Wildlife tourism – killing with kindness (or not?)?

I've handed the reins of my blog over to Mark Avery for most of June. Mark's sharing the successes and challenges of saving nature around the world in the run up to the Rio+20 Earth Summit.

I am, unashamedly, an enthusiast for wildlife, for wild places and for the natural world. Although personal relationships, music and sport have all produced moments of ecstasy and sadness in my life, many of the most memorable moments have been with nature. 

I’ll never forget moments spent with humpback whales in Australia, a grizzly bear mother and her two cubs in the USA or wildebeest, zebra and antelope herds in Kenya.  There are many others, but those three stick in the mind and all involved mammals not birds, all were in beautiful locations where the wildlife added to the experience and all were on other continents. And there’s the rub!

Getting on a plane whose carbon emissions will harm wildlife in order to enjoy wildlife is a moral conundrum that every nature lover with cash to spare faces. And we face it at a smaller scale every time we drive to an RSPB nature reserve or drive down the road to do a bit of bird watching. 

One of the ways to square the circle (although I am afraid it will still have lots of curves on it) and reduce your feelings of guilt is to make sure you reduce your overall carbon emissions in as many ways as possible, and another is to make sure your money does some good.

Costa Rica has made the decision to protect and market its natural environment and beauty. Ecotourism is a bigger earner than bananas and coffee combined and comprises 85% of the country’s Gross Domestic Product. There are taxes on businesses that pollute water and Costa Rica already produces 89% of its energy from renewable sources and aims to be a carbon neutral country by 2021. Landowners are given incentives to protect the country’s natural resources, particularly its forests (those forests where the golden toad once lived – see essay of 2 June). Costa Rica means Rich Coast in Spanish, and it feel as if the country has seriously committed itself to protecting its natural riches.

 Bhutan runs its affairs by different rules from those of most countries, based on its Buddhist religion. Instead of concentrating on increasing a complicated index of economic wealth (GDP) it tries to maximise GDH (Gross Domestic Happiness), and this has been the case for decades.  Visitors to Bhutan tell me that the ordinary Bhutanese in the street is quite likely to mention that environmentalism is an important part of how they and their country measures progress. 

Both Costa Rica and Bhutan are middle-ranking countries in terms of per capita GDP. Their people aren’t very rich and they are looking for ways to improve their lot, but it is striking that they are both taking a very different route from most other countries and they are deliberately choosing to protect natural wealth as part of their economic strategy.

Costa Rica is 3^rd and Bhutan 13^th in a ranking of 178 countries by the New Economics Foundation on a ‘Happy Planet’ index which attempts to take people’s happiness and the environmental impact into account. It’s certainly a different and a stimulating way of looking at things and the highest-ranking EU country is Austria (but that is still at a fairly lowly 61^st position);  the UK is 108^th.

I wonder how much of a voice Costa Rica and Bhutan will have at the Rio+20 conference next week. It seems to me that they could teach the rest of the world a thing or two.

Wondering how you can step up? Why not take a minute to consider greener travel next time you plan a visit to an RSPB nature reserve? Many of our sites have cycle routes and can advise on the best way to reach us by bike.

Dr Mark Avery is a former Conservation Director of the RSPB and now is a writer on environmental matters. We’ve asked Mark to write these 20 essays on the run up to the Rio+20 conference.  His views are not necessarily those of the RSPB.  Mark writes a daily blog about UK nature conservation issues.