A couple of thoughts:
* The incredibly high numbers of birdwatchers listed for various
countries just aren't plausible. I've been to a fair few places
looking for birds and can tell you that birdwatchers are not a major
economic input outside of a handful of very specific places. Compare,
for example, the inputs from skiiing/Scuba diving/bungee jumping with
sharks type activities and the difference is dramatic.
Birding-oriented tourism is a boutique business, not a mass-tourism
business.
* If you're trying to persuade politicians and keepers of the public
purse, I doubt it helps to use unrealistic figures. If they don't
'smell' right, people aren't going to take it seriously. If 1 out of 5
people is a birder, people would have noticed.
* I've seen at least three successful strategies for individuals and
communities for making money out of birdwatching:
1) Niche tourism.
There are, around the world, a relatively short list of places that
pull this off - and they're wonderful.
2) Appealing to a general-interest tourist crowd.
These places may or may not be the best places for general interest
tourists to visit for birds (O'Reilly's here and Monte Verde in Costa
Rica leap to mind) - but they pack the crowds in. Because of the
facilities, educational programs, etc. general interest tourists seem
to have *fantastic* experience and, possibly, gain a new interest. At
the least, they get a new appreciation of how wonderful and
interesting animals can be.
3 Festivals
These are easier to pull off when there is some natural reason for it
- such as the return of migrant species or the peak density of migrant
species. Everyone loves a good festival so these can pull in people of
all ages and descriptions from near and wide.
Note that a lot of places do both niche and mass tourism. My feeling
is that the mass tourism supports and subsidizes the niche tourism. As
an example, we went to Danum Valley for five days once and I figured
it would be crawling with birders. I ran into three. That was it. At
the same time, they had _stacks_ of general interest tourists coming
in for a few days at a time that were bringing in money. I've seen
this pattern again and again at places I figured would be "swamped"
with birders. As far as I can tell, birders alone aren't keeping the
doors open at many places.
A couple of stand-out programs that many on this list will be aware of
are worth mentioning (I'd be keen to hear of more such success
stories):
* The Sam Veasna Center in northern Cambodia has an arrangement with a
small local village (Tmatboey) to preserve their Giant and
White-shouldered Ibis population. This program brings much-needed
money directly to the community in exchange for the community taking
care of their environment/birds. It's a great idea and birders make a
meaningful difference. This is eco-tourism in the good sense.
According to a Sam Veasna newsletter, the site had 71 visitors in 2007
and 128 visitors in 2008. Given the cost of a visit and the extreme
poverty in Cambodia, the revenue generated ($US 5000 in 2007 and $US
12,000 in 2008) is a remarkable achievement.
* Several states in South Africa, notably KZN, have developed "bird
routes". The idea is that you provide a car and engage a trained local
guide to bring along. This program has also been a big success as it
lowers the cost of getting into the building business dramatically.
Previously, guides needed to have their own (large and expensive)
vehicle with insurance. Now they need only the training and skills as
the tourist provides the car. I don't have any figures on this but
they shouldn't be hard to find from BirdLife International or
elsewhere.
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
|
