wildlife tourism define

UN Tourism | Bringing the world closer

Wildlife is our world heritage, unwto/chimelong.

• UNWTO/Chimelong Initiative
• WHY WILDLIFE?
• UNWTO/CHIMELONG ACTIVITIES
• INITIATIVE RESOURCES - CONTACTS

share this content

• Share this article on facebook
• Share this article on twitter
• Share this article on linkedin

Why Wildlife?

• Asia and the Pacific

Wildlife tourism refers to the observation and interaction with local animal and plant life in their natural habitats.

It encompasses segments such as eco-tourism, safari tours and mountain tourism among others. Wildlife watching tourism occurs mainly in protected areas. Nature, national parks and wildlife are considered the most important tourism assets for tourists travelling for instance to Africa.

A WWF report shows that 93% of all natural heritage sites support recreation and tourism and 91% of them provide jobs. For instance, in Belize, more than  50% of the population  are said to be supported by income generated through reef-related tourism and fisheries.

Wildlife represents biodiversity, essential for our health and the well-being of the whole planet.

Wildlife represents biodiversity, essential for our health and the well-being of the whole planet. We live in an interconnected ecological system, where each macro- and microorganism, whether animal, plant or fish affects the other.  Alteration of the natural habitat of any organism will trigger a dynamo effect,  so non-equilibrium in the ecological system as a whole endangers the life cycle of many species. Around 40,000 species of animals, fungi and plants benefit humans. More than the third of our pharmaceuticals originate from wild plants

Wildlife remains a major concern for the international, regional and local communities. Among the multiple risks that menace wildlife are: diseases, climate change and actions of human nature, such as poaching and illegal trafficking. According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red List Index:

• Amphibians are declining most rapidly in Latin America and the Caribbean, partly due to the chytrid fungal disease, 
• The greatest extinction risks for birds and mammals are found in South-Eastern Asia, mainly owing to the conversion of lowland forests.
• 7,000 species of animals and plants have been detected in illegal trade, and the list of species under international protection continues to grow.

Policy measures and higher sensitization of the general public and of specific stakeholders like media professionals appear as needed paths to ensure protection of wildlife and therefore of biodiversity. The engagement of printed, audiovisual and electronic and online media outlets in advocating wildlife as an essential component of biodiversity and as an added potential to tourism development by reporting professionally, accurately and comprehensively on this topic remains a major goal. The increased capacity of the media will enable a framework of action together with governments and civil society to improve wildlife and biodiversity protection.

A WWF report shows that 93% of all natural heritage sites support recreation and tourism and 91% of them provide jobs

Wildlife in the Agenda 2030

Besides been mentioned in the SDGs, wildlife and biodiversity have been placed at the core of most of the discussions of the Agenda 2030. The recent UN Biodiversity Conference (December 2016) was integrated by two Working Groups. Working Group I (WG I) addressed cooperation with other conventions and organizations; a global multilateral benefit-sharing mechanism under the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization; and socioeconomic considerations, liability and redress, risk assessment and risk management, and unintentional transboundary movement of living modified organisms (LMOs) under the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

The Working Group II (WG II) approved conference room papers (CRPs) on sustainable wildlife management, recommendations from the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII), and climate-related geo-engineering. WG II further addressed marine debris and underwater noise, marine spatial planning, biodiversity in cold-water areas and pollinators.

Reasons for wildlife protection and conservation

For those still not convinced about the potential of wildlife, lets remind some of the benefits:

• Biodiversity: In nature, different species are connected through various food webs. The disappearance of one species could influence several others down the line.
• Agriculture:  Promoting wildlife conservation could help secure future food supplies. 
• Research:  There may be many undiscovered plants and animals in the wild. 50 percent of the drugs available in the United States were originally developed from microbial organisms, plants, and animals.
• Economics of Eco-Services: ecosystem activities have an effect on the quantity and quality of fresh water accessible to humans.
• Ecotourism: enjoying African ecosystems has been a tremendous stimulus for economies within Africa.
• Environmental Indicators: various animals can serve as indicators for other environmental problems is one of the rarely discussed benefits of wildlife conservation. The loss of peregrine falcons and bald eagles was one of the factors that alerted scientists to the toxicity of DDT,  unnoticed for longer in a less diverse ecosystem.
• Education:  Studying animals and their habitats can be a valuable learning experience for students of all ages.
• Psychological Benefits: Ecotourists experience a tremendous sense of wonder, contentment, and fulfillment from their wildlife encounters.

Challenges in the wildlife global cause

• Trafficking in wildlife and their parts is a criminal international trade worth an estimated $20 billion a year
• Several iconic species —including elephants, rhinos, and tigers, as well as many lesser known species — toward the precipice of extinction
• Examples: The loss of African elephants: 100,000 over the past three years (96 elephants a day, with only 400,000 remaining in the wild across all of Africa).
• Fewer than 30,000 wild rhinos survive.
• A mere 3,200 wild tigers survive in the forests of Asia, including only 1,000 breeding females.

Areas of work , three central goals:

• Stopping the killing;
• Stopping the trafficking; and
• Stopping the demand

Download PDF

• Download the UNWTO Briefing Paper 'Towards Measuring the Economic Value of Wildlife Watching Tourism in Africa'

National Geographic content straight to your inbox—sign up for our popular newsletters here

At Elephant Valley Thailand, in Chiang Rai, tourists are instructed to observe the animals from a safe distance.

What I learned investigating the wildlife tourism industry

I traveled the world documenting unseen suffering. Here’s what you can do to respect animals during your travels.

Right away, Elephant Valley Thailand felt different. The property, nestled in the forest on the outskirts of Chiang Rai, a small city in northern Thailand, was the fifth elephant attraction I’d visited in a week. I’d seen shows where elephants kicked soccer balls and twirled hula hoops. I’d watched people ride on their backs and swing from their trunks. I’d peeked into the stalls to which elephants returned after working, where they’re chained by their ankles to posts.

But Elephant Valley was quiet. It was the first time all week that I’d seen elephants from a distance. One was bathing in a pond, alone. Another two were eating in the middle of a field. Wooden fences surrounded most of the fields—to keep us out, not them in, John Lee, a manager at Elephant Valley, told me. That’s what struck me most: No one was allowed to touch the animals. These were elephants being elephants. ( Here's why we're shining a light on wildlife tourism. )

Elephant Valley Thailand ”was the most responsible elephant sanctuary that we visited,” says author Natasha Daly.

Elephant Valley Thailand, home to five elephants that previously worked in trekking camps and the logging industry, is unlike most other elephant attractions in Thailand. Many of the country’s 3,800 captive elephants live in camps that offer up-close, interactive experiences that allow visitors to ride or bathe the animals or watch them perform in shows. The activities are a massive draw for travelers from around the world, part of a lucrative global industry that puts people together with exotic animals for once-in-a-lifetime encounters.

It’s what brought me to Thailand , a monthlong stop on a reporting trip for National Geographic magazine that took photographer Kirsten Luce and me to four continents over a year and a half. Our goal was simple: to look at the animals that entertain us and the people who seek them out. Those people are you and they’re me. I have a photo of myself at two years old, perched on an elephant’s back at a zoo in my hometown of Toronto , Canada. Eight years ago, on my honeymoon, I went swimming with captive manta rays in Mexico . But seven years later, while reporting the story, I found myself watching a group of tourists pass around a tiger cub after paying a couple of dollars to feed him a bottle of milk—and wondering if anyone else was questioning why he wasn’t with his mom.

It’s complicated. People love animals and naturally want to get close to them—and genuinely want to learn more about them too. It’s a desire that’s increasingly fueled by social media, where travelers share their experiences instantaneously. The reality that many tourists don’t see is that to stay in business, elephant interactions—and photo ops with tigers and swimming with manta rays—rely on a steady stream of working wild animals, all of which have been caught or bred or trained into submission.

Related: 10 animals to see on a Botswana safari

And it’s all too easy to misread signs of suffering. Captive elephants sway their trunks back and forth—almost as if they’re dancing. In reality, it’s a sign of psychological distress. Sloths seem to love cuddling, but their hug is really just an attempt to cling to what feels to them like a tree trunk. Dolphins appear to be smiling but that’s the natural set of their mouths.

Travelers are increasingly recognizing that many animal tourist attractions may not be ethical. More and more backpackers are shunning elephant riding. ( Follow these tips for ethical animal encounters. )

The industry knows it. Dozens of properties in Thailand now call themselves “sanctuaries.” Many look a lot like Elephant Valley and boast five-star ratings on travel sites such as TripAdvisor . But Kirsten and I found that, unlike Elephant Valley, almost every one offers elephant bathing for visitors who wish to splash with an elephant in a river or mud pit. Often the bathing is repeated all day long. And only trained elephants will submit to baths.

Jack Highwood opened Elephant Valley in 2016. The 40-acre property is his second elephant sanctuary, following a much bigger one he established in Cambodia. He chose to go small with the Thai sanctuary, installing inexpensive wooden fencing and minimal infrastructure because he wanted to make the model as easy as possible for others to copy. It felt peaceful, several visitors at Elephant Valley told me. As if the elephants didn’t even know they were there.

While traveling the world, I spoke to tourists everywhere. In restaurants and hostels. At aquariums and monkey shows. I would often ask people if they prefer to have an up-close experience with an animal in captivity or observe it from afar in the wild. More often than not, they told me the latter. Yet captive encounters remain extremely popular. Maybe because an animal sighting is assured. Maybe because the animals seem happy, and it seems that your admission fee is going to contribute to someone’s paycheck. Maybe, perhaps most compelling of all, because it gives you a photograph—you, together with an exotic animal—that can go straight to your social media feed, where likes and comments are guaranteed.

Across the Pacific, on the North Shore of Oahu, in Hawaii , there’s a beach called Laniakea. People more commonly call it Turtle Beach, because sea turtles regularly come ashore. They’ll pick a spot and sleep in the sun, sometimes for hours at a time. Volunteers are there every day to keep people away from the animals. When a turtle emerges from the sea, the volunteers block off space for it with rope, giving the turtle ample room to relax in peace.

One weekday in September, I sat with dozens of tourists behind the rope and watched them watching a turtle. For the most part, people were respectful. A few asked why they couldn’t touch. It’s illegal to touch sea turtles in Hawaii, the volunteers explained. And it’s important to respect their space, they added. This is their beach too, after all.

It can be hard for most people to tell the difference between ethical and problematic wildlife experiences. There are many shades of gray. But you might follow a few simple guidelines :

Keep your distance. Seek experiences that offer observation of animals engaging in natural behaviors in natural environments.

Do your research. A highly rated place may not necessarily be humane. Read those one- and two-star reviews. It’s often in the pans that visitors chronicle animal welfare concerns.

Beware of buzzwords. A facility may use phrases on their website or promotional materials such as “gives back to conservation,” “rescue,” and “sanctuary,” but if it still offers extensive interaction, that may be a red flag.

• Nat Geo Expeditions

Related Topics

You may also like.

Inside the newest park in Argentine Patagonia

See Kenya’s wildlife in a different light: on horseback

Free bonus issue.

Winter vacations don't have to be about snow—check out these perfect getaways

How I got the shot: Jonathan Gregson on witnessing Uganda's wallowing hippos

Bear Grylls reveals his top travel tips

5 of alaska’s ultimate wildlife adventures.

The Cool List 2024: the 30 most exciting destinations to visit in 2024

• Environment
• Perpetual Planet

History & Culture

• History & Culture
• History Magazine
• Mind, Body, Wonder
• Paid Content
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Children's Online Privacy Policy
• Interest-Based Ads
• About Nielsen Measurement
• Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
• Nat Geo Home
• Attend a Live Event
• Book a Trip
• Inspire Your Kids
• Shop Nat Geo
• Visit the D.C. Museum
• Learn About Our Impact
• Support Our Mission
• Advertise With Us
• Customer Service
• Renew Subscription
• Manage Your Subscription
• Work at Nat Geo
• Sign Up for Our Newsletters
• Contribute to Protect the Planet

Copyright © 1996-2015 National Geographic Society Copyright © 2015-2024 National Geographic Partners, LLC. All rights reserved

Growing Wildlife-Based Tourism Sustainably: A New Report and Q&A

Copyright: Sanjayda, Shutterstock.com

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• While wildlife and biodiversity are increasingly threatened by habitat loss, poaching, and a lack of funding for protection, nature-based tourism is on the rise and could help provide solutions for these issues.
• The publication Supporting Sustainable Livelihoods through Wildlife Tourism highlights successful wildlife tourism programs in seven countries in Africa and Asia that can be used as models to promote conservation and boost economies.
• World Bank lead economist Richard Damania answers questions on the drivers, innovations and challenges for wildlife tourism, and why the World Bank Group and governments should support sustainable tourism strategies.

Wildlife tourism is a powerful tool countries can leverage to grow and diversify their economies while protecting their biodiversity and meeting several Sustainable Development Goals. It is also a way to engage tourists in wildlife conservation and inject money into local communities living closest to wildlife. Success stories and lessons learned from nature-based tourism are emerging from across the globe.

“Here is a way of squaring the circle: provide jobs and save the environment,” said World Bank lead economist Richard Damania, who has extensive experience in understanding the link between tourism and the economy . In 2016, travel and tourism contributed $7.6 trillion, or 10.2%, to total GDP, and the industry provided jobs to one in 10 people, according to the World Travel & Tourism Council .

While nature-based tourism, which includes wildlife tourism, has been expanding rapidly in the last decade or so due to increased demand and opportunities, wildlife and biodiversity are increasingly threatened by habitat loss, poaching, and a lack of funding for protection.

Which is why more than ever countries need to look to concrete examples of well-planned, sustainably-run tourism operations that have led to increased investments in protected areas and reserves, a reduction in poaching, an increase in the non-consumptive value of wildlife through viewing , and opportunities for rural communities to improve their livelihoods through tourism-related jobs, revenue-sharing arrangements, and co-management of natural resources.

A recently-released publication— Supporting Sustainable Livelihoods through Wildlife Tourism —developed by the World Bank Group and the Global Wildlife Program , funded by the Global Environment Facility , showcases sustainable wildlife tourism models that can be applied to developing countries, and offers solutions and case studies to bring insight into this sector as a mechanism for inclusive poverty reduction and global conservation.

The Global Wildlife Program spoke with Damania to learn more about the growth, challenges, and innovations in wildlife-based tourism.

Copyright: Wandel Guides, Shutterstock.com

Why should the World Bank support conservation endeavors, and how does wildlife tourism help support our mission?

Enlightened self-interest is one obvious reason why we need to promote wildlife tourism.  It provides the most obvious way to reconcile the interests of nature with the imperative for development and growth. Tourism simultaneously creates jobs while, when done well, protects natural habitats.

Prudence and precaution are another reason why investments in nature-based tourism ought to be promoted. The science of “ planetary boundaries ” warns us that many fragile natural environments and ecosystems are reaching their limits and in some cases, the hypothesized safe boundaries have been crossed. Further damage will imply that we lose important ecosystem services such as watershed and soil protection with damaging consequences for development.

But, in my mind, perhaps the most important reason is humanity’s moral and ethical imperative as stewards of global ecosystems. Simply because humanity has the ability to destroy or convert ecosystems and drive species to extinction does not make it ethically justifiable. There needs to be an ethical balance and that is where ecotourism comes in. We need jobs and economic growth, but here is a way to get jobs and growth in ways that meet our moral and ethical obligation.

What have been the drivers behind a burgeoning nature-based/wildlife-based tourism sector?  

I think there are two things that drive it: as habitats diminish there is more scarcity and their value goes up. Everyone wants to see the last remaining habitats of wild gorillas for instance, or the few remaining wild tigers in India. In sum scarcity confers economic value. 

Another force driving demand is the internet and rising lifestyles—you can learn about animals and habitats you might not have known existed, and more people have the ability to visit them. So, you have supply diminishing on one hand, and demand rising on the other hand which creates an opportunity for economic progress together with conservation.

What is your advice to governments and others who are developing or expanding on a nature or wildlife-based tourism strategy?

Tourism benefits need to be shared better . There is a lack of balance with too many tourists in some places, and none elsewhere. Some destinations face gross overcrowding, such as South Africa’s Krueger National Park or the Masai Mara in Kenya where you have tourists looking at other tourists, instead of at lions. We need to be able to distribute the demand for tourists more equally. The Bank has a role to play in developing the right kind of tourism infrastructure.

Those living closest to nature and wildlife must also benefit .   The local inhabitants that live in the national parks or at their periphery are usually extremely poor. Having tourism operations that can benefit them is extremely important for social corporate reasons, but also for sustainability reasons. If the benefits of tourism flow to the local communities, they will value the parks much more.

We also need to be mindful of   wildlife corridors . We know that dispersion and migration are fundamental biological determinants of species survival. Closed systems where animals cannot move to breed are not sustainable in the long run. As we break off the corridors because of infrastructure and increasing human populations we are putting the ecosystems on life support.

There are some who believe we can manage these closed ecosystems, but it takes an immense amount of self assurance in science to suggest this with confidence, and it is unclear that one can manage ecosystems that we do not adequately understand. A measure of caution and humility is needed when we are stretching the bounds of what is known to science.

What are some of the innovative partnerships that are helping the wildlife-based tourism businesses in developing countries? 

One very successful model that has combined wildlife conservation and management and community benefits and welfare is the  Ruaha Carnivore Project  in Tanzania, part of Oxford University’s Wildlife Conservation Research Unite ( WildCRU ). They use a payment for ecosystem services (PES) scheme and do all the right things.

Another example are the community conservancies in Namibia. The community manages the land for wildlife and there are a variety of profit sharing commercial tourism arrangements—although not everything always works fairly or perfectly. Incentives matter deeply and communities need to be guided and need technical assistance in setting up commercial arrangements.

The Bank needs to understand these better and find ways of scaling those up. The IFC has a very good role to play here as well. 

To learn more and to explore numerous examples of community involvement in wildlife tourism from Botswana, India, Kenya, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa and Uganda, read the report  Supporting Sustainable Livelihoods through Wildlife Tourism   or find a one-page fact sheet here .

The Global Wildlife Program (GWP) is led by the World Bank and funded by a $131 million grant from the Global Environment Facility (GEF). The program is working with 19 countries across Africa and Asia to promote wildlife conservation and sustainable development by combatting illicit trafficking in wildlife, and investing in wildlife-based tourism. 

• Full Report: Supporting Sustainable Livelihoods through Wildlife Tourism
• Fact Sheet on Key Messages
• Report: Twenty Reasons Sustainable Tourism Counts for Development
• Report: Women and Tourism: Designing for Inclusion
• Blog: Africa can Benefit from Nature-based Tourism in a Sustainable Manner
• Feature: Ramping up Nature-Based Tourism to Protect Biodiversity and Boost Livelihoods
• Website: Global Wildlife Program
• Website: Environment
• Website: Competitiveness
• Global Environment Facility

Wildlife Tourism: Merging Travel with Nature Conservation

Encountering rare wildlife in close proximity is a truly unique and cherished aspect of traveling abroad. Nonetheless, certain forms of wildlife tourism can be detrimental to the animals involved. Activities such as animal rides, zoos, selfies, and shows can have negative consequences. To ensure the well-being of animals, it is crucial to observe them in their natural habitats, treating them with respect rather than as sources of entertainment. Drawing from our extensive travel experience, we’ve gained insights from both positive and negative encounters. Here, we share a guide to steer clear of tourist animal attractions that should be avoided and offer more ethical alternatives.

