Global Ecotourism Conference Oslo 16th May 2007 Theme II: Ecotourism and Nature Conservation II.5. Ecotourism and its Impacts on Wildlife Kolja Zimmermann (M.Sc.;M.A.) Programme Coordinator Sustainable Hunting Tourism k.zimmermann@cic-wildlife.org International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation www.cic-wildlife.org
“Guidelines for Sustainable Hunting and Fishing as Part of Tourism Activities: Biodiversity, Conservation and Tourism” Abstract: In many regions of the world no sufficient economic alternatives exist to ordinary forms of land use. Hunting tourism1 does indeed, under specific circumstances, present such economically viable alternative, like Ecotourism, and also represents a practical tool for sustainable development and conservation. The expression “use it or loose it” stands for a notable approach to sustainable use and wildlife conservation at the same time – yet, it is not very popular among the critical hunting opposition! In what way do we need to manage hunting tourism so that it will fulfill the criteria for sustainable development? In the context of international and national provisions and legal requirements for sustainable use (e.g. CBD Guidelines on Biodiversity and Tourism Development, as well as the CBD Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines for the Sustainable Use of Biodiversity), hunting tourism has to meet suitable criteria, as is the case for any other form of land use, like Ecotourism, today. However, those criteria do not exist yet. The International Council of Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC) is an international nongovernmental organisation and a politically independent advisory body aiming to preserve wild game and promoting its sustainable use. The CIC has realised the lack of standards in hunting tourism and consequently launched a Programme “Sustainable Hunting Tourism” for the development of Principles, Guidelines, criteria and indicators. This programme is based on a wide stakeholder approach and combines knowledge and expertise of a number of the worlds leading organizations in hunting, tourism and conservation. As a first step, it was decided to come up with practical guidelines and principles that will be tailored to specific regions. Key words: sustainable use, hunting tourism, biodiversity and conservation, principles, guidelines, criteria, sustainable hunting tourism, CIC 1
Synonymously used are: hunting abroad, conservation hunting, recreational hunting, trophy hunting, sport hunting, safari hunting
0. Introduction Few other topics are discussed more controversially among conservationists then trophy hunting and hunting tourism in general and their contribution to conservation. Within the last decade, experts of wildlife and tourism sciences acknowledged that hunting tourism offers a number of outstanding monetary and ecological benefits to rural areas. Some experts are even convinced that hunting tourism is a special form of Ecotourism. For our common understanding and before we can approach the main topic of this lecture, it is important to clarify the relationship between hunting/fishing and tourism as well as Ecotourism. What are the links between hunting and tourism? The following points need to be taken into account in the Discussion bellow: a. How is Hunting Tourism integrated in the market of tourism? b. The market of Hunting Tourism c. Impacts, risks and benefits d. How to make hunting tourism more sustainable? 1. Discussion a. How is hunting integrated into the tourism market? How do we have to understand Hunting Tourism and what are the links between hunting and tourism? For our common understanding it is important to clarify certain aspects of both, hunting and tourism. Let’s not forget: Hunting is an original form of land use like forestry, agriculture, fisheries and even mining. It has significance in different regions of the world as a form of subsistence and non–subsistence land use. Hunting is practiced by locals and takes place under different types of landownership (private, community and state land). However, it is always a form of consumptive use of natural resources (wildlife/game) and a part of local heritage. In some areas hunting became a practice of non-residents only. Non-resident hunters can be characterised as people who undertake great efforts in order to hunt at a certain destination. Therefore, hunting abroad is tourism and actually forms part of the wider tourism market. In other words, each non-residential hunter – regardless of how many kilometres he/she travels – is a tourist. Compared to hunting, tourism is a rather new form of land use. Hunting tourism, in fact, is influenced by many factors of the tourism market. Tourists, even hunting tourists, have many different motivations for travelling. There are strong links with nature tourism, in particular culture, rural, and adventure tourism, but also with the market niche of Ecotourism. Following this consideration, the definition of tourism, even Ecotourism, can also be applied to hunting tourism under particular circumstances. The hunting activity might be the main purpose of a trip, but nonetheless, it is only one part of the entire touristic product. The elements of tourism allow hunters, to hunt abroad. Hunting tourism brings important benefits to rural areas, which have basically economical value. Furthermore, hunting generates ecological and sociocultural values (ZIMMERMANN 2004, 2007).
