David Newsome

Growth in the wildlife tourism industry has been significant in recent years with an increasing focus on tourism centered on free-ranging wildlife. In Australia tourism based in the marine environment, including observing and interacting with coastal and marine wildlife, is increasing in popularity. The future potential for increased growth in marine tourism is dependent upon the abundance and diversity of Australia’s marine wildlife. Negative impacts of tourism on marine wildlife are difficult to assess as in many cases little is known about the animals or their environment. With the rapid growth in marine tourism the potential for both biophysical and social impacts needs to be recognised. Given the potential impacts and the variable nature of wildlife tourism operations the need arises for a formal auditing and monitoring framework that can identify potential or actual problems and the need for management. This report will examine the opportunities and the barriers in producing a simple, yet reliable framework to assess knowledge available on visitor satisfaction and expectations, identify key areas of product/service improvement, gauge the quality of interpretation programmes, evaluate the effectiveness of impact mitigation strategies and also evaluate the application of key performance indicators for monitoring systems for marine wildlife tourism.

The demand for different recreational activities in national parks and peri-urban reserves – including horse riding – has increased. Horse riding has been found to be more damaging to the surrounding environment than other recreational activities such as walking. Typical impacts include trampling of vegetation, deepening and widening of trails, spread of weeds and pathogens, and compaction of the soil. Common management techniques include site management and visitor management, but there is little knowledge about the success of these management techniques or if they are being implemented at all. This report documents a case study analysis of bridle trail management undertaken in peri-urban settings near Perth, Western Australia. It provides a simple, rapid assessment of trail condition, and makes recommendations for the ongoing sustainability of the trails.

An exploratory literature review was conducted into the biophysical and social impacts of mountain biking in Australia and around the world. This review provided the basis for an impact assessment method that could be applied to mountain biking in natural areas. Mountain biking is increasing in popularity in Australia and this is adding to the demand for more space in natural areas for recreational activities (Goeft & Alder, 2001, Faulks, Richtie & Fluker 2007, Standing Committee on Recreation and Sport 2006, CALM 2007). Mountain biking can have negative impacts on the natural environment but the extent and significance of impacts is not fully understood (Goeft & Alder 2001, Chiu & Kriwoken 2003, Hasenhauer 2003, Sprung 2004, White, Waskey, Brodehl & Foti 2006). This situation constitutes a problem for managers as they need impact information to ensure mountain biking in natural areas is sustainable. This report addresses mountain biking as a recreational activity by examining styles of riding and the corresponding demands of riders. It also identifies the major impacts of mountain biking and explores potential management techniques for developing sustainable mountain biking activities in natural areas. A method of assessing mountain biking impacts has been field-tested. The study was conducted in John Forrest National Park (JFNP), a popular recreation area in the Perth metropolitan area, Western Australia. Park rangers have previously identified areas in the Park where mountain bikers have created informal trail networks and technical trail features. Such findings are recognised to be having a negative impact on the Park. A GPS and GIS assessment method was field tested in JFNP to quantify this impact and proved to be useful in quantifying areas impacted by mountain bike activities.

Off-road driving, horseriding, rock climbing and similar activities can be lucrative for tour operators and important for local recreational groups, but contentious for management of national parks and protected areas, both because of safety and liability and because of potentially high environmental impacts. These include spreading weeds and pathogens, starting fires and crushing bird nests on beaches, amongst many others. In Australia as elsewhere, off-road vehicles and horses are allowed only in some places in some parks, and often only under permit. We have very little reliable scientific information to-date on just how serious these impacts may be, and on how well they might be managed through minimal-impact practices such as vehicle washdowns, stockfeed processing and seasonal closures. Such information can only be obtained through site specific ecological studies of the plants, animals and watercourses likely to be affected, differentiating tourism impacts from natural causes and fluctuations. This report examines management strategies for these activities worldwide and in Australia. Suggestions for best management practice and future research agendas are set.

The twin goals of the Ningaloo Destination and Data Modelling (NDDM) project are: to develop a dynamic model of Ningaloo incorporating socio-economic, and load implications of tourism that can be integrated with an ecological model of the region; and to effectively engage with stakeholders to build both trust in the model and group learning between researchers and stakeholders with respect to regional tourism planning and governance. Drawing its methodology from mediated modelling, which developed within learning organisations theory, and sustainable tourism planning, the NDDM project is engaging with stakeholders through public workshops, meetings and disseminating information through newsletters and the regional media. The finished model will be used by regional managers (in particular DEC, DPI and the Shires) to input into land and resource use decisions and by all stakeholders including community groups, the shires and the tourism industry, to collaboratively assess and discuss tourism planning in the region. The NDDM project is gathering primary data through surveys of visitors, residents and accommodation providers, and is engaging with other research projects, industries, and public agencies to gather and share secondary data. To date, the three most significant research outcomes are: four collated tourism scenarios for the region; the results of initial visitors surveys; and an early prototype of the Ningaloo Destination Model, that assesses the effects of changing the visitor mix on activities and accommodation demand in different subregions.

