Toledo Ecotourism Association, Belize - Environmental Impact Evaluation

Although the Toledo Ecotourism Association ensured that tourist group size was kept low, the organisation did not excel itself in minimizing environmental impacts. For the TEA, it seemed to be a case of the guides causing damage to the environment rather than the tourist. Although this environmental impact was limited, the TEA could hardly claim to be actively attempting to minimize the impact. A list of observations made whilst on a variety of tours demonstrates the indirect impact my presence had. At this point it must be pointed out that all the guides were aware of the fact that I was studying the TEA programme. Some examples of such behaviour by the guides included:

• Occasionally dropping litter in the form of cigarette butts and plastic wrappers.
• Occasionally indiscriminately macheting small saplings, for no apparent reason.
• Throwing branches at iguanas so that I could witness them jump out of a tree and into a river.
• Poking into a termite nest to see what was inside.
• Hunting for gibnut (a small pig-like animal) inside “ Gibnut Cave ” in the hope of catching one for dinner.

While some of these impacts may have occurred whether the guides had been showing me around or not, others were an indirect result of my presence. The guides clearly thought that this behaviour was environmentally acceptable. Drawing upon Urry’s [1992] work on “the tourist gaze” is relevant:

“What is viewed and criticised as environmentally damaging in one era or one society is not necessarily taken as such in another… Reading nature is therefore something that is learned; and the learning process varies greatly between societies.” [p.174].

Urry [1992] also notes differing ways in which societies have intersected with their respective physical environments:

“Stewardship of the land so as to provide a better inheritance for future generations…; exploitation of land or other resources through seeing nature as separate from society and available for its maximum instrumental appropriation….; and visual consumption through constructing the physical environment as a ‘landscape’ not primarily for production but embellished for aesthetic appropriation.” [p.174].

For the tourist, the environment of Toledo is there for visual consumption, while for the indigenous Mayas, the environment’s significance consists of a blend of the three. Interviewing the Mayas demonstrated that many also attached aesthetic importance to the environment, but many saw its primary importance as being for exploitation. Preserving the environment (stewardship) was considered important so that it could continue to be exploited for the purpose of tourism. Many saw the environment’s “maximum instrumental appropriation” [see above] as being for tourism. To this extent, ecotourism is actively contributing towards preserving the environment in Toledo as the local population now attach additional importance to its presence.

Although visitor numbers are very low (usually just one visit by a singular or small group of tourists per week) the impacts are none-the-less present. Cole [1989, cited in Wall, 1997, p.488] notes that “It is often assumed that the relationship between volumes of use and associated impacts is linear…In fact it is more likely to be curvilinear or even steplike.” The earlier list, particularly the example of the gibnut being hunted, shows that this would seem to be the case in the TEA villages. In one cave visited in Laguna, a few of the stalagmites and stalactites were chipped at the ends – this may have been caused by tourists but it is more likely that this was caused by Mayas living in the caves in the past. Waste produced by tourists is disposed of by burning plastic and paper and burying metals. Neither are particularly environmentally friendly but the alternatives are limited by a lack of re-cycling facilities in Belize . The guesthouses were built using local timber (and thatch) that is supposedly collected sustainably by logging companies, though many local people suggested the logging was rather indiscriminate. The outsides of some of the guesthouses were littered, which did not give the impression of an ecotourism guesthouse.

The TEA falls short of achieving the standards expected by the environmental principles of ecotourism. There are too many examples of environmental inappropriateness. Unfortunately I was unable to witness any other tourist behaviour, but the environmental degradation seems to be caused by the guides who in some cases littered or disturbed the local flora and fauna. Should visitor numbers increase in the future, the guides’ actions whilst guiding tourists could have a profound effect on the natural environment.

Environmental Tours and Ecotourism in Ecuador at Piedra Blanca