b. The market of Hunting Tourism? Hunting tourism is a business with a specific demand, and shows the same characteristics like all other tourism markets. Approximately 4 to 6 million hunters are willing to travel abroad for a hunting experience. However, no reliable numbers exist for demand and supply. There are different options to plan a hunting trip that can highly differ regarding the motivation. The supply is composed of different elements of a trip, namely transportation, local mobility, activities in the destination, food and accommodation, services and goods as well as the activity itself, which is hunting. It is offered by private landowners, hunting tour operators, communities etc.. Hunting trip providers can be grouped in two categories: the tour operators, which operate in the hunting destination, and the travel agencies, which use to operate outside the hunting destination. Compared to the tourism market, professional tourism management is not always visible within the hunting tourism sector. The arrangement of a specific hunting trip is done by use of existing offers (“hunting arrangements”) and according to the clients’ individual desire. The question is, as to what extend hunting arrangements are shaped according to the desires of the individual client. Furthermore, it often remains unclear how the revenues of a hunting trip are divided. It seems that only 1/3 of the revenues benefit local people - which is not much. The market gathers a high number of stakeholders. Working with and developing this market therefore involves collaboration with lots of different players and organisations. In many cases it is not actually clear, whether hunting tourism meets the requirements of sustainability (ZIMMERMANN 2004, WOLLSCHEID 2006). c. Impacts, risks and benefits Hunting Tourism offers lots of opportunities and potentials for regional (rural) development. Hunting tourism also impacts the resources directly as well as indirectly. Hunting is a consumptive use of a natural resource as it directly impacts wildlife populations. If done the wrong way, it causes disturbance, disrupts normal behaviour and potentially affects mortality and reproductive success of game. Tourism is seen as a non-consumptive use of a natural resource. Besides its positive impacts, tourism also has the capacity of causing damage to the environment and society if not well managed. Risks and threats occur where proper management is lacking in both cases. As stated earlier, hunting tourism brings important outstanding benefits to rural areas and generates ecological and socio-cultural values. There is, however, a lack of reliable data concerning the market of hunting tourism. Best practice examples and good practical experience in wildlife utilisation as a conservation tool can be found worldwide, regardless whether one looks at North America (“The North American Wildlife Conservation Model”), Europe, Asia (e.g. Pakistan) or Africa (Namibia, South Africa and Tanzania). All off these examples have one thing in common: they proof the successful conservation of wildlife through hunting tourism. A prominent best practice example can be found in Tanzania http://www.wildlifebaldus.com/start.html; http://www.unep-wcmc.org/sites/wh/selous.html. The Selous Game Reserve generates 2001 3.9 Mio. US-$ per annum from hunting tourism (3.6 Mio. US-$ 92%) and photo-tourism (0.3 Mio. US-$ - 8%) (BALDUS et al. 2003; http://www.wildlifebaldus.com/start.html). Comparing the revenues through hunting and photo tourism, one sees that hunting tourists are willing to pay a multiple amount of money! The Government allows retaining half of this amount to sustain the management of the Game Reserve. This concept allows the Reserve to almost finance itself, which is a best practice example of sustainable finance. First, hunting tourism serves as tool for wildlife management. Second, the revenues enable anti poaching campaigns, guarantee the employment of local people and thereby increase awareness of local people, which at the same time decreases poaching. Third, the wildlife population in the Game Reserve was increased. Interesting enough, also the diversity
of naturally occurring wildlife species (herbivores, carnivores, avifauna, etc.) is, compared with other protected areas where no hunting tourism is organised, higher. 2001
Hunting Tourism
Photo Tourism
ÎŁ Tourism
Number (n)
482
4.802
5.284
Revenue ($)
3.612.000
299.000
3.911.000
7.512
62
Revenue for the state ($)
1.801.000
-
Revenue for the Selous ($)
1.811.000
299.000
2.110.000
86
14
100
Revenue/ Tourist ($/n)
Proportion (%)
BALDUS et al. 2003 (http://www.wildlife-baldus.com/start.html), slightly modified by ZIMMERMANN 2007
