WILDLIFE TOURISM: the great Indian green trick?

     There were shouts across vehicles, and even more excitement when it was discovered that she had two cubs in tow. I knew it was futile to calm the people in my vehicle. The ones with the vantage point refused to budge. For all practical purposes, these tourists were shouting and behaving much the same as visitors watching tigers in a zoo. Amidst this chaos, the mother stood cautiously at the edge of the vegetation; the cubs crouched some 10 m. behind. Silently, the tigress turned towards the bushes, her rust-gold coat blending quickly with the shrubbery. The cubs followed. And then they were gone.
The people were disappointed at not being able to see the tigers out in the open. I was disappointed with the people.
     Today, tourism is ubiquitous in the best sanctuaries and national parks and this is fast becoming the principal means by which people are able to experience and interact with wild nature. The Corbett and Ranthambhore Tiger Reserves, in the north, have their counterparts in the Nagarahole and Bandipur National Parks of Karnataka and Periyar in Kerala where people with disposable incomes visit in increasing numbers. With a high concentration of Asiatic elephants or significant populations of tigers, such reserves offer a huge wildlife tourism potential since large charismatic mammals can be sighted with little difficulty.

TOURISM VS. WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
     So, are wildlife reserves meant for wild animals, or for the entertainment of humans? Is there a link between promoting tourism and wildlife conservation? During my work in both Nagarahole and Bandipur, I have seen that though the volume of park-based tourism has substantially increased, there are few benefits that have flowed to the forest or wildlife from tourism entrepreneurs. The private sector, the main engine of tourism development, contributes very little, apart from meagre entry fees. On the contrary, new roads and view lines, being constructed to facilitate tourism, are fragmenting more wildlife habitats every day, leading to increased disturbance.
     “In the monsoons, mud roads in tourism areas are badly damaged by resort vehicles making the mobility of departmental vehicles for protection duty difficult," says Sunil Panwar, Assistant Conservator of Forests, Nagarahole.
     In Nagarahole, the government had set conditions that each resort should ensure maintenance of two anti-poaching camps, but this is not being seen in practice. A mandatory distance of 30 m. is to be maintained between each vehicle while watching wildlife; this guideline, too, is ignored. Despite this, day by day, there is pressure to permit new resorts to operate in Nagarahole.  In many areas, wildlife tourism has also led to negative socio-cultural impacts resulting in conflicts between local communities and investors, and consequent animosity towards wildlife conservation. 

TOURISM FOR WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
     This said, I would add that wildlife tourism has the potential to be a useful tool that could be synergised with wildlife conservation. But for this to happen, a complete overhaul is required. A good first step would be to enforce existing laws and policies so that the worst impacts of tourism are subdued. Tourism is a lucrative business. Hotels and resorts, restaurants, souvenir shops, travel agents and others who benefit directly or indirectly from wildlife tourism, should contribute directly towards wildlife protection, perhaps through a distinct Protected Area Conservation Tax or some such instrument that benefits the local forest department and its staff.
     Put simply, tourism owes it to the nation to help protect destinations and the animals that constitute such a lucrative source of income. And this income should, ideally, benefit local communities directly so that their lives are improved and their relationship with the parks is less antagonistic.
     Estimates suggest that wildlife tourism is growing at 10 to 12 per cent annually in India.  This is when people should be sitting together to ensure that low-impact tourism, in consonance with Protected Area management, is the order of the day. In its current form, what passes for wildlife tourism lacks focus, discipline and sensitivity to wildlife conservation and to local cultures. Wildlife landscapes should be seen as outdoor educational classrooms rather than recreational locations. Undoubtedly, well-implemented, scientific and environmentally sustainable wildlife tourism can win public support for conservation. But this should follow scientific guidelines and we must have trained, motivated education staff employed by both government and private sectors. The true test of eco-tourism should be its ability to motivate visitors to move from passive appreciation to concern and then action to protect our threatened natural heritage.
NGOs or academic institutions can provide technical and educational support to effective wildlife tourism efforts through planning, monitoring and research. Additionally, scientifically-designed programmes for guides, safari drivers, and other support services are vital and this is where NGOs could play a very positive role. 

