| |
 |  |  |  |  |  |
|   | ||
|
Most "ecotour" companies use the label, but do little or nothing to preserve biodiversity or significantly help local people. While some tour companies use a portion of their profits to support conservation, even this is frequently used ineffectively. Often a developed-world company will send a donation to a non-profit in their own country. While this enables the company to receive a deserved tax-deductible receipt, it rarely has as much impact in preserving biodiversity as supporting an effective conservation project directly. Some nature and birding tour companies donate to projects in the countries they are working to preserve, but much of this goes to research. Research, especially single-species research, is interesting but often ineffective as an efficient tool for conservation. Much single species research takes place in the developing world, where most species occur. While one can argue that this research provides data to convince governments in the necessity of preserving an area, in fact the political will is rarely influenced by research when it comes to setting up preserves and parks. What good does it do to research a species if its habitat is later deforested or otherwise degraded to the point where the species can no longer survive? With the rapid rate of habitat and species loss worldwide, research is usually a luxury we cannot afford. We need to save habitat, and once that is accomplished we can study it if we like. Research can be an effective tool for conservation at an ecotourism destination as it can draw clients. With the clients come profits that can be used for conservation. Professional nature tour guides occasionally discover new species. As a number of the most knowledgeable guides have a science background, they will declare the find, and occasionally take part in the "collection" of the species. Collection is often a matter of killing every individual they find of the new species for research and museum collections around the world. While this "taking" of individuals of a new species is usually something that the species is able to replace over time, the process is not in the best interest of conservation. One reason that recently discovered species have escaped detection for so long is largely because they are specialists, living only in relatively small areas with specialist plants and other specialist organisms. This is part of the reason so many species inhabit the tropics. Without knowing the size of the habitat used by the species, the distribution and the population, collecting could have a harmful effect. In many parts of the world, if an entity (company, individual, mining operation etc.) wants to develop a natural area, it is required to perform an environmental impact study. If species cannot absorb the project without being harmed, the project may be stopped. Scientists collecting a new species rarely if ever are required to determine what the impacts of their activity will be. It is said that if you find gold in the rainforest, bury it and tell no one if you want the forest saved. If we care more about species conservation than we do about claiming a new species or adding to the knowledge base, clearly the thing to do is keep the information to yourself. I am not against collecting for research or museums, if an environmental study first correctly determines how many can be collected without harming the species. But let us not confuse this with conservation! I have photos of a racket-tailed nightjar unknown to science, two new snake species and two new species of toad. I also know the location of a new primate species. I will not publish the location information until science no longer demands that individuals be collected without a study to determine the impact of such a take, and not take if the impact threatens the species. A photo or article about the finding should settle egotistical needs to be recognized for the discovery. We live in a world where most birds and mammals have already been found. If a new species is found, or a rare species exists on private land, we should have a system to pay the locals a substantial amount to see the species on their land. Better yet, we should train the locals to operate the tours to their land, so they are guaranteed a substantial amount. This will create an economic incentive to protect biodiversity. One extreme example comes from a well-known travel organization that identifies itself as a force for conservation. It offers travelers the chance to assist research projects, frequently in economically poor countries. The researchers are often from the developing world, and the funds generated by this organization help fund the research. A participant in one of these projects stated: "I have been active in local conservation being responsible for Agenda 21 sustainability indicators in a previous role. In recognition of this I was made a Millennium Fellow by the Prime Minister's Millennium Commission, set up to commemorate the Millennium. Part of this involved going to Bolivia in 1997 on an [company name deleted] Expedition. Whilst I thoroughly enjoyed this experience, I was unhappy with the rationale behind its conservation ethos, which didn't appear to root the focus of control and development with the local people (I referred to it as 'scientific