CAVE TOURISM AND CONSERVATION

J.R. Dunkley, Australian Speleological Federation

For the purposes of this paper conservation will be defined simply as the wise use of resources, a utilitarian concept broader than that of preservation.

There are basically two approaches to a consideration of the place of cave conservation. One, derived from the philosophy which characterises the ideals of National Parks, is concerned with the maintenance of a current state of resource protection and preservation. The other proceeds from an assumption of production or use, and is concerned with such alternatives as tourism, mining, farming, and other exploitative functions. I propose to concentrate on the latter.

Enough has been said elsewhere about actual and potential threats to caves from mining, water pollution, dam construction, and I do not wish to dwell on these, although of course they are significant and they may well affect tourism. Enough has also been said about the intangible, subjective values of scenery, wilderness and so on. But most of you here are interested in the tourist dollar, so I want to discuss the tourist aspect of cave conservation, compare it with the preservationist philosophy and show that there is a degree of compatibility between them. The general approach will be an economic one, for tourist spending is an economic phenomenon. In doing so I will make these practical propositions:

1. Tourist caves are an economic resource.
2. Conservation of caves is therefore of economic significance and it can make financial good sense.
3. To make money you have to spend money, both on new investment capital and on maintaining existing assets.
4. A long-term management plan for a tourist cave reserve can often cater both for tourist exploitation, and preservation interests, by policies of differential pricing and areal zonation.
5. Policies of development and conservation of tourist caves need to be seen in a regional context if their full economic benefit is to be realised.

1. TOURIST CAVES AS AN ECONOMIC RESOURCE

This much would appear self-evident; my task is to show how this relates to an overall policy on conservation.

2. CONSERVATION CAN MEAN MONEY

Caves can be a valuable economic resource because people are prepared to pay money to see them. But they come for various reasons - some to be entertained, as in the likeness of a certain feature to Marilyn Monroe, some to be educated about vadose and phreatic origins of limestone caves, some merely to be able to appreciate the aesthetic beauty or rugged grandeur of a cave. The amount they will pay depends on the strength of their demand — some will pay much more than others, and it is wise to cater for a wide variety of tastes.

3. TO MAKE MONEY YOU HAVE TO SPEND MONEY

Anyone in the business of making money is well aware of the need for capital expenditure. It is this investment in capital which develops a resource to the stage where it generates income. This investment takes two forms:

Firstly, development of new facilities, as in provision of roads, carparks, ancillary facilities of food and accommodation, and opening up of new caves.

Secondly, maintenance of existing capital. Providing for depreciation is an indispensable expense in other businesses, why not in the management of tourist caves? Such expenses as steam cleaning, track maintenance and reconstruction, rewiring etc must be recognised as essential expenses in asset maintenance, and not as an optional extra.

New Facilities:

It is reliably reported that in the United States, commercial caves are an economic proposition only because of the provision of ancillary facilities of entertainment, food and accommodation. The caves of course are the attraction which bring the tourist to the area, but they do not pay by themselves. Consequently, investment in new facilities may be essential to the continued viability of the caves.

Now to me as a speleologist, places like Jenolan are a magnetic attraction in themselves, an attraction for my money as well, for no other reason than that the caves are intrinsically worth studying and the residents worth meeting. Facilities or no facilities, I would come.

But the average tourist has a relatively weak preference for Jenolan, particularly for return visits. He is attracted, certainly, by easy access and convenient facilities, but he is more likely to return if there are other attractions - other caves, nearby scenic splendours and so on.

Decisions about expenditure on new developments need to be seen, therefore, in a context wider than merely that of wiring, lighting, path construction and the odd toilet. I would suggest that nature trails, interpretation programs, good signposting to interesting surface features and the like can pay for themselves in repeat business and in increasing visitor awareness of and sympathy with a programme of conservation. Furthermore, at least in areas where parking is adequate but caves limited, these extra attractions help reduce peak loads on caves inspections.

