MINISTRY OF RESEARCH, TECHNOLOGY AND HIGHER EDUCATION

UNIVERSITAS GADJAH MADA

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

BAGINDA HILL: GEOHERITAGE OF BELITUNG ISLAND, INDONESIA

PUTRA HERIANTO (12/333130/TK/39664)

ICHSAN RAMADHAN (15/378925/TK/42867)

UNIVERSITAS GADJAH MADA

YOGYAKARTA
2016
 iii

PREFACE

Praise to Allah the only almighty God, because with the blessing and help,
the making of this paper with the title BAGINDA HILL: GEOHERITAGE OF
BELITUNG ISLAND, INDONESIA could be done very well and in a smooth
way.
This paper has been well written and arranged by us and got help from many
parties. Not to forget, gratitude also delivered to Ir. A. Dewi Titisari, M.T., Ph.D as
the academic adviser and all people who have helped us in making this paper
possible and well written and arranged.
Aside from all of those, we are fully aware that there are still many mistakes
in this paper, whether sentence arrangement or grammar. Because of that, we are
open-minded in receiving any suggestions and critics from all the readers hence we
can make it better in the future
Last word, we hope this paper will bring much benefit for all, especially our
research location, Belitung Island, to be more success in developing its potential
geotourism.

Yogyakarta, January 2016

Writers
 iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page ........................................................................................................ i

Approval Sheet ................................................................................................ ii
Preface ............................................................................................................. iii
Table of Contents ............................................................................................ iv-v
Table of Figures .............................................................................................. vi
Table of Tables ................................................................................................ vii
Table of Appendices ....................................................................................... viii-ix
Abstract ........................................................................................................... x
Chapter I. Introduction
I.1 Background ................................................................................. 1
I.2 Purpose and Significance of Research ........................................ 2
I.3 Reachability of Research Area ................................................... 3
Chapter II. Literature Review
II.1 A Brief Introduction .................................................................. 4
II.2 Regional Geology of Belitung Island
II.2.1 Regional Geomorphology ................................................ 4
II.2.2 Regional Stratigraphy ....................................................... 5
II.2.3 Regional Geology Structures ............................................ 7
Chapter III. Methodology
III.1 Inventory Stage ........................................................................ 8
III.2 Quantification Stage ................................................................. 10
Chapter IV. Results and Discussions
IV.1 Results ...................................................................................... 17
IV.2 Discussions .............................................................................. 21
Chapter V. Conclusions and Suggestions .......................................................... 23
Bibliography....................................................................................................... xi
 v

Curriculum Vitae .......................................................................................... xii-xvi

Appendices ................................................................................................... xvii-xix
 vi

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Location of the research (Author, 2016) ............................................ 4

Figure 2. Stratigraphic Column of Belitung Island (Modified from Baharuddin and

Sidarto, 1995) .................................................................................... 6

Figure 3. Proposed stages and sub-stages in geomorphosite assessment (Modified

after Pereira, 2006; Pereira, et al., 2007) ........................................... 8

Figure 4. Geomorphological map of Baginda Hill, Belitung Island (Author, 2016)

........................................................................................................... 18
 vii

TABLE OF TABLES

Table 1. Potential geomorphosites identification criteria (after Pereira, 2006;

Pereira and Pereira, 2010) .............................................................. 8-9

Table. 2 Criteria used in the assessment of potential geomorphosites (Pereira and

Pereira, 2010).................................................................................. 9

Table. 3 Criteria used for geomorphosites selection (Pereira and Pereira, 2010)
........................................................................................................ 10

Table. 4 Description of Geomorphosites characterisation (Pereira and Pereira,

2010) ............................................................................................... 11

Table 5. Numerical assessment of scientific value (Pereira, et al., 2007) ...... 12

Table 6. Numerical assessment of additional value (Pereira, et al., 2007) .... 13

Table 7. Numerical assessment of protection value (Pereira, et al., 2007) .... 13

Table 8. Numerical assessment of use value (Pereira, et al., 2007) ............... 14

Table 9. Numerical Assessment (Kubalkov, 2013) ..................................... 15-16

Table 10. Analysis of numerical assessment for both numerical assessment

(Author, 2016) ................................................................................ 16
 viii

TABLE OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1. The view facing to the West from the East side of Baginda Hill, it
shows a geomorphological unit, which is Unit of Steep Sloping
Adamellite Intrusion Hills (yellow). It also shows the roads directing
to the Hill. (Personal Documentation) ................................................ xvii

Appendix 2. The view facing to the East from Baginda Hill, it shows two
geomorphological units, which are Unit of Steep Sloping Adamellite
Intrusion Hills (yellow) and Unit of Gently Sloping Adamellite
Intrusion Plain (Red). It also shows an ocean horizon (black). (Personal
Documentation) ..................................................................................... xvii

Appendix 3. The view facing to the South-West from Baginda Hill, it shows two
geomorphological units, which are Unit of Steep Sloping Adamellite
Intrusion Hills (yellow) and Unit of Gently Sloping Adamellite
Intrusion Plain (Red). It also shows an ocean horizon (black). (Personal
Documentation) ..................................................................................... xvii

Appendix 4. The view facing to the East from Baginda Hill, it shows two
geomorphological units, which are Unit of Steep Sloping Adamellite
Intrusion Hills (yellow) and Unit of Gently Sloping Adamellite
Intrusion Plain (Red). It also shows an ocean horizon (black). (Personal
Documentation) ..................................................................................... xviii

Appendix 5. The view facing to the East from the West side of Baginda Hill, it
shows two geomorphological units, which are Unit of Steep Sloping
Adamellite Intrusion Hills (yellow) and Unit of Gently Sloping
Adamellite Intrusion Plain (Red). It also shows the appearance of both
Laki Hill and Cewek Hill (Personal Documentation) ...................... xviii

Appendix 6. The view facing to the South from Baginda Hill, it shows two
geomorphological units, which are Unit of Steep Sloping Adamellite
 ix

Intrusion Hills (yellow) and Unit of Gently Sloping Adamellite

Intrusion Plain (Red). It also shows an ocean horizon (black). (Personal
Documentation) ..................................................................................... xviii

Appendix 7. The ladders are using commonly by the tourists and local residents to
reach the top of Baginda Hill (Personal Documentation)............... xviii

Appendix 8. The Adamellite Baginda, which mainly consists of quartz, feldspar,

plagioclase, biotite, and hornblende. It also shows some joints (red)
within the rocks (Personal Documentation) ................................... xix
 x