imperialism' in my write-up). Another innovative attempt to appear as a force in conservation is found in Brazil. A company in Cuiabá north of the Pantanal states: "VERY IMPORTANT: Part of our birding tours profit goes to the [company name deleted] Conservation Fund to support researches of local Biology under-graduate students in the area. You get fun and still collaborate with the conservation of the region!!!" It fails to explain how funding undergraduate research at a big city university leads to conservation. We cannot assume that it will. If this company were seriously interested in using profits for conservation, a program exists to add acres to the nearby Jaguar Ecological Reserve for just $15 an acre. More on this project later, but clearly, this company could change the recipient of its otherwise noble efforts to raise money for conservation and actually conserve biodiversity. Even a tour company owned by a non-profit that uses tourism to raise funds for ecotourism projects is not being nearly as effective as it could be. Their tours to the Jaguar Ecological Reserve contract with a company in Cuiabá, which employs guides from Cuiabá. The local Pantaneiro English-speaking naturalist guide with the knowledge and equipment to lead professional birding tours is not their guide of choice. In comparison, let us consider the ecotourism work of the non-profit Focus Conservation Fund (FCF), a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt non-profit organization registered in the USA, CECD - Community Ecotourism Consulting & Development Inc. and Focus Tours Inc., a for-profit ecotour company. Among other things, they train communities in areas of high biodiversity to operate first class nature and birding tours. Let us return to Brazil's Pantanal for an example. Under the direction of EcoTrent Consulting, the FCF sent a volunteer American English teacher to the Jaguar Ecological Reserve (JER), a private "RPPN" conservation easement reserve. He taught local people English for almost 9 months. Black Diamond Paving (BDP), a company in San Jose, California, USA, provided FCF with the funds to pay Pantaneiro landowners to put their land into permanent reserve status, creating the private JER. So far their donations have put over 800 hectares into the "Reserva Ecologico do Jaguar". Focus Tours and now the FCF have put thousands of US dollars into creating and improving a simple lodge in the richest area of the Pantanal. (Focus Tours clients saw at least one jaguar on 29 out of 31 tours in 2001, and approximately 50% as of December 10, 2002, with nearly 100% seeing at least one species of spotted cat). Working together, the FCF and Focus Tours have trained the now English-speaking Pantaneiro guide, Eduardo de Arruda Falcao, so that he is guiding foreign tourists and earning what foreign guides earn. His family has purchased a van, a pickup truck, a tractor, a computer and more with profits from operating tours. In the last four months of 2002, operating a number of tours, he has earned more than in the last 4 years operating his simple lodge. When the Focus Conservation Fund has people interested in visiting the Pantanal, it works with the for-profit Focus Tours. Let us look at the financial case for one of the first tours that took place in 2002. Focus Tours received payment from two people to operate a 5 day/4 night tour in the Pantanal. Focus Tours kept a 13% commission, and gave the balance to the JER to operate this tour. The FCF, at the Pantaneiros insistence, is a 49% partner with the JER. They wanted to guarantee the long-term participation of the FCF by being 50/50 partners, and the FCF chose instead to be 49% so that it would be a minority partner. This partnership insures that nearly half of the profit will be used for biodiversity conservation. In this case study, the total profits after expenses were distributed as follows: 18.7% - Focus Tours commission 81.3% - Jaguar Ecological Reserve, including the 49% of profits that the FCF puts back into the reserve ecotourism program. This is a "nuts and bolts" breakdown of a real ecotour. It also shows how private-sector companies (EcoTrent Consulting, Black-Diamond Paving and Focus Tours) and an NGO (Focus Conservation Fund) can successfully work together. It was recently stated that the "eco" in ecotourism is currently more of an "echo". If we want to change this several things have to happen.
We are at a crossroads in "ecotourism". Currently, most of what is called ecotourism is simply nature-based tourism, and concentrates the profits in cities. If efforts are made to increase the number of professional community-based ecotourism businesses, the future of ecotourism will lead not only to biodiversity preservation, but also to cultural preservation. We cannot separate nature from people anymore than we can separate people from nature. Humans and biodiversity are intricately linked. We need each other. Author Douglas Trent is an American ecologist, ecotourism consultant specialized in community-based ecotourism development, ecotour operator and a founder of the rainforest movement. He can be contacted at:
111 Malaga Road
|
Focus Conservation Fund FCFunds@aol.com PO Box 22276 Santa Fe, NM 87502 USA (505) 216-7780 All content & images © 2001 FCF. Updated: Site design: Patrick Schneider Site manager: Kristy Haller |