Maintaining Existing Assets:

The most significant point here is that caves, like any other real asset, wear out in time, and allowance must be made for their depreciation. This means two things:

Firstly, developed caves must be maintained and cleaned. In favourable circumstances they may even be closed for regeneration.

Secondly, it will be desirable to have a reserve stock of unopened caves which can be developed when demand grows, or when others are closed. In this regard, speleological exploration has long-term benefits, and the considerable time, effort and money spent for example, in arresting the deterioration of the Barellan Cave at Jenolan, can be justified. This is, indeed a cave which might perhaps be some day opened to tourism. Tasmania in particular has a large stock of potential tourist caves of a very high standard, and certainly the conservation of Exit Cave needs to be seen in the light of future tourist development.

4. SCARCE RESOURCES AND RATIONING

Most of you would be only too painfully aware of the peak load problems commonly encountered in popular tourist resorts in holiday seasons. Here at Jenolan last Easter Sunday an almost immobile queue extended right down the Five Mile Hill and up the Two Mile Hill and there has been serious discussion on alternatives to the present severe shortage of parking. In principle, of course, a sufficiently high charge for parking would deter many of these, but the caves also suffer from the very heavy traffic on days like this. Most of the visitors on such holidays are just interested in a nice day's drive, and their demand would be satisfied by any cave which was easy of access, not too long an inspection, and not too expensive. Such a cave need not, and indeed should not be the best available where there are several.

If a higher price is then charged for admission to the better caves, we will restrict demand to those who are more likely to appreciate what they receive for their money, and simultaneously of course we eliminate those whose demand could be satisfied quite adequately by a lesser cave.

This principle can be applied by private operators of commercial caves if they remember that what they are interested in is maximum revenue, not maximum number of visitors. It follows that demand can be reduced by making access more difficult and inspections longer and more expensive, and this need not imply any reduction in revenue.

The same principle applies on the surface. In a caves reserve as a whole, substantial areas can be preserved if most development is concentrated in a small area beyond which access becomes increasingly more difficult. This principle of zoning is the one adopted by National Parks authorities in most of their land management plans, allowing concentrated development of popular areas without marring the intact beauty of places further afield.

5. THE REGIONAL CROWN

Private ventures in tourist cave development obviously have to be internally viable. However those under control of the Crown can and should be considered as part of a regional cost-benefit analysis. How much benefit from the tourist caves at Mole Creek or Buchan, for example, accrues not to the cave owners, but to the local tradespeople and community generally? Quite a deal, I imagine. Even relatively small numbers of speleologists can add to the local economy: after the Hobart Conference of the Australian Speleological Federation in 1971, I estimated the gross contribution of visiting speleologists to be up to $1000 just in Mole Creek village. This is important to a small community.

CONCLUSIONS

1. In the context of tourism, cave conservation means a great deal more than just prevention of damage to decorations.
2. The long term economic significance of a cave makes it a powerful agent of protection. Assessed on a present-value basis and in a regional context, it may well exceed in productive value any short term gains from mining.
3. In that it is responsible for an increase in the number of people appreciating or experiencing the value of natural areas, tourism of any form represents a potential for change.
4. It is sound practice to provide a variety of tours, both underground and on the surface, to cater for differing tastes and pocket.
5. But tourism must not be the 'kiss of death' — it must not result in destruction of the very resource essential to its existence. Thus money spent in conservation becomes an investment in the future.
6. Finally, I stress that economists have barely begun to come to grips with an analysis of consumer behaviour in the tourism and conservation market. There is, however, ample evidence that there are several "sub-markets" and specialist interests which can be catered for.

I finish with these points for further discussion.

1. Is differential pricing feasible? Will it antagonise the public? Will they feel cheated?
2. What cost-benefit or environmental impact studies have been made of regions in which cave tourism is a significant economic factor?
3. What kind of a market is there in practice for such new departures as
   1. special interest tours where people would have an opportunity to learn something of the caves and their environment e.g. historical, geological, surface features?
   2. commercial tours of undeveloped or partly developed caves? I had in mind here something of the underground wilderness concept and in particular Exit Cave.