ABSTRACT

BAGINDA HILL: GEOHERITAGE OF BELITUNG ISLAND, INDONESIA

Putra Herianto1 and Ichsan Ramadhan1
1
Departemen Teknik Geologi, Fakultas Teknik, Universitas Gadjah Mada,
Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Abstract: The Belitung Island is one of the most famous islands in Indonesia.
Baginda Hill is located on the south part of it, which has not become the major
attraction yet for visitors to the island. Moreover, this 110-meters-height hill is not
well known to the visitors and the story behind of it is rarely published. Besides,
there are many other places in Belitung Island which are very well known either
well promoted for tourism. This paper uses the methodological guidelines for
geomorphosite assessment and literature review. This paper also highlights the
geological and geomorphological conditions of Baginda Hill for geotourism
purposes. The hill is composed of Baginda Adamellite (the I type granite) and its
absolute age is ranging from 216 6 Million years ago. There are also some
lineaments around the hill, which directions are North-East South-West and
North-West South-East. These hill plays an important role in local identity, as the
myths behind of it and the cultural events that are frequently hold on this hill. This
paper considers the opportunities of geological and geomorphological conditions
from the Baginda Hill and also its geomythological aspect, not to mention, its myths
and legends to be the consideration for a further geotourism advancement in
Belitung Island.
Keywords: Geotourism, Geomorphosite assessment, Geological Heritage, Baginda
Hill, Indonesia
 1

I. INTRODUCTION

I.1 Background
Belitung Island is located on the Western part of Indonesia. It covers approximately 4,800.6
km square, and had a population of 271,868 in 2014 (Wikipedia, 2015). Administratively, it is a
part of the province of Bangka-Belitung Islands.
Belitung Island has many beaches and offshore-smaller islands for tourism activities, for
examples: Tanjung Tinggi Beach, Tanjung Kelayang Beach, Batu Berlayar Island, Lengkuas
Island, and Seliu Island. The main activities that tourists do in Belitung Island are mostly about
water-sport activities such as snorkeling and scuba diving.
Famous tourist destination in Belitung Island mostly located at Western part and Northern
part of Belitung Island. In contrary, the South-West part of Belitung is less popular than the
Western part. Even though the South-West part has spectacular and wonderful tourist destination,
but number of tourist visiting there is not as many as those who visit the Western part. The factor
causing that is less developed access in the past, like proper and comfort road, accessible public
transportation, and supporting facilities. Amazing destination but low accessibility is pointless.
Even though, the South-West part of Belitung now is having a great accessibility, but it still has
not yet as well-known as its Western part.
The South-West part of Belitung Island is in Membalong Districts. Membalong Districts
consist of 12 villages, one of them called as Padang Kandis Village. Like the other villages in
Belitung Island which offer beauty of nature with their specific characteristics, Padang Kandis
Village also offers its beauty that ready to be explored and opened for public. There are some
places in Padang Kandis Village that are already a part of the destinations for tourists purposes,
for examples Tanjung Kiras Beach and Penyabong Beach. Actually, there are other attractive
places that can be found in the Padang Kandis Village, one of them is Baginda Hill.
Baginda Hill is located in the Batu Lubang sub-Village, Padang Kandis Village. It
consisted of two hills, the first is called as Laki, located at 313'03.6"S; 10737'23.9"E, which
could not be climbed by the beginners. The second hill is called as Cewek, located at
312'56.7"S; 10737'09.0"E, which could be climbed without any specific techniques. The Laki
height is approximately 92 meters with its slope is ranging 40-65, while the Cewek height is
 2

approximately 110 meters with its slope is ranging from 20-25. Because the different steepness
of both hills, which The Laki is steeper than The Cewek as seen in the Appendix 5, so The Cewek
hill is the one which usually called as the Baginda Hill as it is the one that can be normally climbed
by the majority of tourists. From the top of The Cewek hill, seen The Laki hill with its steepness
and trees around both hills.
The Baginda Hill is composed of I type Granite (as cited in Baharuddin and Sidarto, 1995),
as it is absolute age is ranging from 216 6 Million years ago (as cited in Barber, A.J., et al.,
2005).
The Baginda Hill is not quite famous as other destinations that located nearby, such as
Penyabong Beach. The most reasonable cause, why this hill is not that famous, is because it is
quite difficult to climb the hill for the majority of tourists. The infrastructures that are already
available to climb this hill are only two traditional stairs (as seen in the Appendix 7) that tied up
and anchored to the rocks of the Baginda hill itselves, which are not safety enough if there are a
lot of tourists come. The low safety also become tourists consideration to not climb the hill.
The other reasons are the main attractions, scientific information and stories behind this
hill is not well-told or pointed out by the villagers. The villagers know about some myths behind
it but they have no idea about how Baginda Hill was geologically formed or is geomorphology
appeared. By blending geological aspects of Baginda Hill with its local myths and stories will
make up good combination to attract more tourists to come.
This research will make the Baginda Hill as more known as a place where many researchers
do their research, will give more scientific information about Baginda Hill, Baginda Hill will be
noted for its historical background, Baginda Hill will be more famous and will be gaining more
visitors. This research will also make the local residents, government and private sector to be more
concerned to develop this geoheritage of Belitung Island.

I.2 Purpose and Significance of Research

a. To give a brief short about Baginda Hill, its scientific information and publish its
existence for geotourism.
b. To describe the geological and geomorphological aspects of Baginda Hill.
c. To assess the geomorphosite characterisation of Baginda Hill.
 3

d. To define the obstacles on developing Baginda Hill as one of geoheritage in Belitung

Island.

I.3 Reachability of Research Area

The area of research located in Belitung Island. It can be reached by using airplane that
goes from Jakarta (Soekarno Hatta Airport) to Tanjung Pandan (H.A.S. Hanandjoeddin Airport).
After that, continued by using local transportation or car that goes to the Padang Kandis Village,
Membalong District about 2 hours, where it is located approximately 70 kilometers to the South
of Tanjung Pandan City.
 4

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

II.1 A Brief Introduction

Geoheritage was defined as those components of natural geodiversity of significant value
to humans, including scientific research, education, aesthetics and inspiration, culutral
development, and a sense of place experienced by communities (as cited in Kubalkov, 2013).
Geomorphosites refer to the geomorphological assets of geological heritage, the term being a
contraction of geomorphological sites, which a value can be attributed and they can be used by
society as a geomorphological resource (as cited in Pereira and Pereira, 2010, and Kubalkov
2013). As if the definitions are accepted, then some of the geosites and geomorphosites can be
considered as specific examples of geoheritage (Kubalkov, 2013).

II.2 Regional Geology of Belitung Island

II.2.1 Regional Geomorphology
Van Bemmelen (1949) stated that Belitung (Billiton) Island is one of the surrounding islands in
Lingga Archipelago that belongs to the great Tin-belt. The belt extends from the Western part of
the Malay Peninsula via the Lingga Archipelago with Singkep, to Bangka and Billiton. The
Belitung Island represents a drowned topography. An aureole of submerged river valleys,
containing alluvial tin-ores are surrounding the Belitung Island.

Seliu Island

South China Sea

Gaspar
Strait
Java Sea
Belitung Island

Java Sea

N
: Research Location

Figure 1. Location of the research (Author, 2016)

 5

Figure 1 shows the location of the research and also it shows that on the North part of
Belitung Island, it is bordered with the South China Sea. On the East and South part, it is bordered
with the Java Sea. On the Western part, it is bordered with the Gaspar Strait.
Belitung Island has a variety in topography, it consists of hills and lowland or coastal
plains. In average, the highest land in Belitung is 500 meters above sea level, with the highest peak
is at Tajam Mountain, located in Badau District.

