Tourism versus conservation

Eco-tourism is relatively unknown here. This is because tourism, in the Indian context, is still recreation-based with no crucial distinction between resorts, pilgrim centres and game reserves. On the occasion of World Tourism Day, which falls on September 27, S. THEODORE BHASKARAN examines the dangers eco-systems face when people get out of hand.

PRINCE SADRDRUDDIN AGA GHAN, former United Nations diplomat and an environmentalist, once said that of all the "isms" of the 20th Century, we might find that "tourism" was the worst. "Alp Action", an outfit he formed to save the Alps from degradation, identified tourism as the major threat to alpine ecosystem. The Manila Declaration on World Tourism, released after the World Tourism Conference in 1989, pointed out the threatening relationship between tourism and environmental degeneration. The danger posed by tourism to ecosystems is demonstrated in many countries, including India.

A few months ago at Thekkady, Kerala, I watched a boat with at least 100 tourists move close to a herd of elephants on the bank. Going to one side, the visitors shouted at the animals to provoke them. Later, when the boat reached the jetty, all the men got out and squatted, along the water's edge, as if in a bizarre ritual, and urinated. At the Vedanthangal sanctuary, Chingelpet, Tamil Nadu, buses go right up the lake bund, disturbing the nesting birds and shattering the serenity of the place. In Ranganathittu, Karnataka, a mixed heronery near Srirangapatna, boatloads of tourists are taken close to the nesting birds. In some large sanctuaries, at the height of the season, there are so many private vehicles inside the sanctuary that you begin to wonder whether you are on Anna Salai, Chennai, or inside a wildlife habitat. The peering, prodding, picture-taking, noisy tourists scare the animals and birds.

What is forgotten in all these situations is that sanctuaries exist for animals, birds and plants. Tourism can only be incidental, to be accommodated only as far as it does not pose any hazard to the creatures there and that animals do not take kindly to human intrusion. We humans, in our arrogance, seem to consider all creatures exist only for our benefit and pleasure. The primary purpose of setting up sanctuaries is to conserve all living forms in that area. It is their habitat and any intrusion has to be unobtrusive.

Tourism in a wildlife area has to be very different from the conventional mode. Eco-tourism respects nature and aims at minimal impact. A mere trip into the wilderness is not eco- tourism. Often such visits have a harmful effect on wildlife if one is not sensitive to nature. The danger inherent in wildlife tourism is that it could destroy the very resource it depends on - wildlife. The fragility of an ecosystem could collapse with the impact of thousands of tourists who do not respect wildlife. (For more on this see Ecotourism: Potentials and Pitfalls, Elizabeth Boo, World Wide Fund for Nature, U.S., 1990).

In our country, the emphasis is still on recreation-based tourism. We do not make the crucial distinction between resorts, monuments, pilgrim centres, picnic spots and sanctuaries. Every place is a picnic spot with freedom to litter and to be noisy. Visitors are not told how to conduct themselves inside a wildlife refuge - that they have to be totally silent, should not wear bright clothes, and not spray on fragrances. We are impervious to the environmental and ecological implications of tourism. Nature- based tourism is relatively unknown in India.

Tourists want to be shown something during their visit to a sanctuary. Till a few years ago, there used to be a "lion show" for tourists in the Gir sanctuary, Gujarat. A domestic buffalo was tied to a tree and the lions came, killed and ate it. Tourists who paid for the show could watch the lions feed. Wildlife researchers pointed out the damaging effect of this practice on the behaviour of the lions. Fortunately, the practice was stopped. The desire to see something spectacular is the cause of trouble. When we go into the jungle, we have to be conscious that we are trespassing into the habitat of wildlife and that sighting them depends on chance.

Tourism requires vehicular traffic inside sanctuaries and for this you need roads. What is the impact of a road in a forest? If splits the wilderness into two, creates a barrier for the movement of animals and fragments the habitat. It provides a conduit for exotic vegetation. In many of our sanctuaries you can see parthenium all along the roadside. When you lay a road in a forest, you expose the soil to wind, rain and sun. So it dries up the land and this increases the chances of fire, both natural and manmade. Roads make the forests accessible not only to tourists but also to the timber mafia, poachers and film crews. In some of the world's best-managed sanctuaries, in Kenya, New Zealand and Australia, there are no roads, just dirt tracts used only for management. Visitors have to either walk or ride on horses. In some sanctuaries, such as Kaziranga, Assam, you can go only on elephant back.

Just as the number of animals that can be sustained by a given patch of forest is limited - wildlife biologists refer to this as "the carrying capacity" - so is the number of tourists who can visit a sanctuary. It has to be determined how many tourists can be inside a sanctuary, at any given time, without damaging it. And the comforts provided should be minimal. The higher the comfort level, the heavier will be the impact, in terms of pollution, demand for water, power and staff required. The litter left behind by tourists, particularly plastic bags, is a threat to wildlife. There is one more problem. To run nature tourism packages on sound professional lines, you require inter- departmental cooperation. Departments like forest, tourism, transport and fisheries have to coordinate and this is still a distant dream in India.

Advocates of tourism in sanctuaries point out the situation in African countries where wildlife tourism has emerged as a big industry. After visiting a few sanctuaries in Africa, including the fabled Masai Mara, I realised there could be no comparison. The African savannah and dry scrub jungle support a vast number of each species. In some spots you see herds of animals as far as the eye can see. But in India, the absolute number of each species is dangerously low. There may be 400 lions, 700 rhinos, 40 Sangai deer and so on. Also here we deal with fragile ecosystems, like rain forests and mangrove swamps. Add to this the fact that some of our national parks are just a few square kilometres, like the Guindy National Park, Chennai, or the Borivili National Park, Mumbai. But most important, African wildlife refuges are run on professional lines, with unrelaxing standards. No private vehicles or thoroughfares inside a protected area. The cottages are of low height, much below the tree canopies. Only colours that merge with the forests are used. All signboards are on bare wood, with the letters burnt in. The guides are knowledgable. In the Masai Mara, the youngster who brought tea saw me watching birds outside my tent. Pouring the tea, he asked me if I had spotted the Tsavo purple-banded sunbird yet and went on to describe it in the lingo of a seasoned birder.

Such professionalism is absent in Indian sanctuaries, though there are a few exceptions. One such is the Kabini Lodges on the fringe of Nagarhole National Park in Karnataka. It is wildlife tourism run competently. Knowledgable guides, a light impact on the ecosystem, sensitivity to the environment and sound management. I am not familiar with the nature resort at Vythiri in the Wynad hills of Kerala, which I hear is quite good in this respect.

The impact of tourism will be light if the visitor is aware that a sanctuary exists basically for the various life forms there. Those who take this ideology seriously, and go trekking, back- packing, bird watching, camping, river-running or just to be in the wilderness, actually heighten their awareness and find the experience life enhancing.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Features
Previous : The making of Mirabehn