Wildlife Tourism Definition

Wildlife tourism refers to travel or excursions centered on observing and interacting with animals in their natural habitats or in specialized environments. It encompasses a broad range of experiences, from safaris in the African savannahs and bird-watching expeditions in tropical rainforests to visits to marine parks and aquariums. While this form of tourism offers unique and often once-in-a-lifetime opportunities to connect with the animal kingdom, it also carries with it the responsibility of ensuring that such interactions are sustainable and do not harm the animals or their habitats. Done right, wildlife tourism can serve as a tool for conservation and education, fostering a deeper appreciation for the world’s biodiversity.

Wildlife tourism examples span a diverse array of experiences across the globe. In the vast plains of Africa, safaris allow tourists to witness the majestic migration of wildebeests or the elusive behavior of big cats in their natural habitats. The dense rainforests of Costa Rica offer canopy tours where travelers can spot vibrant toucans, sloths, and myriad butterfly species. In Australia’s Great Barrier Reef, divers and snorkelers immerse themselves in an underwater world teeming with colorful corals, fishes, and occasionally, the gentle sea turtle. On the colder end of the spectrum, the Arctic provides cruises to observe polar bears, seals, and whales in their icy environments. Meanwhile, sanctuaries and rehabilitation centers, like the Elephant Nature Park in Thailand, give visitors a chance to learn about and support conservation efforts firsthand. Wild life tourism offers travelers a unique opportunity to engage with nature and witness the beauty and diversity of our planet’s flora and fauna.

Ethical Animal Tourism: Alternatives

Delving deep into the nuances of animal tourism, one quickly realizes the intricate balance between human enjoyment and animal welfare. The landscape of this industry is filled with both shadows of exploitation and rays of responsible practices. As we venture into this realm, it’s paramount to be equipped with knowledge and discernment. By fostering an understanding of the ethical dimensions of animal tourism, we can better navigate the landscape, seeking out alternatives that celebrate and respect the intrinsic value of the creatures we so admire.

1. Zoos & Aquariums

Across the globe, a significant portion of animals showcased for tourism find their homes in zoos and aquariums. Proponents of these institutions emphasize their invaluable contributions to conservation endeavors, highlighting their commitment to the preservation and resurgence of threatened species. However, as with any complex issue, the landscape is not purely black or white. While there’s no denying the potential benefits of zoos and aquariums, it’s essential to critically assess the broader implications of these establishments on animal welfare, natural behaviors, and long-term sustainability. As we navigate the debate, let’s delve into the multifaceted considerations surrounding the support for zoos and aquariums:

• Nature’s Design Versus Captivity: Every wild creature has evolved over eons to thrive in its natural environment. Take the dolphin, for example; these majestic beings are designed to plunge into oceanic depths and traverse vast marine territories. Contrastingly, the limited dimensions of aquarium tanks are a stark deviation from their expansive natural habitats, hindering their instinctual behaviors;
• Alteration of Intrinsic Routines: Predators like lions and tigers possess innate patterns of activity, often being crepuscular — most active during dawn and dusk. However, the ceaseless stream of visitors and operational hours of zoos can disrupt these rhythms, potentially leading to stress and behavioral abnormalities;
• Behind-the-Scenes of Animal Shows: The allure of animal performances can mask concerning truths. The processes used to train animals for these displays can be fraught with ethical issues. Harsh training techniques, premature separation of offspring from their mothers, and other unsavory practices might lurk behind the curtain of that dazzling show;
• Psychological Implications of Enclosure: Some animals, especially those with advanced cognitive abilities like primates, grapple with significant psychological repercussions in captivity. A stark example can be found in the Tarsiers from the Philippines. These highly-sensitive creatures, when subjected to confinement, have exhibited alarming tendencies such as self-infliction. Such evidence underscores the imperative to reconsider the emotional and mental toll of captivity on these sentient beings.

Eco-Friendly Choices Beyond Zoos & Aquariums

Rather than touring a zoo, why not explore an ethical wildlife sanctuary? Ensure you’ve thoroughly vetted your choice, perhaps using resources such as the Global Federation of Wildlife Sanctuaries.

For marine life enthusiasts, think about volunteering with organizations like the Sea Turtle Conservancy in Costa Rica. Their mission revolves around research, education, and the conservation of marine species for future generations. Participating in beach clean-ups is also an excellent way to contribute to cleaner and safer oceans for marine life.

If you’re looking to immerse yourself directly, consider snorkeling or obtaining your PADI diving certification. Top destinations for PADI certification include Thailand, Egypt, and Malta.

2. Wildlife Sanctuaries

While numerous wildlife sanctuaries champion the cause of animal welfare and conservation, it’s crucial to approach them with discernment. The allure of terms like ‘conservation’, ‘wildlife protection’, and promises of animals that ‘roam freely’ can sometimes mask underlying unethical practices. A classic example is sanctuaries promoting their mission to save elephants from poachers but simultaneously allowing tourists to ride these elegant beings.

The Dark Side of Tiger Selfies

The phenomenon of tiger selfies, particularly in Asia, has intrigued many travelers seeking intimate encounters with these splendid animals. However, the harsh truth is that a genuine wild tiger isn’t naturally placid around humans; often, they are drugged to ensure their passivity.

Thailand emerges as a prime destination for such wildlife experiences. Tragically, many tigers there face distressing conditions, from being forcibly separated from their mothers at birth to enduring confinement, chaining, and continuous sedation. Certain notorious sanctuaries, such as the Tiger Kingdom, have even been implicated in trading tiger parts. A Vox article delves deeper into this alarming industry.

Eco-Friendly Wildlife Experiences Beyond Sanctuaries

Finding wildlife sanctuaries that operate ethically can be a challenge. However, resources like the Global Federation of Sanctuaries can guide you. It’s crucial to ensure that your chosen sanctuary prioritizes conservation, has a solid reputation, and discourages direct interactions like photography or physical contact with the animals.

For a more authentic connection with nature, consider immersive experiences like a canoe expedition down the Amazon River. Such adventures offer opportunities to observe stunning wildlife in their natural habitats.

3. Animal-Based Tourist Attractions

Wildlife encounters are frequently marketed to tourists, encompassing activities like lion treks, crocodile feedings, or shark diving adventures. However, these interactions come with several concerns, including potential disturbances to ecosystems, fostering unhealthy human-animal dynamics, and exerting stress on both the wildlife and the environment.

• Delving Deeper into Crocodile Attractions: While crocodile farms might seem like an exhilarating tourist hotspot, there’s more than meets the eye. These farms commercialize crocodiles, turning them into mere attractions for selfies, feeding sessions, and even audacious shows. Such interactions not only rob these ancient reptiles of their natural behavior but also underline a broader issue of animal commodification and maltreatment in the name of entertainment;
• Unraveling the Complexities of Shark Diving: For the adrenaline junkie, diving with sharks might top the adventure list. However, beneath the surface, this activity is riddled with ecological and behavioral concerns. The act of ‘chumming’—where operators release fish remnants to lure sharks—has implications beyond the obvious. Beyond the immediate disruption to marine life, it risks reshaping the sharks’ behavioral patterns. While sharks are typically reserved creatures, associating humans with food sources may lead to increased hostility, a deviation from their natural disposition;
• Unmasking the Facade of Lion Walks: Touristic locales like South Africa have popularized the idea of “lion walks,” an experience where visitors can walk alongside these majestic big cats. But the backstory is less enchanting. To ensure safe human-lion interactions, these creatures are often prematurely separated from their maternal figures, compelling them to undergo a forced acclimatization to humans. This process may see lions housed in less-than-ideal conditions and trained to exhibit behaviors eerily reminiscent of domestic cats, diluting their wild essence.

Responsible Approaches to Wildlife Sightseeing

For those eager to witness animals in their natural habitats, it’s crucial to adopt a considerate approach. Opt for tours known for their responsible practices, ensuring minimal disturbances to wildlife. For instance, embark on a safari in Sri Lanka, where experienced guides facilitate respectful observations of elephants, leopards, and other wildlife from a non-intrusive distance.

4. The Ethical Concerns of Animal Riding

Using animals as modes of transportation or entertainment raises serious ethical concerns, as it often exploits them for financial gain. When tourism dictates an animal’s workload, it becomes a commercial endeavor rather than a compassionate interaction.

• Camel Expeditions: In countries such as Morocco and Egypt, camels have historically served as transportation. However, today’s tourists might mount these creatures for a fleeting photo opportunity at the Pyramids or a short trek up a sand dune – activities that could easily be undertaken on foot;
• Donkey Treks: Popular destinations, like Santorini in Greece, frequently showcase donkeys ferrying tourists uphill. These animals are often tethered in scorching conditions, deprived of water, and physically coerced to quicken their pace. Inadequate care, coupled with ill-fitting saddles, can result in painful sores;
• City Horse Carriages: The idyllic image of horse-drawn carriage rides during city excursions belies the reality. These horses face long working hours, bearing significant loads, and are exposed to harmful urban pollutants. Once their service ends, many are tragically sent to slaughterhouses;
• Horseback Adventures: If contemplating horseback riding, it’s essential to scrutinize the animals’ physical condition and observe the guides’ behavior towards them. Any signs of maltreatment, like excessive whipping, should be noted with concern;
• Elephant Rides in Asia: In parts of Asia, elephant rides are a sought-after attraction. It’s crucial to recognize that these majestic beings are wild and potentially hazardous. Contrary to the popular belief of them being serene and human-friendly, they undergo a brutal “taming” process. This involves separating infants from their mothers, restraining them, and enforcing human dominance through harsh means, such as using heated prods.

Ethical Alternatives to Animal Riding

Instead of engaging in activities where animals are ridden for mere pleasure, consider walking alongside them or observing them from afar. When animals are used as a mode of transportation, alternatives like walking or using public transit are more humane choices. Supporting such practices with our wallets only perpetuates the industry. If you wish to appreciate these animals, embark on a responsible safari or visit a credible donkey sanctuary. Being informed and spreading awareness about the implications of animal rides is key to bringing about change.

Rethinking Common Wildlife Tourism Practices

Wildlife tourism, a booming sector of the travel industry, offers individuals the chance to get up close with nature’s most fascinating creatures. However, many of these interactions come at a significant cost to the animals involved. Tourist attractions, driven by the demand for unique and intimate encounters, regularly exploit animals for entertainment purposes. This could range from structured events like dolphin performances to more casual, yet still harmful, activities such as taking selfies with an elephant.

To ensure these animals remain docile and cooperative for human entertainment, many handlers and facilities resort to dominance-based techniques. These may encompass keeping the animals in confined and unnatural spaces, forcibly separating them from their families or social groups, or using physical force. As wildlife enthusiasts and responsible tourists, it’s crucial to research and support only those ventures that prioritize the animals’ welfare and promote their natural behaviors and habitats.

Ecosystem Disruption in Wildlife Tourism

While wildlife tourism aims to offer travelers unparalleled experiences with nature, its unintended consequences often ripple through entire ecosystems, affecting a multitude of species. Beyond the apparent and immediate harm to individual animals, these interactions can trigger far-reaching disturbances in environmental harmony. Such disruptions can arise from practices like feeding wildlife diets that deviate from their natural consumption patterns, clearing vast tracts of forests to create tourist-centric enclosures, or inundating serene natural habitats with large groups of tourists.

To illustrate, consider an experience in Langkawi, a popular tourist destination. Here, some tour guides, in an attempt to enhance the tourist experience, encourage visitors to feed eagles chicken skin. While this might seem like a harmless, fleeting interaction, it introduces an unnatural element into the eagles’ diet. Over time, such alterations can lead to imbalances in the local food chain, ultimately cascading into broader ecological disruptions. As the demand for wildlife tourism grows, it becomes paramount for both providers and tourists to understand and mitigate its potential adverse impacts on the environment.

Promoting Responsible Wildlife Tourism

The vast tapestry of wildlife that adorns our planet stands as a testament to nature’s brilliance, underscoring the urgency of preserving these treasures for future generations. While the allure of interacting with wildlife draws many tourists, it’s pivotal to channel this interest into sustainable and responsible avenues. Ethical wildlife tourism transcends mere observation. It encompasses sanctuaries dedicated to the rescue, rehabilitation, and release of animals, such as the commendable efforts at Elephant Nature Park in Chiang Mai, Thailand. Beyond that, there are proactive marine conservation projects that actively seek volunteer assistance to shield critical nesting grounds.

A sobering statistic from World Animal Protection reveals that a staggering 550,000 wild animals are held in captivity, often under dire conditions, all in the name of tourist amusement.

An Important Takeaway: Amplifying the narrative around the adverse effects of heedless wildlife tourism can make a palpable difference. You can contribute by sharing enlightening documentaries, endorsing relevant petitions, or diving into hands-on conservation activities, like initiatives focused on reforestation.

Wildlife tourism, intrinsically, is a bridge connecting human beings with the diverse tapestry of animal life that shares our world. This form of tourism opens doors to witness, marvel at, and occasionally interact with animals, be it in the untouched wild or in managed settings. While it undeniably deepens our connection and admiration for the wonders of the animal realm, it comes with an inherent responsibility. Pursuing wildlife tourism with an ethical compass not only prioritizes the well-being and dignity of these creatures but also champions the preservation of their native environments. By committing to responsible practices, we’re not just ensuring the survival of myriad species, but we’re also enhancing the ecological equilibrium and fostering a globally engaged and environmentally conscious society.

You May Also Like

Top Leading Eco-Tourism Companies for Sustainable Adventures

Tracking Wildlife Safely: The Power of GPS and VHF Collars

Kangaroo Conundrum: New Zealand’s Wildlife Mystique

More from author.

Your Ultimate Guide to Tauranga Adventures

Explore Dunedin, New Zealand: A Captivating City Brimming with Adventure

The Ultimate Guide to Exploring Waiheke Island: Where Adventure Meets Tranquility

+ there are no comments, cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

The Ultimate Guide to the Mount Maunganui Walk: A Hiker’s Haven

You may also like:.

Exploring the Tranquil Wilderness: Your Ultimate Guide to Moke Lake walk

Hiking Havens: Discover Queenstown’s Top Trails for the Ultimate Outdoor Adventure

Discover the Hidden Gem: What to Do on Stewart Island

Protecting Wildlife

Wildlife under threat.

Unfortunately, many of the iconic wildlife species that captivate us are also threatened by human activities. Animal and plant species around the world are facing extinction at up to  1000 times  the natural rate. Elephants, tigers, sea turtles, and orangutans are just a few of the species that are currently endangered. When one species goes extinct we not only lose that species forever, but it can also throw off the balance of the entire ecosystem.

Sustainable Wildlife Tourism

Tourism activities such as safaris, birdwatching, snorkeling, and nature photography all depend on healthy plants and animals. As wildlife tourism becomes increasingly popular, it’s important to ensure it happens in a sustainable manner. We believe that tourism can and should protect global biodiversity, safeguard habitats, and prioritize animal welfare. Afterall, there won’t be much to see if the plants and animals that inspire us no longer exist.

Protected Areas

Most wildlife tourism occurs in and around protected areas, such as nature reserves, national parks, and wilderness areas. In fact, it is estimated that protected areas around the world receive about  8 billion  visits every year.

By drawing visitors to remote regions, protected area tourism creates valuable economic benefits for rural communities and supports local businesses. Tourism also drives revenue to the protected areas themselves which helps finance their conservation.

However, tourism can also have harmful impacts on protected areas. Overvisitation and unsustainable behavior can disrupt the species that live there and degrade their fragile habitats. To conserve the plants and animals that tourism depends on, we must foster sustainable wildlife tourism and carefully manage visitation to protected areas.

Did You Know?

Scientists estimate that there are  8.7 million animal and plant species on earth.

Wildlife tourism supports nearly  22 million jobs around the world.

Visits to protected areas generate as much as  $600 billion   of tourism spending annually.

More than  1 million  plant and animal species are now threatened with extinction.

Explore the Issues

While most of us are well-intentioned wildlife lovers, if we are not aware, our travels can inadvertently cause animals to suffer, encourage the harvesting of endangered plants, or damage important wildlife habitats. Click below to learn more about the different issues that we’re addressing to protect the plant and animal species that tourism depends on.

Careless behavior and unethical attractions can harm animals and damage plants.

Harmful Wildlife Interactions

The construction of tourism infrastructure can destroy important habitats and impact wildlife.

Destructive Tourism Development

Tourism can diminish wildlife populations if species are overharvested for food, materials, or souvenirs.

Unsustainable Wildlife Harvesting

Waste generated by tourism threatens the lives and health of animals.

Waste & Pollution

Rising temperatures pose a threat to vulnerable wildlife species and global biodiversity.

Climate Change

When too many tourists visit a natural area, it can disturb the animals that live there.

Overtourism

How we safeguard nature.

Discover what we’re doing to protect freshwater resources and minimize tourism’s impacts on nature and wildlife.

Stay Connected

Get our email updates to see how we’re protecting our planet’s most vulnerable and treasured destinations

Newsletter Signup

• Enter your email address
• Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
• © 2024 | Sustainable Travel International
• Privacy Policy

Download Our Sustainable Travel Tips List

Subscribe to get your free tips list, plus sustainable travel emails and content

Check your inbox for our Sustainable Travel Tips.

Introduction: Wildlife Tourism Management and Phenomena: A Web of Complex Conceptual, Theoretical and Practical Issues

• First Online: 16 June 2017

Cite this chapter

• Ismar Borges de Lima 6 , 7 &
• Ronda J. Green 8 , 9  

Part of the book series: Geoheritage, Geoparks and Geotourism ((GGAG))

2355 Accesses

4 Citations

This introductory chapter highlights the major conceptual and practical issues regarding wildlife tourism worldwide. A series of events have brought concerns that the status and conditions of wild animals in the tourism needs further critical discussion, with current study cases being in the spotlight for analysis. There is a web of complexities permeating the field of wildlife tourism in terms of planning and management, not to mention the ethical issues. The current state of wildlife tourism draws attention to the need of in-depth reflections and insights on the use of animals as attractions as well as the needs and attitudes of tourism personnel and visitors. A change in perception of the natural world on the whole is needed, from a fully utilitarian view to a more compassionate one. The Earth is not home only for humans, so we need to break away from a predominantly anthropocentric view in our society. Indeed, within these epistemological and philosophical frames, ‘ecological’ and ‘conservation’ aspects have been regarded as fundamental for bringing a certain consensus to the equation on a morally acceptable human-nature relation for the 21st Century. This introductory chapter begins by presenting conceptual and disciplinary approaches to environmental social sciences, as well as human and political ecology, pertinent to this volume. It then presents some of the polemic cases involving wildlife and visitors, such as Cecil the lion, the tigers in the Thai Buddhist Temple, and, the killing of gorilla Harambe. The chapter concludes by presenting a summary of each chapter providing unique and original content to making this volume an exciting reading experience to update the readers' knowledge and understanding of the current state of wildlife tourism and issues facing it, as part of the bigger picture of our practical and ethical viewpoints of humans and the rest of nature on our planet.