II.2.2 Regional Stratigraphy

Figure 2 shows the lithologies that composed the island of Belitung (Baharuddin and
Sidarto, 1995) from the oldest to the youngest:

1. Kelapakampit Formation (PCks)

This formation consists of flysch sediments that slightly folded, consist of metasandstone
alternating with slate, mudstone, shale, tuffaceous siltstone and chert. Based on the fossils
assemblage on this formation age, it is concluded a Permo-Carboniferous age.

2. Tajam Formation (PCTm)

This formation was probably interfingering with the Kelapakampit Formation and formed
at Permo-Carboniferous age. This formation consists of Quartz sandstone intercalated by siltstone.
Thick of bedding is 2-40 cm. Primary tin associated with quartz occurs in fissures and stockwork
veins.

3. Siantu Formation (PCsv)

This formation was deposited in a marine environment and presumably also interfingering
with the Kelapakampit Formation. This formation consists of lava basalt and volcanic breccia.

4. Tanjungpandan Granite (Trtg)

Tanjunpandan Granite, its absolute age based on K-Ar is range from 208 to 245 million
years ago (as cited in Baharuddin and Sidarto, 1995). It consists of foliated granite. This rock
belongs to the S granite (as cited in Baharuddin and Sidarto, 1995).
 6

Surficial Deposit and Volcanic Rocks

Era Period Epoch Million Age Intrusive Rocks
Sedimentary Rocks
65
Cretaceous Kbg Kbd
115
Mesozoic

135
Jurassic 160 Jma
205
208
Triassic Trtg
245
250
Permian
290 PCTm PCsv
Paleozoic

PCks Kbd : Batubesi Quartz Diorite

Kbg : Burungmandi Granodiorite
Carbonaferous Jma : Baginda Adamellite
355 Trtg : Tanjungpandan Granite
PCsv : Siantu Formation
PCTm : Tajam Formation
PCks : Kelapakampit Formation

: Main focus of this research

Figure 2. Stratigraphic Column of Belitung Island (Modified from Baharuddin and Sidarto,
1995)

5. Baginda Adamellite (Jma)

Baginda Adamellite has an absolute age that ranges from 160 to 208 million years ago as
seen in the Figure 2 (as cited in Baharuddin and Sidarto, 1995). It consists of Adamellite, grey to
greenish, holocrystalline, equigranular, coarse grained. Mineral constituents are quartz, feldspar,
plagioclase, biotite, and hornblende (as seen in the Appendix 8), with secondary mineral such as
chlorite, carbonate, limonite, and iron oxide. Based on chemical analyses, the rock belongs to the
I type granite (as cited in Baharuddin and Sidarto, 1995) which not contains cassiterite mineral.

6. Burungmandi Granodiorite (Kbg)

Burungmandi granodiorite has an absolute age that ranges from 115 to 160 million years
ago or Cretaceous (as cited in Baharuddin and Sidarto, 1995). It consists of Granodiorite. Based
on geochemical analyses, this rock belongs to the I type granite (as cited in Baharuddin and
Sidarto, 1995).
 7

7. Batubesi Quartz Diorite (Kbd)

Batubesi quartz diorite has an absolute age from 115 to 160 million years ago or Cretaceous
(as cited in Baharuddin and Sidarto, 1995). It consists of quartz diorite.

II.2.3 Regional Geology Structures

Baharuddin and Sidarto (1995), stated that structures occurred in Belitung Island are folds,
faults, joints and lineaments. Direction of axial folds are commonly North-West - South-East,
where the faults are North-East - South-West. Tectonic activity is commenced since Permo-
Carboniferous which deposited flysch type sediment of Kelapakampit Formation, at the same time
a collision forms Siantu Formation. On Triassic time, magmatic activity took place and formed
Tanjungpandan Granite which carried primary cassiterite. During Jurrasic time magmatic activity
continued and resulting Baginda Adamellite, this magmatic activity ceased on Late Cretaceous
when diorite and granodiorite intrusive rocks formed. Since Late Cretaceous until Quaternary time
erosional and depositional processes took place which resulting Carbonaceous sand and alluvium
deposits.
 8

III. METHODOLOGY

Method used in making this research was created by Pereira and Pereira (2010). This
method is divided into two main stages, which are inventory stage and quantification stage (see
Figure 3). Inventory stage includes four sub-stages and quantification stage includes two sub-
stages.

Figure 3. Proposed stages and sub-stages in geomorphosite assessment (Modified after Pereira,
2006; Pereira, et al., 2007)

III.1 Inventory Stage

a. Identification of potential geomorphosites

The important goal of the inventory stage is selecting landform that can be defined as
geomorphosites by four kinds of identification (see Table 1)

Table 1. Potential geomorphosites identification criteria (after Pereira, 2006; Pereira and Pereira,
2010)

(i) Scientific relevance recognized during the geomorphological survey of the

area or by former scientific works;

(ii) Landform aesthetics and peculiarity, compared with other situations in the
same or other areas;
 9

(iii) Links between landforms and cultural elements such as archaeological

features, population settlements, castles, agriculture, etc;

(iv) Links between landforms and ecological issues such as fauna and flora
settlements.

b. Qualitative assessment
This sub-stage is used to determine intrinsic value, potential use, and required protection,
as shown in the Table 2. Scientific, ecological, cultural, and aesthetic define geomorphological
intrinsic value. Potential use defined by accessibility, visibility, and use of other natural or cultural
values. The last aspect, need for protection, defined by two criterias, deterioration and
vulnerability.

Table. 2 Criteria used in the assessment of potential geomorphosites (Pereira and Pereira, 2010)
CRITERIA ASSESSMENT
2 low;
3 medium;
Scientific (Sc)
4 high;
5 very high
Geomorphologic 0 nil;
Other geomorphological
al intrinsic value
values (Ogv) 1 - very low;
(IV)
Ecological (Ec)* 2 low;
Cultural (Cul)** 3 medium;*
Aesthetic (Ae)*** 4 high;***
5 very high**
Accessibility (Ac)* 1 - very difficult;
Visibility (Vi)** 2 - difficult;
Use of other natural or
Potential use 3 - medium;
cultural values (Oth)
(PU)
4 - easy/good;*
5 - very easy/very
good**
Deterioration (De) 1 low,*
Need for
Vulnerability (Vu) 2 medium;
protection (NP)
3 high
 10

c. Geomorphosite Selection
Geomorphosites selection is based on their rank on previous sub-stage, qualitative
assessment. From the previous sub-stage, the highest total score is selected for characterization.
Geomorphosites selection uses criteria scores from qualitative assessment then grouping them to
4 different types as shown in the Table 3 (type I, type II, type III, and type IV).

