TRENDS IN CAVE VISITOR NUMBERS
INTRODUCTION
In the Proceedings of the 1981 Yallingup Conference, cave visitor numbers throughout the 1970s were recorded for virtually all cave areas in Australia (Watson 1982). Without any exception, all areas demonstrated a more or less steady increase in visitor numbers over the ten year period. The actual rate of increase varied from area to area, with Yallingup virtually trebling its numbers and others increasing more slowly.
The only comment one might have made then is that the variation in the rate of increase seemed to be related to the extent to which areas did or did not undergo some sort of major shift in management or marketing. However, the 1980s have been very different. Many areas now have less visitors than they did in 1981. Many have varied both up and down over the period. Interestingly, in spite of a world increase in tourism, this seems to be part of a world trend: participation in much non-urban recreation and tourism has suffered a decline (Stankey 1986) over the same period in most countries. It has increased markedly where new and much more sophisticated large-scale infrastructure and marketing has been utilised as at the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park or Uluru and Kakadu National Parks, but this appears to be at the expense of smaller and/or less 'commercialised' operations.
The decline has, of course, both benefits and dis-benefits. At the end of the 1970s, it appeared that our natural resources were going to be crushed under the hoards of people flooding over them in ever-increasing numbers. Some of us, regrettably, are still battling that flood. But, the stabilising of visitor numbers now gives us the opportunity to provide much more adequate resource stewardship and (hopefully) a higher quality visitor experience.
The down side is that as management moves increasingly, and sometimes quite inappropriately, into a user-pays era, some parks may well find that their income no longer meets their financial demands. Even worse, this may lead to closure of some tourist caves, and the world experience (Gurnee, pers. comm.) is that no cave is more vandalised than an ex-tourist cave - we have some very sad Australian examples, particularly at Mole Creek and in Western Australia.
SOME PROBLEMS ABOUT VISITOR STATISTICS
The first comment that must be made is that we have a clear problem in the absence of real attention to proper collection of statistical data. More importantly, we have a major problem in that this in turn indicates a lack of real concern about performance.
Simple statistics of visitor numbers do not tell the full story - but they are one of the most readily available performance indicators, and should be taken very seriously.
There are a number of different problems. The first is simply that statistics may not be kept on a consistent basis. Some managers are unable to supply data for certain years; others had to point out that data for some years was apparently falsified; and some could only provide a tangled mess of conflicting sets of information. More fundamentally, most statistics just reflect tickets sold. At many cave areas, we don't know whether a number of 4,000 represents 1,000 people, each taking four tours or 4,000 people, each taking one tour! Some do keep separate records for each cave, but the same problem prevails. We may also need separate figures for each kind of tour - an adventure tour at $25.00 is very different from a conventional mass tour at $5.00.
In other words, we need to develop statistics which distinguish clearly between:
- visitors
- visits
- tours
One indication of the importance of this is some recent work at Jenolan which indicates that a significant proportion of visitors just do not enter the caves. This will vary from one area to another - for instance, it is probably very high at Yanchep where the park itself is a delightful and popular picnic ground and relatively low at Yallingup, where the cave reserve is relatively isolated from other key attractions.
This all points to the fact that ticket sales are just not enough to keep us clearly informed about what is happening to visitor patterns. Developing a pattern of properly controlled visitor surveys should be given a much higher priority by managers if cave tourism is to survive.
LOOKING AT THE 1980s
As noted above, some data received from managers is either not sufficiently reliable or not adequate for easy comparison. This paper is based upon only 12 sites, which range from the major operations of Jenolan and Waitomo to the modest but effective small operations at Shades of Death (Murrindal) and Englebrecht Cave (Mount Gambier). More detailed data will be summarised separately in the Association's Newsletter.
All have suffered ups and downs throughout the 1980s. On the whole, however, these are relatively minor and the overall pattern, contrasting greatly with the 1970s, is one of more or less stable numbers. Perhaps the best example of this is Yanchep, where despite a small rise at the time of the America's Cup extravaganza, there has been extremely little variation indeed. This suggests a similarly stable market pattern - probably Perth residents on a family day outing.
Given this overall trend, it is not surprising that a number end the 1980s with less visitors than at the beginning of the decade. Of the twelve areas considered here, five now have a lesser number of visitors than in 1981; and of the remaining seven, most only show a very minor lift in numbers.
Now, let us look at some of the detail and endeavour to explain some aspects of the patterns which are emerging.