This book gathers a great selection of case studies that fill gaps in the literature on wildlife tourism, by critically and insightfully informing the readers on theoretical and practical issues with regards to human and wild animal encounters, and the ways to approach, understand and manage this complex and intricate relationship.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Actman J (2016) Cecil the lion died one year ago—here’s what’s happened since. Wildlife Watch News. National Geographic (May, 2016). Retrieved from, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/06/cecil-african-lion-anniversary-death-trophy-hunting-zimbabwe/ . Accessed on 8 Dec 2016

Altschiller D (2011) Animal-assisted therapy. Health and medical issues today. Greenwood, Oxford, UK

Google Scholar  

Armstrong P (2011) The gaze of animals. In: Taylor N, Signal T (eds) Theorizing animals: re-thinking humanimal relations. Brill, Leiden & Boston, pp 175–201

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Archer J (1988) The behavioural biology of aggression. Cambridge University Press, Melbourne

Bauer J, Giles J (2002) Recreational hunting: an international perspective. Wildlife Tourism Research Report Series n. 13. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism—CRC, Queensland, Australia

BBC (2016) Thai Tiger Temple’s long history of controversy. Asia section (June 1, 2016). Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-36423321 . Accessed on 08 Dec 2016

Beatson P (2011) Mapping human animal relations. In: Taylor N, Signal T (eds) Theorizing animals: re-thinking humanimal relations. Brill, Leiden & Boston, pp 21–58

Bertelsmeier C, Bonnaud E, Gregory S, Courchamp F (2012) Applied ecology. In: Hastings A & Gross L (eds), Encyclopedia of theoretical ecology. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles

Brando S (2016) Wild animals in entertainment. In: Bovenkerk B, Keulartz FWJ (eds) Animal ethics in the age of humans: blurring boundaries in human-animal. Springer, Cham, pp 295–318

Cambronne A (2013) Deerland: American hunt for ecological balance and the essence of wilderness. Nature. Lyon Press, New York

Chandler CK (2012) Animal assisted therapy in counseling. Routledge, New York

Cunningham W, Cunningham M (2005) Environmental Science. McGraw-Hill Education, New York

Cusack O (1988) Pets and mental health. Routledge, London

de Lima IB (2009) Utilitarian and abstract rhetorics in ecotourism and social constructionism: the power of language. Int J Manag Decis Mak 10(231):2009

Duffy R, Moore L (2011) Global regulations and local practices: the politics and governance of animal welfare in elephant tourism, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(4-5):589–604

EcoWatch (2016) Five times animals have been killed in zoos due to human encounters. Animals (June 3, 2016). Retrieved from http://www.ecowatch.com/5-times-animals-have-been-killed-in-zoos-due-to-human-encounters-1891162359.html . Accessed on 08 Dec 2016

Engel TB, Galloway ML, Bull MP (1994) The horse, the handicapped and the riding team in a therapeutic program. A training manual for volunteers. University of Virginia, USA

Festa-Bianchet M, Apollonio M (eds) (2003) Animal behaviour and wildlife conservation. General introduction. Island Press, London, pp 3–12

Franklin A (1999) Animals and Modern Cultures: A sociology of human-animal relations in modernity. Sage Publications, London

Frost W (ed) (2011) Zoos and tourism: conservation, education, entertainment? Channel View Publications, Ontario

Green RJ, Higginbottom K (2001) The Negative Effects of Wildlife Tourism on Wildlife. Wildlife Tourism Research Report Series No. 5, status assessment of wildlife tourism in australia series, CRC for sustainable tourism, Queensland, Australia

Green RJ, Wood P (2015) Australian wildlife and research network. In: Slocum SL, Kline C, Holden A (eds) Scientific tourism: researchers as travellers. Taylor and Francis, New York, pp 164–180

Hastings A, Gross L (eds) (2012) Encyclopedia of theoretical ecology. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles

Higginbottom K (2004) Wildlife tourism: impacts, management and planning. CRC sustainable tourism & common ground, UniversityPress.com, Altona, Victoria, Australia

Higginbottom K, Northrope C, Green RJ (2001) The positive effects of wildlife tourism on wildlife. wildlife tourism research report series No. 6, status assessment of wildlife tourism in australia series, CRC for sustainable tourism, Queensland, Australia

Holden A (2016) Environment and tourism. Routledge, New York

Hughes M, Carlsen (2008) Human-wildlife interaction guidelines in Western Australia. J Ecotourism 7(2–3):147–159

Article   Google Scholar  

Humphrey SR, Bain JR (1990) Endangered animals of Thailand. Sandhill Crane Press Inc, Gainesville, Florida, USA

IISC (2016) Indian Institute of Science. Centre for Ecological Science. National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries and Biosphere Reserves in India. Retrieved from, http://ces.iisc.ernet.in/envis/sdev/parks.htm . Accessed on 08 Dec 2016

Ingold T (1988) Introduction. In: Ingold T (ed) What is an animal? Unwin Hyman, London, pp 1–16

Kemmerer L (2011) Theorizing others. In: Taylor N, Signal T (eds) Theorizing animals: re-thinking humanimal relations. Brill, Leiden & Boston, pp 59–86

Khullar DR (2016) Geography: fundamentals of physical geography and physical environment. New Saraswati House, New Delhi

Knight C, Sullivan M (2016) Gorilla killed after 3-year-old falls into zoo enclosure. Cincinnati.com. Retrieved from, http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/05/28/police-child-taken-hospital-after-falling-into-gorilla-pen/85095094/ . Accessed on 08 Dec 2016

Krichner J (2009) The balance of nature: ecology’s enduring myth. Princeton University Press, Princeton

Kontogeorgopoulos N (2009) Wildlife tourism in semi-captive settings: A case study of elephant camps in Northern Thailand. Current Issues in Tourism 12:429–44

Lair RC (1999) Gone astray: the care and management of the Asian elephant in domesticity. FAO. Forestry Department, Rome, Italy, and Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (RAP). Dharmasam Co, Bangkok, Thailand. Available online. Retrieved from, http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/AC774E/AC774E00.HTM . Accessed on 11 Dec 2016

Lindenmayer D, Burgman MA (2005) Practical conservation biology. Csiro Publishing, Collingwood

Markwell K (2015) Animals and tourism: understanding diverse relationships. Channel View Publications, Ontario

Melkania NP (1998) Towards an integrated conservation strategy. In: Singh V, Sharma ML (eds) Mountain ecosystems: a scenario of unsustainability. Indus Publishing Company, New Delhi, pp 89–100

Miller JR, Lerner RM, Schiamberg LB, Anderson PM (eds) (2002) Encyclopedia of human ecology A-H. ABC Clio, Santa Barbara, CA, USA & Oxford, UK

Mills DS, Marchant-Forde JN (eds) (2010) The encyclopedia of applied animal behaviour and welfare. CABI, London

Moran EF (2010) Environmental social science: human—environmental interactions and sustainability. Wiley, Oxford

Book   Google Scholar  

Moscardo G, Saltzer R (2005) Understanding tourism wildlife interactions: visitor market analysis. Technical Report. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism—CRC, Queensland, Australia

Newman JL (2013) Encountering gorillas: a chronicle of discovery, exploitation, understanding and survival. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Lanham

Novelli M, Humavindu MN (2005) Wildlife tourism: wildlife use vs local gain: trophy hunting in Namibia. In: Novelli M (ed) Niche tourism: contemporary issues, trends and cases. Elsevier Buttlerworth-Heinemann, Burlington, pp 171–182

Pickover M (2005) Animal rights in South Africa. Double Storey, Cape Town

Raina AK (2005) Ecology, wildlife and tourism development: principles, practices and strategies. Sarup & Sons, New Delhi

Ramsey A (2016) What really happened at Thailand’s Tiger Temple? News Features online. Aljazeera. Retrieved from, http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2016/06/happened-thailand-tiger-temple-160605074332073.html . Accessed on 08 Dec 2016

Reardon M (2012) Shaping Kruger: animal behaviour, ecology and management in Africa’s Premier Game Park. Struick Nature. Random House, Cape Town

Reynolds JE, Redfern JM, Shulstad RN (eds) (1974) Readings in natural resource economics. Committee on Soil and Water Conservation of the Agricultural Board. MSS Information Corporation, New York, pp 111–133

Romo R, Sholchet C (2013) Costa Rica to close zoos, release some animals. CNN Online. Regions. Retrieved from, http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/07/world/americas/costa-rica-zoo-cages/ . Accessed 12 Dec 2016

Roterman N (2016) Two lions killed to save suicidal young man in Chilean Zoo. Retrieved from, http://www.latintimes.com/two-lions-killed-save-suicidal-young-man-chilean-zoo-386300 . Accessed on 4 Dec 2016

Rowan R, Knowlton N, Baker A, Jara J (1997) Landscape ecology of algal symbionts creates variation in episodes of coral bleaching. Nature 388:265–269

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Semeniuk AD, Haider W, Cooper A, Rothley KD (2010) A linked model of animal ecology and human behavior for the management of wildlife tourism. Ecol Model 221(2010):2699–2713

Shapiro K (2002) The state of human-animal studies: solid, at the margin! Soc Anim 10:330–337

Shapiro K, Copeland MW (2005) Toward a critical theory of animal issues in fiction. Soc Anim 13:343–347

Smith M, Duffy R (2003) The ethics of tourism development. Routledge - Taylor & Francis: London and New York

Spaargaren G (2000) Ecological modernization theory and the changing discourse on environment and modernity. In: Spaargaren G, Mol APJ, Buttel FH (eds) Environment and global modernity. Studies in International Sociology 50. SAGE, New Delhi, India, pp 41–72

Stewart E (2013) No ethical way to keep elephants in captivity. A voice for elephants (May 3, 2013). National Geographic. Retrieved from, http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/tag/ed-stewart/ . Accessed 10 Dec 2016

Stoddart MCJ (2012) Making meaning out of mountains: the political ecology of skiing. UBC Press, Vancouver

Szarycz G (2011) The representation of animal actors: theorizing performance and performativity in the animal kingdom. In: Taylor N, Signal T (eds) Theorizing animals: re-thinking humanimal relations. Brill, Leiden & Boston, pp 149–174

Taylor AB, Goldsmith ML (eds) (2003) Gorilla biology: a multidisciplinary perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Tribe A (2001) Captive wildlife tourism in Australia. Wildlife Tourism Research Report Series n. 14. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism—CRC, Queensland, Australia

Tyler T (2009) Introduction; the case of the camel. In: Tyler T, Rossini MS (eds) Animal encounters. Brill, Leiden and Boston

Usher MB (ed) (1986) Wildlife conservation evaluation. Chapman and Hall, London

UNTWO (2016) World Tourism Organization - UNTWO Highlights 2016 Edition. Available online, http://www.e-unwto.org/doi/pdf/10.18111/9789284418145 , accessed on November 2016

Vaccaro I, Smith EA, Aswani S (2010) Environmental social sciences: methods and research design. Cambridge University Press, New York

Vidal J (2016) Tiger temple scandal exposes the shadowy billion-dollar Asian trade. The Guardian online (4th June 2016). Online content. Retrieved from, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/04/tiger-temple-scandal-billion-dollar-trade-china-thailand . Accessed on 08 Dec 2016

WPSI (2016) Wildlife protection society of India. Tiger Reserves. Sundarbans. Online content. Retrieved from, http://www.wpsi-india.org/tiger/sundarban.php . Accessed on 08 Dec 2016

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Business and Tourism, Southern Cross University, Gold Coast, Australia

Ismar Borges de Lima

MultiAmazon lab, Recinatur Intl Foundation, and UNIFESSPA, Roraima State University, UERR, Boa Vista, Brazil

Environmental Futures Research Institute, Griffith University, Nathan, Australia

Ronda J. Green

Wildlife Tourism Australia Inc., Rathdowney, Australia

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ismar Borges de Lima .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

School of Business and Tourism, Southern Cross University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia

Wildlife Tourism Australia (WTA) , Rathdowney, Queensland, Australia

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Borges de Lima, I., Green, R.J. (2017). Introduction: Wildlife Tourism Management and Phenomena: A Web of Complex Conceptual, Theoretical and Practical Issues. In: Borges de Lima, I., Green, R. (eds) Wildlife Tourism, Environmental Learning and Ethical Encounters. Geoheritage, Geoparks and Geotourism. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55574-4_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55574-4_1

Published : 16 June 2017

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-55573-7

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-55574-4

eBook Packages : Earth and Environmental Science Earth and Environmental Science (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Why Wildlife Tourism Isn’t Always A Good Thing

Disclaimer: Some posts on Tourism Teacher may contain affiliate links. If you appreciate this content, you can show your support by making a purchase through these links or by buying me a coffee . Thank you for your support!

Wildlife tourism refers to any tourism that involves wildlife- from swimming with dolphins to volunteering at a turtle conservation centre. The wildlife tourism industry is diverse, taking many different shapes and forms. However, the wildlife tourism industry is also very controversial and has been subject to a lot of negative media coverage in recent years.

In this article I will teach you about what wildlife tourism is and I will introduce you to the different types of wildlife tourism that occur around the world. I will also explain to you why this is a very important industry and the many advantages of wildlife tourism. Lastly, I will outline some of the negative aspects that are associated with wildlife tourism and provide suggestions on how wildlife tourism can be responsible.

What is wildlife tourism?

Zoos and aquariums, animal rescue centres and sanctuaries, birdwatching, whale watching, hunting and fishing, swimming with dolphins, playing with lions and tigers, cuddling a panda, elephant riding, shark cage diving, gorilla trekking, monkey forests, ostrich riding, conservation, breeding porogrammes, economic benefits, job creation, mistreatment of the animals, introduction of disease, wild animals can be dangerous, changes in animal behaviour, reduced breeding success, do your research before you go, don’t get too close, sanctuaries and rescue centres are better than zoos, don’t mess with nature, animal souvenirs, eat carefully, raise awareness about wildlife tourism, wildlife tourism: further reading.

Put simply, wildlife tourism is tourism that involves wildlife. But the important question is, what is wildlife? And when does a wild animal stop being ‘wild’?

Most types of animal tourism involves the use of animals that are or were once living in the wild. Whether its a stray cat who was taken into a shelter, or a zoo-based rhinoceros that was rescued from poachers, unless bred in captivity, the majority of animals that we see in the tourism industry come from the wild.

As such, wildlife tourism, in its broadest sense, encounters all types of tourism that involves animals. Types of wildlife tourism can then be segregated into two categories: animals in captivity and animals in the wild.

Types of wildlife tourism

There are many different types of wildlife tourism.

The United Nations estimates that tourism involving wildlife accounts for around 7% of all tourism around the world. However, they exclude animals in captivity, so unreality this figure is likely much higher. From safaris in Tanzania to diving at then Great Barrier Reef, there are plenty of ways that tourists can watch and get up close and personal with wildlife.

Below, Have outlined the most commonly found types of wildlife tourism around the world, with examples.

A safari takes place in an animal’s natural habitat. Safari’s usually involve the use of a small safari vehicle and a ranger, who will drive tourists to areas where there are likely to be animals.

Safari is traditionally associated with Africa, but can also be found in other parts of the world.

Popular safari destinations: Tanzania; Kenya; South Africa

A zoo or an aquarium is a place where animals are kept captivity, usually in cages. Zoos are renowned for having small enclosures and for domesticating animals.

Some zoos and aquariums have important research projects and breeding programmes. Many will also take on rescue animals or marine life.

Popular zoos: San Diego Zoo; Singapore Zoo; Australia zoo, London Zoo

Popular aquariums: Georgia aquarium; Marine Life Park, Sentosa, Singapore; Dubai Mall Aquarium

Many farms around the world have been commercialised to allow visitors in to see the animals. They may include feeding experiences and the opportunity to interact with the animals, such as stocking the rabbits or riding the horses.

Farms are usually small, independently owned businesses that are not famous around the world, but that are well known within the local area.

Animal rescue centres and sanctuaries are businesses who rescue animals and then care for them.

Oftentimes they will look like a zoo, and may be commercialised in a similar way. However, the funds made should be reinvested into the business, rather than for profitable gain.

Popular animal rescue centres and sanctuaries: Elephant Nature Park, Thailand; Lonely Pine Koala Sanctuary, Australia; Sloth Sanctuary of Costa Rica ; The David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust, Kenya; Panda Research Centre,Chengdu, China

Birdwatching, also referred to as birding, occurs in a bird’s natural habitat. It involves watching the birds, often from a distance with the use of binoculars.

It can also involve the use of a webcam, facilitating virtual tourism .

Popular birdwatching destinations: The Gambia ; The Galapagos; The Pantanal, Brazil

Whale watching usually occurs on tours, when tourists will be taken out to sea on a boat in search of whales. There will usually be a guide who will provide details about the whales and who is able to spot them easily through a trained eye.

Popular what watching destinations: Australia; Iceland; South Africa ; Canada

Hunting is the practice of pursuing and capturing or killing wild animals. Many animals are hunted for enjoyment throughout the world, from deer to pigeon to bears.

Hunting can be both legal and illegal depending on where it takes place and what is being hunted.

Likewise, fishing is a popular activity around the globe. Some people fish for enjoyment and return the fish to the water once caught and others eat or sell the fish.

Popular hunting animals: Deer; pigeon; rabbit; bears

Diving is a popular form of wildlife tourism, enabling tourists to experience life beneath the sea.

Many people will undertake PADI courses or similar to enable them to dive deeper and swim further.

Popular dive sites: the Great Barrier Reef, Australia; The Red Sea,Egypt ; Blue Hole,Belize, Gili Islands, Bali

Wildlife encounters

Many people are keen to get up close and personal with wildlife.

Back in the 2000’s everyone was doing it. If you had a photo of you and a baby tiger as your Facebook profile picture you were one of the cool kids. Upload that same photo today and you will likely experience a barrage of abuse from your nature-loving friends and connections.

Some types of wildlife encounters are great. Take volunteer work, for example. There are many conservation projects around the world that are desperate for volunteer tourists to help run their operations.

However, most animals encounters are not so good. Animals are often drugged or abused to keep them calm around the tourists. They are kept in inhumane conditions and treated unethically- I mean, would you want to walk up and down the road all day long with people on your back?!

Here are some the most common wildlife encounters around the world:

You can swim with dolphins in the wild in a handful of places around the world.

It is more common, however, to swim with dolphins that are in enclosures. These animals are taken out of their natural habitats and asked to perform trips and entertain tourists.

Popular places to swim with dolphins: USA, Mexico, Bahamas , Portugal.

There are plenty of places that allow you to have an up close and personal experience with lions and tigers.

Naturally, these are dangerous animals, so that instantly raises alarm bells to me. Oftentimes these animals are drugged and abused to ensure that they ‘perform’ for the tourist.

Popular places to play with lions and tigers: Thailand, India , South Africa

Cuddling a panda is a thing of the past unless you are a volunteer tourist (and still many would argue even this is unethical). The last commercial activity which enabled you to cuddle and have your photograph taken with a panda stopped operations in 2018.

However, there are still plenty of opportunities to visit the famous giant pandas, most of which are in China .

Popular places to visit pandas: China

Elephant riding is most commonly found in Asia. Elephants are used to carry tourists around as a leisure activity. There have been many ethical debates about this, which has resulted in a reduction of elephant rides taken around the world.

Now, many elephant organisations are trying to appeal to tourists who take a more ethical approach by transforming their organisation into an ‘elephant sanctuary. Whilst these are sometimes genuine, with ethical practices, some are not so- they simply disguise their unethical approaches by giving themselves the title ‘sanctuary’.

Popular elephant riding destinations: Thailand , Cambodia, India

A cat cafe is a venue that houses a variety of cats, whilst also serving basic food and beverages. People pay an entrance fee or hourly rate to sit with the cats. You can play with the cats and stroke them. Cat cafes are most commonly found in Asia and are particularly popular in Japan, although you can also find them in other parts of the world.