NEW INITIATIVES
     The activities of three eco-development committees in the Periyar Tiger Reserve (PTR) are examples that should be emulated. My research on the India Eco-development Project (IEDP) at Periyar provided me with close insights into their work. The local Mannan, Paliyan and Urali tribals, and former poachers and timber smugglers directly manage a part of the tourism activity and distribute the benefits between themselves. This eco-tourism activity, the flag bearer of the IEDP, provided a source of primary occupation to about 1.5 per cent of the targeted 5,540 households, which goes to show that this can work; and that well-managed eco-tourism can bring revenue and provide sustainable livelihoods to some local communities. However, it would be a mistake to presume that this can be scaled up through replication of such activities in the whole of Periyar Tiger Reserve or in all PAs. These activities need specific, thoughtful planning and motivated staff to implement them.  
     Novel ideas that can provide viable economic development alternatives for local communities, based on tourism, are urgently required. At places such as Nagarahole, where forest-dwelling communities have been resettled outside the park, they could still benefit from low-impact tourism activities. People from such communities would make excellent guides and many could find gainful employment as guards too. The more entrepreneurial among them could be trained to carry out guided walks in reserved forests adjacent to the national park for those who wish to step off the beaten track. Coffee plantations with natural tree cover are, of course, already popular as home-stays and they are good destinations for birding and watching small animals.

WINNING SUPPORT
     The key focus of wildlife tourism should be on winning supporters for conservation. This must offer economic benefits to locals whose leadership and skills need to be honed in ways that enable some to earn greater incomes than can be offered to cooks, drivers, gardeners, or cleaners. Essentially, livelihoods need to offer better economic security so that people themselves move away from options such as marginal agriculture and animal husbandry. Wherever possible, local communities must own tourism facilities, or have a distinct share in the profits.
     This is new territory for the authorities too, and we must therefore be open to new scientific guidelines and polices that direct wildlife tourism to go beyond conventional tourism.  For instance, carrying capacity is undefined for most of our PAs. This capacity must not be determined by politicians or bureaucrats, but rather by ecologists who have a better understanding of how forest ecosystems work. Enforcement is poor. This is a fact. Fortunately, the National Tiger Conservation Authority has brought in new guidelines to restrict tourism activities in tiger reserves. These need to be implemented effectively and if this is done, it is the tourism industry that will be the first beneficiary of the rejuvenated biodiversity that is bound to follow.
     In the past few decades, we have seen almost every kind of tourism wrapped in a veneer of green. This cannot be allowed, or conflicts between conservationists and the tourism industry are inevitable. After all, people will continue to visit parks only if the forest is alive with wildlife. Similarly, cornering all the benefits of tourism by the ‘big boys' will prove to be counter productive. Responsible visitors want to see their money benefiting communities. They want to know that their money helps wildlife. This must be the very purpose of tourism. 

WHAT IS ECO-TOURISM?
     The term eco-tourism first appeared in the 1970s but became a buzz word in the early ‘90s in western countries. The Quebec Declaration (UNEP/WTO 2002) suggested five criteria to define eco-tourism, which are: nature-based product, minimal impact management, environmental education; and contribution to conservation and the local community. In India, tourism to wildlife destinations in the garb of eco-tourism is already a popular concept, however the term is by and large misused. In practice, it is used as an ‘eco-sell' marketing tool. The terms used are numerous: eco-tour, eco-travel, eco-adventure, eco-safari. Google the word ‘eco-tourism, India' and one gets a plethora of websites claiming to be involved in eco-tourism. A more scientific explanation for eco-tourism is “environmentally responsible travel to natural areas, in order to enjoy and appreciate nature, promote conservation, have a low visitor impact and provide for beneficially active socio-economic involvement of local peoples." It can be distinguished from other forms of tourism by its emphasis on conservation, education, traveller responsibility and active community participation.