Waitomo demonstrates the vulnerability of the major resort to factors lying completely outside of managerial control. Here we have an area which has developed a large international patronage, and which has therefore suffered as a result of the Australian pilot's strike, the grounding of DC10s, and the Gulf War. However, when one takes account of the closure of Ruakuri Cave (which had contributed some 15,000 ticket sales per year) it is clear that Waitomo is performing extremely well in holding its numbers with a drop of only some 3,000 sales over the last three years. This is, at the same time, presenting the managers with an immense problem in trying to maintain quality of visitor experience.
Jenolan shows a somewhat similar pattern but like most of New South Wales (especially the North) suffered a decline during the Brisbane Expo and other bicentennial events. However, Jenolan has a much larger day trip market than Waitomo, and so has shown less recent decline. Wombeyan depends heavily upon this massive day trip market, and, perhaps because it provides a high quality, relatively low cost destination for the Sydney day-tripper, has suffered minimal impact from the current recession.
The influence of competing events is clear at both Augusta-Margaret River and Wellington. Both suffered from the 1988 Expo and bicentennial problem. Augusta-Margaret River has responded by re-scheduling of tours, and is now steadily re-building visitor numbers. Wellington has suffered perhaps more than any others from the current economic downturn - it is not a significant day-trip destination, depending largely upon passing road traffic in the course of longer journeys - and hence, a rapidly diminishing source of visitors.
Interestingly, Carlsbad Caverns (Kerbo, pers. comm.) has suffered similarly - as transcontinental air travel becomes progressively cheaper, so Carlsbad becomes less and less accessible. The same seems to be operating in relation to both Naracoorte and Englebrecht Cave, both of which have suffered a serious decline, even though the latter has performed well, as a newcomer to Southeast tourism, and one staffed entirely by volunteers.
The other modest newcomer is the Shades of Death Cave at Murrindal, and again, this has shown a steady rise in visitor numbers with no downturn up to 1990. The Buchan Caves Reserve has also held its numbers, which certainly helps create the opportunity for Shades of Death. This perhaps points to another issue. Buchan has been identified as a nodal point in the East Gippsland tourist strategy; the district has accumulated a number of other quality attractions; the caves are undergoing considerable enhancement through sensitive redevelopment; all of which means that the district as a whole is offering a lot of very high quality experiential tourism. So, they are able to transcend the absence of any massive day trip market, and Buchan is becoming a quality longer distance destination in its own right.
Perhaps a somewhat similar phenomenon is occurring at Princes Margaret Rose Cave, which has not suffered the same decline as its near neighbours across the border. Its continuing patronage is probably based in the increased profile and 'market re-positioning' of the Glenelg River region as a whole.
Finally, we come to Mole Creek. Here we have an extremely interesting (but unfortunately short-lived) phenomenon where Tourism Tasmania developed and successfully marketed a series of coach tours - their influence is clear, and it is to be regretted that these tours were discontinued.
So, in the end, the one aspect over which managers may (with persistence or luck) be able to influence is the 'market position' of what they have to offer. This depends at base on the quality of their 'product' but much more upon the consequent infrastructural support (good coach tours or quality restaurants and accommodation), existence of other complementary offerings (as at Buchan) and effective marketing to the right audience.
CONCLUDING COMMENTS
Some people may disagree with the apparent emphasis of this paper on 'bums on seats' as an indicator of performance. I also do not believe it is the most important thing - but it is the base from which most else grows. If we do not maintain numbers and or economic profitability, we will just not get the necessary resources to do other things.
David Williams of Waitomo suggests there are several key trends emerging in the potential market - a growing demand for experiential tourism, e.g. Black Water Rafting; small groups of wealthy travellers who want and are prepared to pay for the best; growing numbers of international visitors from newly-developing countries in the Asian region. Many cave parks might well develop programs for the first of these; but can only cater for the second if they have the right supporting infrastructure and can only attract the third if they are adjacent to the right 'conveyor belt'.
I believe the figures cited here also indicate some of the factors at work in Australia. They show clearly the importance of specific. market sectors in current patterns of cave visiting; the importance of appropriate infrastructure and marketing; and the importance of regional or district development and marketing. Hopefully, this paper will stimulate many others to think about ways in which our cave parks can compete more effectively with Kakadu, Uluru and the Barrier Reef!
REFERENCES
STANKEY, George, 1986, Trends in backcountry and wilderness use : Is past prologue to present? Paper to National Symposium on Social Science in Resource Management, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR
WATSON, J.R., 1982, An annotated list of Australian Show Caves, Cave Management in Australia IV: 69