This study defines and explores the nature of impact creep within the context of two contrasting case studies. The methods applied in undertaking this study consisted of a literature review and development and distribution of questionnaires to visitors at Monkey Mia and an interview of managers at Monkey Mia and Tree Top Walk. The project considered impact creep relevant to both public and private facility developments. Impact creep can be defined as a temporal sequence of changes that lead to a site being more developed. These changes confer both negative and positive impacts. Each impact creep situation may be deemed unique according to different tourism situations and attractions. Both Tree Top Walk and Monkey Mia have a history of increasing visitation which has increased the potential for further impacts. Management has responded accordingly and the resultant actions have reduced negative environmental impacts through site hardening and associated developments. The resultant development in turn appears to have contributed to an increased attractiveness for a wider visitor profile. At both Monkey Mia and the Tree Top Walk increasing visitor numbers were not an immediate concern. Generally visitors to both sites are predominantly first time visitors on a multi-destination trip. Visitors to these sites are most likely to visit in family groups or with friends of two to four persons, aged in the 25 to 49 year age bracket. In both surveys there were a higher proportion of females to males. At Monkey Mia, the majority of respondents are from overseas and Western Australia with the lowest proportion from interstate. In contrast, at Tree Top Walk, the proportion of overseas, Western Australia and interstate visitors was fairly even. Respondents were most likely to travel to the respective regions in passenger vehicles and generally stay for short visits (less than a week). The main attraction for respondents was the natural area attraction, i.e. dolphins at Monkey Mia and the Tingle forest/Tree Top Walk at the Valley of the Giants. The Monkey Mia visitor survey was also used to determine if management actions of site hardening detract from the visitor experience and to determine how visitors feel about highly developed sites such as those that contain permanent accommodation facilities and infrastructure. The survey revealed that visitors generally prefer natural landscapes with limited facilities. However, the facilities provided were not seen as being detractive and had no influence on the quality of the visit. Moreover, facilities may be considered as a positive influence because of the convenience they offer. A major difference between the two case studies is that impact creep has occurred according to different policy directives. Tree Top Walk was developed under a management plan that had clear guidelines. Monkey Mia had no management plan and joint management with the Shire of Shark Bay. When accommodation facilities were developed at Monkey Mia, the Western Australian Department of Conservation and Land Management (CALM) recommendations were ignored in favour for economic returns and political pressure. A notable difference between the two sites, therefore, is that Tree Top Walk has no accommodation facility so the visitation period is short, while Monkey Mia has accommodation which means that limiting visitor use is problematic because as many as 600 people stay in the vicinity of the interaction area overnight. For Tree Top Walk a dispersal strategy in the form of a visitor centre may help to focus attention away from the main attraction during busy periods and during wait times if restrictions are operating due to heavy demand. Because of the potential for increased visitation, crowding, conflicts and reduced visitor satisfaction at Monkey Mia limitations on use may have to be applied. Previous work has shown that use/access restrictions, in the form of a reservation or permit system, may be the best approach.

This study investigated the issues surrounding iconic wildlife in terms of both visitor perceptions and experiences and also in terms of the economic contribution of visitors to the destination. The methods employed consisted of a literature review and development and distribution of questionnaires to visitors and tour operators and an interview of managers at Monkey Mia, Western Australia and Hervey Bay, Queensland. It was found that the absence of dolphins from Monkey Mia would greatly detract from visitor satisfaction, with the opportunity to experience dolphins close up being the best part of the overall experience. Managers were of the view that there would be an economic impact on local businesses and on the tourism industry and staffing levels would have to be reduced both at CALM and at the resort. Operators indicated that they would change their itinerary and would consider no longer coming to Monkey Mia. Management felt that Monkey Mia would lose its identity if the dolphins were no longer present and there would be a reduction in visitor numbers. Similar findings were indicated at Hervey Bay in that an absence of whales would greatly detract from the visitor experience, while seeing whales close up, including along side of the boat, was the best part of the their experience. Managers and tour operators generally thought that if it was not possible to take a whale watching tour then tourists would still come to Hervey Bay but there would be a reduction in the number of visitors. Some operators indicated that a long-term absence of whales from Hervey Bay would result in them having to close their business and that there would be a large impact on local businesses and accommodation providers. Economic analysis shows that the residents of the Gascoyne are more dependent on wildlife icons for their livelihood than the residents of Hervey Bay, although the total visitor expenditure that is attributable to wildlife icons is approximately equal in both regions. This study highlights the importance of maintaining the icon and a high quality experience through interpretation and management of potential impacts. More importantly there is a need to diversify the tourism product that is currently available at both icon sites in order to alleviate problems that may arise as a result of dependence on wildlife icons.