be implemented on a small to medium scale so that any visible changes compliment the existing landscape. Recommended would be activities that don’t disturb the landscape quality, as it is quite low at the moment.

Pedajamäe /Kastolatsi /Vana-Otepää Sensitivity: Low Egology: 2 Protected Spicies, 1 SMZ Geophysical: Soil is most sensitive aspect Culture: None Landscape Quality: Medium Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: None Accommodation: c. 30 beds Settlement: Low Density Communication: Low Density

Arula

Sensitivity: Medium Egology: 3 Protected Spicies, 2 SMZ Geophysical: Soil , topography, water features are equally most sensitive aspects Culture: Arula manor, Hill of Crosses Landscape Quality: Medium

Pressure: High Recreation: Marathon Ski Trail, Kuutsemägi, Elion Estonian Cup Track, Eliona Hiking Trail

Culture: Arula manor, Hill of Crosses Accommodation: c. 115 beds Settlement: Low Density Communication: Medium Density

Capacity: High Rather flat relief, so preferable activities are hiking, cross country skiing, running, cycling and other sports which do not require hilly landscapes. Low sensitivity allows development of some harder recreational activities, and the low pressure indicates that there might be a unused potential there, waiting to be discovered. Due to the already existing accomodation places, there could be longer hiking trails etc, because there is place for people to rest.

Capacity: Medium Pressure is already high, so any new bigger sports acitivities are rather prohibited. Pro is the big accomodation number, and the closeness of an already famous Kuutsemäe center, which attracts many people during winter time. Due to that it would be easier to introduce new activities like hiking, runnnig, cycling, skiing trails in the neighbourhood.

Capacity Analysis

N체pli Sensitivity: Low Egology: 2 Protected Species, 1 SMZ Geophysical: Topography is most sensitive aspect Culture: None Landscape Quality: Medium Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: None Accommodation: None Settlement: Low Density Communication: Low Density

Capacity: High Low sensitivity allows development of some harder recreational activities, and the low pressure indicates that there might be a unused potential there, waiting to be discovered. Since there is no recreation there at the moment, a lot of unused potential and room is available to use, like for hiking trails, skiing-, cycling-, running tracks. Development opportunity for recreation sub-centres with activities such as adventure parks, multi-use sports fields, smallers sports and cultural events.

Pilkuse Sensitivity: Low Egology: 2 Protected Spicies, 1 SMZ Geophysical: Soil is most sensitive aspect Culture: None Landscape Quality: Medium Pressure: Very Low Recreation: Elion Estonian Cup Track, Elion Hiking Trail Culture: None Accommodation: None Settlement: Medium Density Communication: Medium Density

M채rdi

Sensitivity: Low Egology: 2 Protected Spicies, 1 SMZ Geophysical: Soil is most sensitive aspect Culture: Wooden sculpture, Old mill Landscape Quality: Medium Pressure: Low Recreation: Maraton Ski/Cycling Track, Elion Estonian Cup Track, Elion Hiking Trail, K채채riku Running Trail

Culture: Wooden sculpture, Old mill Accommodation: c. 40 beds Settlement: Medium Density Communication: Low Density

Capacity: High Low pressure indicates that there might be a unused potential there, waiting to be used. Low sensitivity allows development of some harder recreational activities. Changes are for hiking trails, skiing-, cycling-, running tracks. Although any visual changes that are being done, should not dominate existing landscape. Development opportunity for recreation subcentres with activities such as adventure parks, multi-use sports fields, smallers sports and cultural events.

Capacity: High There are quite some opportunities for development here. Sport activities that could be done there are ranging from hiking to more intensive activities that might require special infrastructure, something like an adventure park or a climbing wall. Helpful factor for developing recreation in the area, is the already existing accomodation possibilities.

Capacity Analysis

Vidrike Sensitivity: Low Egology: 2 Protected Species, 1 SMZ Geophysical: Topography and soil are most sensitive aspects Culture: None Landscape Quality: Medium Pressure: Low Recreation: None Culture: None Accommodation: c. 150 beds Settlement: Low Density Communication: Low Density

Capacity: High Low sensitivity and pressure levels indicate opportunities for larger development for recreation sub-centres or for family holiday cabins with facilities for children and parents. Although there are existing accomodation possibilities, which suggest to create more recreational acitivities in the area, rather than sleeping places. Changes in the landscape should be minor ones still, because of the land quality.