Table. 3 Criteria used for geomorphosites selection (Pereira and Pereira, 2010)
Selection criteria
I Sc = 5
Sc = 4 or Sc = 3 and Ec 4 or Cul
4 or Ae 4;
II
Ac 3 and Vi 4 or Oth 4;
De 2 and Vu = 1
Single places and areas
Sc = 4 or Sc = 3 and Ec 4 or Cul
III 4 or Ae 4;
De 2 and Vu 2 (urgent need for
protection)
Panoramic viewpoints outside the study
area
IV Sc = 4 and Ec = 5 or Cul = 5 or Ae =
5;
Ac 3 or Vi 4

d. Geomorphosite Characterisation
Detail description of each selected criteria for the geomorphosites as shown in the Table
4, completes the process involved in the compilation of the inventory. The information that already
collected is expected to support next sub-stage.

III.2 Quantification Stage

a. Numerical assessment
This step uses the criteria that already introduced in inventory stage, then divides them to
different classes to create two levels: principal and secondary indicators. The sum of all indicators
from this sub-stage defines the total value of geomorphosites.
 11

Table. 4 Description of Geomorphosites characterisation (Pereira and Pereira, 2010)

GEOMORPHOSITE CHARACTERISATION
Geomorphological description, interpretation and heritage
Regional and local geomorphological setting, and the main
Description
features observed.

Geomorphic processes, geomorphological evolution, and natural

Interpretation
and cultural features related.

Justification of heritage value of the geomorphosite (high or very

Heritage value
high intrinsic value).
CARTOGRAPHY
Extract from the detailed geomorphological map (or geological if that does
not exist) with the geomor-phosite location. For panoramic viewpoints both
the observation spot and the area seen from it must be located.
ILLUSTRATION
Photos with captions.
USE AND MANAGEMENT
Description of the access type (roads, trails, footpaths...),
Accessibility
distances and existence of parking areas.
Conditions for the geomorphosite user, existence of obstacles or
Visibility
vegetation.
Other kinds of Natural (flora, fauna, other geological assets) and cultural
value features with relevance for the site.
Present uses Human activities and use as a natural or cultural site.
Conservation Geomorphosite deterioration by natural or human causes.
Possible geomorphosite deterioration by natural or human
Vulnerability causes in the future mainly as the result of its use as a
geomorphosite.
Geomorphosite protection by legal instrument. For panoramic
Legal status view-points both the observation spot and the area seen from it
must be considered.
Supporting Existence of services and equipments for tourism use such as
infra-structures hotels, res-taurants and information centres.
Necessary and Proposition of initiatives for site prequalification and its use as
possible actions geomorphosite.
In this sub-stage, two types of numerical assessment are used. They are numerical
assessment by Pereira, et al., (2007) and numerical assessment by Kubalkov (2013).
 12

Table 5 to 8 are numerical assessment by Pereira, et al., (2007), and Table 9 is numerical
assessment by Kubalkov (2013). As shown in the Table 5, Table 6, Table 7, Table 8 and Table
9, the criteria used has some differences type of value. It shows that Pereira, et al., (2007) is more
complex and have more specific criteria rather than Kubalkov (2013).

b. Analysis of Results
In analyzing results from numerical assessment uses different method as Pereira suggested.
This sub-stage, new method is used, which can be seen on Table 10. It divides 100% into three
different groups that have its own percentage. The percentage is calculated from total score of
geomorphosites assessment divided by maximum score of numerical assessment times 100%. For
Numerical Assessment by Pereira the maximum score is 20 and Kubalkovs is 18.5. Hence,
classifying its percentage value and it has its own description recommendation (see Table 10).

Table 5. Numerical assessment of scientific value (Pereira, et al., 2007)

Number of interesting geomorphological
SCIENTIFIC VALUE (ScV) (maximum 5.5) Dv
features (diversity)
Ra Rareness in relation to the area 0 1
0 It is not one of the most important 5 0,33 2
0,25 It is not one of the most important 3 0,67 3
0,5 One of the most important 3 1 More than 3
0,75 The most important Ge Other geological features with heritage value
1 The only occurrence 0 Absence of other geological features
Other geological features but without relation to
In Integrity/Intactness 0,17
geomorphology
Other geological features with relation to
0 Highly damaged as a result of human activities 0,33
geomorphology
0,25 Damaged as a result of natural processes 0,5 Occurrence of other geosite(s)
Damaged but preserving essential geomorphological Scientific knowledge on geomorphological
0,5 Kn
features issues
Slightly damaged but still maintaining the essential
0,75 0 None
geomorphological features
1 No visible damage 0,25 Medium: presentations, national papers
Representativeness of geomorphological processes
Rp 0,5 High: international papers, thesis
and pedagogical interest

0 Low representativeness and without pedagogical interest Rn Rareness at national level

With some representativeness but with low pedagogical
0,33 0 More than 5 occurrences
interest
Good example of processes but hard to explain to non
0,67 0,17 Between 3 to 5 occurrences
experts
Good example of processes and/or good pedagogical
1 0,33 2 occurrences
resource
0,5 The only occurrence
Scientific value (Ra + In + Rp + Dv + Ge + Kn
ScV
+ Rn)
 13

Table 6. Numerical assessment of additional value (Pereira, et al., 2007)

ADDITIONAL VALUES (AdV) (maximum 4.5)

Cult Cultural value

0 Without cultural features or with cultural features damaging
0,25 Cultural features with no connection to landforms
0,5 Relevant cultural features with no connection to landforms
0,75 Immaterial cultural features related to landforms
1 Material cultural features related to landforms
1,25 Relevant material cultural features related to landforms
1,5 Anthropic landform with high cultural relevance
Aest Aesthetic value
Subjective value. Aspects to be considered:
0-0.5 Low
visual singularity of landforms; panoramic quality;
objects and colour diversity and combination;
0.5-1 Medium
presence of water and vegetation; absence of
human-induced deterioration; proximity to the
1-1.5 High
observed features.
Ecol Ecological value
0 Without relation to biological features
0,38 Occurrence of interesting fauna and/or flora
0,75 One of the best places to observe interesting fauna and/or
1,12 Geomorphological features are important for ecosystem(s)
1,5 Geomorphological features are crucial for the ecosystem(s)
AdV Additional values (Cult + Aest + Ecol)

Table 7. Numerical assessment of protection value (Pereira, et al., 2007)

PROTECTION VALUE (PrV) (maximum 3.0)

In Integrity/Intactness
0 Highly damaged as a result of human activities
0,25 Damaged as a result of natural processes
Damaged but preserving essential geomorphological
0,5
features
Slightly damaged but still maintaining the essential
0,75
geomorphological features
1 No visible damage
Vu Vulnerability of use as geomorphosite
0 Very vulnerable, with possibility of total loss
0,5 Geomorphological features may be damaged

1 Other, non-geomorphological features may be damaged

1,5 Damage can occur only in/along the access structures

2 Not vulnerable
PrV Protection value (In + Vu)
 14

Table 8. Numerical assessment of use value (Pereira, et al., 2007)