Some cat cafes claim to be rescue centres or sanctuaries, but most operate on a for-profit business. Some do not allow young children in, for fear off them scaring or hurting the animals. Others have no such rules. A cafe is obviously not a natural place for a cat to live, and some argue that the concept in unethical.

Popular destinations with cat cafes: Japan, Thailand ,

Shark cage diving is essentially underwater diving or snorkelling whilst inside a cage. A process called chumming ( baiting the sharks with minced fish) is used to lure the sharks towards the cage.

Shark cage diving can be dangerous both for the person inside the cage and for the shark. The methods are also questionable. Encouraging the sharks to behave in a way that they wouldn’t usually will lead to lasting behavioural changes, which will inevitably have a knock on effect on other marine life and the wider ecosystem.

Popular shark cage diving destinations: South Africa, Florida

Gorilla trekking occurs in remote areas on the African continent . The concept is quite simple- tourists go hiking in search of gorillas.

Gorilla trekking is a unique experience, and tours are pricey. Tourists generally keep their distance and there have been few negative impacts reported.

However, there is always potential for abuse. Careful regulation and monitoring needs to remain in place to ensure that the gorillas are not tempted into certain areas with food or disturbed by the presence of trekkers.

Popular gorilla trekking destinations: Rwanda, Uganda

A monkey forest is a wooded area where monkeys live. This could be the monkeys’ natural habitat, but more likely they have been placed there intentionally.

Visitors will usually pay an entrance fee. They are then free to roam around the forested area and interact with the monkeys. Some monkey forest areas are relatively natural, whereas others may have monkey shows or circuses.

It can be dangerous to visit a monkey forest. As a result of human interaction and loss of natural habitat and feeding grounds monkey often become vicious. It is common for them to bite tourists, which then requires the person to visit a hospital for a rabies jab.

Ostrich riding occurs mostly on ostrich farms and was a popular tourist activity until fairly recently. In 2017, ostrich riding was banned in South Africa, which is where it most commonly occurred.

Ostrich riding as a form of wildlife tourism was/is unethical. This is because the weight of the tourist can seriously hurt the ostrich. It is also not good to make the ostrich spend its day running up and down with people on its back.

Popular places to ride an ostrich: South Africa

Benefits of wildlife tourism

Wildlife tourism can be a great thing. There are many positive impacts of wildlife tourism including; conservation, research, breeding programmes and economic benefits.

For many wildlife tourism businesses, conservation is their top priority. In fact, most places where the focus is conservation would rather not have any tourists come to visit at all, however it is the tourists that pay the bills and allow their business to operate.

Wildlife tourism businesses can be fantastic for conservation and can raise a lot of money. These types of businesses are usually charities or trusts. They do not make a profit and their intentions are wholesome.

Wildlife tourism also facilitates important research. Research can help us to further understand the animals and therefore to better cater for them, both in the wild and in captivity.

Many wildlife tourism projects have successful breeding programmes. From Siberian tigers and pandas in China to koalas in Australia to lions in Botswana, there are successful breeding programmes underway around the world.

Many of these programmes would not be able to operate without the money raised from tourists.

There are many positive economic impacts of wildlife tourism.

Wildlife tourism brings tourists to a given area, and they bring money with them! They spend money on hotels, on food and on transport.

This money can then be reinvested into the economy and spent on areas such as healthcare and education.

Another economic advantage of wildlife tourism that is worth mentioning is job creation. Whatever type of wildlife business it is, it will require staff. This helps to boost employment figures in the area as well as helping the boost the overall economic prospects resulting from wildlife tourism.

Disadvantages of wildlife tourism

Sadly, there are also many disadvantages of wildlife tourism. Whilst there is great potential for wildlife tourism to do good, many businesses are poorly managed and demonstrate unethical practices. This most commonly includes; the mistreatment of animals, introduction of disease, dangerous behaviour, changes in the animal’s behaviour and reduced breeding success.

Mistreatment of animals is common, especially in developing countries.

Fortunately, there is a lot more awareness of this nowadays than there once was. Recent years have seen many laws and regulations introduced in the name of animal welfare all over the world. This has helped to reduce the mistreatment of animals in the wildlife tourism business.

Nevertheless, mistreatment does still occur and it is pretty common. There are still circuses that use animals and attractions that make animals perform tricks for tourists. From elephant camps in Thailand to monkeys dressed as babies in Morocco, there are many examples of mistreatment around the world.

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, I think that all understand animals can pass disease onto humans. And this also works the other way around.

When tourists are allowed to have close interaction with animals there is a risk of them passing on illnesses that the animals do not have immunity to. A common cold might not be a big deal for a human, but it could kill a lion cub, for example.

Many of the people who work in animal tourism are not trained in this field and could unintentionally introduce disease either to humans or to the animals that they are working with.

Animals are unpredictable and can be dangerous. Elephants can easily trample people, sharks can bite and monkeys can give a person rabies.

Using animals in a tourism setting can have serious implications for its welfare and wellbeing.

How would you respond if you were locked in a cage and only let out to perform tricks? I bet your behaviour would change!

These behavioural changes can be unpredictable and dangerous, for both the tourist and the animal.

When animals are taken away from their usual habitat and exposed to tourists they may have trouble breeding.

For businesses that claim to be conservation centres, this can actually have the opposite effect. Instead of protecting the species it can exemplify and exhasberate its extinction.

Responsible wildlife tourism

The moral of the story here is this- wildlife tourism can be great, but it needs great management. When wildlife tourism is bad, it is very bad.

Wildlife tourism businesses need to operate under sustainable tourism practices. In recent years we have seen many wildlife tourism organisations change their practices. This is perhaps most common in Thailand, where many elephant riding companies have become sanctuaries.

But it’s not just down to the business, it’s down to us tourists too! Here are some of the things that can do to ensure responsible wildlife tourism.

This is sometimes easier said than done, because there isn’t always a great deal of information available about every wildlife tourism attraction. Nonetheless, you should always try to research the place that you are considering visiting before you do so.

There are many wildlife conscious people around in today’s world, and if it is a major attraction that you are thinking about going to then there will be reviews on Trip Advisor and other review sites. And if there is mistreatment of the animals then you will most likely find information about it here.

If the reviews are bad then I urge you not to go. Yes, you might get to have a cuddle with a lion cub, that’s cute. But think about the picture picture here.

Getting too close to animals can have a number of negative impacts. It can scare the animals, it can cause changes to their behaviour, it can cause them to stop breeding or relocate town area that is less safe. It can also be dangerous.

Be sensible and keep your distance from animals.

If you really want an animal experience, you should choose to visit a sanctuary or research centre rather than a zoo. From the outside, the differences might not be that obvious, but from the inside the differences are big.

The treatment of the animals should be better, to start with. Plus sanctuaries have underlying motives that are not about making money. They are there to protect, rehabilitate and conserve the species, not to exploit it. For these types of organisations, allowing visitors is a means of making enough money to support the conservation project, not a way to get rich as the expensive of a poor animal(s).

Beware, however. Some places label themselves as sanctuaries, when there is in reality little conservation involved. It is simply cover up for their less altruistic intentions. This is why doing your research is important- don’t just read what you see on the tin!

Let nature be nature. Don’t put clothes on animals, don’t feed them and don’t interfere with them.

All of these things lead to instant and progressive changes in animal behaviours. The wildlife that you are seeing today won’t be the same in 10 or 20 or 30 years if you keep messing with it.

Be mindful of souvenirs that you are buying. Sometimes souvenirs are made with ivy or animal fur, for example. This has inevitably involved the death of an animal. So be careful when you go shopping and think before you buy.

There’re also a number of destinations that use wildlife in their food and drink.

In Vietnam, for example, many backpackers think it is funny to drink snakes blood or drinks theatre made bu drowning live snakes in them. There is nothing funny our cool about killing a snake. End of.

In countries such as China and Japan, it is common to see (often endangered) shark on the menu un restaurants. And in Iceland you can eat whale or puffin. I’m not a vegetarian, but I draw the line on eating endangered animals, and you should too.

The most important thing you can do is raise awareness.

If you visit wildlife attraction that you think is doing a great job, write a review on Trip Advisor, tell your friends. Every little helps to support their cause.

Likewise, if you see an attraction that is operating unethically, then you should definitely speak out. This is especially important with smaller, lesser known attractions. If nobody tells you, then you don’t know, right?

I hope you have enjoyed reading this article about wildlife tourism and that you have learnt something new today! If you want to learn a bit more, then I recommend the following:

• Wildlife Tourism – A landmark contribution to the rapidly growing field of wildlife tourism, especially in regard to its underpinning foundations of science, conservation and policy. 
• Wildlife Tourism Futures: Encounters with Wild, Captive and Artificial Animals – An excellent book focussing on future wildlife tourism development and management; the experiential value, educational components and ethical relevance of tourism-animal encounters; and the technology applied to wildlife tourism. 
• Marine Wildlife and Tourism Management: Insights from the Natural and Social Sciences – This book demonstrates that through scientific approaches to understanding and managing tourist interactions with marine wildlife, sustainable marine tourism can be achieved.

Liked this article? Click to share!

What Is Ecotourism? Definition, Examples, and Pros and Cons

• Chapman University
• Sustainable Fashion
• Art & Media

Ecotourism Definition and Principles

Pros and cons.

• Examples of Ecotourism
• Frequently Asked Questions

Ecotourism is about more than simply visiting natural attractions or natural places; it’s about doing so in a responsible and sustainable manner. The term itself refers to traveling to natural areas with a focus on environmental conservation. The goal is to educate tourists about conservation efforts while offering them the chance to explore nature.

Ecotourism has benefited destinations like Madagascar, Ecuador, Kenya, and Costa Rica, and has helped provide economic growth in some of the world’s most impoverished communities. The global ecotourism market produced $92.2 billion in 2019 and is forecasted to generate $103.8 billion by 2027.

A conservationist by the name of Hector Ceballos-Lascurain is often credited with the first definition of ecotourism in 1987, that is, “tourism that consists in travelling to relatively undisturbed or uncontaminated natural areas with the specific object of studying, admiring and enjoying the scenery and its wild plants and animals, as well as any existing cultural manifestations (both past and present) found in these areas.”

The International Ecotourism Society (TIES), a non-profit organization dedicated to the development of ecotourism since 1990, defines ecotourism as “responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment, sustains the well-being of the local people, and involves interpretation and education [both in its staff and its guests].”

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) looks at ecotourism as a significant tool for conservation, though it shouldn’t be seen as a fix-all when it comes to conservation challenges:

“There may be some areas that are just not appropriate for ecotourism development and some businesses that just won’t work in the larger tourism market. That is why it is so important to understand the basics of developing and running a successful business, to ensure that your business idea is viable and will be profitable, allowing it to most effectively benefit the surrounding environment and communities.”

Marketing an ecosystem, species, or landscape towards ecotourists helps create value, and that value can help raise funds to protect and conserve those natural resources.

Sustainable ecotourism should be guided by three core principles: conservation, communities, and education.

Conservation

Conservation is arguably the most important component of ecotourism because it should offer long-term, sustainable solutions to enhancing and protecting biodiversity and nature. This is typically achieved through economic incentives paid by tourists seeking a nature-based experience, but can also come from the tourism organizations themselves, research, or direct environmental conservation efforts.

Communities

Ecotourism should increase employment opportunities and empower local communities, helping in the fight against global social issues like poverty and achieving sustainable development.

Interpretation

One of the most overlooked aspects of ecotourism is the education component. Yes, we all want to see these beautiful, natural places, but it also pays to learn about them. Increasing awareness about environmental issues and promoting a greater understanding and appreciation for nature is arguably just as important as conservation.

As one of the fastest growing sectors of the tourism industry, there are bound to be some downsides to ecotourism. Whenever humans interact with animals or even with the environment, it risks the chance of human-wildlife conflict or other negative effects; if done so with respect and responsibility in mind, however, ecotourism can reap enormous benefits to protected areas.

As an industry that relies heavily on the presentation of eco-friendly components to attract customers, ecotourism has the inevitable potential as a vessel for greenwashing. Part of planning a trip rooted in ecotourism is doing research to ensure that an organization is truly providing substantial benefits to the environment rather than exploiting it.

Ecotourism Can Provide Sustainable Income for Local Communities

Sustainably managed ecotourism can support poverty alleviation by providing employment for local communities, which can offer them alternative means of livelihood outside of unsustainable ones (such as poaching).

Research published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that communities in regions surrounding conservation areas in Costa Rica had poverty rates that were 16% lower than in areas that weren’t near protected parks. These protected areas didn’t just benefit from conservation funds due to ecotourism, but also helped to reduce poverty as well.

It Protects Natural Ecosystems

Ecotourism offers unique travel experiences focusing on nature and education, with an emphasis on sustainability and highlighting threatened or endangered species. It combines conservation with local communities and sustainable travel , highlighting principles (and operations) that minimize negative impacts and expose visitors to unique ecosystems and natural areas. When managed correctly, ecotourism can benefit both the traveler and the environment, since the money that goes into ecotourism often goes directly towards protecting the natural areas they visit.

Each year, researchers release findings on how tourist presence affects wildlife, sometimes with varying results. A study measuring levels of the stress hormone cortisol in wild habituated Malaysian orangutans found that the animals were not chronically stressed by the presence of ecotourists. The orangutans lived in the Lower Kinabatangan Wildlife Sanctuary, where a local community-managed organization operates while maintaining strict guidelines to protect them.

Ecotourism May Also Hurt Those Same Natural Ecosystems

Somewhat ironically, sometimes ecotourism can hurt ecosystems just as much as it can help. Another study in the journal Trends in Ecology and Evolution found that ecotourism can alter animal behaviors in ways that put them at risk. If the presence of humans changes the way animals behave, those changes may make them more vulnerable by influencing their reaction to predators or poachers.

It's not just the animals who are at risk. As ecotourism activities become too popular, it can lead to the construction of new infrastructure to accommodate more visitors. Similarly, more crowds mean more pressure on local resources, increased pollution, and a higher chance of damaging the soil and plant quality through erosion. On the social side, these activities may displace Indigenous groups or local communities from their native lands, preventing them from benefiting from the economic opportunities of tourism.

Ecotourism Offers the Opportunity to Experience Nature

Renown conservationist Jane Goodall has a famous quote: “Only if we understand, will we care. Only if we care, will we help. Only if we help, shall all be saved.” It can be difficult to understand something that we haven’t seen with our own eyes, and ecotourism gives travelers the opportunity to gain new experiences in natural areas while learning about the issues they face. 

Ecotourism also educates children about nature, potentially creating new generations of nature lovers that could someday become conservationists themselves. Even adult visitors may learn new ways to improve their ecological footprints .

EXAMPLES OF ECOTOURISM

The East African country has some competitive advantages over its neighbors thanks to its rich natural resources, paired with the fact that it has allocated over 25% of its total area to wildlife national parks and protected areas. Because of this, an estimated 90% of tourists visit to Tanzania seeking out ecotourism activities. Ecotourism, in turn, supports 400,000 jobs and accounts for 17.2% of the national GDP, earning about $1 billion each year as its leading economic sector.

Some of Tanzania’s biggest highlights include the Serengeti, Mount Kilimanjaro , and Zanzibar, though the country still often goes overlooked by American tourists. Visitors can take a walking safari tour in the famous Ngorongoro Conservation area, for example, with fees going to support the local Maasai community.

The country is also known for its chimpanzees , and there are several ecotourism opportunities in Gombe National Park that go directly towards protecting chimpanzee habitats.

Galapagos Islands

It comes as no surprise that the place first made famous by legendary naturalist Charles Darwin would go on to become one of the most sought-after ecotourism destinations on Earth, the Galapagos Islands .

The Directorate of the Galapagos National Park and the Ecuadorian Ministry of Tourism require tour providers to conserve water and energy, recycle waste, source locally produced goods, hire local employees with a fair wage, and offer employees additional training. A total of 97% of the land area on the Galapagos is part of the official national park, and all of its 330 islands have been divided into zones that are either completely free of human impact, protected restoration areas, or reduced impact zones adjacent to tourist-friendly areas.

Local authorities still have to be on their toes, however, since UNESCO lists increased tourism as one of the main threats facing the Galapagos today. The bulk of funding for the conservation and management of the archipelago comes from a combination of governmental institutions and entry fees paid by tourists.

Costa Rica is well-known throughout the world for its emphasis on nature-based tourism, from its numerous animal sanctuaries to its plethora of national parks and reserves. Programs like its “Ecological Blue Flag” program help inform tourists of beaches that have maintained a strict set of eco-friendly criteria.

The country’s forest cover went from 26% in 1983 to over 52% in 2021 thanks to the government’s decision to create more protected areas and promote ecotourism in the country . Now, over a quarter of its total land area is zoned as protected territory.

Costa Rica welcomes 1.7 million travelers per year, and most of them come to experience the country’s vibrant wildlife and diverse ecosystems. Its numerous biological reserves and protected parks hold some of the most extraordinary biodiversity on Earth, so the country takes special care to keep environmental conservation high on its list of priorities. 

New Zealand

In 2019, tourism generated $16.2 billion, or 5.8% of the GDP, in New Zealand. That same year, 8.4% of its citizens were employed in the tourism industry, and tourists generated $3.8 billion in tax revenue.

The country offers a vast number of ecotourism experiences, from animal sanctuaries to natural wildlife on land, sea, and even natural caves. New Zealand’s South Pacific environment, full of sights like glaciers and volcanic landscapes, is actually quite fragile, so the government puts a lot of effort into keeping it safe.

Tongariro National Park, for example, is the oldest national park in the country, and has been named by UNESCO as one of only 28 mixed cultural and natural World Heritage Sites. Its diverse volcanic landscapes and the cultural heritage of the indigenous Maori tribes within the create the perfect combination of community, education, and conservation.

How to Be a Responsible Ecotourist

• Ensure that the organizations you hire provide financial contributions to benefit conservation and find out where your money is going.
• Ask about specific steps the organization takes to protect the environment where they operate, such as recycling or promoting sustainable policies.
• Find out if they include the local community in their activities, such as hiring local guides, giving back, or through initiatives to empower the community.
• Make sure there are educational elements to the program. Does the organization take steps to respect the destination’s culture as well as its biodiversity?
• See if your organization is connected to a non-profit or charity like the International Ecotourism Society .
• Understand that wildlife interactions should be non-invasive and avoid negative impacts on the animals.

Ecotourism activities typically involve visiting and enjoying a natural place without disturbing the landscape or its inhabitants. This might involve going for a hike on a forest trail, mountain biking, surfing, bird watching, camping, or forest bathing . 

Traveling in a way that minimizes carbon emissions, like taking a train or bike instead of flying, may also be part of an ecotourism trip. Because these modes of travel tend to be slower, they may be appreciated as enjoyable and relaxing ecotourism activities.

The Wolf Conservation Center ’s programing in New York State is an example of ecotourism. This non-profit organization is dedicated to the preservation of endangered wolf species. It hosts educational sessions that allow visitors to observe wolves from a safe distance. These programs help to fund the nonprofit organization’s conservation and wildlife rehabilitation efforts.

Stonehouse, Bernard. " Ecotourism ." Environmental Geology: Encyclopedia of Earth Science , 1999, doi:10.1007/1-4020-4494-1_101

" What is Ecotourism? " The International Ecotourism Society .

" Tourism ." International Union for Conservation of Nature .

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1307712111

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0033357

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2015.09.010

https://doi.org/10.5897/JHMT2016.0207

" Galapagos Islands ." UNESCO .

