’Last chance tourism’ may be self-fulfilling prophecy for fragile ecosystems
World’s most cherished places at risk of being visited into oblivion
More than a decade ago, some enterprising entrepreneurs in far flung regions of the globe came upon a new marketing idea for their fragile ecosystems.
With coral reefs dying, glaciers melting and the polar ice cap vanishing, they realized that these natural wonders would not be around – at least in their present form – much longer.
And thus was born the concept of “last chance tourism.”
Today, it is a booming segment of the global travel industry.
But, even as some of those who offer these trips will admit, it is a double-edged sword.
With hordes of visitors trampling over some of the most fragile and endangered ecosystems in the world, they are speeding up the destruction of irreplaceable environments – and their emissions are worsening global warming as they travel to these distant destinations.
While the revenue they generate is often put to good use preserving some of these locations and sustaining local communities, the net benefit is debatable at best – irrelevant at worst.
But, just as the United Nations Climate Change Conference Cop26 winds down, the debate has been engaged.
One of the most thoughtful discussions of the phenomenon was by JoAnna Haugen in Adventure Travel News in the October 2019 article There’s a Reason Why Last-Chance Tourism Happens, But We Still Need to Talk About It
Two years previously, in November 2017, it was widely reported that climbing on Uluru, Australia’s sacred monolith rock also known as Ayers Rock, would be banned beginning October 26, 2019.
Yet, as the date of the ban drew near, a number of news media reported tourists were flocking to the site.
“The park saw a 20% increase in visitation due at least in part to more direct flights from Darwin and Adelaide to the region,” Haugen noted in her article.
“Nonetheless, headlines for news stories focus specifically on Uluru’s climbing ban as the reason the park has seen a surge in visitation, a phenomena known as last-chance tourism,” Haugen writes.
This was not the first time a threatened natural phenomenon in Australia experienced the phenomenon.
A 2016 study See it before it's gone: The paradox of 'last chance tourism' on the Great Barrier Reef published in the Journal of Sustainable Tourism found that nearly 70% of visitors questioned about their motivations to visit the Great Barrier Reef were “strongly motivated” to see the Reef “before it’s gone.” So here is evidence destinations’ uncertain futures are a compelling reason for people to visit them.
Noting this trend, Haugen added: “Regardless of whether a specific correlation can be made or not, the spotlight on Uluru and the way popular media has reported on it over the past several months highlights the growing phenomenon of last-chance tourism and how reducing a destination into alarmist sound bites by popular and social media can have adverse consequences.”
In noting that this was not a new trend, Haugen cited a 2010 study that had already reported that concerns over vanishing destinations – including the Great Barrier Reef, the Everglades, Maldives, Galapagos Islands, the ice cap on Mt. Kilimanjaro, and the polar regions – had prompted some tour operators and agencies to recommend that travelers visit these destinations “before they disappear.”
“These concerns date back well over a decade, yet it’s become a mainstream trend running parallel with the climate crisis over the last couple years,” Haugen wrote.
“Last chance tourism” is actually related to a broader issue called “over tourism” – also not a new phenomenon but one made infinitely worse since the advent of cheap airfares. Haugen calls the two “a destructive duo.”
“By now, it’s old news that over tourism is a global problem,” she writes. “In fact, many destinations have closed or restricted access in order to manage the overwhelming number of tourists that crowd beaches, city streets, and historical sites.”
These include Machu Picchu, Thailand’s Maya Bay and Boracay Island in the Philippines. City destinations like Venice, Rome, and Amsterdam have implemented visitation fees, stricter laws, and management strategies to address structural and cultural damage and tourists’ inappropriate behavior.
Haugen’s prescription is that an honest debate is needed about these related issues.
“Avoiding conversations about over tourism and destinations in dire straits is irresponsible,” she says. “These are urgent and important issues the travel and tourism industry needs to take seriously, but how can we talk about destinations suffering from last-chance tourism without doing more harm?”
A public debate might have the consequence of leading more people to book these tours, she says, but still it is important to have it and she makes her position crystal clear.
“Instead of taking advantage of increased interest due to destinations’ fragile circumstances, the [travel] industry needs to be vocal about why taking advantage is wrong. Those working in the industry need to set the standards of right and wrong, and emphasize this until it becomes common practice and universally accepted.”
She summarizes it with a call to action:
“Travel professionals everywhere need to talk about last-chance tourism not as an opportunity to “go before it’s gone,” but to make clear why it is irresponsible and dangerous for people to do so. Not doing so may result in irreversible damage to precarious destinations around the world.”
As Cop26 wraps up in Glasgow, there are many on the front lines of popular but endangered ecosystems around the globe already living with the consequences of global warming – some more responsibly than others.
One example is Iceland’s Glacier Adventure which offers a “glacier walk with a local company.”
According to its web site, “Glacier Adventure is a family-run company. Our company revolves around Europe’s largest glacier, Vatnajökull. All of our tours are operated on and under the glacier and surrounding mountains.”
