Travel Operators for Tigers

A Road Map for the Future - Guidelines that work

We need a more visonary, more inclusive and more participatory approach to save the forests and its biodivesity.

First Step – Adjust the text below to suit you

If you have any personal opinions related to this topic and you'd like to add to the email, please add them to the letter below.

Dear Shri Jairam Ramesh,

As a Destination Management company, we send clients to numerous Tiger reserves and sanctuaries across India. We have also committed to best practice tourism in our operations through membership commitments to Travel Operators for Tigers (TOFT). In this capacity I would like to bring our views to bear on the recent Ecotourism Guidelines published by your Ministry.

The announcement of these Guidelines were very welcome by everyone, as we recognise the challenges that are faced by our rapid and often unplanned development, specifically around our Protected Areas. We believed that this committee’s remit offered all involved in conservation and ourselves as suppliers of nature tourists, a unique opportunity to go forward together.

We believed this was a great chance to have visionary, sensible, practical and enforceable rules and regulations that could clean up the worst examples of poor nature tourism enterprise in our industry,  encourage the very best and give us all of us a clear ‘Road Map’ as to how to build a better nature tourism industry that delivers both an exceptional wildlife experience to our clients - comparable with many other parts of the world in which we are in fierce competition  -  but most importantly a powerful tool for conservation to save our Forests and Wildlife.

Sadly, the Guidelines do not yet offer any of these benefits. This, after months of advice from a range of ecotourism professionals and Travel industry members.

There are a number of aspects in the document which we can agree to but here are the 
issues that need serious redress:

•	2.1.8 - The proposed CESS Hotel turnover fee.  There is no business in the world that could sustain such a ‘turnover tax’ alongside a host of others taxes. It’s completely nonsensical, exhibits no understanding of the commercial reality of our industry (given that we all pay many taxes and Park fees, now more expensive than most African countries Park fees) , is wholly impractical to administer, and will ruin the very activity its trying to support. Furthermore there is no accountable way for this to be administered to or by communities. These guidelines need to be encouraging community based enterprise and activity – not charity and dependency.(see points iii) below)
•	2.2.4  - The percentage land use of PA’s for tourism, which are illogical and cause bizarre tourism management situations where little landscape exists for nature tourism, helping to exacerbate the overcrowding issues that our clients always complain about - rather than solving it. While tourism is attracted to tigers, it is clear from the healthy populations in the most 'tourism dense' parks that far from being adversely affected by visitors, tigers seem to be flourishing with the added eyes, ears, attention and accountability that our visitors inevitably brings. These guidelines must plan for a huge increase in numbers of visitors, both from International visitors but more especially from our own Indian markets – and you must encourage and incentivise us (with other great wildlife habitats and wildlife experiences) to spread our clients thinner and further across India’s wilderness landscapes, not ‘bottling’ them up in a few ‘zoo like’ experiences. 
•	2.2.7  - The residential facilities in Parks are some of the best and most valuable assets in our parks today. Most of today’s conservationists fell in love with nature when staying in these resthouses and lodges. (Valmik Thapar, Bittu Saghal, Billy Arjan Singh to name a few you know). How can you destroy our children’s chance of experiencing nature in this natural way?  Furthermore International research, experience, and common sense shows that such facilities deter poaching, woodchopping and grazing – a 100 times more damaging activities that a few tourists in a small resthouse. As Travel Businesses we would like to see more of these Forest resthouses opened and then tended to reputed private operators to run more effectively and environmentally - like many of our very best lodge owners are providing.
•	2.1.11   - The composition of Local Advisory Committees. We need real enforcers, not more bureaucratic and unaccountable bodies policing an industry whose officials that have no interest, experience or understanding of tourism. We would ask that any guidelines give legal authority and a funding mechanism to a specific ‘Ecotourism Services Authority’, run by acknowledged professionals and experts in their field, specifically Wildlife Tourism - and who work with each State to set rules and minimum standards, authorise EIA’s and audit providers to old and new operations in and around PA’s and Forest areas. All operations that use ‘nature tourism as their primary attraction’ should have a ‘Licence to operate’ from this authority (some initial fee and annual fee can be devised) after achieving building standards, minimum standards of operation, including targets for local employment, lodge footprint, water and waste disposal etc.

We also believe these Guidelines lack:
•	i) Any vision as to the future of denuded buffer zones and corridors  and how they could be revitalised through new forms of Community based conservancies, by public/private partnerships in conservation and restoration, by Carbon financing and private and NGO conservation funding mechanisms being worked highly successfully in other parts of the world. India is being left behind in its thinking and vision, still believing that only one type of ‘top down’ management regime can work here.

•	ii) Any mechanisms, like Government funding options, tax breaks and capital incentives by which tourism entrepreneurs, like ourselves can become more involved in supporting conservation measures and helping in managing and protecting landscapes. In big cities our Government subsidises the building of hotel bedrooms – so let’s use the reverse of such a mechanism to encourage smaller properties rather than larger ones, leaving more land to nature on these properties, encourage reforestation projects will local villages, encourage community ownership or shareholding in new properties.

•	iii) Any meaningful mechanisms by which local communities can become actively involved in tourism enterprises. Our industry is one of the best and easiest to become a part of for local communities bordering reserves, without complex skills sets, funding or knowledge of the industry, yet there is nothing here for them except ‘CESS handouts’.  The guidelines should be setting out mechanisms for community owned and run campsites which we can send low budget clients too, nature camps which our childen can enjoy, set up trade cooperatives, small loans for support services, guide, food and beverage training, homestays and arts and crafts that can be used, rented and bought by our clients.

•	Iv) A mechanism by which Field Directors and their staff, can carry out their jobs with their own resources, whilst our tourists and the countless ‘Official VIP Tourists’ can be taken care of within the responsibilities of a specially trained park based Tourism Officer, whose role is to coordinate the relationship and workings between parks and tourism. A provision within park fees revenues could be a way forward to budget for this.

We all know that the only way to go forward is by opening up the Forest Service to new ways of thinking, more inclusive decision making, greater mutual partnerships between your department, local communities and our visitors and providers. Only then will you get and receive much greater help and participation in your job of conserving Tigers and wildlife – for all our futures.

Its a challenging job -  but not an impossible task.