USE VALUE (UsV) (maximum 7.0) Ou Present use of other natural and cultural interests

Ac Accessibility 0 Without other interests, promotion and use

0 Very difficult, only with special equipment 0,33 With other interests but without promotion and use
Only by 4 wheel-drive vehicle and more than 500 metres
0,21 0,67 With other interests and their promotion, but without other use
by footpath
0,43 By car and more than 500 metres by footpath 1 With other interests, with promotion and use
0,64 By car and less than 500 metres by footpath Lp Legal protection and use limitations
By 4 wheel-drive vehicle and less than 100 metres by
0,86 0 With total protection and prohibitive use
footpath
1,07 By car and less than 50 metres by footpath 0,33 With protection, with use restriction

1,29 By bus on local roads and less than 50 metres by footpath 0,67 Without protection and without use restriction
By bus on national roads and less than 50 metres by With protection but without use restriction or with very low use
1,5 1
footpath restriction
Vi Visibility Eq Equipment and support services
0 Very difficult or not visible at all 0 Hostelry and support services are more than 25 km away
Can only be viewed using special equipment (e.g. artificial
0,3 0,25 Hostelry and support services are between 10 and 25 km away
light, ropes)

0,6 Limited by trees or lower vegetation 0,5 Hostelry and support services are between 5 and 10 km away

0,9 Good but need to move around for a complete observation 0,75 Hostelry or support services are less than 5 km away
1,2 Good for all relevant geomorphological features 1 Hostelry and support services are less than 5 km away
1,5 Excellent for all relevant geomorphological features UsV Use value (Ac+Vi+Gu+Ou+Lp+Eq)
Gu Present use of the geomorphological interest
0 Without promotion and not being used
0,33 Without promotion but being used
0,67 Promoted/used as landscape site
1 Promoted/used as geomorphosite or geosite
 15

Table 9. Numerical Assessment (Kubalkov, 2013)

Scientific and intrinsic values
0 - totally destroyed site,
0.5 - disturbed site, but with visible abiotic
Integrity
features,
1 - site without any destruction
0 - more than 5 sites,
Rarity (number of similar sites) 0.5 - 2-5 similar sites,
1 - the only site within the area of interest
0 - only one visible feature/processes,
Diversity (number of different partial
features and processes within the 0.5 - 2-4 visible features/processes,
geosite or geomorphosite)
1 - more than 5 visible features/processes
0 - unknown site,
0.5 - scientific papers on national level,
Scientific knowledge
1 - high knowledge of the site, monographic
studies about the site
Educational values
0 - low representativeness/clarity of the form
and process,
Representativeness and
0.5 - medium representativeness, especially
visibility/clarity of the features/
for scientists,
processes
1 - high representativeness of the form and
process, also for the laic public
0 - very low exemplarity and pedagogical use
of the form and process, 0.5 - existing
exemplarity, but with limited pedagogical use,
Exemplarity, pedagogical use
1 - high exemplarity and high potential for
pedagogical use, goedidactics and
geotourism
0 - no products,
Existing educational products
0.5 - leaflets, maps, web pages,
1 - info panel, information at the site
0 - no educative use of the site,
Actual use of a site for educational 0.5 - site as a part of specialized excursions
purposes (excursions, guided tours) (students),
1 - guided tours for public
Ecomonical values
0 - more than 1000 m from the parking
place,
0.5 - less than 1000 m from the parking
Accessibility
place,
1 - more than 1000 m from the stop of public
transport
0 - more than 10 km from the site existing
tourist facilities,
Presence of tourist infrastructure
0.5 - 5 10 km tourist facilities,
1 - less than 5 km tourist facilities
0 - no local products related to a site,
Local products 0.5 - some products,
1 - emblematic site for some local products

Conservation values
Actual threats and risks
Potential threats and risks
Current status of a site
Legislative protection
Cultural values: presence of
historical/archaeological/ religious
aspects related to the site
Ecological values
Aesthetic values: number of
colours; structure of the space,
viewpoints
Table. 10 Analysis of numerical assessment for both numerical assessment (Author, 2016)
16
0 - high both natural and atrophic risks,
0.5 - existing risks that can disturb the site,
1 - low risks and almost no threats
0 - high both natural and athrophic risks,
0.5 - existing risks that can disturb the site,
1 - low risks and almost no threats
0 - continuing destruction of the site,
0.5 - the site destroyed, but now with management
measures for avoid the destruction,
1 - no destruction
0 - no legislative protection,
0.5 - existing proposal for legislative protection,
1 - existing legislative protection (Natural monument,
Natural reservation)
Added values
0 - no cultural features,
0.5 - existing cultural features but without strong relation
to abiotic features,
1 - existing cultural features with the strong relations to
abiotic features
0 - not important,
0.5 - existing influence but not so important,
1 - important influence of the geomorphologic feature on
the ecologic feature
0 - one color,
0.25 - 2-3 colors,
0.5 - more than 3 colors;
0 - only one pattern,
0.25 - two or three patterns clearly distinguishable,
0.5 - more than 3 patterns;
0 - none,
0.25 - 1-2,
0.5 - 3 and more
 17

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

IV.1 Results
The research data has gotten from direct field observations, which fulfill all of the methods
criteria, hence forming the results and further discussions. The Baginda Hill formed the basis of
the inventory of geomorphological heritage. It is a panoramic viewpoint where large landforms
can be perceived. The hill characterized by Baginda Adamellite (see Appendix 8). The hill could
observe a great variety of landforms. Baginda itself has been known scientifically as the name of
the Baginda Adamellite Formation (Baharuddin and Sidarto, 1995). The flora that can be seen
nearby the sites are pepper trees and palm trees that are planted by the residents. Hence, as seen in
the Table 1, the criteria needed is fulfilled.
Baginda hill is assessed qualitatively, as seen in the Table 2, from intrinsic value (IV),
potential use (PU), and need for protection (NP). From Geomorphological intrinsic value (IV),
scientific (Sc) has score of 3 (medium), ecological (Ec) 3 (medium), cultural (Cul) 5 (very high),
Aesthetic (Ae) 4 (high). From potential use (PU), accessibility (Ac) 4 (easy/good) and visibility
(Vi) 5 (very easy/very good). From need for protection (NP), Deterioration (De) has score of 1
(low) and Vulnerability 1 (low).
From scores given to each criteria in Geomorphosite Selection sub-stage, Baginda hill is
grouped in type II, as classified in the Table 3, because it fulfills the range of scores of each criteria.
Baginda hill fulfills the score of Sc=3, Cul 4 or Ae4, Ac3 and Vi4, De2 and Vu=1
Baginda hill in geomorphological aspect that can also be seen its geomorphological map
at Figure 4, is a 110 meters hill that composed by Baginda Adamellite (as seen in the Appendix
8). It could be said that this hill is an isolated-hill which located in low-lands, nearby the beaches.
Its slope is ranging from 20-25. The highest point is 110 meters while the lowest one is 20 meters.
Its distributary pattern is radial. There are some lineaments around the hill, which directions are
North-West South-East and North-East South-West. Exogenic processes that happen to this
hill are erosion and weathering. The land uses nearby are farms, mining sites and settlements. The
geological disasters that probably happen are landslides and mass movements.
The view from Baginda Hill can be seen in Appendix 2, 3, 4, and 6, and the view to Baginda
Hill can be seen in Appendix 1 and 5. The Figure in Appendix 1 and 5 shows that the road heading
to the Baginda Hill is already good in quality for even a bus to pass.
 18