Tõutsi /Karutootsi Sensitivity: Low Egology: 2 Protected Spicies, 1 SMZ Geophysical: Soil , topography, water features are equally most sensitive aspects Culture: None

Landscape Quality: Medium Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: None Accommodation: None Settlement: Medium Density Communication: Medium Density

Pilkuse

Sensitivity: High Egology: 4 Protected Spicies, 3 SMZ Geophysical: Topography is most sensitive aspect Culture: None Landscape Quality: Medium Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: None Accommodation: None Settlement: Very Low Density Communication: Very Low Density

Capacity: High Landscape is rather smooth, so preferable activities are hiking, cross country skiing, running, cycling and other which do not require hilly landscapes. Low sensitivity allows development of some harder recreational activities, and the very low pressure indicates that there might be a unused potential there, waiting to be taken advantage of. Con could be distance from Otepää and other recreational type places. But there is room for quite some amount of development, from trails to sports sub-centres.

Capacity: Low Sensitivity’s high level puts rather limited options for development. In favour are low intensity activities like hiking on corresponding trails. Changes in the existing landscape are allowed only on a minimal scale. Although little settlements or accomodation can be developed in the area.

Capacity Analysis

Pühajärve Sensitivity: Low Ecology: 8 Protected Species, 1 SMZ Geophysical: Medium soil, hydrology and topographical sensitivity Culture: None Landscape Quality: Low Pressure: Medium Recreation: Murrumetsa Hiking Trail Culture: None Accommodation: c. 205 beds Settlement: Medium Density Communication: Medium Density

Capacity: High There is potential for development here. Suitable sports range from hiking and swimming to more intensive activities that require specialist infrastructure such as an adventure park or a climbing wall. The topography here does not favour downhill skiing but cross country skiing, snowtubing and sledging could be a winter alternative.

Pühajärve/ Otepää Sensitivity: Very Low Ecology: Nothing of Special Interest Geophysical: High Hydrological Sensitivity Culture: None Landscape Quality: Low Pressure: Low Recreation: Elion Estonian Cup Track, Elion Hiking Trail, Maraton Hiking Trail Culture: None

Accommodation: c.15 beds Settlement: High Density Communication: Medium Density

Otepää

Sensitivity: High

Ecology: 3 Protected Species, 1 SMZ Geophysical: Topography has highest sensitivity Culture: II World War memorial, Otepää New cemetery, Otepää parsonage building, Otepää Maarja Lutheran Church, Kunimägi hill, Otepää stronghold and city ruins, Otepää rectory/ Kerkuwald Landscape Quality: Medium

Pressure: Very High

Recreation: Elion Estonian Cup Track, Elion Hiking Trail, All three Maraton Trails, Tehvandi Sports Centre, Otepää Adventrue Park, Snowtubing Hill, Skate Park, Otepää Sports Hall Culture: As above Accommodation: c. 250 beds Settlement: Very High Density Communication: Very High Density

Capacity: Very High Scope for more extensive development here, a few of the key trails run through but the very low sensitivity means that more hard recreation should perhaps be considered for the area. Motorcross could take place here, or a large adventure trail. including high ropes course, climbing wall and mountain biking. Sports pitches or indoor sports halls to compliment the Tehvandi Sport Centre could be built in this area which is also conveniently close to Otepää town.

Capacity: Very Low The pressure in the Otepää area is already very high, this combined with high sensitivity due to three protected species and many cultural sites means that there is little room for more recreation and attractions. For this area, rather than add to the pressure, the focus should be on improving and maintaining the current amenities and attractions. Cultural sites should be protected and as Otepää is the starting point of the three Maratons, any new such trails and events should consider using a different area for their focus.

Nüpli

Capacity Analysis Sensitivity: High Ecology: 3 Protected Species, 2 Protected Single Species Geophysical: Topography has very high sensitivity Culture: Cemetary Landscape Quality: High Pressure: Very High Recreation: Maraton Cycling Track, Maraton Skiing Track, Elion Estoni-

an Cup Track, Elion Hiking Trail, Part of tehvandi Sports Centre, Old Roller Skiing Road, Ansomäe snowtubing hill, Väike Munamägi, camping, Snowmobile rental

Culture: Cemetary Accommodation: c. 170 beds Settlement: Very High Density Communication: High Density

Capacity: Very Low This area is only suitable for low impact soft recreation such as swimming, road cycling on existing roads networks, hiking on existing trails and in low numbers. This is mainly due to the already well developed tourist and recreation infrastructure combined with the high sensitivity. Here again, the focus should be on managing the existing amenities for long term sustainability.

Kääriku/ Sihva/ Märdi Sensitivity: Medium Ecology: 2 Protected Species, 1 SMZ Geophysical: Topography has very high sensitivity Culture: Pilkuse manor Landscape Quality: High Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: Pilkuse manor Accommodation: c.40 beds Settlement: Low Density Communication: Low Density

Mäha

Sensitivity: Medium Ecology: 2 Protected Species Geophysical: Topography and Hydrology have high sensitivity Culture: None Landscape Quality: Very High Pressure: Medium Recreation: Golf Course Culture: None Accommodation: None Settlement: Low Density Communication: Low Density

Capacity: Medium This medium capacity zone is suitable for sports such as mountain biking, cross country skiing, health trails, zip wires and disc golf. These should implemented on a small to medium scale so that any visible changes compliment the existing landscape. Lakes in this area can be used for non-motorised boating. Other medium capacity sports such as paintballing should be avoided in this area because of the high landscape quality.