" About Costa Rica ." Embassy of Costa Rica in Washington DC .

https://www.stats.govt.nz/information-releases/tourism-satellite-account-2019

• Costa Rica’s Keys to Success as a Sustainable Tourism Pioneer
• What Is Sustainable Tourism and Why Is It Important?
• What Is Community-Based Tourism? Definition and Popular Destinations
• How to Be a Sustainable Traveler: 18 Tips
• What Is Overtourism and Why Is It Such a Big Problem?
• Defeating Deforestation Through Rum, Chocolate, and Ecotourism
• Empowering Communities to Protect Their Ecosystems
• Best of Green Awards 2021: Sustainable Travel
• Why Bonobos Are Endangered and What We Can Do
• Why Are National Parks Important? Environmental, Social, and Economic Benefits
• IUCN President Tackles Biodiversity, Climate Change
• The World’s Smallest Tiger Is Inching Towards Extinction
• Ecuador Expands Protected Galapagos Marine Reserve by More Than 23,000 Square Miles
• What Is Voluntourism? Does It Help or Harm Communities?
• Regenerative Travel: What It Is and How It's Outperforming Sustainable Tourism
• New Zealand Aims to Become World's Largest 'Dark Sky Nation'

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Animals (Basel)

The Escalating Effects of Wildlife Tourism on Human–Wildlife Conflict

Qingming cui.

1 School of Tourism Management, South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, China; moc.621@gnimgniqiuc

2 South China Ecological Civilization Research Center, South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, China

3 School of Hotel Administration, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14850, USA; ude.llenroc@242ry

Honggang Xu

4 School of Tourism Management, Sun Yat-sen University, Zhuhai 519082, China

Associated Data

Simple summary.

Communities adjacent to protected areas usually face conflict with protected wildlife. Wildlife tourism is regarded as a tool to mitigate such conflict through bringing economic benefits to villagers and then increasing villagers’ tolerance of wildlife. We used qualitative methods to conduct a case study on a macaque tourism attraction in China and find that tourism may escalate rather than mitigate community–wildlife conflict. Provisioning food is a common way to attract wild animals to visit and stay in human activity areas. In the case of macaque tourism, anthropogenic food provision caused rapid population increase and more intra-group aggressive behaviors. More tourist–macaque interactions resulted in macaques becoming habituated to human’s presence. These ecological impacts on macaques led more invasion to the surrounding community and intensified resident–macaque conflict. Meanwhile, low community participation in tourism generated few benefits for residents and did not help alter residents’ hostile attitudes towards the macaques. Local residents gradually retreated from agriculture as the macaques became more intrusive. We propose a holistic model combining social and ecological perspectives to evaluate the role of wildlife tourism in resolving community–wildlife conflict. We suggest that wildlife tourism should minimize human–wildlife intimate interactions and food provision.

Human–wildlife conflict is a barrier to achieving sustainable biodiversity conservation and community development in protected areas. Tourism is often regarded as a tool to mitigate such conflict. However, existing studies have mainly adopted a socio-economic perspective to examine the benefits of tourism for communities, neglecting the ecological effects of tourism. This case study of macaque tourism on a peninsula in China illustrates that tourism can escalate rather than mitigate human–wildlife conflict. Fifty-three stakeholders were interviewed and secondary data were collected to understand the development of rhesus macaque ( Macaca mulatta ) tourism and community–macaque conflict. The results show that food provision and tourist–macaque interactions rapidly increased the macaques’ population, habituation, and aggressive behaviors, which led them to invade the surrounding community more often and exacerbated human–macaque conflict. Meanwhile, low community participation in tourism generated few benefits for residents and did not help alter residents’ hostile attitudes towards the macaques. Local residents gradually retreated from agriculture as the macaques became more intrusive. A holistic approach to evaluating the role of wildlife tourism in resolving community–wildlife conflict is proposed and practical suggestions for alleviating such conflict are given.

1. Introduction

In the past few decades, protected areas have been one of the main tools for maintaining and improving biodiversity conservation [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ]. However, there are tensions between wildlife conservation and the development of communities adjacent to protected areas [ 5 , 6 ]. The establishment of protected areas deprives communities of natural resources and restricts industrial and agricultural development, suggesting that to conserve ecology and wildlife, those communities sacrifice economic opportunities [ 7 , 8 , 9 ]. Moreover, wild animals often cross the borders of protected areas and enter neighboring communities, causing human–wildlife conflict [ 10 , 11 ]. The costs that wildlife impose upon local people include crop-raiding, livestock loss, human attacks, and opportunity and transaction costs [ 8 , 12 ]. Local residents who suffer economic, social, and health losses may then become hostile to wildlife and conservation, and even harm or kill wild animals for revenge [ 12 , 13 ]. Human–wildlife conflict is therefore one of the main problems besetting sustainable wildlife conservation and the sustainable livelihoods of local communities. “Human–wildlife conflict” in this study mainly refers to the community–wildlife conflict, following most other conservation studies, e.g., [ 12 , 14 , 15 ].

Wildlife tourism development has been proposed as a solution to human–wildlife conflict [ 3 , 14 , 15 ]. Recent studies have focused on examining whether and how tourism benefits can alter communities’ hostile attitudes and livelihoods from the economic and social perspectives [ 16 ]. In this article, we argue that those studies neglect the ecological costs of wildlife tourism. Human–wildlife interactions in tourism can bring about various adaptive ecological and behavioral changes that cause wildlife to become a nuisance and make human–wildlife conflict difficult to manage [ 17 , 18 ]. The introduction of profit-driven wildlife tourism in protected areas can trigger complicity in relation to human–wildlife conflict and result in a divergence from original conservation principles. In order to bridge the above research gap, we propose a holistic approach that synthesizes social and ecological perspectives to examine the interactions among tourism businesses, local community, and wildlife.

We use macaque tourism in Hainan Province, China, as a case study to show how wildlife tourism can intensify, rather than mitigate, human–wildlife conflict. The specific research questions include: (1) How do the community residents cope with the community–wildlife conflict? (2) How does the community participate in tourism, and can tourism benefits change the community’s attitude towards wildlife? (3) How does tourism activities affect wildlife? (4) Does wildlife tourism exacerbate or mitigate human–wildlife conflict if assessing the socio-economic benefits and ecological costs combined?

2. Literature Review

2.1. tourism as a way to mitigate human–wildlife conflict.

There are controversial arguments about whether and how tourism development mitigates human–wildlife conflict in protected areas. Many studies endorse the premise that tourism benefits that accrue to local residents can raise villagers’ environmental awareness, increase residents’ tolerance of wildlife [ 15 ], and transform traditional livelihoods [ 19 ]. For instance, Mbaiwa and Stronza found that in Okavango Delta, three communities participating in tourism had stopped traditional activities, such as hunting, gathering, livestock raising, and crop farming [ 20 ]. Tourism revenue-sharing projects in gorilla tourism in Rwanda and Uganda have received the most research attention, with studies finding that national park officials and local representatives believe that revenue-sharing is the most significant advantage of living adjacent to gorilla national parks [ 21 ] and that residents benefit from tourism revenue-sharing through infrastructure projects [ 22 , 23 ]. Cases from Brazil and Peru also support the argument that tourism benefits local residents, and that local participation in management can generate conservation attitudes and actions [ 24 ].

However, other scholars have questioned the effectiveness of tourism in improving community development and biodiversity conservation [ 9 , 16 , 25 ]. Swemmer et al. pointed out that “benefit sharing is messy, is complex, and occurs at various scales with multiple trade-offs” [ 26 ] (p. 17). Stakeholders at different scales have heterogeneous demands for revenue, for various reasons. For instance, communities in Uganda’s Mgahinga Gorilla National Park were found to want benefits to compensate for crop and livestock losses caused by wildlife, park officials hoped to use tourism revenues to offset the costs of management, and the national government tended to allocate tourism revenues according to the conservation needs of the whole state [ 27 ]. In many developing countries, the government and park authorities have the power to determine the allocation of tourism revenues, and communities lack access to participation in the decision-making process [ 25 , 28 , 29 ].

In addition to unequal power relations and a lack of local participation, the uneven distribution of tourism benefits is another problem [ 16 ]. Within communities, poor residents often perceive that the elite obtain the majority of tourism benefits [ 22 , 28 ]. Hemson et al. noted that only residents in tourism industry gain benefits; most local residents are not beneficiaries of tourism [ 30 ]. Tourism revenues may not be distributed evenly among different communities. For example, residents in the buffer zone of Nepal’s Chitwan National Park are constrained in their use of natural resources, but only those villages close to the park’s entry points benefit from tourism incentives [ 31 ]. In China’s Wolong Giant Panda Nature Reserve, the communities close to main roads gain more income from tourism than the remote communities that bear greater costs of conservation [ 32 ]. The spatial unevenness of revenue distribution has also been found in gorilla national parks in central Africa [ 25 , 33 , 34 ].

Moreover, the distribution of tourism economic incentives is often mismatched. Crop-raiding and livestock loss caused by wildlife are the problems of most concern to local residents [ 25 , 34 ]. However, tourism benefits are often allocated to improving social infrastructures, such as clinics, schools, roads, bridges, wells, and water tanks, rather than direct compensation or the prevention of human–wildlife conflict [ 21 , 22 ]. Because of this mismatch, local people remain hostile towards wildlife [ 30 ]. The locals in Kibale National Park in Uganda regard building elephant trenches as being better than building schools and roads [ 35 ]. Many scholars have therefore suggested that tourism revenues should be used to directly offset losses caused by human–wildlife conflict to more effectively improve local attitudes to conservation [ 22 , 25 , 28 , 34 ].

Generally, existing studies mainly evaluate the role of tourism in conservation from the socio-economic dimension, and conclude that although tourism benefits contribute to changing local people’s attitudes towards wildlife and conservation, the effectiveness of tourism is limited due to the unequal, uneven, and mismatched distribution of benefits [ 16 , 36 ]. By contrast, few studies consider the ecological impacts when assessing the impact of tourism on mitigating human–wildlife conflict. Many protected areas use their unique species as tourist attractions to generate economic revenues. However, wildlife-based tourism development is not without cost. Tourism activities can generate negative effects on wild animals [ 37 , 38 ], which should also be considered when evaluating social and economic benefits [ 39 ]. In the next section, we review the effects of wildlife tourism on macaques as an exemplar species.

2.2. The Effects of Wildlife Tourism on Macaques

Humanity has a long history of interacting with macaques ( genus Macaca ). In contemporary society, free-ranging macaques have become popular tourist attractions. There are 23 species of macaque distributed in Asia, North Africa, and Gibraltar, many of which are strongly involved in the tourism industry [ 40 ].

Wild animals usually avoid encountering humans, which makes wildlife-based tourism unpredictable and uncontrollable [ 41 ]. In non-captive macaque tourism, food provisioning is a common way to tempt macaques to stay in a certain area and become habituated to the presence of people [ 42 , 43 , 44 ]. In some wildlife tourism sites, feeding animals is itself an important tourist experience [ 44 ]. Provision of food is an effective strategy to increase the likelihood of tourists interacting with free-ranging macaques [ 44 ].

However, food provisioning and tourist activities have various negative effects on macaques [ 44 , 45 ]. Anthropogenic foods are highly caloric and are more palatable and more accessible than macaques’ natural foods. Wild macaques therefore spend more time at tourist sites and come to rely on the provided food supply, resulting in changes in their activity budgets and dietary diversity [ 43 , 46 ]. Provisioning also affects the population in diverse ways. A stable, intensive, and abundant food supply can dramatically increase the population of macaques [ 39 , 44 , 47 ]; however, close contact raises the possibility of mutual pathogen transmission between humans and macaques, which can further affect the health and population of the animals [ 48 ].

Macaques in tourism areas gradually develop interspecific aggressive behaviors. The presence and proximity of tourists can elevate Barbary macaques’ anxiety levels [ 49 , 50 ]. Many tourists are not satisfied with inactive wildlife. They often tease monkeys to behave more actively by pointing, waving, slapping, mimicking, yelling, throwing food, and even threatening [ 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 ]. Many studies show that tourists initiate the majority of interactions with macaques [ 54 , 55 ]. Tourists’ provocative behaviors induce monkeys’ agonistic responses such as biting, scratching, hitting, and threatening [ 52 , 56 ]. Because of interspecific differences, tourists generally misinterpret the meaning of monkeys’ behaviors, which may enhance the agonism. For example, Maréchal et al. found that in interactions, most tourists cannot identify the exact meanings of macaques’ facial expressions [ 57 ]. The longer the history of visitors’ interactions with macaques, the more aggressive the macaques may become [ 58 ].

Food provision also intensifies intraspecific agonism. Monkeys fight with each other during the feeding time [ 59 ]. There is a positive correlation between food provision and the frequency of in-group aggression [ 54 ]. Furthermore, tourists like to feed baby monkeys, which they perceive as cuter than adults [ 51 ]. This preference violates the strict hierarchy among macaque groups and increases the rate of attacks on baby and juvenile macaques by male adult macaques [ 51 , 59 ].

Despite these negative impacts, some scholars regard human–macaque interactions in tourism as opportunities that have stimulated the evolution of macaques [ 18 ]. Evidence for this point of view is the robbing and bartering behavior developed by long-tailed macaques at Uluwatu Temple, Indonesia [ 60 ]. The macaques have learned to steal inedible objects such as glasses and hats from tourists and barter the objects for food with the staff. This innovation has been socially learned and has spread in the group, suggesting that human–macaque interactions in tourism can cause significant cultural change in a macaque group [ 61 ].

Existing research shows that tourism affects macaques at the population, behavioral, and cultural levels. Macaques can develop adaptive behaviors in anthropogenic tourism environments. Barrett, Stanton and Benson-Amram called for more studies to explore the roles of animals’ adaptive behaviors in worsening or mitigating human–wildlife conflict in protected areas [ 17 ]. This study uses macaque tourism in China to show that the effects of tourism on macaques can exacerbate rather than mitigate human–wildlife conflict.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. study site.

The study site is Nanwan peninsula in Lingshui county, Hainan, China ( Figure 1 ). This peninsula consists of three main areas: Nanwan Macaque Provincial Nature Reserve, Monkey Tourism Park, and Nanwan Village. The nature reserve was established in 1965 and covers 10.2 square kilometers [ 56 ]. The reserve contains more than 2000 rhesus macaques ( Macaca mulatta ), which are second class protected animals in China. There is a protection station responsible for conservation work. In 1974, a tourism park was built in the experimental zone of the nature reserve. Food was used to attract wild monkeys into the tourism area [ 62 ]. In 2020, more than 500 monkeys visit the tourism park every day, and approximately one million tourists visit every year. Nanwan Village, which has approximately 550 residents, is also located in the experimental zone of the reserve. Agriculture is still the way of life for some villagers. Macaques often cross the border of the nature reserve and enter the village, causing community–macaque conflict.

Map of the study site.

The macaques are the only target attraction in this area. There are also some potentially attractive houseboats on the sea, where some water people still live. However, those houseboats are usually seen from the cable cars, few tourists approach them.

3.2. Data Collection

The research team visited the site 10 years ago and conducted a study attempting to understand the tourism development model of the conservation area. The current qualitative study is based on twice fieldwork conducted from 16 to 22 February 2019, and from 28 to 30 September 2020. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews and observation. We used the method of purposive sampling to find the people who best know the situations about tourism, community, and nature reserve. We interviewed 2 managers from the nature reserve, 2 managers and 5 staff from the Monkey Tourism Park, 26 tourists, the chairman of Nanwan Village and other 17 Nanwan villagers. We also interviewed a biologist who had studied the macaques in the park since 2013. Interviews with tourists were mainly conducted at the visitor center. The main questions were about the visitors’ general views on macaques, and how they perceived and reacted to aggressive macaques. Interactions between the tourists and macaques were observed and recorded as field notes. Interviews with managers and staff were conducted in their workplaces. We mainly asked about the development of scenic spots, management of the macaques, and community participation in tourism. The interviews with the nature reserve managers covered the establishment and development of the protected area, the protection of macaques, the relationship between the protected area and the tourism park, and responses to community–macaque conflict. Interviews with the villagers concerned their livelihood, their attitudes to macaques, and management of the nature reserve and tourism park. All interviewees gave their permission to be recorded.

Observation was mainly used to understand the spatial arrangements of tourism park, tourist routes, nature reserve, and community land utilization. For example, the route that tourists go to the park from the mainland and return, the distance between the community and the park, the locations of village mango groves. The spatial relations between the tourism park, nature reserve, and village are essential to understand human–macaque conflict (see Supplementary Materials Figures S1–S4 ).

In addition to the above first-hand data, we also searched second-hand data about the Monkey Tourism Park, such as published research articles (e.g., [ 56 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 ]), and news reports (e.g., [ 66 , 67 ]) to help comprehensively understand the history of tourism development and macaque protection.

3.3. Data Analysis

From numerous qualitative data analysis methods, we chose “thematic analysis” [ 68 ] to analyze our collected materials. During the data analysis, the audio records were transcribed first. Then, two authors separately read the first-hand and second-hand data repeatedly to get familiar with the data. Second, we generated many initial codes about conservation conditions, community-macaque conflicts, community participations in tourism, and tourism’s ecological impacts. Third, we thought about the relationships between codes and categorized these codes into many sub-themes and themes, including conservation modes, villagers’ strategies to cope with conflict with macaques, low community participation in tourism, and two main ecological impacts of tourism on macaques. Fourth, each of the two authors reviewed and named the themes. After that, we wrote an outline by relating these themes to explain the story of community–macaque conflict and tourism development, then compared the two outlines to obtain a mutually agreed version and construct a thematic map. The third author then compared this outline with the data to check its validity, and proposed a final thematic map (see Supplementary Materials Figure S5 ), on which the results are based. Finally, the three authors proposed a general model to explain the exacerbating effects of tourism on human–wildlife conflict according to the evidence from Nanwan.

4.1. Coercive Fortress Conservation and Spatial Exclusion of the Community

The community–macaque conflict on the Nanwan peninsula has existed for a long time. In the 1930s and 1950s, before the establishment of the nature reserve, the conflict was solved at the cost of a loss of macaques. To safeguard their crops, community residents killed macaques. When the nature reserve was established in 1965, there were only 5 groups of macaques left, comprising about 115 individuals [ 62 ].

The nature reserve system in China prohibits any use of natural resources in the core and buffer zones, and only allows limited research, education, tourism, and leisure activities in the experimental zone [ 69 ]. This management regulation tallies with the model of fortress conservation, according to which “biodiversity protection is best achieved by creating protected areas where ecosystems can function in isolation from human disturbance” and “only tourism, safari hunting, and scientific research are considered as appropriate uses within protected areas” [ 70 ] (p. 704). The fortress conservation in Nanwan is coercive and underpinned by national laws. All conservation work in the reserve is run from a protection station, which routinely sends rangers to patrol and record at various points in the reserve. Considering that the Nanwan villagers and their ancestors have lived in this area for a long time, this conservation model excludes the community residents from using resources that once belonged to them. It also means that Nanwan villagers sacrifice their development opportunities for conservation.

As a result of the coercive fortress conservation, macaques are well protected. The number of macaques has undergone a rapid increase. In 1988, there were 903 macaques in Nanwan nature reserve [ 63 ]. In 1998, the population was estimated to be 1300 [ 63 ]. In 2019, the manager of the nature reserve told us that the current estimate is more than 2000 macaques.