The Figure in Appendix 2 shows that the Baginda Hill is strongly evidence as an isolated
hill. The Figure in Appendix 3 and Appendix 6 shows the diversity of geomorphological aspects
nearby Baginda Hill as it also shows the view of the ocean directly from the hill. Appendix 4 shows
the diversity in flora nearby the hills, which means that the hills have important roles to the
ecology.
Baginda Hill has close relation to nearby residents. Many residents do culture-related
celebration on the top of the hill when they have recovered from sick, after catching fish, or other
reasons. Those celebrations are conducted by the local shaman. Local residents also believe the
chunk of rock on the top of the hill as a medium between human and unseen entity living in
Baginda Hill. People also believe that the visitors who visit Baginda Hill with bad intention and
menstruation for female will be misled in the journey. Local shaman also said that Baginda Hill is
heritage from previous ancestors because of the local belief.

Figure 4. Geomorphological map of Baginda Hill, Belitung Island (Author, 2016)

 19

The roads that go to Baginda Hill parking area are really good (see Appendix 1 and 5), and
after reaching the parking area, the visitors could just go by walk in the footpaths to the peak of
Baginda Hill in approximately 200 meters.
On the path from the parking area to the Baginda Hill, there are some vegetation that will
probably distract the visitor while they are on their walk. In some specific moment, the visitors
could also see wild monkeys and wild boars.
There is no kind of building built (see Appendix 4) on the site nor the path going to the
peak and as its natural process, the deterioration might be erosion and weathering. The possible
geomorphosite deterioration by natural or human causes in the future will be the used of this site
as the geotourism itself. As the number of visitors will increase, the buildings and other supporting
infrastructures will also be increased.
The Baginda Hill has not yet got a legal instrument neither by the government nor the
private. There are some hotels and restaurants nearby that located less than 5 kilometers from the
Baginda Hill, but the souvenirs has not yet the main interest from this site because of the lack of
interest and it is not the main intention from the residents to develop this site as it is not as well-
known as other tourism places.
The needs of further geomorphology and geological information, better safety
infrastructures and also legal acknowledgements by the government are highly required to be the
prequalification and its use as geomorphosite.
After Inventory stage is done, then entering Quantification stage. In the first sub-stage
(Numerical Assessment) two types of numerical are used. First is numerical assessment by Pereira
and second from Kubalkov.
Firstly, numerical assessment which created by Pereira, et al., (2007). For scientific value
(ScV), the score of rareness in relation to the area (Ra) is 0.75 (the most important),
integrity/intactness (In) 0.75 (Slightly damaged but still maintaining the essential
geomorphological features), representativeness of geomorphological processes and pedagogical
interest (Rp) is 0.67 (Good example of processes but hard to explain to non-experts), number of
interesting geomorphological features (diversity) (Dv) is 1.00 (more than 3), other geological
features with heritage value (Ge) is 0.33 (other geological features with relation to
geomorphology), scientific knowledge on geomorphological issues is (Kn) 0.25 (Medium:
presentation, national papers), Rareness at national level (Rn) is 0 (More than 5 occurences). From
 20

the scores, the scientific value can be calculated by adding Ra, In, Rp, Dv, Ge, Kn, and Rn is 3.75.
For Additional values (AdV), the score of cultural value (Cult) is 1.00 (Material cultural features
related to landforms), aesthetic value (Aest) is 1.3 (High), ecological value (Ecol) is 0.38
(Occurrence of interesting fauna and/or flora) that can be seen from Appendix 6. From the scores,
additional values (AdV) calculated by adding Cult, Aest, and Ecol giving score of 2.68. For Use
Value (UsV), the score of Accessibility (Ac) is 0.64 (By car and less than 500 meters by footpath),
visibility (Vi) is 1.5 (Excellent for all relevant geomorphological features), present use of the
geomorphological interest (Gu) is 0.67 (Promoted/used as landscape site), present use of other
natural and cultural interests (Ou) is 1.00 (With other interest, with promotion and use), legal
protection and use limitations (Lp) is 0.67 (Without protection and without use restriction),
equipment and support services (Eq) is 1.00 (Hostelry and support services are less than 5 km
away). From the scores, use value (UsV) calculated by adding Ac, Vi, Gu, Ou, Lp, and Eq and get
the score of 5.48. For Protective Value (PrV), the score of Integrity/intactness (In) is 0.75 (Slightly
damaged but still maintaining the essential geomorphological features) and vulnerability of use as
geomorphosite (Vu) is 1 (Other, non-geomorphological features may be damaged. From the
scores, Protection Value (PrV) adding In and Vu getting score of 1.75. Then the total score
(ScV+AdV+UsV+PrV) of Baginda Hill according to this numerical assessment is 13.66
(maximum score 20)
Secondly, numerical assessment by Kubalkov (2013). For scientific and intrinsic values,
integrity has score of 1 (site without any destruction), rarity 0.5 (2-5 similar sites), diversity 1
(more than 5 visible features/processes), and scientific knowledge 0.5 (scientific papers on national
level). For educational values, representativeness and visibility/clarity of the features/processes
has score of 0.5 (medium representativeness, especially for scientists), exemplarity, pedagogical
use 0.5 (existing exemplarity, but with limited pedagogical use), existing educational products 0.5
(leaflets, maps, web pages), and actual use of site for educational purposes 0.5 (site as a part of
specialized excursion (students)). For economical values, accessibility has score of 0.5 (less than
1000 m from the parking place), presence of tourist infrastructure 1 (less than 5 km tourist
facilities), and local products 0.5 (some products). For conservation values, actual threats and risks
has score of 1 (low risks and almost no threats), potential threats and risk 1 (low risks and almost
no threats), current status of a site 1 (no destruction), and legislative protection 0 (no legislative
protection). For added values, cultural values has score of 0.5 (existing cultural features but
 21

without strong relation to abiotic features), ecological values 0.5 (existing influence but not so1
important), and aesthetic values 0.5 (more than 3 colors), 0.5 (more than 3 patterns), 0.5 (3 and
more viewpoints). Then the total score of Baginda Hill according to this type of numerical
assessment is 12.5 (maximum score 18.5)
From numerical assessment sub-stage, it shows the total score for both type of numerical
assessment and then bring it to calculation and grouping in Result Analysis. For Pereira assessment
the total score is 13.66 and Kubalkov is 12.5. From the scores which could be used for the
calculation of percentage for both numerical assessments as shown in the equation 1 and equation
2.
Pereira, et al., (2007) (1)
13.66
100% = 68.3%
20
Kubalkov (2013)
12.5 (2)
100% = 67.57%
18.5
From equation 1 and equation 2, the total score from each numerical assessment shows that
Baginda Hill has range of ratio 66-100% (by using classification in Table 10) which means
Baginda Hill is classified as the group III which is more recommended for geotourism.

