I recently drove from west to east and past the lodges, resorts, camps and hotels that lie along and outside the northern border of the Chitwan National Park. Over the three days it took, I stayed in two different lodges and visited perhaps 20 others. I talked to lodge owners, managers and workers. Much has been happening since the lodges inside the National Park were closed last summer. [break]
It reminded me of one of the main challenges tourism in Nepal has faced over the last 30 years: the question of ‘Quality versus Quantity.’ Some years ago our much smaller neighbor Bhutan opted for ‘Quality’. With a modest population and limited infrastructure, they imposed a high minimum charge per day for visitors, kept numbers down and achieved their aim. Nepal on the other hand opened its doors and said ‘welcome to all’. A democratic approach that had, and probably still has, the support of the majority of people in the industry.
Looking back, the early days of the 70s and 80s were the ‘heyday’ for Nepal. We were the ‘flavor of the month’ during that time. High profile visitors and higher paying groups arrived together with world travelers, mountaineers, and budget trekkers. Kathmandu valley was still the ‘Shangri La’ with warm, welcoming people, little traffic and wonderful culture. A few good hotels with friendly staff opened in the footsteps of the old Royal Hotel (now the Election Commission building). Early trekking tourism was dominated by well-equipped camping/tented treks with strong Sherpa support and there were few lodges in the hills. River running on the Trishuli started in 1977.
Phewa lake in Pokhara was pristine and a settlement with small shops, lodges and a few restaurants sprang up along its shores to cater to international tourists. Building was not permitted between the road and the shoreline of the lake. In Chitwan a number of lodges were given leases to operate inside the National Park. Of these, the first and most famous, Tiger Tops, was opened in 1965; some eight years before, in 1973, Chitwan National Park itself was created. With its tree top rooms, golcha, ambience and conservation influence, Tiger Tops set the standard and in its own right helped establish and market tourism in Nepal. By the mid 70s tourism had become a major foreign currency earner for the country.
Arrivals grew steadily through the 70s and 80s and then came the opening up/easing of the economy in the early 90s. This was followed by the Maoist insurgency starting later in the decade. People fled the hills for the cities, violence and bad international press coverage halved tourist arrivals to the country. Operators slashed prices to try to attract what business there was, corners were cut, investment in new hotels and renovations in existing ones ground to a halt. It was a long lean period through to 2006/7 when the shooting stopped and things gradually started to improve.
By then however the shine had gone off Nepal. It was no longer new, the population in the Kathmandu valley had grown enormously, environmental degradation had set in. The whole place looked to be in need of a major ‘face lift’. Luckily extra airline seats (mostly on airlines whose target market catered to the labor movement to/from the Gulf States) and peace, led to a steady growth in arrival numbers over the last seven years. Closer examination shows that much of this growth focused around the ‘back packer’ end of the market, whereas the top end stagnated. If it had not been for the increase from India, China and South East Asia, the market numbers would not have reflected the encouraging figures we have seen since 2007.
The single biggest recent change to tourism in Nepal, and the one that has had most impact, has however been the closure of the premier lodges located inside the Chitwan National Park. Their leases ran out in summer 2012 and were not renewed. Bardia, Suklaphanta and the Kosi Thappu Reserve all have much to offer, but Chitwan is the largest and most easily accessible of the wildlife parks. Until the closure it had been the star attraction offering the Bengal Tiger, great one-horned Rhinoceros, and Gharial and Mugger crocodiles amongst much else. Up to Summer 2012 there had been six resorts inside Chitwan National Park.
Of these, one, Gaida had been closed earlier for other reasons. The lodges were tucked away in the jungle, located to ensure the dispersal of impact of the visitors and well regulated by the government. Early morning elephant rides in the mist, jungle walks in the towering sal forests, jeep safaris, bird watching, float trips down the Rapti or Narayani offered special exposure of the highest quality before clients returned to the comforts of the lodges. They operated in line with conservation ethics of leaving a minimum human footprint inside protected areas.
Come spring 2013 and there is a totally new situation. From a managed and dispersed scenario, now only Saurha offers easy access to the Park. There, government owned elephants are given priority access. Privately owned elephants are not permitted, though once all fees are paid private jeep safaris are allowed access to the Park. Consequently many of the visitors to the area now limit their wildlife exposure to the park buffer zones. These are liable to human settlement, cattle grazing, agriculture and have limited forest cover and little atmosphere. With Saurha now overbuilt, developers are looking elsewhere and new lodges are being created right across the area I visited. Given they are outside the wonderful environment of the Park itself, some are indeed as well located as possible, However, the experience is just not what it was before.
Some of Nepal’s higher paying clients may well use these lodges, but currently reports suggest they are not coming to Chitwan in any numbers. Some are visiting Bardia in west Nepal, but others perhaps are going to India or Africa.
On the wildlife side it is probably too early for detailed surveys to have been carried out on poaching levels pre and post closure. Prior to closure the lodges inside the national park assisted with wildlife counts and movements. Now they are gone, there is no one to assist. In Saurha the feeling was that poaching has increased. Whether that is because of the absent lodges, less security, greater demand and higher prices for animal parts, is not known. Africa also experimented with having the ‘Lodges outside as against inside national Parks’ and it was found that when there was no human occupation inside, the poaching levels did indeed increase.
Additionally there are practical and financial implications. I was told that the Park Authorities now do not have the manpower to properly maintain the roads or fire breaks inside the park and patrolling the huge area, particularly during the monsoon, is a major challenge. Also the closures mean that the government no longer receives considerable income the lodges inside the Park used to pay in annual Leasing fees, Company tax and VAT takings which totaled approximately US $1 million.
My interest is more generally in overall tourism to Nepal and I am no expert on the rights and wrongs of the conservation arguments relating to ‘inside or outside the Park’. But Nepal is a poor country, needs all the income it can get, and unless the case against lodges inside the park is overwhelming (and that seems to be in question) can the nation really afford the loss of perhaps 1,500 full time jobs and another 1,000 or more daily wage staff? And what happens to the many thousand dependents reliant on those wages? Where do new jobs and employment come from? In addition there are provisions suppliers, transporters and a hoard of others whose livelihoods are being adversely affected.
The reality that now needs to be faced is this: With the closure of lodges in Chitwan, there is a clear danger that ‘quality vs quantity’ debate on tourism in Nepal is getting out of balance. Of course we need the backpacker and more budget orientated side of the market. This represents our ‘quantity’ side and the largest part of our inbound tourist market. But we cannot afford to further erode our vital ‘quality’ top-end market either.
The author, a UK native, has been living in Nepal for the last 35 years. He has been involved with the Nepali tourism industry for the whole time
Related story
Daily life affected by Mechi Highway closure