The following speculative calculation might illustrate the potentials of hunting tourism. Let’s compare the impacts of 500 hunting tourists with the number of photo tourists needed to achieve the revenue of 3.6 Mio. US-$. To achieve same, 30.000 photo tourists would be needed. This would result in a use of fresh water, gasoline, and waste production and pollution, which is 60 times higher. In this regard, one should also think about the carrying capacity of the game reserve, the pressure on the environment and the communities etc.. Against the background of the actual discussion about climate change, this would indeed be a disastrous imagination. While it would need 2 aircrafts (round trip, e.g. Boeing 767) to transport 500 hunting tourists in and out, it would require 120 aircrafts (round trip) to transport 30.000 photo tourists to the same destination. Leaving the aspect of hunting (consumptive use of wildlife) aside, the footsteps of photo tourists have, compared with those of hunting tourists, a much higher impact on the environment and rural communities. It is evident that the combination of tourism and hunting leads to a win-win situation and results in synergetic effects. The value of wildlife is increasing, which offers incentives for both, wildlife and habitat conservation. d. How to make hunting tourism more sustainable? An assessment of hunting tourism does not bring up enough evidence for the overall sustainability of the market. A specific management is needed to minimize/avoid negative impacts of tourism and resource use in general on wildlife and biodiversity, and to maximize benefits. Respective experts point out that hunting tourism can fulfil requirements of sustainability. Some experts are even convinced that hunting tourism is a special form of Ecotourism. The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro (1992) applied the concept of sustainable development. This concept requires that every use of a resource needs to take account of economical, ecological and socio-cultural interests. The currently practiced form of hunting tourism has to fulfil this postulate. Back in 2002, the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) agreed that also the private sector (companies) are bound to this concept and have the responsibility to implement it. Against this background, the currently practiced form of hunting tourism has to fulfil this postulate. Framework guidelines and standards are needed to combine all three different interests. During the last years, the sector of tourism has developed different concepts for environmentally friendly forms of tourism. A so-called “environmental
management” can assure that negative impacts of tourism are reduced to a minimum. Which criteria are needed for hunting tourism? In the context of international and national provisions and legal requirements for sustainable use, hunting tourism has to meet suitable criteria, as is the case for any other form of land use today. However, those criteria do not exist yet. In what way do we need to manage hunting tourism so that it will serve as tool for sustainable development? A number of regional and global initiatives do exist that have one aim in common: to further sustainable use of all resources (http://www.cbd.int/default.shtml). Global level The Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) has developed two very significant Guidelines: the Guidelines on Biodiversity and Tourism Development and the Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines for the Sustainable Use of Biodiversity (AAPG). The Guidelines on Biodiversity and Tourism Development (http://www.cbd.int/programmes/socio-eco/tourism/guidelines.asp): CBD recognizes that sustainable tourism can provide significant benefits to biodiversity conservation. The guidelines cover all forms of tourism. Special focus lies on indigenous and local communities. Tourism can also play a crucial role in incorporating sustainable use and equity strategies within and around protected areas. The Convention furthermore asks for feedback on the effectiveness of these Guidelines. The Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines for the Sustainable Use of Biodiversity (AAPG) (http://www.cbd.int/programmes/socio-eco/use/addis.asp) were developed and finally adopted by the Parties to the CBD in February 2004. The CIC, like IUCN, was right from the beginning a partner in this process and assisted in the development of the AAPG. The AAPG in fact represent the latest state of the art on sustainable use of biodiversity, and provide a framework for assisting stakeholders on all geographical levels, as well as institutional levels such as the UN System, Conventions, Governments, development agencies, local and indigenous communities, resource managers, the private sector and NGOs, on how to ensure that their uses of biodiversity will not lead to its longterm decline. Both Guidelines, therefore, have almost similar aims. Sustainability will be enhanced if there is: • supportive & linked governance at all levels, • Stakeholder involvement, • empowerment & accountability of local users (particularly indigenous communities), • adaptive management using science, monitoring, local knowledge and timely feedbacks, • equitable sharing of benefits for local people, • transparency & international co-operation, • public awareness of the benefits • financing of conservation European level The Federal Environment Agency of Austria has established Guidelines for sustainable hunting back in 2001 (http://www.biodiv.at/chm/jagd/english/criteria.htm), which also served as basis for the Guidelines for sustainable hunting in Europe, developed and published by the European Sustainable Use Specialist Group (ESUSG) of IUCN in September 2006 (http://www.iucn.org/themes/ssc/susg/). Right now, the Council of Europe is developing a Charter on Hunting and Biodiversity. Even though there are good approaches and examples in place, a lack of instruments to measure and prove the sustainability is evident. The biggest problem connected with these approaches is that they do not meet the requirements of the market.
