 |
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||
Use this link to request more information Ecotourism 101.
Contact us about doing
a similar study for you by calling Ted Eubanks
at 512-450-0313 or e-mail.
|
Ted L. Eubanks Fermata Inc. Published in the Proceedings of the Second State of the Bay Symposium, by Galveston Bay National Estuary Program, GBNEP-23, February 1993. Ecotourism is tourism that is based upon the natural rather than the synthetic attractions of a locality. Ecotourism is the tourist industry’s most rapidly expanding sector (Alpine, 1986; Groom et al., 1991). A number of states and local communities in the United States have come to recognize ecotourism as a significant facet of their economic strategy. For example, in several western states it has become the largest private employer (Vickerman 1988). The potential pool of ecotourists in the United States is impressive. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) estimated in 1980 that 93 million Americans participated in some form of nonconsumptive use of wildlife, and 79 million enjoyed wildlife while on a trip away from home. Most importantly, the USFWS found that 28.6 million people engaged in travel primarily for the nonconsumptive enjoyment of wildlife and spent $4.0 billion in the process (Shaw and Mangun, 1984). The exponential growth in environmental awareness among the American public suggests that the number of potential ecotourists will proportionately multiply as well. Communities wishing to develop an ecotourist base are confronted with a number of challenges. First, the locality must possess substantial and/or unique natural or environmental attractions. For example, the community of Rockport has a unique ecotourist asset in the Whooping Cranes which winter at the nearby Aransas National Wildlife Refuge. The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department estimates that crane watching generates $4.5 million annually in the local community. Second, a tourist support infrastructure (hotels, restaurants) must exist or be developed. Third, information concerning the environmental attributes of the area must be developed for both advertisement and guidance. Information concerning the ecological assets of the area should be directed at increasing environmental awareness among local residents, attracting ecotourist from outside of the community and aiding tourists in locating and enjoying particular sites. Last, materials and personnel offering assistance in interpreting the ecological value of the area should be available. Most of the pool of potential ecotourists are not seasoned naturalists or ecologists, and aid in comprehending the area’s natural history will significantly enhance their experience. Galveston Bay is blessed with an abundance of ecologically valuable sites and a substantial tourist support infrastructure. Galveston Bay communities, however, lack a cohesive, comprehensive strategy to develop ecotourism beyond its present latent level. The following are examples of initial steps that might be taken towards the development of a sustainable, long-term ecotourist industry for Galveston Bay:
Bibliography Alpine, L. 1986. Trends in Special Interest Travel. Specialty Travel index, 13:83-84. Groom, M.J., R.D. Podolsky, and C.A. Munn. 1991. Tourism as a Sustained Use of Wildlife: A Case Study of Madre de Dios, Southeastern Peru. In Robinson and Redford, Neotropical Wildlife Use and Conservation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 393-412. Shaw, W.W. and W.R. Mangun. 1984. Nonconsumptive Use of Wildlife in the United States. Washington: USDI, Fish and Wildlife Service, Resource Publication 154. Vickerman, S. 1988. Stimulating Tourism and Economic Growth by Featuring New Wildlife Recreation Opportunities. Transactions of the 53rd North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 414-423.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