4.2. Community–Macaque Conflict and the Lack of Ecological Compensation

As the population of macaques has grown, community–macaque conflict has worsened. According to Lian and Jiang [ 64 ], the ecological capacity of Nanwan nature reserve can provide resources for 1900 macaques at most. The current macaque population level has exceeded the maximum capacity. In a study conducted in 2010 [ 65 ], an ecologist has pointed out the problem of ecological overshoot on Nanwan peninsula.

Many bold macaques now enter the community area to search for food. The most damaged crops include mangoes, sweet potatoes, and watermelons. In Nanwan village, nearly every household used to have a mango grove, and selling mangoes was one of their main income sources. When the mango harvest was better, a farmer could earn about $2800 USD to $4200 USD per year. However, when the mangoes are ripe, macaques enter into the groves almost every day. As one resident (L02) described: “We are the poorest village in this town area. When mangoes ripen, macaques come down to eat. They not only eat whatever they can, but also grab and throw away the rest.” Some monkeys have even broken into residents’ houses to search for cooked food or steal eggs from chicken pens. The locals show obvious hostility towards the monkeys by describing them as “public nuisances” and “thieves”.

Because of the legally protected status of the macaques, the community cannot hurt monkeys as their ancestors did in the past. After the establishment of the nature reserve, it was made very clear to the Nanwan villagers that capturing monkeys is illegal. Nowadays, the residents do not have effective ways to expel the annoying macaques. “Many macaques come to the village at a time. You cannot catch them. You cannot beat them. We know it is illegal. If we frighten them, they run to the top of the trees and cannot be driven away. They are animals, we cannot control them.” (L01). Some villagers tried to isolate mango groves from the macaques using nets, but staff from the protection station stopped that defense because they feared that the net may pose a threat to the macaques. The conflict between the community and the macaques became more tense.

As a result, villagers were eager to be compensated by the government for their loss of livelihood. However, the protection station manager said: “There is no special fund for ecological compensation in Hainan Province for macaque damage.” (SM01). Nanwan villagers complained about the lack of ecological compensation: “We live on mangoes, macaques often come down to eat, they [the protection station] do not give us money, even a penny.” (L02). With no ecological compensation, the conflict between villagers and macaques remains unsolved, even though the station manager is aware of the macaques’ crop-raiding.

4.3. Monkey Tourism and Limited Community Participation

The development of monkey tourism brought a new potential opportunity to solve the conflict between villagers and macaques. There is a long history of developing macaque tourism on Nanwan peninsula. In 1974, the staff of the protection station began to feed two groups of macaques and the area received tourists in 1980 [ 62 ]. Around 1985, the Lingshui county government established a tourism company and cooperated with the reserve to develop monkey tourism on a large scale [ 62 , 66 ]. After experiencing 10 years of rapid development, the tourism park began to decline [ 67 ]. To restore tourism development, in 1999 the county government sold the rights of developing the park to a private cable car company. To reinvigorate tourism development, the company built a two-kilometer cableway to connect the mainland to the peninsula, rebuilt the park’s infrastructure, and improved the park’s management [ 67 ]. The tourism development has followed the conservation plan, such that nobody can enter the core zone of the reserve; the tourism park is restricted to the experimental zone and tourists can only interact with macaques when the monkeys freely enter this zone [ 65 ]. The attraction is now a national 4A level scenic area and attracts approximately one million tourists every year.

However, the prosperity associated with the monkey tourism has not resulted in the economic development of Nanwan village for many reasons. The most important is that the enclaved mass tourism model leaves no room for business opportunities for the Nanwan villagers. Most visitors are package tourists. They enter the scenic area via the sightseeing cableway from Xincun town on the mainland. The trip is about two-hour visit. They then either take a cable car or a boat and shuttle bus back. There are no tourism products in the village. Thus, there are few intersections between the tourists’ activities and village spaces. The villagers once applied to do business in the scenic area, but were denied by the manager. “When the scenic area belonged to the county government, we could sell things inside. When the tourism company contracted with the local government, they promised we could still do business inside. But after selling for one month, we were driven away by the tourism company and were not allowed to sell things from then on.” (L08).

Second, the tourism park only employs a limited number of villagers, due to its adoption of a modern business management model. Well paid and skilled jobs can only be from outside the peninsula. There are more than 130 households in Nanwan village. Only about 10 of them have obtained low-salary jobs in tourism to do cleaning and security work. The average salary is about $230 USD per month, lower than working in other places. “Now only some old villagers work in the scenic spot as security guards. They look after the scenic spot during the night.” (L09). Work in tourism is not economically attractive compared with off-farm jobs in the city.

Third, about 10 households rent their land to the company managing the scenic area. However, the contract was signed 20 years ago for a period of 50 years with a land value based on its 1999 evaluation. The village chairman revealed that: “About 10 households have contracts with the scenic area. Rents are low. Now the park pays the rent every year, about $50 USD per household. Only about 10 households receive the money.” (L01). The residents are powerless compared to the company, who is a big tax-payer for Lingshui County. Thus, it is impossible for the residents to push the company to sign a new contract based on the current land value.

The perception of the tourism park manager is that the company is not responsible for community development and compensation for macaque damage. “I am not clear about the negotiation between the nature reserve and the community. It [the compensation] has nothing to do with our park. We are only responsible for business operations. Macaques belong to the nature reserve, who should be responsible for the compensation.” (PM01).

It may be true that for historical reasons, the partnership among the conservation committee, the park company, the village committee, and the villagers was not perfectly designed because the potential dynamics of tourism and the macaques were not clear initially. The major challenge now is that the initial collaboration model was not designed to enable all parties to negotiate and benefit from the collaboration when changes occur. In the next section, we show how the development of macaque tourism is likely to escalate community–macaque conflict, and demonstrate the obligation of the tourism industry to provide compensation.

4.4. Adaptive Macaques and Escalation of Human–Wildlife Conflict

4.4.1. population, aggression, and tourist–macaque conflict.

As with macaque tourism in other regions, developing tourism on Nanwan peninsula has had many ecological effects on monkeys. One of the most obvious impacts is the rapid growth of the macaque population. Food provision is the main method of attracting wild macaques to the tourism park area and keeping them there. Such provisioning started in 1974 and continues now. Usually, the macaques come down from nearby hills every morning, stay in the park area during the day and go back to the hills in the evening. The park staff feed the macaques at 08:00, 12:00, and 17:30 each day with wheat and various vegetables [ 56 ]. In 2013, around 80 g of food was formally provided per individual per day [ 71 ]. In addition, the park sells food for tourists to feed the macaques. Anthropogenic provision can increase macaque populations. A biologist who is studying macaques in the park said that “provision can lead to the growth of the monkey population within the park. My records are from 2013 to this year 2019 and show that the number of fertile adult female macaques has grown every year in this park.” (R1). More fertile adult female macaques mean that there are more baby macaques every year. Zhang et al. recorded 7 groups with approximately 350 individuals visiting the park in 2014 [ 56 ]. According to the official data, the macaque population grew from 393 in 2018 to 433 in 2019. The head of Department of Macaque Management estimated that the number is more than 500 in 2020 and there are about 80 new-born baby macaques every year. The population growth effect of tourism provision corresponds with studies of Barbary macaques in Gibraltar [ 47 ] and Japanese macaques in Oita [ 39 ].

Second, the macaques become habituated to the presence of people and more aggressive to tourists. The provisioned food (80 g/individual/day) is not enough to satisfy the needs of every monkey. Many monkeys develop robbing, biting, scratching, and threatening behaviors towards tourists. Zhang et al. recorded 195 instances of aggressive behavior, most of which were aimed at obtaining food [ 56 ]. Tourist-induced aggressive behaviors accounted for 54.67% of the total [ 56 ]. Visitors often pursue close interactions with monkeys by feeding and touching them, even though the park regulations and tour guides prohibit such behaviors.

During our field observations, we found that when entering the park, tour guides usually counselled visitors not to feed monkeys or hold drinks, foods or colorful bags in their hands, and they repeatedly reminded visitors not to open bags in front of the macaques to prevent robberies by the monkeys. Park managers also set up many noticeboards to remind the tourists not to engage in these “transgressive” behaviors, but still allowed tourists to buy park-provided food to feed the macaques. Tourists usually perceived the monkeys, especially baby monkeys, as “funny, cute, and human-like”, and thus “approachable and playful” (T01). Many tourists ignored or forgot the guides and warnings, and approached the macaques to feed, tease and interact with them. These behaviors are highly likely to incur an attack. Staff in the park’s clinic said that nearly every day there are incidents in which tourists are hurt by macaques. Moreover, there were 45.33% aggressive behaviors initiated by the macaques [ 56 ]. Sometimes monkeys actively rob food, drinks, and inedible objects such as paper napkins and glasses from careless tourists. Some bold adult male macaques may even open tourists’ bags to search for food.

The above evidence shows that macaques in Nanwan Monkey Park have developed adaptive aggressive behaviors through long-term human–macaque interactions to better obtain anthropogenic resources and maximize their benefits. Tourists who are bitten or scratched by macaques need to be given vaccines, which increases the economic cost of the park’s operation and leads to economic disputes with tourists and the tourism company. Therefore, the park has built many wooden “cages” for tourists to eat inside to avoid monkey robberies. A number of security guards have been recruited to constantly remind visitors to pay attention to safety, and stop tourists from engaging in transgressive behaviors. The security guards are also responsible for driving macaques back to the trees when they gather at the visitor center or trails. However, it is difficult for the guards to watch over such a high number of tourists and troublesome macaques. The interviewed biologist revealed that in recent years the park had decided to increase the amount of food provision with the aim of making the macaques fuller and thus reducing their attacks on tourists. Now, in 2020 the head of Department of Macaque Management told that the park fed 50 kg of rice and 10 kg of peanuts for the macaques every day, that is 100 g for an individual per day.

Many measures have been formulated to mitigate tourist–macaque conflict in the park. However, the impact of the aggressive monkeys on the local community on Nanwan peninsula has been largely neglected. The monkeys not only make trouble in the park, but also invade Nanwan village, intensifying community–macaque conflict.

4.4.2. Intensification of Community–Macaque Conflict

It is difficult for the rapidly increasing and aggressive macaques in the tourism park not to influence the community, because the park is next to the community’s mango groves and the macaques are free to range in the park, the nature reserve, and the village. The park is separated from one main piece of village’s mango groves by a wall, which “can only prevent humans entering the park, not stop the monkeys entering the mango grove”, commented by a villager (L16) (see Supplementary Materials Figure S3 ). The interviewed biologist revealed that “Nanwan village is just next to the monkey park. Sometimes park macaques do range in Nanwan Village.” (R01). Although there has been no quantitative research calculating the proportions of park macaques and nature reserve macaques invading Nanwan village, it can be sure that monkey tourism has affected the community–macaque relationship.

The effects of tourism on the population and behaviors of the macaques have contributed to the escalation of community–macaque conflict. First, the fact that the tourism park has provided a stable and increasing food source for macaques has made the park a “reservoir” of constantly reproducing macaques. These macaques inevitably overflow into the surrounding areas including the village, especially when the park does not provide abundant food. A resident (L07) commented that “A few years ago there were more monkeys because they [the park] did not provide enough food for the monkeys, who then came to the village to steal food. Now, they feed more food and monkeys have become fewer in our village.” The village head told that “There were more monkeys disturbing the village in the COVID-19 pandemic compared to past years, maybe because the tourism food provision became less” (L01). The problem is that more provision can only keep macaques in the park temporarily, at the cost of macaques reproducing in the future. Thus, it is predictable that more provision cannot resolve the conflict between the community and the macaques, but will eventually intensify it. Second, the park macaques have become habituated to the presence of humans. When they invade Nanwan village, they are not afraid of villagers. Hence, villagers have few methods to repel the macaques. “After our protection, the macaques live harmoniously with humans. When people treat macaques well and stop hurting them, their courage will increase and they will definitely come to the village to find food to eat.” (SM01). The ecological impacts of tourism on macaques complicate the community–macaque conflict.

Residents’ reactions to macaque invasion provides further evidence of the escalated conflict. Nanwan villagers usually adopt two strategies in response to the ongoing macaque invasions. Some villagers spend more time and energy watching out for macaques to defend their mangoes (see Supplementary Materials Figure S2 ). In the ripe season, they have to stop most other daily work to drive away the invading monkeys, who may appear in the village at any time. Although driving away the monkeys is quite time and labour consuming, this intense defense does not significantly reduce invasion by the macaques. For instance, “Near the harbour, a boss rents the land and has planted many mangoes. The operation is different. They employ special men to drive away macaques all the day. But they said there are still a lot of monkeys going to eat mangoes.” (L06). Even the professionalization of repelling monkeys cannot stop macaque damage. Thus, many other residents have given up planting in most of the mango groves near the hills and the park (see Supplementary Materials Figure S4 ). Some have even abandoned mango cultivation as a main livelihood and have chosen to find jobs in the county town. “Now my family members don’t care about whether the mangoes grow well or not. We find jobs in other places. My parents stay at home, but have also stopped planting mangoes.” (L04). Only about 15 households still plant mangoes now, according to the estimate of the village head. The strategies of intense defense against macaques and retreating from planting mangoes are the community’s helpless reactions to the escalation of community–macaque conflict.

5. Discussion

The Nanwan case shows a dynamic and growing pattern of human–macaque conflict over time. This conflict existed when the community lived on the island before the reserve was established and did not stop when the nature conservation system was implemented. However, conflicts intensified when tourism was introduced. The structures leading to these conflicts are presented in Figure 2 . We argue that making food available to macaques is the critical aspect underlying all of these complicated conflictual relationships.

Integrated model of tourism–macaque–community interactions.

In the absence of anthropogenic and external influences, wild macaques live mainly by foraging for natural food. Under this condition, the macaque population will not exceed the maximum ecological capacity, and in the long term, wild macaques and the natural environment will reach an ecological balance. As the top left loop in Figure 2 illustrates, natural food resources impose a constraint on the growth of macaque populations, and vice versa. In the loop without anthropogenic influence, ecological rule plays the vital role in controlling macaque population.

However, in reality there are usually human communities adjacent to protected areas, and their agricultural crops provide additional food sources for wildlife. Hence, when protected areas lack sufficient food, wild macaques will invade the surrounding communities for extra food. When crop raiding, macaques must bypass communities’ guards, which usually evolves into human–macaque conflict. In the case of Nanwan, the villagers have developed different strategies to cope with human–macaque conflict in different social, historical, and institutional contexts.

Before the establishment of the nature reserve and the legislation of macaque protection, humans had advantages over the monkeys. They often hunted the transgressive macaques to protect their crops, which reduced the wild macaque population. After the nature reserve was established, the advantages were reversed. The villagers were prohibited from hurting the macaques, even for the purpose of protecting their property. Subsequently, the residents adopted a defensive strategy in the short term and attempted to drive the nuisance macaques away. This defense was effective in reducing crop loss and restraining the rapid increase of macaques. However, because of the gradual habituation of the macaques to the presence of humans, the residents have become unable to find effective methods to expel the monkeys once and for all. Thus, their defense strategy has failed to stop the macaque invasion. Human–macaque conflict has heightened; crop damage has increased, and the macaque population has grown steadily. In the long term, as the labour and time costs of defense have continued to increase, the community has begun to retreat, stop planting crops and find alternative livelihoods, resulting in a further increase of the macaque population in the community’s agricultural area. The conservation policies and community’s livelihood strategies determine the community–macaque interactions. In the context of coercive fortress protection, macaques have big advantages over humans, and the community–macaque conflict loop will not be completely mitigated until the community fully retreats from agriculture.

The introduction of wildlife tourism was supposed to mitigate community–macaque conflict. However, food provision has exacerbated the conflict. The Monkey Tourism Park uses food to tempt wild macaques to visit the park regularly, as many other tourism attractions have done [ 39 , 51 , 52 ]. This attracts tourists who want to watch and interact with the monkeys at close range. Close tourist–macaque interactions induce frequent macaque attacks on tourists [ 52 , 56 ], which have resulted in additional economic costs and disputes for the tourism park. To reduce these attacks and their associated costs, the tourism park has increased the amount of food provided to make the macaques more satiated and thereby stop them robbing food from tourists. Thus, a vicious loop has developed. Commercial logic dominates this loop. For maximizing the profit, the tourism park must maintain and increase food provision to attract macaques coming and reduce macaque attacks. As a consequence, the population of macaques will keep growing [ 39 , 47 ]. Macaques may also develop adaptive behaviors, including aggressive behavior, in continuous interactions with humans [ 18 , 61 ].

As the macaque population grows, the food provided by the tourism park can never be enough. Some macaques inevitably intrude into the nearby village to search for edible crops. This widens the macaque–community conflict loop. Because of the constantly reinforced loop in the tourism park, crop damage is intensified as more and more macaques become habituated to and aggressive towards humans. As a result, the macaque population gradually increases and the community retreats from agriculture with a hostile attitude.

This integrated model provides a general theoretical explanation of the dynamic and growing pattern of human–macaque conflict under the impact of wildlife tourism. The model covers the interactions between tourism, the community, and the macaques that we can see. However, it needs more testing and validation before it can be extended to explain conflict between humans and other species in other regions.

6. Conclusions

In protected areas, human–wildlife conflict is one of the main barriers to achieving sustainable biodiversity conservation and community development [ 6 , 12 ]. Tourism is usually regarded as a way to mitigate human–wildlife conflict by involving communities in tourism to obtain benefits that will change their hostile attitude towards wildlife or transform traditional livelihoods [ 3 , 15 , 20 ]. Existing studies mainly focus on examining the effectiveness of tourism in mitigating human–wildlife conflict from social, economic, and political perspectives [ 16 , 36 ], ignoring the biological consequences to wildlife. This study contributes to understanding the effect of using tourism as a tool to mitigate human–wildlife conflict. The provision of food in wildlife tourism can dramatically change the natural ecosystem and the behaviors of macaques, as well as the balance between natural capacity and the number of macaques. Human–wildlife conflict worsens in this scenario.

This research suggests the need for a holistic, integrated, and dynamic approach to evaluating tourism development and solving human–wildlife conflict in protected areas. Human–wildlife conflict is not only embedded in social systems, but also involves ecosystems. Thus, it is not adequate to solely consider the social and economic benefits brought by tourism. It is also necessary to consider tourism’s impacts on wildlife and ecology. As wildlife habitats shrink, more wild animals will cross the borders of protected areas into peripheral spaces, which then become the hot spots at the human–wildlife interface. It should be recognized that it is nearly impossible to protect a species without any human disturbance in the Anthropocene [ 72 ]. Hence, a balanced approach is to assess the mitigating effects of wildlife tourism in human–wildlife conflict by integrating social and ecological/biological perspectives.

Moreover, scholars should pay more attention to the agency of animals. Animals are not passive things waiting for human actions. Wildlife can actively develop adaptive behaviors in anthropogenic environments to maximize its own benefits [ 18 ]. More human–wildlife interactions provide more opportunities for wildlife to acquire more adaptations [ 17 ], such as the robbing and bartering behaviors of long-tailed macaques in Bali [ 61 ]. This adaptation and evolution, when combined with coercive institutional protection, give wildlife many advantages in conflicts with humans and make the conflict unmanageable and uncontrollable, as in the case of Nanwan. Wildlife tourism is based on human–wildlife interactions, and their impact on the adaptation and evolution of wildlife should be fully considered.