IV.2 Discussions
This researchs objectives are on the description of geomorphosite and comparation
between two numerical methodologies. The main focus is to take the most objective point of view
qualitatively and quantitatively about the consisting parameters in potential geomorphosites
As the result of the methods that this research used, it could be assumed that the Baginda
Hill cannot be underestimated as it is classified as Group III, which is more recommended for
geotourism.
However, there are still some obstacles ahead that need to eliminate, which are:
1. It is really hard to find the material for desk study as the lack of research and
published paper about this area.
2. The traditional ladders (as seen in the Appendix 7) that use by the visitors to go to
the top of Baginda Hill are not eligible for a long-term use as those are obsolete
supporting infrastructures that need to be renewed to the sustainable one
 22

3. There are many wild animals which is actually a double-edged sword. In one side
it could attract the visitors about the variety of fauna that can be found there, on the
other side it could also be the obstacles for the visitors to reach the top of the hill.
4. Baginda Hill is not one of most-visited tourist destination in Belitung Island.
5. The variety of hand gift in Belitung Island is not really related to the Baginda Hill.
6. The promotion and sounding about the Baginda Hill from the government or the
private sectors has not yet wholeheartedly done.

The solution for those problems should be comprehensive and chronologically applicable.
The main treatment should be firstly started by doing research therefore all the geological and
geomorphological aspects of Baginda Hill can be observed and published internationally. After
that the enlargement of its infrastructure should be built by the government, which should be
environmentally and ecologically friendly, and the support from the private sectors and also mutual
relationship with the residents to considerably accept the Baginda Hill as the geoheritage of
Belitung Island, not only an understanding but also legally and notably legitimated by all the
parties.
Moreover, the development of infrastructure and the interest of research are
comprehensively will become better in the future. Later on, as the Baginda Hill will have been
already notably as the most-visited tourism destination in Belitung Island, it would be government
and private sectors whom its base is tourism that should be the one who responsibly maintain the
interest of Baginda Hill for its aesthetical side, the promotion, and the souvenirs, not to mention,
it also needs full supports from the local residents.
 23

V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

Basically, it is really interesting to learn the geology and geomorphology of Baginda Hill
which composed by Adamellite while enjoying the panoramic view of the South-West part of
Belitung Island, which is a part of Geomorphological Unit of Steep Sloping Adamellite Intrusion
Hills.
Based on the analysis, both methods has proved that Baginda Hill is more recommended
for geotourism as its criteria and geomorphosite characterization has already sufficient.
Even though in the method already use numerical assessment as the part of quantification
stage which means less subjectivity applied, but there will always subjectivity in giving the score
to some criteria as all criteria cannot be exactly measured.
Nonetheless, the methods being used in this research need to be refined and more
thoroughly improved as the criteria for the list of assessment is not yet complete and it needs a
further discussion for the subject.
For the purpose of making the Baginda Hill to be the geoheritage of Belitung Island, it is
necessary:
- To increase the number of research and published papers,
- To give more scientific information about Baginda Hill,
- To develop the infrastructure in Baginda Hill, and
- To make sure all the parties involved understand all of the circumstances faced.
Therefore, the goal to make Baginda Hill for geotourism will really happen.
The other thing that could be suggested from this research is that there are a lot of places
in Indonesia that also have not yet been observed well which actually have many interesting
geologically and geomorphologically backgrounds for example Rammang-Rammang Hill,
Bambapuang Mountain, and Latimojong Mountain, in South Sulawesi, Indonesia.
 xi

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baharuddin and Sidarto. 1995. Geological Map of the Belitung Sheet, Sumatera. Geological
Research and Development Center. Bandung.
Barber, A. J., Crow, M. J., and Milsom, J. S. (eds) 2005. Sumatra: Geology, Resources and
Tectonic Evolution. Geological Society. London, Memoirs.
Brahmantyo, B. and Bandono. 2006. Klasifikasi Bentuk Muka Bumi (Landform) untuk Pemetaan
Geomorfologi pada Skala 1:25.000 dan Aplikasinya untuk Penataan Ruang. Jurnal
Geoaplika, Volume 1, No. 2, p. 071-078
Kubalkov, L. 2013. Geomorphosite assesment for geotourism purposes. Czech Journal of
Tourism 02/2013.
Pereira, P. 2006. Patrimnio geomorfolgico : conceptualizao, avaliao e divulgao.
Aplicao ao Parque Natural de Montesinho. PhD thesis, Departmento de Cincias da
Terra, universidade do Minho.
Pereira, P., Pereira, D. I., Alves, M. I. C. 2007. Geomorphosite assessment in Montesinho Natural
Park. Geographica Helvetica. Portugal.
Pereira, P. and Pereira, D. I. 2010. Methodological guidelines for geomorphosite assessment.
Van Bemmelen, R.W., 1949. the Geology of Indonesia, Vol. 1 A. Government Printing Office, The
Hauge, Amsterdam.
Van Zuidam, R.A., 1983. Guide to Geomorphologic Aerial Photographic Interpretation And
Mapping, ITC. Enchede, the Netherlands.
Belitung (2015, November 30). Retrieved from http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Belitung.
 xii

CURRICULUM VITAE

PERSONAL INFORMATION:

Name : Putra Herianto

Address in Jakarta
Address in Yogyakarta
Phone Number
: Jalan Manunggal 1 no.50 RT
009/012 Cibubur Ciracas
Jakarta Timur
: Pogung Kidul SIA XVI no.02
RT 02/ RW 49 Sinduadi Mlati
Sleman Yogyakarta
: 087838300432

E-mail : putra.herianto@mail.ugm.ac.id
Date of Birth : 19th June 1995
Nationality : Indonesian

PERSONAL STATEMENT:
A college student from Universitas Gadjah Mada, Majoring Geological Engineering. A
well-experienced leader with proven abilities to work in under pressure situations.
EDUCATION:
Duration Details
2012 Now Geological Engineering, Universitas
Gadjah Mada
2009 2012 SMA Negeri 28 Jakarta

ORGANIZATIONAL EXPERIENCES:
Duration Details
2015 2016 President of AAPG UGM SC
2014 2015 Head of Services and Advocacy division,
Advocacy Department, BEM KMFT UGM
2014 2015 Vice head of Students and Alumni
Department, HMTG FT UGM
2014 2015 Member of Course and Workshop
Division, AAPG UGM SC
2013 Now Student Member, SPE
2012 Now Student Member, AAPG
 xiii

