Proposed Tourism Opportunity in the Tiger Conservation Area of the Nam Et-Phou Louey National Protected Area, Lao PDR

Transcription

1 Proposed Tourism Opportunity in the Tiger Conservation Area of the Nam Et-Phou Louey National Protected Area, Lao PDR 25 October 2005 For technical information on the Nam Et-Phou Louey National Protected Area please contact: Dr. Arlyne Johnson, Country Program Co-Director and Mr. Venevongphet, Tiger Project Manager Wildlife Conservation Society Lao Programme Unit 17, Ban Sisavath, Chanthabouly District Vientiane, Lao PDR Tel/Fax: and For information on tourism activities in this area please contact: Tara Gujadhur, SNV Sustainable Tourism Advisor Luang Prabang Provincial Tourism Office Ban Visoun Luang Prabang, Lao PDR Tel:

2 Executive Summary This summary report outlines the results and tourism opportunities identified during a tourism field survey in the Nam Et-Phou Louey National Protected Area (NEPL NPA), Lao PDR in March The second largest NBCA in Laos, the NEPL has a relatively high level of species diversity, and is home to a tiger population estimated to number between 7 to 21 individuals one of the highest in the region. It is thought that, in the medium term, this area has significant tourism potential. This report is targeted towards the private sector to inform them of work undertaken to date and to encourage dialogue and feedback on the tourism potential of the site. It is hoped that products can be developed in the near future to a) support and expand tiger conservation efforts already underway and, b) contribute to sustainable development of local communities. The survey upon which this report is based was carried out from March 23 27, 2005, with the participation and support of the Wildlife Conservation Society (currently supporting tiger conservation efforts in the NBCA), the Lao-American Project Luang Prabang, the NBCA Management Unit, SNV Netherlands Development Organisation, and the Provincial Tourism Offices of Houaphan and Luang Prabang. The route followed was a 5 night/6 day trek beginning to the northwest of the NBCA in Viengkham district, Luang Prabang, through the tiger conservation area in the NBCA, over the summit of Phou Louey and ending in Viengthong district, Houaphan province (see Map 1). The route was unique in Laos for its extreme wilderness and nature experience, varied terrain, and ability to see tiger tracks and a variety of wildlife. However, the area is very remote, and the trail is long and strenuous. Several other routes have been proposed to give tour operators as many options as possible to develop potential products, in partnership with the protected area and tourism offices. The NEPL has strong potential for development as an exclusive tourism destination, catering to a market currently under-exploited in the region. It is hoped that wilderness, hiking, and wildlife enthusiasts can be drawn to an area that has seen little human utilisation, and no tourism activities whatsoever. At this early stage of the product life-cycle, this implies the market would be extremely specialised, due to the remoteness of location, demands of the trek, and length of time required. However, the products would have the unique selling point of passing through a premier tiger conservation area, and would be making an active contribution towards efforts to increase the tiger population and sustain the habitat and ecosystems of the protected area. To realise the potential of this unique site, there is a need for the private sector to agree to very specific management and financial distribution mechanisms with the key project partners, namely the protected area and tourism offices and supporting NGOs.

3 Table of Contents Introduction... 1 Background... 1 NBCA... 1 Management Issues... 1 Survey... 2 Objectives of Survey... 2 Survey Summary... 5 SWOT Analysis of Trek... 8 Potential Itineraries... 8 Needed Inputs... 9 Basic Conditions... 9 Conclusions Annex 1. Citations Annex 2. List of Survey Participants Annex 3. Photos Acronyms DANIDA DOF IUCN LAP-LP MAF NBCA NEPL NPA NTFP PAFO PTO SNV WCS WWF Danish International Development Assistance Department of Forestry World Conservation Union Lao-American Project Luang Prabang Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry National Biodiversity Conservation Area Nam Et - Phou Louey (also spelled Louei) National Protected Area Non-Timber Forest Products Provincial Agriculture and Forestry Office Provincial Tourism Office Netherlands Development Organization Wildlife Conservation Society World Wildlife Fund

