The Unfenced Desert Towards a strategy for eco ... - Nwrc.gov.sa

infringements, environmental damage or other management problems, or even just
acting as wildlife observers to provide information on the status and distribution of key
species.
With increased local community appreciation of and support for the protected area there
may be a decrease in poaching and other violations, and prevention of such impacts may
become more a community concern.
In a wider sense, community support for the protected area and awareness of the need to
conserve natural resources to maintain tourist revenue will steer development since
tourism would effectively be one development option. Without ecotourism the protected
area may become threatened by unsustainable development along its boundaries.
Does the above list of benefits sound familiar? It mirrors the challenges facing protected
areas under the new management paradigm of sustainable development, as outlined
earlier. So, is that our answer? Will ecotourism solve all the problems of protected areas?
Not quite that simple. Protected areas are inherently sensitive sites; increased visitor
levels will have inevitable negative impacts at a number of levels. Such impacts may be
direct, arising from the presence of the tourists, or indirect, due to the infrastructure
supporting the industry (Ceballos-Lascurain 1996). These negative impacts can lead to
environmental degradation, economic inequity, and sociological change (reviewed in Boo
1990; Ceballos-Lascurain 1996; Roe et al. 1997; and references therein).
Impacts of Tourism
Environmental impacts
Local scale impacts may be divided into indirect impacts, caused by the infrastructure
created to support tourism, and direct impacts caused by the presence of tourists
themselves (Ceballos-Lascurain 1996). Indirect impacts will be in common with any form
of development and may include loss of natural habitats, changes in flora and fauna in
disturbed areas, changes to water catchments and water-flow patterns, increased erosion
following loss of stabilising vegetation, site levelling and quarrying, and increased
pollution from fumes, waste, noise and light. Direct impacts include impacts on minerals,
fossils and soils, impacts on water resources, vegetation and animals, and sanitation and
aesthetic impacts (Ceballos-Lascurain 1996).
The degree to which visitors have an impact on the natural environment will vary
according to the number, sensitivity and activities of the visitors. High volumes of even
well-meaning tourists may exceed environmental carrying capacities and inflict damage
through repetition, for instance, compacting and erosion of soil along trails. The
Galapagos National Park attract people who are interested in seeing wildlife and are
sensitive to its vulnerability; however damage has been inflicted on the Park due to quota
revision which allowed 25,000 visitors, rather than the 12,000 visitor-limit necessary to
avoid major impacts (Alderman 1994); actual visitor numbers reached nearly 42,000 in
1989 (Wallace 1993). Canadian National Parks (Guardian)
Social and Cultural Impacts
Social and cultural effects of tourism include unsustainable changes in the structure of
local economies, in particular reliance on tourist dollars and therefore increased
vulnerability to changing patterns of tourism due to a number of factors, including the
following.
♦ Local changes in tourist volumes or movements, e.g. when a walking track in the
Annapurna area of Nepal was upgraded for vehicles the numbers of visitors moving
through the area on foot dwindled almost to nothing (Garforth 1994). With the road
able to be covered in a matter of hours rather than 2-3 days, trekkers no longer
needed to find food and accommodation along the way. Consequently the local
people, who had grown to rely on revenue from providing these services to tourists,
were effectively out of business.
16