Implications

The integrated model of tourism–macaque–community interactions proposed in this study needs validation for other species and in other regions. Trans-species interactions in tourism can generate different effects on different wildlife due to the heterogeneity of species [ 37 ]. Thus, wildlife may evolve heterogeneous behaviors and then influence community–wildlife conflict in different ways. For instance, human–elephant conflict is also a challenging problem due to the excellent memory ability of elephants and their high food demand. Moreover, the diversity of social, cultural, economic, and political contexts in which human–wildlife conflict is embedded means that different regions must adopt different strategies to cope with the conflict. Under China’s current policies, culling protected wildlife is not possible to control wildlife populations, but in some other countries the culling of overpopulated wildlife is a normal ecological management policy. Different social, cultural, and institutional contexts produce different ways to address human–wildlife conflict.

This study has many implications for practice. Our observations suggest that wildlife tourism attractions should design their activities cautiously and minimize human–wildlife interactions and food provision if possible. It is better to control tourists’ behaviors to meet the behavioral patterns of wildlife rather than the other way around. If the tourism sites plan to feed wildlife, it is better to provide food via formal supervised arrangement and eradicate tourists’ accidental and non-regulatory feeding activity [ 44 ]. Furthermore, the institutional design for cooperation among communities, tourism companies, and conservation committees should also be flexible to allow for the adjustment and re-negotiation of benefits and obligations, because the interaction among tourists, wildlife, community, and ecosystem is always evolving. Because, in general, local communities are in relatively weak bargaining positions, it is better for governments to establish special ecological compensation projects for wildlife damage, and control wildlife populations properly according to the principle of maintaining ecological balance.

Acknowledgments

We thank Huang Xuebing, Wu Chengfeng and Wei Cao for their help in collecting data, and thank Lin Jiayi for helping edit the map. We also give gratitude to the managers and staffs of Nanwan Nature Reserve and Monkey Tourism Park and the Nanwan villagers for accepting our interview. Thanks to two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments!

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ani11051378/s1 , Figure S1: A photographic illustration of the community–macaque conflict, Figure S2: Well-cared mango groves in a relatively remote place from the monkey park and reserve hills, Figure S3: The wall between the monkey park and mango groves, Figure S4: The abandoned mango groves beside the monkey park and reserve hills, Figure S5: The thematic map showing the (sub)themes from thematic analysis.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Q.C. and H.X.; methodology, Q.C. and Y.R.; validation, Q.C. and H.X.; formal analysis, Q.C. and Y.R.; investigation, Y.R.; resources, H.X.; data curation, Y.R.; writing—original draft preparation, Q.C. and Y.R.; writing—review and editing, Q.C. and H.X.; visualization, Q.C. and H.X.; supervision, H.X.; project administration, Q.C.; funding acquisition, Q.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China, grant number 41901161.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The manuscript does not need ethical approval. The paper deal with villagers’ conflict with macaques and the study has been run through a questionnaire.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

How can wildlife tourism be improved in India?

India is a land of incredible biodiversity and has long been a popular destination for wildlife tourism. With its varied terrain and unique wildlife, from tigers and elephants to birds and reptiles, India has something to offer for every wildlife enthusiast. However, as the number of tourists visiting protected areas increases, the negative impact on wildlife and their habitats becomes a concern. In fact, wildlife tourism was temporarily banned in 2010 due to these concerns.

It is crucial to explore ways to improve wildlife tourism in India to ensure that it remains sustainable in the long run. In this blog post, we will discuss some ways to achieve this, backed by scientific findings. From promoting ecotourism and developing sustainable tourism practices to enhancing visitor education and strengthening conservation efforts, several measures can be taken to minimize the negative impact of tourism on wildlife while also providing an immersive experience for visitors. Join us as we explore the ways to improve wildlife tourism in India and ensure that it remains a sustainable industry for years to come.

Promote Ecotourism

Ecotourism is a type of tourism that promotes responsible travel to natural areas while supporting conservation efforts and local communities. Encouraging ecotourism can help reduce the negative impact of tourism on wildlife and their habitats, as well as provide economic benefits to local communities . According to a study by WWF-India, ecotourism can also increase local awareness and support for conservation efforts.

India already has some successful examples of ecotourism. For instance, the Periyar Tiger Reserve in Kerala has been successful in promoting ecotourism by offering guided nature walks, bamboo rafting, and other eco-friendly activities. Such practices help to reduce the negative impact of tourism on wildlife and their habitats, while also providing an immersive experience for visitors.

Develop Sustainable Tourism Practices

Developing sustainable tourism practices is essential to minimizing the negative impact of tourism on wildlife and their habitats. This includes measures such as limiting the number of tourists, regulating visitor behavior, and enforcing guidelines for wildlife viewing.

Several studies have emphasized the importance of sustainable tourism practices for wildlife conservation. For example, a study by the Wildlife Conservation Society India found that unregulated tourism was a significant threat to tiger conservation in India. Therefore, it is crucial to regulate tourism to minimize its impact on wildlife.

One effective approach to promoting sustainable tourism is to develop carrying capacity models for different protected areas. This would help to determine the maximum number of visitors that a protected area can accommodate without causing harm to the wildlife or their habitats.

Enhance Visitor Education

Enhancing visitor education about wildlife conservation and sustainable tourism practices is critical to reducing negative impacts on wildlife. This can be done through interpretive displays, guided tours, and educational programs that teach visitors about the importance of conservation and responsible tourism practices.

Studies have shown that visitor education can be an effective tool for promoting sustainable tourism. For instance, a study by the Centre for Wildlife Studies found that visitors to Bandipur National Park in Karnataka were more likely to follow guidelines for responsible tourism if they had received educational materials about wildlife conservation.

To enhance visitor education, it is crucial to provide educational materials that are accessible and engaging. This could include interpretive displays, audio-visual presentations, and interactive exhibits. In addition, training local guides to provide accurate and engaging information to visitors can also be an effective way to enhance visitor education.

Strengthen Conservation Efforts

Strengthening conservation efforts is crucial for ensuring the long-term sustainability of wildlife tourism in India. This includes measures such as habitat protection, wildlife monitoring, and anti-poaching efforts. According to a study by the Wildlife Conservation Society-India, effective management of protected areas is essential for the conservation of India’s wildlife.

One effective approach to strengthening conservation efforts is to involve local communities in conservation efforts . This could include providing economic incentives for local communities to participate in conservation activities, such as patrolling protected areas and monitoring wildlife.

In addition, it is crucial to develop effective anti-poaching measures to prevent illegal hunting and trade in wildlife products. This could include increasing patrols in high-risk areas, improving law enforcement, and increasing penalties for wildlife crimes.

Encourage Responsible Wildlife Tourism

Encouraging responsible wildlife viewing practices is crucial for minimizing the disturbance to wildlife. This includes maintaining a safe distance, avoiding loud noises and sudden movements, and not feeding or touching the wildlife. Research suggests that these guidelines can reduce the impact of wildlife tourism on animal behavior and help maintain natural ecological processes. By following responsible wildlife viewing practices, visitors can have a more authentic experience while also minimizing their impact on wildlife and their habitats.

Moreover, visitors must also be mindful of the season and time of day while planning their wildlife viewing activities. Wildlife species have different activity patterns, and visiting them at the wrong time can disturb their natural behavior. For example, nocturnal animals may be disturbed by visitors during the day, and diurnal species may be disturbed at night. Hence, visitors must plan their wildlife viewing activities based on the season and time of day.

To promote responsible wildlife viewing practices, visitors can also be provided with information on the appropriate behavior and practices while visiting protected areas. This can be done through the use of signage, brochures, and interactive educational sessions. Visitors can also be encouraged to undergo training programs that teach them about the importance of responsible wildlife viewing practices.

The Way forward for Wildlife Tourism in India

In conclusion, India’s wildlife tourism industry can be improved by promoting ecotourism, developing sustainable tourism practices, enhancing visitor education, strengthening conservation efforts, and encouraging responsible wildlife viewing practices. These measures can not only minimize the negative impact of tourism on wildlife and their habitats but also provide economic benefits to local communities.

By working towards sustainable tourism practices, we can ensure that India’s wildlife remains protected and conserved for future generations to appreciate and enjoy. As we have seen from scientific studies, effective management of protected areas is essential for the conservation of India’s wildlife. By taking a collaborative approach that involves all stakeholders, we can achieve the goal of improving wildlife tourism in India while also conserving its natural heritage. Let us take responsibility as tourists and work towards sustainable tourism practices to ensure that wildlife tourism in India remains a sustainable industry for years to come.

Help us Help Them! Think Wildlife Foundation is a non profit organization with various conservation initiatives. Our most prominent campaign is our  Caring for Pari  intiative. Pari is a rehabilitated elephant at the Wildlife SoS Hospital. 25% of the profits from our  store  are donated to the elephant hospital for Pari. Other than buying our wonderful merchandise, you could donate directly to our  Caring For Pari fundraiser .

Written by : Krishnanunni TS

• CHECK OUR REVIEWS ON

Wildlife Tourism in India: Safari Adventures and National Park Delights

Posted on By Blog Admin

Wildlife tourism in India is a major attraction for all kinds of travellers – both for people travelling to India and for people from within India itself. This blog will cover all you need to know for your next wildlife encounters in India !

Table of Contents

Wildlife Tourism – Why is it important?

At Flying Squirrel Holidays, we define wildlife tourism as any visit to a place with the main objective being to see the natural flora and fauna of that particular destination.

Wildlife tourism is the best way to learn about the importance of nature . You get to see every aspect of the natural world working together in harmony to sustain this magical experience we all call life. You see the role of every single thing in nature, from the m ajestic animals to the mesmerising trees .

WIldlife tourism in India is an incredible experience for nature lovers. India is the seventh largest country in the world by area, with a myriad of ecosystems that result in a rich and varied biodiversity. 

Each part of India is rich in biodiversity and filled with unique flora and fauna. The climatic conditions and geographical differences between different parts of the country make wildlife tourism in India a nationwide affair. 

The Most Important Wildlife Zones in India – UNESCO World Heritage Sites

The unique climatic, biological and geographical diversity in India has been recognised throughout history. The importance of India’s biodiversity has resulted in many of India’s protected forests being named UNESCO World Heritage Sites . These particular protected areas represent unique combinations of biodiversity, geology and climatic conditions that cannot be found anywhere else.

Here are the biodiversity hotspots named as UNESCO World Heritage Sites in India

• Kaziranga National Park – Assam
• Keoladeo National Park – Rajasthan
• Khangchendzonga National Park – Sikkim
• Manas Wildlife Sanctuary – Assam
• Sundarbans National Park – West Bengal
• Nanda Devi and Valley of Flowers National Parks – Uttarakhand
• Western Ghats –  Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu
• Great Himalayan National Park Conservation Area – Himachal Pradesh

North India’s Wildlife Treasures-The Best Wildlife Safaris of North India

North India features a wide variety of breathtaking landscapes – mesmerizing plains, the majestic Himalayas and the hypnotic beauty of the Thar Desert. Apart from the well-known Golden Triangle and the myriad incredible cultural experiences in the region, it also contains many ecological treasures.

Nanda Devi and Valley of Flowers National Parks

These adjacent National Parks combined to form the Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve , covering over 70,000 hectares. Centered around the highest mountain located entirely within India’s borders, this region of the country contains a wealth of natural treasures.

The park is home to over 500 species of fauna, including rare species such as the snow leopard, Himalayan musk deer, and Himalayan brown bear. It is also known for having over 1000 species of plants, with over 300 different flowering varieties.

Nearest City: Joshimath Famous For: Stunning views, rhododendrons, snow leopards, black bears, brown bears Recommended For: Trekking and camping lovers, couples, friends groups Best Time to Visit: June, July, August, September. Operating Months: May to October Accommodation Options: Camping options are available. The Uttarakhand Government’s Garhwal Mandal Vikas Nigam also operates a guesthouse within the Park’s borders. The Tattva at Joshimath is a popular option for travelers looking for luxury.

Corbett Tiger Reserve

Named after one of the most famous personalities of Indian wildlife conservation, the Corbett National Park covers over 52,000 hectares of stunning forests. This natural treasure has the distinction of being the first National Park declared by the Indian Government .

The Park is famed for its tigers, immortalized by the writings of the Park’s namesake. It is home to over 617 plant species, 50 mammal species, 580 bird species, and 25 reptile species . 

Nearest City: Ramnagar Famous For: Tigers, Elephant herds, Corbett Falls, Kalagarh Dam Recommended For: Photography lovers, families. Best Time to Visit: December, January, February, March, April, May, June Operating Months: The Park operates year-round. However, fewer permits are issued during July, August, and September as the monsoon creates difficult conditions. Accommodation Options: Camping options are available. Multiple government-owned guest houses are available within the Park. Vanya River Resort is a popular choice for accommodations near the Park.

Great Himalayan National Park Conservation Area

The Great Himalayan National Park Conservation Area was declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site during the 38th World Heritage Committee meeting in Doha, Qatar. This site covers over 90,000 hectares, containing 25 different types of forests. 

The stunning beauty of the Himalayas accompanies an incredible range of biodiversity. The park is home to 31 different mammal species, over 200 bird species, and a wealth of invertebrates and reptiles still being documented. It is suspected by naturalists and forest officials that there are many endemic species yet to be discovered in the rugged terrain of the National Park.

Nearest Cities: Kullu, Manali Famous For: Snow Leopard, Himalayan Tahr, incredible landscapes Recommended For: The most dedicated trekkers, photographers, and nature lovers – one must trek to the park to begin with. Best Time to Visit: April, May, June, October, November Operating Months: The Park operates year-round. However, during August, the monsoon creates difficult conditions. Accommodation Options: Camping is the only option for accommodation within the Park. All activities within the Park are conducted on foot, and no civilian vehicles are allowed past the buffer zone.

Ranthambore National Park

Once a hunting ground for the Royal Family of Jaipur, Ranthambore National Park covers over 13,34,000 hectares of the State of Rajasthan . This National Park is famous for being one of the first sites chosen for Project Tiger in 1973. 

Ranthambore is most famous for its tigers, although various endangered species such as the Indian pangolin, blackbuck and Indian flapshell turtle. The park is home to over 50 species of mammals, 160 species of birds and 40 species of reptiles.

Nearest City: Sawai Madhopur Famous For: Royal Bengal Tiger, Leopard, Indian Pangolin, Blackbuck Recommended For: Families, couples Best Time to Visit: October to March Operating Months: January to June, October to December Accommodation Options: Multiple government-owned guest houses are available within the Park. At Sawai Madhopur, many options for accommodations are available, the most popular ones being Abhyaran Resort & Spa and Regenta Resort Vanya Mahal.

Keoladeo National Park (Bharatpur Bird Sanctuary)

Formerly known as the Bharatpur Bird Sanctuary, Keoladeo National Park is a haven for birds. More than 350 avian species reside within the 2,873 hectares of this green oasis adjacent to the city of Bharatpur.

The Park is an artificially created and managed wetland, originally created between 1726 and 1763 by the erstwhile ruler, Maharaja Suraj Mal. The Park is near the confluence of the Gambhir and Banganga rivers. It is one of two Ramsar Conservation Sites in Rajasthan.

Nearest City: Bharatpur Famous For: Siberian Crane (winters only), Greater Spotted Eagle, Eastern Imperial Eagle Recommended For: Families, couples, Senior citizens Best Time to Visit: August to November Operating Months: The Park operates throughout the year. Accommodation Options: Multiple government-owned guest houses are available within the Park. There is a great variety of options for accommodation at Bharatpur, the most popular options being Amritara Chandra Mahal Haveli and Regenta Resort Bharatpur .

The Best Wildlife Destinations of Western India

Known for its hot climate and stunning coastlines, Western India has a diverse range of ecosystems. Ranging from the semi-arid terrain of Kutch to the lush forests of Maharashtra, this part of India is filled with ecological wonders.

Gir Wildlife Sanctuary and National Parks

The last home of the Asiatic Lion, Gir Wildlife Sanctuary, and National Parks represents a legacy of environmental stewardship. The unique nature of the biodiversity of the region makes this one of India’s most important protected forests.

The Park is home to 38 different varieties of mammals, 37 species of reptiles and over 300 species of birds. There are over 2000 species of insects within the Park, many of which have only been observed here. Over 120,000 tons of fuel wood is collected from this forest by the neighboring villages every year. 

Nearest Cities: Talala, Veraval Famous For: Asiatic lion, pangolin, chousingha Recommended For: Families and couples Best Time to Visit: December to March Operating Months: The Park operates throughout the year. Accommodation Options: Multiple government-owned guest houses are available within the Park. The most popular private accommodation options are The Fern Gir Forest Resort and Jagira Ananta Elite.

Kutch Desert Wildlife Sanctuary

Right next to the India-Pakistan border, the Kutch Desert Wildlife Sanctuary is a treasure trove of ecological and historical wealth. The Park has an area covering over 75,000 hectares of seasonal saline wetlands and a true saline desert.

The major attraction of the Park is Flamingo City, where thousands of flamingos arrive during the monsoons. The area is also the only place where the rosy pelican has been observed to breed. The Park is also home to fossil beds, giving researchers a view into the history of the land itself going back millenia. Another recent discovery within the Park is the remains of the ancient Harappan city of Dholavira.

Nearest City: Bhuj Famous For: Flamingo, rosy pelican, fossil beds, ancient ruins Recommended For: Couples, families, history lovers Best Time to Visit: October to February Operating Months: The Park operates throughout the year. Accommodation Options: No accommodations are available within the Park. The most popular private accommodation options nearby are The Fern Royal Farm Resort and White Rann Resort.

Netravali Wildlife Sanctuary

Located in the picturesque State of Goa, Netravali Wildlife Sanctuary covers over 21,000 hectares. The Park is considered an important wildlife corridor for the wildlife in the adjacent protected areas – Cotigao Wildlife Sanctuary, Mollem National Park, Mhadei Wildlife Sanctuary, and Bhimgad Wildlife Sanctuary .

The park is home to a wide variety of flora and fauna due to its topology and abundance of perennial streams. The park is home to many rare animals, such as leopards, Indian sloth bears, Indian giant squirrels, and chousingha. The Park is best known for its extensive variety of butterflies, such as the Malabar banded swallowtail and Malabar banded peacock.

Nearest City: Netravali Famous For: Leopards, sloth bear, butterflies, birdwatching Recommended For: Couples, friends groups Best Time to Visit: June to August Operating Months: The Park operates throughout the year. Accommodation Options: One government-owned guesthouse is available within the Park. The most popular private accommodation options nearby are The Postcard Hideaway at Netravali and Mangaal Farmstay at Quepem.

Koyna Wildlife Sanctuary

Located at the southwestern portion of Maharashtra, the Koyna Wildlife Sanctuary is a wonderland for wildlife lovers. Covering over 420,000 hectares of area, this protected area forms the northern half of the Sahyadri Tiger Reserve, the southern half being Chandoli National Park.

Koyna has deep roots for Marathis, with many stories of this forest being a refuge for the tactical master. The undulating terrain of the area lends to the myth, although today the verdant landscapes of this park hide a wealth of biodiversity. The park is home to royal Bengal tigers, leopards, sambar deer and other rare mammals. Over 1500 species of fauna and 2000 species of flora, this national park in Maharashtra is a gem worth exploring.