4 INTRODUCTION This report outlines the results and tourism opportunities identified during a tourism field survey in the Nam Et-Phou Louey National Biodiversity Conservation Area (NEPL NBCA) in March 2005 (Hedemark et al 2005). This survey was a follow-up to two previous surveys carried out in December 2004 (Hedemark and Phetmixai 2005; SNV 2005) 1. The March survey specifically examined the opportunity for a trek through the NBCA s Tiger Conservation Area that could be catered to wildlife and nature enthusiasts. Ecotourism development is in line with the NBCA s Management Plan (MAF 2003), WCS technical assistance strategies under the Tiger Conservation Project (Johnson et al, 2004), and the Houaphan Provincial Tourism Action Plan (Rogers et al 2004). As it is a national protected area, the overall objective of any tourism activities should be to support biodiversity conservation. Stakeholders as varied as the Wildlife Conservation Society, the Lao-American Project for opium eradication, SNV (advising on pro-poor tourism), provincial tourism offices and protected area authorities have found common ground and are willing to support and invest in tourism development of the area if it can contribute to these aims. Here, we have outlined background to the area, potential tourism products, and inputs needed to gauge the interest of the private sector in marketing the area in a sustainable manner. BACKGROUND NBCA The Nam Et and Phou Louey NBCAs together form the second largest national protected area in Laos, established in Geopolitically, they cover three provinces and 7 districts. The elevation ranges from 336 to 2257 metres above sea level, and the topography of the area is steep with only 9% having a slope less than 12%. Satellite images from 1997 show that the NBCA has a long history of forest disturbance. At that time, 23% of the NBCA was classified as disturbed or open forest and 13% paddy and grassland (MAF/LSFP 2001). Nevertheless, Nam Et-Phou Louey has a relatively high level of species diversity that can be a strong drawing card for tourists. Roughly fifty species of mammals and 290 species of birds are reported (Davidson 1999), and in a Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry prioritization of Lao NBCAs based on forest and wildlife diversity and regional complementarity, NEPL NBCA was placed within the Highest category (MAF/LSFP 2001). The area has also been identified as having two Important Bird Areas in Laos (Ounekham and Inthapatha 2003). Recent studies using camera traps in the NEPL NBCA report 19 carnivore species including six species of wild cats (Johnson et.al. 2005). This is quite impressive in relation to other areas of Indochina and suggests that prey species are also present to support the carnivore community. Notable among the species list are Tiger, Owston s Civet, and Back-striped Weasel, which are globally threatened. Five individual tigers have been photographed and 7-21 tigers are estimated to inhabit the protected area. This is a higher tiger density than found in many protected areas in neighbouring Cambodia, north-eastern Thailand, China or Vietnam. Management Issues The headquarters for the Nam Et-Phou Louey NBCA are located in Mueang Hiem, Viengthong district. Understaffing and lack of revenues to pay recurrent costs are the main management 1 The two surveys were: (1) Tourism survey of Lao-American Project, Luang Prabang target villages in Ngoi and Viengkham districts, with the participation of the Luang Prabang PTO, SNV, LAP-LP, District staff and local community members, and (2) First survey for Potential Ecotourism Products in the Nam Et Phou Louey NBCAs, by M. Hedemark and P. Phetmixai, with the participation of Wildlife Conservation Society, NEPL NBCA Management Unit, Houaphan PTO, and local community members. 1

