OMSLAG 5.indd - IUCN

from tourism to compensate fishermen for the nets damaged while freeing
dolphins. One of the guides is in charge of checking the nets and removing
dangerously placed ones. During the project period (July 2005-July
2006) no dolphins died as a result of entanglements in fishing nets, while
in earlier years several dolphins had died in this way. One dolphin was
reported to having got entangled but was safely released. The fishermen
got compensated for cutting open the net. For a highly endangered species,
such as the freshwater dolphin (locally named pesut mahakam), with a
population of only 70 animals, such an effort is crucial. There are also plans
for a different route for the tugboats transporting coal though the dolphin
habitat. This is not only good for tourism development and fisheries, it will
no doubt benefit the dolphins as well. Whether this leads to an increase
in the dolphin population should be monitored over the coming years,
because both the population’s size and its viability also depend on many
other factors.
Construction
of a visitors
centre at
Prreseve Muriqui,
Brazil
Visitor centre
on the
Mahakan River,
with dolphin
viewing creek
40 41
In conclusion, we could say that monitoring the results is of the utmost
importance if you want to answer the question whether tourism
development benefits conservation. Without monitoring, it is very difficult
to substantiate that tourism development does have a positive influence
on conservation and to enhance this influence. Lack of monitoring also
means that possible negative effects of the developments are not registered
and adjustments cannot be made. Sadly but understandably, in most of
the described projects, monitoring did not have the highest priority. They
lacked funds for proper monitoring or it took so much time to make the
project work, that monitoring simply disappeared from the agenda. A
positive exception is INDECON, who have developed a visitor impact
monitoring system. Visitors receive a form on which they can record
what species they saw and in what location. The results are mapped and
this is the basis for the local visitor management. Disturbed animals, too
many tourists visiting the same area, or the presence of many young
animals may be reasons to ‘close’ that area for a while. This system is a
good first step, as it enables the organization to steer the developments in
the desired direction. However, visitor feedback should be part of a larger
system, which includes more objective indicators for impacts in the field.
Developing a scientific monitoring system that can be used on a larger
scale and for different purposes will take more effort.