National level Examples for guidelines, criteria and indicators developed on a national level can, for instance, be found in Sweden: the tourism provider Nature’s Best (http://www.naturesbest.nu) – a joint network of now more then 50 tour operators – offers more then 100 certified products. Three out of these 100 products offer hunting trips that fulfil the “sustainability criteria” of Nature’s Best. These criteria are developed according to the special Swedish circumstances and are by now a best practice example for Ecotourism recognised even globally. The International Council of Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC) (www.cic-wildlife.org) has realised the lack of standards in hunting tourism and consequently launched a Programme “Sustainable Hunting Tourism” for the development of Principles, Guidelines, criteria and indicators. In August 2006, a two days think-tank workshop was organized by CIC at the IUCN Regional Office for Europe in Brussels. This gathering brought together experts from the hunting administration, the tourism sector, scientists and game managers from Europe, the US and South Africa, as well as experts from CITES, IUCN and TRAFFIC. During the subsequent analysis of strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities of the hunting tourism market, an outline for a Sustainable Hunting Tourism Programme was drafted. The SHT programme is based on a wide stakeholder approach and is supposed to combine knowledge and expertise of a number of the worlds leading organizations in hunting and conservation. As a first step, it was decided to develop practical guidelines and principles that would translate the globally accepted Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines for the Sustainable Use of Biodiversity and the Guidelines on Biodiversity and Tourism Development into the needs of the hunting sector worldwide. The first Draft of a set of practical principles will be published in the course of 2007. A next step will then be to develop criteria and practical indicators on a regional and national basis in a participatory process together with the stakeholders. Regions such as Southern Africa, Central Asia etc. will be in the focus for the development and implementation of these guidelines and criteria. 2. Lessons learned For the better understanding of hunting tourism, it is important to note: • hunting is an original form of using a natural renewable resource (game) • hunting is a tool for wildlife management • hunting can be a leisure-time activity • hunting tourism is a market segment within the wider tourism market • therefore, hunting tourism has to be seen as a complex land use strategy. The market for hunting tourism can be characterised in the following way: • No trustworthy data is available about the demand. • The supply is strongly influenced by the variable desires of the costumers. • The design of a hunting trip depends on the tour operators and travel agents. • The tourism providers decide on the extent of the local benefits, the cash flow and added value. • The business is not always managed by professionals with sufficient knowledge of tourism management. • The market is not transparent. • The number of various stakeholders is relatively high.
For the assessment of hunting tourism, it will be important to know that: • combining tourism and hunting results in a win-win-situation and produces synergetic effects. • hunting tourism is a small-scale tourism but can offer a number of outstanding monetary, ecological and socio-cultural benefits to rural areas world wide. • hunting tourism builds awareness at local communities. • hunting tourism increases the value of wildlife. • hunting tourism can be one tool for conservation („use it or loose it“). 3. Conclusion Hunting tourism and Ecotourism has a number of similar elements and often takes place in the same area. Hunting tourism achieves a number of benefits and generates high revenues. At the same time its negative impacts are very low. The existing hunting tourism has to be managed in a sustainable manner. Standards for sustainable hunting tourism do not exist; they have to be developed by regional stakeholders. The CIC and its partners will support this process. Well managed hunting tourism meets the concept of Ecotourism. Ideally, it is both, a use of wildlife and a conservation tool. Therefore, it is an alternative form of land use, which needs to be considered seriously. It has to be discussed in more depth, in what way sustainable hunting tourism will be accepted by the Ecotourism community. Nevertheless, successful management concepts for Ecotourism can represent best practise examples for the development of sustainable hunting tourism. On the other hand, sustainable hunting tourism can also play a leading role in preparing the ground for other Ecotourism products. Sustainable approaches like Ecotourism and sustainable hunting tourism can be used in the same region – this is practiced in many countries (Austria, Germany, Sweden or Namibia and South Africa). For sustainable regional development (e.g. in and around protected areas), it is indeed fundamental to combine different solutions like consumptive and non-consumptive use in order to maximize the revenues from natural resources. For decision makers, it is most important to keep this relationship in mind.
For further Information, please contact k.zimmermann@cic-wildlife.org International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation CIC Administrative Office H-2092 BUDAKESZI P.O. Box 82 Hungary Telephone: +36 23 453 830 Fax: +36 23 453 832 Email: office@cic-wildlife.org