QUALIFICATIONS:
A. Software

Office Software Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel,

Microsoft Power Point
Geology Software ArcGIS, Surfer, GlobalMapper, Seisee,
Petrel
Design Software CorelDraw

B. Languages:

Bahasa Indonesia Native Proficiency

English Professional Proficiency
(TOEFL predicition test score: 537)
French Limited Working Proficiency
(DELF A2)

C. Experiences:

Assistant of Basic Chemistry Geochemistry Laboratory, Geological

Engineering Department, Universitas
Gadjah Mada

CERTIFICATIONS:
Hold on Description Held by
June 2015 Certificate of Recognition as American Association of
Participant in Guest Lecture Petroleum Geologists, Universitas
Gadjah Mada and University of
and Workshop The World Pembangunan Nasional Student
after Macondo: Geological Chapter, License DHG-P-0082
Aspects of Drilling Hazard
Mitigation and
Geopressure Prediction
and Geomechanics
Analysis for Wellbore
Stability
May 2015 Certificate of Attendance in Schlumberger
Workshop Petrel
Workshop
March 2015 Certificate of Recognition as American Association of
Participant in Course Petroleum Geologists Universitas
Gadjah Mada Student Chapter,
Introduction and License PGC-P-001
Application of Petroleum
Geochemistry
 xiv

March 2015 Certificate of Recognition as Society of Petroleum Engineers

Participant in Course Low
Resistivity Log Analysis
Certificate of Recognition as
October 2014 Participant in Workshop
Well Log Analysis in
Petroleum Exploration
Universitas Gadjah mada Student
Chapter, License 15-EDU/WK-0-
PART007
American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Universitas
Gadjah Mada Student Chapter,
License WLA-P-065

September 2014 Certificate of Recognition as American Association of

Participant in One Day Petroleum Geologists, Universitas
Gadjah Mada Student Chapter,
Course Energy Summit License PED-C-011
2014, Petroleum
Exploration and
Development in Indonesia:
Opportunities and
Challenges
May 2014 Certificate of recognition as Society of Petroleum Engineers,
Participant in Workshop Universitas Gadjah Mada Student
Chapter
Wellsite Geologist
March 2014 Certificate of recognition as Society of Petroleum Engineers,
Participant in Parallel Universitas Gadjah Mada Student
Chapter
Course: Regulation and
Economic Perspectives of
Oil and Gas Industries in
Indonesia Reservoir
Evaluation and
Optimization
Unconventional Energy
Potential in Indonesia
February 2014 Certificate of recognition as Oil and Gas Intellectual Parade
Participant on Plenary 2014, Universitas Pembangunan
Nasional Veteran Yogyakarta
Discussion Rising Clean
Gas Energy Role for Green
Future
October 2013 Certificate of recognition as Society of Petroleum Engineers,
Participant in a Short Course Gadjah Mada University Student
Chapter
Introduction to enhanced
oil recovery (EOR) and its
process
March 2013 Certificate of recognition as American Association of
Participant in a Short Course Petroleum Geologists, University
of Gadjah Mada Student Chapter,
"Oil and Gas Prospects of License OAG100313-58
Eastern Indonesia"
 xv

PERSONAL INFORMATION

Name : Ichsan Ramadhan

Place&Date of Birth : Yogyakarta, February 6th 1997
Sex : Male
Religion : Islam
Blood Type :O
Nationality : Indonesian
Address : Gandok Baru 45, Condongcatur,
Depok, Sleman
Phone Number : 082153779899
Email : iramadhane@gmail.com

EDUCATION
2015- : Undergraduate Program of Geological Engineering, Gadjah Mada University, Indonesia
2012-2015 : SMAN 1 Balikpapan, Indonesia
2009-2012 : SMPN 1 Balikpapan, Indonesia
2003-2009 : SD Patra Dharma 3 Balikpapan, Indonesia

COMMITTEE EXPERIENCE
Name : SMANSA Starry Night
Description : Astronomical study, Telescope explanation, including theoretical, assembly, and using
telescope
Year : 2015
Position : Chairman
 xvi

PERSONAL SKILL
Classical Guitar
Doodling

ACHIEVEMENT
Bronze Medal OSN Kebumian 2014
Active Participant of OSN Geografi 2013
Quarter Finalist of Medical Science and Application for South East Asias High School Students
2014
Participant of Student Guitar Competition 2011
Distinction Grade of International Competitions and Assessments for Schools 2011, Subject
Mathematics
Credit Grade of International Competitions and Assessments for Schools 2011, Subject Science
Second Place of SUKEN Test Period IV Level 5 2010
First Place of Bridge in Wawali Cup 3 Balikpapan 2011
First Place of Bridge in Piala Wakil Walikota Balikpapan II 2009
Merit Grade on Grade 4 Guitar by The Association Board
 xvii

APPENDICES

horizon (black). (Personal

Documentation)

Appendix 1. The view facing to the West

from the East side of Baginda Hill, it
shows a geomorphological unit, which
is Unit of Steep Sloping Adamellite
Intrusion Hills (yellow). It also shows
the roads directing to the Hill.
(Personal Documentation)
Appendix 3. The view facing to the South-
West from Baginda Hill, it shows two
geomorphological units, which are
Unit of Steep Sloping Adamellite
Intrusion Hills (yellow) and Unit of
Gently Sloping Adamellite Intrusion
Plain (Red). It also shows an ocean
horizon (black). (Personal
Documentation)

Appendix 2. The view facing to the East from

Baginda Hill, it shows two
geomorphological units, which are
Unit of Steep Sloping Adamellite
Intrusion Hills (yellow) and Unit of Appendix 4. The view facing to the East from
Gently Sloping Adamellite Intrusion Baginda Hill, it shows two
Plain (Red). It also shows an ocean geomorphological units, which are
 xviii

Unit of Steep Sloping Adamellite

Intrusion Hills (yellow) and Unit of
Gently Sloping Adamellite Intrusion
Plain (Red). It also shows an ocean
horizon (black). (Personal
Documentation)
Appendix 6. The view facing to the South
from Baginda Hill, it shows two
geomorphological units, which are
Unit of Steep Sloping Adamellite
Intrusion Hills (yellow) and Unit of
Gently Sloping Adamellite Intrusion
Plain (Red). It also shows an ocean
horizon (black). (Personal
Documentation)
Appendix 5. The view facing to the East from
the West side of Baginda Hill, it shows
two geomorphological units, which
are Unit of Steep Sloping Adamellite
Intrusion Hills (yellow) and Unit of
Gently Sloping Adamellite Intrusion
Plain (Red). It also shows the
appearance of both Laki Hill and
Cewek Hill (Personal Documentation)

Appendix 7. The ladders are using commonly

by the tourists and local residents to
reach the top of Baginda Hill (Personal
Documentation)
 x

Appendix 8. The Adamellite Baginda, which

mainly consists of quartz, feldspar,
plagioclase, biotite, and hornblende. It
also shows some joints (red) within the
rocks (Personal Documentation)