Pre-departure Destination Brief: Milford Sound
Shuo Yang (3940194)
Brock University
Zealand
Due: Feb, 18th, 2010
Introduction
Milford Sound (Piopiotahi in Māori) is a fjord on the south west coast of the
South Island within Fiordland National Park and the Te Wahipounamu World Heritage
site in New Zealand (Inglis, Gust, Kospartov, Peacock, 2008). It has been described
by Rudyard Kipling as the ‘eighth wonder of the world’ (Transit New Zealand, 2007).
The valley walls drop steeply to water depths, especially Mitre Peak, has been one of
the most well-known tourism icons (Becken, 2005). Its unique natural attractions,
many wildlife, and marine biota attract a huge number of tourists to visit Milford
Sound on annual basis. For example, Visitor numbers to Milford Sound / Piopiotahi
have grown from 247,000 in 1992 to approximately 470,000 in the 2004 /2005 season
(Fiordland National Park Management Plan, 2007). The rate of growth continues over
the life of management plan (Fiordland National Park Management Plan, 2007).
Environmental Impacts of Tourism Development on Milford Sound
Milford Sound as the “focal point for tourism in Fiordland National Park” was to
be the blueprint by which tourism could move ahead (Department of Conservation,
2002), as it was presumed to be clean, green and most importantly natural (Riddell,
2004). However, these great expectations in an economic sense do not mean Milford
Sound has managed to escape a wide range of environmental effects associated with
tourism and large influxes of tourists. For example, there are more than 50 buses and
4,000 visitors in Milford Sound on daily basis (Becken, 2005). It has been estimated
that among all travelers visiting New Zealand, 35% of them tend to choose Milford
Sound as one of their destination as it has been successfully promoted as a sightseeing
attraction in a commercial sense (Carey, 2003). Thus, the issue of carrying capacity of
the number of travellers at Milford Sound has been put forward (Carey, 2003; Becken,
2005; Sirota, 2006).
The congestion and the great intensity of tourists in Milford Sound not only bring
environmental concerns, but also may negatively influence the perceptions held by
tourists towards this popular sightseeing destination and therefore its commercial
values. Moreover, in addition to the economic benefits and environmental concerns,
the impacts of tourism on local communities should also draw wide attention.
On one hand, the increasing number of tourists can definitely generate more
revenue for local economy. For instance, The Helicopter Line (THL) announced in
2008 that Milford sales and the sale of an Auckland coach line will generate proceeds
of $26 million and one-off gains of about $9 million (Hartley, 2008). On the other
hand, an ever increasing flow of tourists to Milford Sound causes congestion and
overcrowding not only at Milford Sound and but also its road corridors (Riddell, 2004;
Becken, 2005). The congestion issues are plaguing many key localities of Milford
Sound and surrounding areas such as water ways, terminus, and road access
(Department of Conservation, 2002).
While the primary reason that account for the
congestion on the waterways has been identified by some researchers as the lack of
limit put on the number of vessels in Milford Sound, others argue that the reasons lie
in the excessive number of tourists on a boat (Riddell, 2004). Particularly, large
international cruise ships which use the waterways on a regular basis, in conjunction
with local tourist boat cruises, constitute another form of commercial boating activity
in Milford Sound (Sirota, 2006). Therefore, when the issue of the carrying capacities
of the sightseeing attractions are examined, it is highly suggested that neither aspects
should be neglected, namely, the lack of limit put on its infrastructural facilities, as in
this case, the total number of its vessels, and the excessive number of tourists. In
addition to its waterways, around the peak time the terminal area becomes
over-crowded when tourists arrive en-mass to meet boat departures (Riddell, 2004).
Besides, during the peak times, buses which frequently drive by to drop off
passengers are unable to find a parking space at the terminal (Riddell, 2004, p.80).
The situation of crowdedness is further compounded by “the one way single egress”
(Riddell, 2004, p.83) leading to the popular attraction. The only road for ground
transportation to get to Milford Sound is an alpine traffic corridor that provides the
only road access for a growing number of tourists, operators, workers and suppliers to
Milford Sound (Riddell, 2004).
All these issues may lead to the negative perceptions amongst visitors towards
Milford Sound. As a result, in recent years, the Milford Sound’s initial target groups
including New Zealand and Australian Free and Independent Travelers (FIT’s) have
been considerably reduced partly due to the negative visitor perceptions (Riddell,
2004). The revenue that can be generated from the local tourism industry would
decrease because tourists may choose other sightseeing destinations such as Doubtful
Sound instead of Milford Sound as the result of their negative images towards Milford
Sound. Consequently, the negative perceptions of stakeholders towards Milford
Sound would also decrease the interest in investment (Riddell, 2004). Interestingly,
possibly due to the cultural differences among tourist from different backgrounds,
Asian tourists who tend to move and travel in large tour groups tend to have greater
tolerance towards the intensity of people at tourism attraction as in the case of Milford
Sound, to which most tourists from European, Australian, American and New Zealand
markets, on the contrary, dislike (Riddell, 2004). For instance, one of the major
groups visiting Milford Sound is Japanese (Riddell, 2004). Nevertheless, in Milford
Sound, the noise from the aircraft (Becken, 2005) and the commercial vessels and
cruise ships (Sirota, 2006) would affect the perceptions of natural quiet, visitor
enjoyment and safety concerns (National Park Service, 1994, cited in Cessford, 2000).