Glacier Adventure has its base camp about 12km east of the Jökulsárlón, the Glacier Lagoon, one of Iceland's most popular attractions.
One of its offerings is Snowmobile Adventure on Europe´s Largest Glacier
“Snowmobiling on a Glacier is a must-do thing when traveling in Iceland. This tour will give you the chance to ride your own snowmobile on Vatnajökull Glacier. While on this tour you will enjoy the beautiful wintery scenery, even during summer.
“First, we drive on our Super Jeeps on road F985 towards the glacier and then we continue on our Skidoo snowmobiles where we have breathtaking views of Vatnajökull.”
One is left to wonder about the deleterious effects of “Super Jeeps” and snowmobiles and their emissions on the glacier, but this is not addressed on the company’s web site.
In a recent interview on CBS, Iceland's Minister of the Environment Gudmundur Ingi Gudbrandsson said tourism in his country was booming before COVID, increasing nearly 40% in some years, topping 2 million annual visitors, which is more than four times the population of the entire country.
“Iceland is a beautiful country and we also have a responsibility to protect our nature,” Gudbrandsson said. But he cautioned that all the visitors flying in are making the climate issue worse.
“We are an island in the middle of the North Atlantic, and most of the people come on planes,” he said. “If people are coming here because they want to see something that is disappearing, it is our responsibility to tell people why [it’s disappearing] and what they can do to prevent it.
“And we have a lot of opportunities to do so here in Iceland, especially with receding glaciers.”
It seems like it’s a conundrum for Iceland: the tourist boom is good for the economy but may be destroying the very reason visitors come in the first place. It’s a situation not unique to Iceland; there are many other destinations facing the same dilemma.
One of those personally affected is Haukur Ingo Einarsson, a tour guide for Glacier Adventures, which now occupies what used to be an old family farm with dozens of cows.
“Until three years ago we used to milk the cows here – up to 34 cows every day, twice a day,” Einarsson said. “[Now] it’s different. I joke that now we milk tourists instead of cows!”
But Einarsson takes his new responsibility seriously: He says his job is to make visitors get a deeper appreciation for how quickly the scenery in their photos has changed.
“We’re able to influence them in a good way, like we opened their minds and sent them home with some thoughts. So that's how I see it – as an opportunity.”
There again is the dilemma: Welcoming tourists is good for business, but if you can educate them while they're visiting and send them home with a greater awareness of climate change, maybe it's all worthwhile.
Reasonable people can disagree!
Another Iceland-based company embracing the “last chance tourism” concept is Gondwana Ecotours which makes the slogan a central part of its appeal:
“Have you heard about “last-chance tourism”? It’s the latest trend in the travel industry,” its website says. “People are flocking to places that may be in danger of disappearing forever, due to climate change or other destructive human activities.”
While acknowledging the problem, it poses its own solution:
“This has created some controversy since an increase in unregulated tourism can actually cause more damage to places that are already struggling. That’s why it’s important to do some research and only travel with companies who are interested in preserving these spaces instead of profiting from them.”
Gondwana Ecotours says it “is a company that’s dedicated to providing unique travel experiences that educate people on the importance of conservation while at the same time, keeping the ecological impact of travel to a minimum.”
It then adds its unique twist to the marketing message:
“Gondwana Ecotours takes the time to educate people on the unique culture, customs, and ecology of every place we go. You’ll get a real feel for what it’s like to live in a world that is totally different from your own.”
In case you did not get the message, it summarizes what could be a credo for all similar companies.
“Our goal as a company is to not only create exciting tours that allow people to have an extraordinary experience, but also to promote travel in a responsible and sustainable way. We minimize use, waste, and the impact we have on the places we travel by using the “reduce, reuse, and recycle” principle. When we can’t offset something on our own, we purchase carbon offsets in order to make every trip carbon neutral.”
This is the essential dilemma facing both tour operators and the tourists who use them.
Indeed, climate change is causing severe damage to these fragile ecosystems which are in many cases vanishing rapidly.
So it is natural that people want to visit them before they disappear.
But that actually is making the problem worse: over tourism has so many negative impacts that it is viewed by many – including local residents – as anti-social.
Striking a balance is difficult – but essential. We cannot ban tourism, it’s far too late for that. But sensible regulation, limits and education provide at least part of the answer – maybe the best part.
In New Zealand we welcomed tourists, the more the merrier. They brought with them giardia. It was traced to hitch hikers refill their bottles from the streams. There was a time that I would drink directly from a stream or river. No longer.
I have been out to Uluru here in Australia. I was lucky enough to have my late boss fly me there. We didn't land but we did fly at an unauthorised height. A spectacular place.
I had and have never had any desire to climb it I did however walk Kings Canyon which was equally as beautiful as Uluru. I think the 3-4 hours it takes to walk puts many off
Bring on the crowds! Thousands of Chinese and Indian tourist likes to travel away from their over crowded countries to crowd somewhere else! Covid might have stemmed the tide a bit, but not for much longer.