Capacity: Medium A substantial part of this area is already a golf course which should be considered when introducing more activities to the area despite it being a medium capacity area. The Landscape Quality is very high so recreational activities should not leave a visible mark on the landscape. Suitable options would be horseback riding, fishing, swimming or boating in the lakes, hiking and cycling trails. A sauna might suit this location due to the picturesque lakes but any accommodation would have to be in the form of small cabins or campsites.

Capacity Analysis

Kääriku/Sihva Sensitivity: Very High Egology: 9 Protected Species, 2 SMZs Geophysical: Topography is most sensitive aspect Culture: None Landscape Quality: Very High Pressure: High Recreation: Selection of the Kekkose ski trail, Kääriku sports center, Elion Estonian Cup trail

Culture: None Accommodation: 140 Settlement: Medium Density Communication: Medium Density

Capacity: Very Low This area is very low capacity. The Area include popular sporting and resting place, such as Kääriku Leisure and Sports Center and various recreations: mountain-biking, shing trail on existing trails and, Elion Estonian Cup trail. Area have a very high landscape quality and also special management zones and the pressure is very high.

Vidrike Sensitivity: Medium Egology: Nothing of special interest Geophysical: Topography and water features is most sensitive aspect

Culture: None Landscape Quality: Very High

Capacity: Medium This area is only suitable for low impact soft recreation such as camping. Low recreation activity and nothing of special interest in ecology aspect make a low potential for development here.

Pressure: Very Low Recreation: Camping Culture: None Accommodation: None Settlement: Low Density Communication: Very Low Density

Nüpli /Pilkuse

Sensitivity: High Egology: 16 Protected Species, 0 SMZs Geophysical: Landcover and topography is most sensitive aspect Culture: None Landscape Quality: Very High Pressure: Low Recreation: Elion Estonian Cup trail, Pühajärve hiking trail, Otepää-Käriku sports trail, Sports road. Culture: None Accommodation: c. 5 beds Settlement: Very Low Density Communication: Medium Density

Capacity: Very Low This area suitable for intensive recreations such as one of the oldest hiking trails in Estonia, mountainbiking, running, horceback riding, rollerskiers, skates, cyclist and wheelchair athletes, skiers. There is also many cpecial management zones where woodland is more cared for. The low pressure make a low potential for development here. Landcape offers interesting views such as lake, Sõjatamm, forest areas landscape quality is also very high.

Arula/Mäha/Sihva/ Pühajärve Sensitivity: Medium Egology: 4 Protected Species, 0 SMZs Geophysical: Topography and landcover is most sensitive aspect Culture: Mõrsjaristikivi (Bride’s Cross Stone) Landscape Quality: Very High Pressure: Low Recreation: Tehvandi sports center Culture: Mõrsjaristikivi (Bride’s Cross Stone) Accommodation: c. 45 beds Settlement: Very Low Density Communication: Very Low Density

Capacity Analysis Capacity: Medium Significant part of this area is Tehvandi sports center. Topography conditions is good also because of the maintenance. The area has various kinds of recreations, such as swimming, road cycling on existing roads networks, hiking on existing trails, ski jumping, skiing tracks. There are also a number of special management zones.

Nüpli Sensitivity: Medium Egology: 3 Protected Species, 0 SMZs Geophysical: Topography and landcover is most sensitive aspect Culture: None Landscape Quality: Very High Pressure: Very Low Recreation: None Culture: None Accommodation: None Settlement: Very Low Density Communication: Low Density

Capacity: Medium Despite medium capacity there is potential for development also topography conditions is good but very low level recreational activities and cultural sites. There are also a number of special management zones where woodland is more cared for.

Capacity Analysis

Pilkuse Sensitivity: Medium Egology: 10 Protected species, 1 SMZs Geophysical: Hilly topography and higly forested Culture: No cultural sites Landscape Quality: Very High Pressure: Very Low Recreation: Estonian Elion Cup cycling marathon trail, Elion Cup

hiking trail, Old rollerskating road, Tartu Marathon running trail, Tartu Marathon cycling trail Culture: No cultural sites Accommodation: None Settlement: Very low density Communication: Low density

Capacity: Medium Sports infrastructure should be limited from low to medium intensity. Thanks to very high landscape quality and hilly topography the site has good potential for cycling, mountain biking, hiking and skiing trails. The existing sports trails also provide good access. High intensity accomodation should be kept to a minimum due to poor road access and many protected species. Accommodation could be provided with small forest cabins and campsites that compliment the landscape.

