Is the rise in ‘eco-tourism’ a threat to Australia’s national parks?

Back in another life, when I was working with Sport & Recreation Queensland (SRQ) we were embedded in the larger Department of National Parks. As a joint collaboration between the two sub-departments we formed a joint committee working on a cabinet paper investigating the feasibility of opening up national parks to eco-tourism. At the time, and ever since, politicians have viewed our prized national parks with a gleam in their eyes, and dollar signs in their thinking. For me it was a task that gave me lots of experience in inter-agency working, but looking back, with what I know now, I understand that commercial operations on our crown land, including our national parks, is in conflict with their overarching purpose, which is to protect and sustainably manage.

The Guardian is today carrying a story about this issue, and asking the same question that I have always asked "is eco-tourism compatible with our national parks". The link is below.

Because national parks are the responsibility of individual states, governed by their own national park acts, each state goes its own way on this issue, and the federal government has no power to intervene. And each state has dipped its toe in this controversial area. Like I said, 10 years ago Queensland played with it. Tasmania has allowed it on its iconic Overland Track, by allowed private tour companies to build their own huts in the nationally significant Lake St Clair Cradle Mountain National Park. Other states have followed suit. No one seems to have put up much of a fight, having given into the economic argument. I feel its because not many people understand the overarching purpose of the parks. Biodiversity protection, not visitation.

Eco-tourism researcher Sonya Underdahl says there are few successful examples worldwide of accommodation inside national parks that take a conservation-led approach. She says while countries like Thailand?and China are demolishing luxury resorts and hotels in forests and national parks, Australia is moving in the opposite direction. “There is no research that supports development in parks. This is now globally being withdrawn,” Underdahl says “All the other locations [proposing accommodation inside national parks] are generally in developing nations and they’re using it for poverty alleviation and poaching.”

Some accommodation sites across Australia are state-run, like the huts proposed for Ben Boyd national park. However, in the past decade or so, there has been a significant increase in public-private partnerships where companies pay state governments to lease the land, something Underdahl says can be traced back to the 2009?National Long-term Tourism Strategy Steering Committee?recommendations to better tap into the “latent tourism potential” of national parks.

Along with the Light to Light Walk,?NSW has proposed cabins and “glamping” sites for the Great Southern Walk?near Sydney, as well as the construction of Australia’s longest zipline and accommodation at the?Gardens of Stone?walk near Lithgow. In Queensland, “eco-accommodation” proposals are on the boil at the Wangetti Trail (Mowbray national park), Macalister Range national park,?Cooloola Great Walk?(Great Sandy national park) and Paluma to Wallaman Falls (Paluma Range national park).

Victoria is building new cabins at Mount Buffalo; Western Australia has?announced?$6.5m to develop eco-lodges and retreats in national parks; and in South Australia, there are plans to develop?off-grid “pod” accommodation?and two new lodges on Kangaroo Island.

It’s Tasmania, though, that is the most advanced in this space, with 138 commercial leases granted to tourism providers in national parks and reserves. Thirty of these, including private accommodation sites, complement the state’s extensive public hut network.

Tasmanian Walking Company (TWC), which operates two “accommodation-based” guided walks inside national parks, says their market is primarily middle-aged to older walkers, with the “average” being a 53-year-old female. However, they say it’s not uncommon to host walkers in their 80s “who are less likely to venture into the wilderness without support”. “It is bucket list item for those seeking an immersive experience who more often than not leave as advocates for the protection of these precious legacy lands,” a spokesperson said.

A TWC spokesperson says the company is aware of its clear obligations when it comes to operating in national parks and funds “wildlife rescue programs, reforestation initiatives and educational activities that encourage advocacy of conservation sites”.

“While the consideration of in-park commercial accommodation is genuine, many of the industry players worry it steals oxygen from the bigger environmental issues that we must all get our heads around.” However, experts, traditional owners and?locals have complained?that some development proposals are racing ahead with little community consultation. “The general public is not in favour of these kinds of developments but developers don’t care … They are looking at single visits by wealthy urbanites,” says Ralf Buckley, emeritus international chair in ecotourism research at Griffith University.

Underdahl says leases granted inside Australia’s national parks are often commercial in confidence, meaning there is little transparency over the net benefits of the schemes. Documents released by the proponents?of one Tasmanian eco-tourism proposal in 2020 showed they would pay about $6,000 a year in rent to the state government while planning to charge $4,500 per person per trip.

“Taxpayers often pay for the infrastructure, clearing for the creation of trails [and] quite often, marketing and promotions,” Underdahl says. “So it’s costing taxpayers a lot.” A NSW Planning, Industry and Environment document requested by GCFA last year revealed the overall budget for developments at Ben Boyd national park had blown out from $7.9m to an estimated $14.5m. The document cited “significant cost escalations” since the project was announced in 2018.

As land managers we need to be the champions of sustainable management. It is our job to give fearless and frank advice when it comes to our parks, remind people of their purpose, and ensure that any development proposed is considered through a prism of "no development in a national park adds value to the park". It might add value to the visitor experience but that is not the end-sum game.