Although tourists from different backgrounds may demonstrate disparities in their
perception towards certain attraction with great intensity of tourists, there is less
possibility that any tourist for the purpose of sightseeing will favor places which are
environmentally contaminated or have other ecological problems due to overcrowding
and congestion.
However, it is also worth noticing that the ever increasing number of tourists may
put greater pressure on local infrastructure (e.g. toilets and sewage disposal system)
(Riddell, 2004; Becken, 2005). To make the matter worse, despite the relatively
greater tolerance towards the high tourist intensity at certain tourism attraction among
Asian tourists, they tend to move in large tour groups so that the effects are massive
on the infrastructure, water supply, effluent disposal and so on (McIntyre, 1998).
Indeed, some improvements to infrastructure have been carried out by local
government including an upgrading of the wharves at Freshwater Basin more recently.
Nevertheless, these measures do not substantially benefit the local people for them to
have a quality life (Riddell, 2004). According to Nitsch and Straaten (1995), any
changes necessary to accommodate tourists should not be detrimental to community
needs. Therefore, the influx of tourists not only puts stress on the environment at
Milford Sound, but also brings socio-economic concerns and the sustainability of
Milford Sound would be considerably threatened.
Environmental Impacts of Tourism Development on Wildlife and Marine Biota
in Milford Sound
Aside from the negative environmental impacts on Milford Sound, the increase in
commercial and tourists’ activities have put pressure on wildlife and marine biota in
Milford Sound (Sirota, 2006). Higham, Kearsley and Kliskey (2000) also point out
that increasing waterborne traffic in the fiords of Fiordland National Park may
threaten the wilderness status of this area. More specifically, first of all, the presence
of high intensity of tourist boats operating in the fiord influences the dolphins that
visit Milford Sound directly (Fairbairn, 2003). For example, high speed vessels would
harm dolphins due to collisions, especially when dolphins are trying to avoid vessels
(Riddell, 2004; Sirota, 2006). It had been estimated over the period of time of the
study by Lusseau (2005) that on average four individuals from a population of
between 45 and 55 dolphins had propeller marks from collisions with boats. Also, two
of the four had collided with over the study period, one of which (a two week old calf)
disappeared after being hit and presumed dead. Lusseau’s study (2005) also indicates
that commercial sea-surface activities have impacts on the time spent by pods of
dolphins in Milford Sound, as it has shown that dolphins tend to spend less time in
Milford Sound when traffic is heavy. The similar behavior trend of dolphins can also
be found in the study by Sirota (2006), who states that cetaceans (whales and dolphins)
move away from boat when interactions become intrusive or too lengthy, as the
results of acoustic disturbance or the risks of personal injuries (Sirota, 2006).
Secondly, the noises from the diesel engines of the large vessels within Milford Sound
may hinder the ability for dolphins to communicate in synchronized diving efforts for
in-fiord species (Sirota, 2006, p.6). Also, fur seals are disturbed by tourists coughing,
making seal noises, hissing or shouting at them. For example, ther is also sufficient
evidence showing that the hissing from venting scuba tanks disturbs them as well
(Sirota, 2006). The current levels of commercial vessel traffic disturb whales to enter
Milford Sound (Constantine, 1999).
Thirdly, the commercial vessel traffic also affects the marine biota (Sirota, 2006). For
example, the alteration of the hydrograph of two
main basins including Deep Water Basin or Fresh Water Basin would change the
conditions within the water layers and thereby affect marine biota (Hanning, 1998),
Also, black coral conies are sensitive to changes in oxygen concentrations and the
presence of hydrogen sulphide and would be unlikely to survive in conditions of low
oxygen concentration (Kai, 2000).
Fourthly, the exhaust fumes, smoke, and oil leak from the large international cruise ships
pose great threat to Milford Sound and wildlife in Milford Sound (English, 2000; Riddell,
2004; Siorta, 2006). In addition,litter from boat, human waste, and waste food also
considerably affect the wildlife and biota in Milford Sound. Therefore, it has been
demonstrated by these examples that the tourism development in Milford Sound is
threatening its abundance of wildlife and mammals.
Last but not least, the negative impacts on local wild life will
also affect the area economically in the long run. Based on a survey on tourists in
Milford Sound by O’Neill (1994), one of the most common features is wildlife
viewing, such as seals. Thus, if the wildlife and mammals are under threat, visitors’
enjoyment might decrease and thereby the economic sustainability of the attraction
will be ultimately influenced due to the reduction of tourists.