Pühajärve/Nüpli Sensitivity: Very High Egology: 2 Protected species, 1 SMZs Geophysical: Many wetlands and medium soil sensitivity Culture: No cultural sites Landscape Quality: High Pressure: High Recreation: Pühajärve hiking trail, Kääriku sports road, Murrumetsa hiking trail, Pühajärve Spa hotel, Pühajärve exercise course, Aedlinna football stadium Culture: No cultural sites Accommodation: c. 150 beds or more Settlement: Low density Communication: Low density

Capacity: Very Low Due to extensive accommodation and sports infrastructure, the area should not be further developed. The existing buildings and trails should be regularly maintained but changes to landscape are not advisable.

Sihva/Pühajärve/Nüpli Sensitivity: Very High Egology: 7 Protected species, 1 SMZs Geophysical: Mostly water area, medium soil sensitivity and highly forested

Culture: Lake Pühajärve: Kloostrisaar and Armuallikas Landscape Quality: Very High Pressure: Low Recreation: Pühajärve hiking trail, Murrumetsa hiking trail, Kääriku sports road, Old rollerskiing road, Tartu Marathon cycling trail Culture: Lake Pühajärve: Kloostrisaar and Armuallikas Accommodation: None Settlement: Low density Communication: Low density

Capacity: Very Low Due to very high sensitivity and several protected species, the land area should not be further developed. Since most of the area is covered by Lake Pühajärv, that is not very intensively used, new sports infrastructure could include water activities. Those would also provide access to the many islands that are considered as local cultural values.

Capacity Analysis

Raudsepa Sensitivity: Low Egology: No protected species, no SMZs Geophysical: Very sensitive soil, flat terrain and grasslands, abandoned peat mine Culture: No cultural sites Landscape Quality: Very Low

Pressure: Very Low Recreation: Tartu Marathon cycling trail, Tartu Marathon skiing trail, Elion Cup cycling trail Culture: No cultural sites Accommodation: None Settlement: Very low density Communication: Very low density

Capacity: High The area has aesthetically low value landscape but a very sensitive soil. That means the most suitable activities would be the ones taking place during winter, when the soil is protected by frost and snow. The area could be used as an accommodation centre for surrounding areas, but new infrastructure would have to be build in a sustainable way.

Vidrike/Truuta/Kaurutootsi/Kolgo Sensitivity: Very High Egology: 1 Protected species, no SMZs Geophysical: High in water features, hilly terrain, medium soil sensitivity and mostly grasslands Culture: Old manorhouse, Manor Getrudenhof Landscape Quality: Very High

Pressure: Low Recreation: No recreation infrastructure Culture: Old manorhouse, Manor Getrudenhoft Accommodation: c. 30-50 beds Settlement: Medium density Communication: Medium density

Capacity: Very Low No existing sports facilities, high landscape quality, existing accommodation and rather good road network means this area has a good potential for new sports infrastructure. However, high sensitivity requires low intensity activities. Hilly and open terrain favours cycling and hiking trails. Skiing is not the best option due to wide open areas that often tend to be very windy. There is no immediate need for additional accommodation.

IlmjĂ¤rve/TĂśutsi Sensitivity: Very Low Egology: 2 Portected species, no SMZs Geophysical: Highly sensitive soil, flat terrain and grasslands Culture: Orthodox church Landscape Quality: Very Low Pressure: Low Recreation: No recreation infrastructure Culture: Orthodox church Accommodation: c. 10-20 beds Settlement: Medium density Communication: Low density

Capacity: Very High Due to low sensitivity the area has potential for high density accommodation like hotels or spas. Building should take into consideration high soil sensitivity in certain areas. Low pressure means potential for intensive recreational activities and development of new sports centers. Low landscape quality requires the sports infrastructure itself to be the aesthetically pleasing sight.

Summary

Capacity Analysis

In quantifying the capacity and analysing each area individually according to itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s particular attributes we are able to determine potential sites within the Otepaa Municipality where development for tourism and recreation could take place but also the areas where development should be avoided. In general the areas of high ecological importance have turned out to have the lowest capacity for development and their ecological value should be upheld. This is not necessarily to say that visitors should be kept out of these areas altogether. It can be beneficial to promote the biodiversity of these locations to ensure their safekeeping in the long run, but a very sensitive approach should be taken. Other areas of low capacity include the developed region around the town of Otepaa where pressure is already high and the current appealing character of this landscapee is at risk if more pressure from tourism is added. There is, however, great scope for development in the medium to high capacity areas which make up for over half of the municipalityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s landscape character areas. A number or recreational activities such as fishing, hiking and health trails do not have a huge impact on the landscape and are a well suited to areas of medium capacity. More intensive activities such as adventure parks have been suggested for the high capacity areas. The sports halls and stadiums that require a lot of infrastructure are restriced to the two areas that have been designated very high capacity status.