Nearest City: Satara Famous For: Tigers, leopards, Malabar pied hornbill Recommended For: Trekkers, friends groups Best Time to Visit: June to August – Monsoons make the forest more lush. Operating Months: The Park operates throughout the year. Accommodation Options: A wide variety of accommodations are available at Satara. The most popular choices are The Fern Residency Satara Maharashtra and Treebo Trend City Inn.

Tadoba Andhari Tiger Reserve

Maharashtra’s oldest and largest National Park, Tadoba Andhari Tiger Reserve covers over 62,500 hectares of deep forests, hills, caves and valleys. Parts of the forest are considered sacred by the neighbouring villagers and tribes. 

Tadoba is home to one of the largest tiger populations in India. Additionally, it also is the habitat of over 40 different mammal species, 20 reptile species and over 1500 insect species. There are over 100 different types of medicinal plants and trees that are native to this forest. 

Nearest City: Chandrapur Famous For: Tigers, leopards, Mugger crocodile Recommended For: Trekkers, families Best Time to Visit: For those interested in birdwatching, February to April is the best time. During the extremely hot months from April to June, wildlife spotting is the easiest as the vegetation is at its thinnest. Operating Months: The Park operates throughout the year. Accommodation Options: A wide variety of accommodations are available within the Park. The most popular choices are Irai Safari Retreat and Jharna Resort Tadoba.

Mangroves, Mountains and More: The Best Wildlife Tourism Destinations in Eastern India

Eastern India is filled with diverse landscapes – the plains of Bengal, the rolling hills of Sikkim and the lush jungles of Assam. Wildlife enthusiasts will be enamoured by the wondrous beauty of Eastern India.

The Sundarbans National Park of West Bengal represents a part of the world’s largest river delta ecosystem . The Park covers over 130,000 hectares of intersecting streams and silt islands.

The Park is known for its mangrove forests, and being the place where the Royal Bengal Tiger got its name. The tiger is the mascot of the Park, and it was chosen among one of the first sites for the implementation of Project Tiger in 1973. Over 240 species of birds are found in the Park, making it a haven for birdwatchers.

Nearest City: Kolkata Famous For: Tigers, saltwater crocodiles, lesser adjutant Recommended For: Families, couples, birdwatchers Best Time to Visit: November to February Operating Months: The Park operates throughout the year. Accommodation Options: A wide variety of accommodations are available within the Park. The most popular choices are Sundarban Tiger Camp and Sundarban Tiger Roar Resort.

Kaziranga National Park

Home to two thirds of the world’s Indian rhinoceros population, Kaziranga National Park and Tiger Reserve is a haven for any wildlife lover. The National Park spans over 37,800 hectares, containing grasslands, meadows and deciduous forests.

The forest is home to 35 species of mammals, 479 species of birds, 42 species of reptiles and over 1,000 species of trees and plants. The park is not only home to the largest population of Indian rhinoceroses, but also of wild water buffaloes and barasinghas. It is also considered an important habitat for the asian elephant.

Nearest City: Golaghat Famous For: One-horned rhino, tigers, elephants, barasingha. Recommended For: Families, birdwatchers Best Time to Visit: November to February Operating Months: November to April. Accommodation Options: A wide variety of accommodations are available within the Park. The most popular choices are Green Reed Resort and Kodom Bari Retreat.

Manas National Park

Located on the border with Bhutan, Manas National Park is home to some of the rarest species in India. This 50,000 hectare National Park shares its northern border with the Royal Manas National Park of Bhutan, making it one of the most ecologically sensitive areas of the Himalayas.

The Park has 55 recorded species of mammals, 50 reptile species and over 450 avian species. The core zone alone is home to over 500 species of plants. The neighbouring villages rely on the park’s biodiversity for firewood, fruits and other natural products.

Nearest City: Barpeta Road Famous For: Pygmy hog, golden langur, Assam roofed turtle, Bengal florican. Recommended For: Couples, birdwatchers Best Time to Visit: November to January Operating Months: October to May. Accommodation Options: A wide variety of accommodations are available within the Park. The most popular choices are Bansbari Lodge and Musa Jungle Retreat.

Khangchendzonga National Park

Named after the world’s third highest mountain, Khangchendzonga National Park is a testament to the unique relationship between man and nature. Spanning an area of over 84,000 hectares, this Park joins the Qomolangma National Nature Preserve of Tibet on its northern boundary and the Kanchenjunga Conservation Area of Nepal on its western side.

Khangchendzonga National Park is home to a variety of rare Himalayan species, including the mainland serow, red panda and takin. Over 500 species of birds have been sighted in the Park boundaries. The Park also has a significant role in the spiritual beliefs of the Khasi and Lepcha tribes, and also contains the Tholung Monastery – one of the holiest buddhist sites in Sikkim.

Nearest Cities: Chungthang, Yuksom Famous For: Red panda, takin, bearded vulture, Himalayan vulture, stunning views Recommended For: Friends groups, couples, birdwatchers Best Time to Visit: March to May Operating Months: The Park operates for the entire year, however June to September are known for heavy showers and unpredictable conditions. Accommodation Options: Camping is allowed within the Park, but only with a licenced guide and a Park Authority Permit. Ejam Residency at Yuksom and Chungthang Teesta Homestay at Chungthang are popular choices.

Jaldapara National Park

Situated at the Himalayan foothills, Jaldapara National Park is known for its stunning scenery and vast grasslands. The Park is spread over 20,000 hectares, containing a unique combination of higher altitude grasslands and riverine forests. 

Although the Park is best known for its Indian rhinoceros population, it is also home to leopards, elephants and gaur. The Park is also famous among birdwatchers, and is one of the few places where the Bengal florican can still be seen. 

Nearest City: Siliguri Famous For: Indian rhinoceros, leopard, Bengal florican Recommended For: Families, birdwatchers Best Time to Visit: January to March Operating Months: The Park operates for the entire year. Accommodation Options: Camping is allowed within the Park. Multiple guesthouses are available within the Park itself. The most popular choices are The Mystic Forest and Jaldapara Wildhut Resort.

Amazing Places For Wildlife Tourism In South India

South India is known for its stunning coastlines and lush forests. Home to both the Western Ghats and the Eastern Ghats, this part of India is filled with gems for wildlife lovers.

Bandipur National Park

Located at the meeting point of the Deccan Plateau and the Western Ghats, Bandipur National Park is a stunning amalgamation of a wide variety of biomes. Spanning an area of over 90,000 hectares, this Park was one of the original sites for Project Tiger in 1973.

Bandipur is most famously associated with sandalwood and is considered one of the last homes for this sacred tree. The Park is home to over 80 different species of mammals, 50 species of snakes and over 200 species of birds. 

Nearest City: Chamarajanagar Famous For: Tiger, elephant, chousingha, sloth bear, sandalwood forest Recommended For: Couples, friends groups, birdwatchers Best Time to Visit: May to October is the best time for animal sightings. November to April is the best time for birdwatching. Operating Months: The Park operates for the entire year. Accommodation Options: Camping is allowed within the Park. Multiple guesthouses are available within the Park itself. The most popular choices are The Serai Bandipur and Dhole’s Den.

Anamalai Tiger Reserve

Located on the Western side of Tamil Nadu, Anamalai Tiger Reserve is home to a vast number of species endemic to this part of India. Covering an area of over 95,000 hectares, there are over 6 different biomes represented in this Park.

The park is home to over 2000 varieties of plants, 400 of which are medicinal. Over 250 bird species are known to live within the Park. The park is home to at least 5 endemic species of reptiles and 15 endemic species of birds.

Nearest City: Coimbatore Famous For: Tiger, elephant, lion-tailed macaque Recommended For: Couples, families, birdwatchers Best Time to Visit: May to October is the best time for animal sightings. November to April is the best time for birdwatching. Operating Months: The Park operates for the entire year. Accommodation Options: Camping is allowed within the Park. Multiple guesthouses are available within the Park itself. 

Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve

Part of the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve, Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve is an essential part of the ecosystem of South India. Covering an area of over 140,000 hectares, it is the largest protected area of Tamil Nadu.

Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve is one of India’s newest tiger reserves, named so in 2013. Aside from tigers the park is home to an impressive 72 species of mammals, over 200 bird species and 42 species of reptiles. 

Nearest City: Sathyamangalam Famous For: Tiger, sloth bear, striped hyena Recommended For: Birdwatchers, couples, families. Best Time to Visit: October to March is the best time to visit. The temperatures are the lowest during this time. Operating Months: The Park operates for the entire year. Accommodation Options: Multiple guesthouses are available within the Park itself. The most popular choices are Mavallam Farms & Resorts and Bull and Bush Resort.

Mudumalai Tiger Reserve 

Bandipur’s neighbor to the South, Mudumalai Tiger Reserve has everything a wildlife lover is looking for. With an expanse of over 68,000 hectares, this forest is an essential part of the Nilgiri Biosphere Reserve.

The forest is most famously associated with teak and rosewood, important for the economy of the State. Over 1000 faunal species reside in the park, including endangered animals such as Malabar giant squirrel, dhole and jaguars. During the monsoons, the park is popular among birdwatchers, who come to see the over 250 different species of birds here.

Nearest City: Mudumalai Famous For: Tiger, leopard, Malabar giant squirrel Recommended For: Birdwatchers, friends groups Best Time to Visit: March to August is the best time for spotting wildlife. From September to October is the best time for birdwatching. December to February has the lowest temperatures. Operating Months: The Park operates for the entire year. Accommodation Options: Camping is allowed within the Park. Multiple guesthouses are available within the Park itself. The most popular choices are Greenwoods Nature Camp and Mammoth’s Cliff Jungle Resort. 

Periyar Tiger Reserve

Periyar Tiger Reserve stands as a beacon of conservation, offering an enchanting eco-tourism experience amidst Kerala’s rich biodiversity and majestic tigers.

Recently awarded the title of “ Best Managed Tiger Reserve ” by the National Tiger Conservation Authority, Periyar Tiger Reserve is a must-visit for wildlife enthusiasts. The Reserve covers over 30,000 hectares of a variety of unique forests and ecosystems.

The Reserve is a treasure trove of biodiversity, protecting over 60 species of mammals, 340  bird species, 60 amphibian species and 65 species of reptiles. Additionally, over 4,800 varieties of flowering plants are found within the Reserve.

Nearest City: Kumily Famous For: Tiger, lion tailed macaque, asian elephant Recommended For: Birdwatchers, friends groups Best Time to Visit: September to April Operating Months: The Park operates for the entire year. Accommodation Options: Cottages are available within the Reserve itself. Outside the Reserve, the most popular choices are Poetree Thekkady and Forest Canopy Thekkady. 

Don’t Miss These Hidden Gems For Birdwatching In India

Birdwatching in India is a delight, with an incredible diversity of species in different parts of the nation. Discover the best birdwatching sites in India.

Dr Salim Ali Bird Sanctuary

Named after India’s most famous ornithologist, Dr. Salim Ali Bird Sanctuary is a stunning mangrove forest on the Mandovi River of Goa. The ecosystem here attracts many varieties of fishing birds, such as cranes and kingfishers. It is also a haven for estuarine fishes and crustaceans. Over 470 species of birds have been observed here.

Nearest City: Panaji Famous For: Spoonbills, pintails, crabs Recommended For: Birdwatchers Best Time to Visit: June to August Operating Months: The Park operates for the entire year. Accommodation Options: No accommodations are available within the Park. Taj Cidade de Goa Horizon and Goa Marriott Resort & Spa are the most popular choices at Panjim.

Nandur Madhmeshwar Bird Sanctuary

Maharashtra’s first Ramsar Site, Nandur Madhmeshwar Bird Sanctuary is an amalgamation of lakes and forests around the Godavari. After the construction of the Nandur Madhyameshwar stone pick up weir over the Godavari river in 1913, the landscape of the area transformed into a lush forest, perfect for bird life. Over 536 species of birds have been recorded here.

Nearest City: Nashik Famous For: Black Ibis, Brahminy duck, garganey Recommended For: Birdwatchers Best Time to Visit: August to October Operating Months: The Park operates for the entire year. Accommodation Options: The most popular choices at Nashik are Radisson Blu Hotel & Spa and  The Source at Sula. 

Nal Sarovar Bird Sanctuary

One of the major wildlife attractions of Gujarat, Nal Sarovar Bird Sanctuary is a protected lake and marshlands ecosystem that attracts a wide variety of migratory birds throughout the year. Covering around 12 hectares of area, the lake and its surrounding marshes are the habitat of over 220 species of birds. 

Nearest City: Ahmedabad Famous For: Flamingo, cranes, cormorants Recommended For: Birdwatchers Best Time to Visit: November to February Operating Months: The Park operates for the entire year. Accommodation Options: Cottages are available within the Reserve itself. Outside the Reserve, the most popular choices are  Welcomhotel By ITC Hotels, Ashram Road and The Hillock Ahmedabad.

Important Note For Wildlife Photographers and Videographers

India is a popular destination for wildlife photographers from around the world. Visiting Photographers and Video teams should always ensure that they are taking the appropriate permits with park authorities. Additionally, drone photography and the use of camera support equipment require special permits as well. In the case of drone photography, all aerial vehicles in India must conform to DGCA guidelines .

Why Sustainable Tourism And Wildlife Conservation Are Important For India’s Tourism Industry?

Wildlife conservation has played an important role in developing India’s tourism industry. Seeing iconic Indian wildlife, such as tigers and elephants, in their natural habitat is a major draw for visitors to India. Sustainable tourism in India is still mainly based around the major National Parks of India, such as at Ranthambore and Gir. Many National Parks, such as Periyar and Nanda Devi, are developing low-impact tourism activities to encourage the growth of sustainable tourism.

What do you mean by wildlife tourism in India?

When we say Wildlife Tourism in India, we mean going to a place where interacting with the biodiversity of India – this could be animals, plants or just enjoying the great outdoors. Wildlife tourism has special considerations over other kinds of tourism, as permits and other paperwork is required for ensuring a safe and hassle-free trip. 

How fast is wildlife tourism growing in India?

Wildlife Tourism in India is a very popular activity for both foreign and domestic travelers. India’s stunning wildlife and mesmerizing forests have been documented extensively throughout history, from seals of the Indus Valley Civilisation to modern documentaries made by the likes of National Geographic and others. Recently, the Oscar-winning documentary “Elephant Whisperers” has resulted in an increased interest in visiting South India’s forests.

How can wildlife tourism be promoted in India?

Wildlife Tourism can be promoted in India by promoting eco-friendly tourism activities and helping people to learn about India’s rich biodiversity .

What kind of wildlife is India famous for?

India is famous for all kinds of wildlife. There are charismatic megafauna species such as Asian elephant, Royal Bengal tiger, blackbuck, and Indian rhinoceros . India is also famous for birds, like peacocks, hornbills, kingfishers, and egrets. India is home to iconic reptiles such as the king cobra, reticulated python, and gharial. 

What is the most popular example of wildlife tourism?

The most popular example of wildlife tourism would be a jeep safari at one of India’s many National Parks . Jeep safaris are the safest way for people to see wild animals.

Incredible Wildlife Tourism in India With Flying Squirrel Holidays

Wildlife tourism in India is an incredible experience for all ages. Witnessing the majestic beauty of a tiger, or catching a glimpse of a stunningly colored bird are experiences that will be remembered for your entire life.

Choose Flying Squirrel Holidays for the best Wildlife tourism in India.

• EPIC Azerbaijan Tourist Places – Incredible Travel Guide 2024
• Halong Bay Cruise Uncovered: Your Comprehensive Guide to Everything You Want and Need to Know
• Best Spots For Hot Air Balloon In Rajasthan In 2024
• Hidden Gems: Awesome 2024 Offbeat Kashmir Itineraries
• Best Places To Visit In Singapore For Honeymoon
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Disclaimer Policy

Opinion: NC Wildlife Commission has failed to protect black bear cubs, other wildlife

This is the second high-profile bear cub abuse case I am aware of in North Carolina that the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission failed to prosecute. In the first case, Richard Godley posted videos of himself and his dogs tormenting two, approximately 2-month-old cubs in Beaufort County. Two-month-old cubs weigh a mere 4-6 pounds and cannot survive without their mother. The Wildlife Commission searched for those cubs for an hour and then gave up, ensuring their deaths.

Even after Godley was interviewed by the commission, he tripled down by posting additional cub abuse videos which is why these ‘abuse for likes’ cases must be vigorously prosecuted to deter other abusers and state wildlife disturbance and abuse laws and penalties must be introduced, codified and enforced.

In this most recent ‘abuse for likes’ case, the cruel and stupid people who terrorized the two cubs in Fairview — causing one cub to go to rehab never to be reunited with its mother and likely causing the death of the other cub — will also suffer no consequences for their despicable actions. The perpetrators could have been charged with unlawful possession of a black bear and/or possession of black bear in the closed season, carrying $2,000 fines each. The commission’s tired argument that the perpetrators weren’t charged because they released the cubs is another feeble excuse for their refusal to enforce N.C.’s wildlife laws that are already wholly inadequate, even if the commission enforced them.

As we’ve recently seen in Montana where Cody Roberts ran down a juvenile wolf (a species sharing 99% of its DNA with domestic dogs) with his snowmobile and then dragged the gravely injured and terrified wolf into a relative’s bar and tortured her for several hours until he finally put her out of her misery, wildlife agencies are not friends to wildlife. Roberts' only penalty was a measly $250 fine for a sick crime that rained down international shame on Roberts, his family, community and Montana’s wildlife authorities resulting in a state tourism boycott .

Similar to N.C.’s unscientific regulation that excludes bears over 12 months from rehabilitation and leaves that age determination up to life and death guesses, Godley and the Fairview perpetrators’ actions did not fall under the possession statutes because the statutes do not specify how much time someone must hold wildlife for it to count. Since in both cases the abusers released the cubs, the commission decided they weren’t in possession long enough to violate a law that intentionally doesn’t define length of time.

If the Godley case is any indication, which in my four years of entanglement with the NCWRC it is, the commission looked only briefly for the missing cub in Fairview, their investigative will and capabilities are significantly exaggerated, and the only reason they bothered to respond is due to media pressure.

While I have long argued for rehab for bears of any age who need it, rehab is not a more optimal option for a bear cub who was living and learning from their mother. And notably, the commission has made no mention of the suffering of the cubs or anguish of the mother bear who is an individual who lost both of her babies due to the cruelty and stupidity of not only the perpetrators, but also to the gross indifference of the commission’s executive director, Cameron Ingram, who has once again failed the wildlife that belongs to all of us that he has sworn to protect.

Government wildlife agencies manage populations with no regard for individual animals’ welfare. Commission biologist, Ashley Hobbs, who, according to her LinkedIn does not have a wildlife biology degree and found one of the cubs wet, shivering and injured, and law enforcement Capt. Branden Jones, who cannot know with certainty that “no bears died” have repeatedly called the revolting abuse of the Fairview cubs an “incident” with no recognition of the value each individual animal has to each other, to their species dynamics, and to the ecological balance of their space — a value that is much, much more than a $2,232 replacement cost.

This is not the last ‘abuse for likes’ wildlife case we will see in North Carolina. While there are some prohibitions against disturbing wildlife on federal lands, North Carolina does not have laws that specifically prohibit disturbing wildlife on state lands or private property. Please contact your state legislators and demand they introduce laws with stiff penalties for disturbing North Carolina’s wildlife.

More: NC Wildlife: No charges in Asheville 'black bear cub harassment' for selfies

More: Opinion: Bear hunters, NC Wildlife Commission misleading public on black bear population

Diana Starr is a multispecies geographer and advocate for the indigenous rights of bears.