Wildlife tourism & recreation: Impacts of elephant safaris in the Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal : A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Science at Lincoln University

The Royal Chitwan National Park (RCNP) of Nepal is renowned for its large variety of wildlife, including rhinoceros and tiger, which can be viewed during safaris from the back of an elephant. The demand for elephant safaris has risen as a result of increasing tourist visits to the park. The total number of tourists visiting the park increased from 836 in 1974 to 96,062 in 1997. The impact of this tourist or recreation activity on park resources is as yet unknown. Thus, this study investigates the impacts of elephant safaris on the park. The main purpose of this study was to investigate people's perceptions of the biophysical, social and economic impacts of elephant safaris. The study also investigated the current and historical status of the safaris in Nepal. Finally, on the basis of the findings of this research, both future research and practical management recommendations are suggested to enhance the quality of elephant safaris while minimising impacts in the park. Both qualitative and quantitative approaches were adapted for this study. Two different questionnaires were developed. First, a self-administered questionnaire was offered to park visitors (203) and second, a questionnaire was used for interviewing elephant drivers (40), tourist guides (30), and park staff (30). More than ten key informants, including park managers and conservationists, were interviewed. Field observations to gain an in depth knowledge of the wildlife responses to the elephant safaris were also done. Social impacts were determined on the basis of tourist attractions, and satisfaction with and crowding levels of the safaris. It was found that more than 97 per cent of visitors wanted to participate in elephant safaris and that was a most enjoyable activity for the majority of visitors. More than 68 per cent of visitors gave high satisfaction ratings for elephant safaris. The crowding level of elephant safaris at Sauraha, as rated by the respondents, was higher than in both the Tiger Tops and Kasara areas. Economic impacts were analysed on the basis of tourist expenditure and the revenue and employment generated by the safaris. The study indicates overall agreement of respondents that elephant safaris have been the main cause of economic development of Sauraha (main entrance gate of the park). Elephant safaris have generated 428 full time jobs and more than 16 per cent of the revenue in the park in 1997. This study found that an elephant safari is a perfect way to go wildlife viewing. It is very eco-friendly overall, and surpasses its alternatives, especially noisy Jeep safaris. However, more people are becoming aware of the biophysical impacts of the safaris in the park. They perceive that the safaris cause negative impacts on wildlife and can impact on their habitat through soil compaction and erosion, vegetation damage and wildlife disturbance. The study also estimated that the current wildlife observation distances from elephant safaris are less than 15 metres, which is too close and may be harmful to wildlife. There is considerable variation in the perception of appropriate wildlife viewing distances among different groups of people (elephant drivers, tourist guides and tourists). The park staff recommended that wildlife viewing distances should be more than 15 metres while the other three groups suggested less than 15 metres. This suggests that park staff are more concerned that the closeness of the safaris approaching wildlife has negative effects on their behaviour. This study also provides interesting comparisons with previous studies on impacts of tourist activities on wildlife from a biological perspective in that the appropriate distance perceived by park staff to view wildlife was the only one to "fit" the distance recommended by these earlier studies. The distances perceived by other groups of people as appropriate would in fact cause unacceptable levels of disturbance. Therefore, this study concludes that social (human) perception of disturbance by elephant safaris may not accurately reflect the biological severity of their impacts.