5 limitations of the NBCA (DOF/WWF 2005). Since establishment of the NBCA, the protected area has been largely reliant on technical and financial support from two sources, IUCN/DANIDA ( ) and the Wildlife Conservation Society (2002 to present). The principle reason for establishing ecotourism in the NBCA is to generate a source of sustainable funding for NBCA management, which includes both government staff and village conservation workers. The major threat to tigers and their prey in the area is market hunting (Davidson 1999; Johnson et al 2004) and the major threat to the forests in the area is slash and burn agriculture (MAF 2001). Villagers rely heavily on wild meat for protein and for sale for cash. While it is hoped that harvest of wildlife and plants can be maintained for village subsistence and customary use, commercial harvest for sale to urban centres and other countries cannot be sustained. Poverty reduction in rural communities requires ecological stability, which means healthy and balanced wild animal and plant populations. For example, a study of household consumption of wild meat in NEPL estimated that each household consumes 141kg of wild meat per year (ICEM 2003). Wild food is an important part of food security. Mammal and bird conservation is needed to provide the ecosystem with plant pollinators, seed disbursers and pest management (especially natural predators that control insect and rodent outbreaks that destroy rice crops). Villagers need to conserve wildlife for subsistence and survival, especially when crops fail and domestic livestock die from disease. The mission of the NEPL NBCA is to conserve biodiversity and to improve living standards of its residents (MAF 2003). The goal of the Tiger Conservation project in the NBCA is to conserve tiger and prey populations in the protected area while resolving problems of human-tiger conflict (Johnson et al 2005). A major assumption underlying the tourism-conservation link is that if Lao people (rural and urban) in and around NEPL NBCA can obtain financial benefits from tiger and their prey in a non-exploitive manner they will conserve and sustainably manage these resources. A major assumption of the anti-drug tourism link is that if people have alternative livelihoods, they will not use drugs or grow drugs for sale. These linkages between tourism and conservation or drug control are difficult to attain, however, it is an option worth exploring. If the right mechanisms for financial, conservation, and development benefits can be established, a win-win situation for the protected area, local communities, and private sector may be possible. It is in the interest of all tourism stakeholders to maintain the tiger population in the NPA. Without tigers, wildlife tourism will not flourish, and likewise, without the revenues and awareness that wildlife tourism could generate, the tigers may soon perish. SURVEY Objectives of Survey The survey was carried out from March 23 27, 2005, with two main objectives: 1. To survey and document potential tourist trekking routes through the Nam Et-Phou Louey NBCA 2. To assess the viability of developing a tourist trekking route that will benefit tiger conservation and protected area management, and contribute to livelihood development for target villages of the LAP-LP, WCS, and districts A route was mapped that began in Ban Phoungthao, a Lao Loum village to the northwest of the NBCA in Viengkham district, Luang Prabang province (a LAP-LP target area), through the tiger conservation area and NBCA that included the summit of Phou Louey and descent down to Ban Sakok, in Viengthong district, Houaphan province (see Map 1). Protected area staff and local residents determined the route based on recommendations from the team regarding scenery/attractions, walking distances and difficulty, and camping sites. It must be noted that none of the team members had done this complete trail WCS staff, villagers, and NBCA staff had done sections, but not the entire route. Thus, it was quite a new and challenging prospect. 2

6 During the trek, questionnaires to guide our thinking and general observation was used to assess the following factors: Scenery/distinctive attractions Trail difficulty and condition of trail Trekking time (on the assumption that tourists will trek up to 4-6 hours/day) Appropriate camping and resting spots Equipment/infrastructure needs Potential to benefit tiger conservation and local communities 3

7 Tourism Opportunity in the Map 1. Route of Nam Et-Phou Louey Trek 4

8 Survey Summary The trip was a 6 day/5 night programme beginning in Ban Poungthao and ending in Ban Sakok. All except the first night were spent camping in the forest, with almost no signs of human activity. All food and equipment had to be carried in, and local porters and guides were essential. The total team consisted of 19 people 2 10 district, provincial, and technical staff, and 9 porters/guides though 4 porters were able to return to their village on Day 4 when the loads lightened. The total amount of walking was about 37 hours, and Figure 1 shows a profile of the trek as it relates to time walking and elevation. Note that this chart is not a topological profile (i.e. distance vs. elevation) and that walking uphill takes more time than walking down hill. Figure 1. Trek Profile: hours vs. elevation !Trek Profile Hours walked vs elevation Meters Ban Phoungthao Camp 1 Camp 2 Camp 3 Camp 4 Ban Sokok 0 36:20 34:35 32:35 31:05 29:20 27:05 26:11 25:15 23:30 20:54 19:20 18:00 17:05 16:30 15:10 14:15 12:45 9:45 8:45 8:00 6:45 5:30 3:00 0:00 Hours Day 1. Meet in Ban Poungthao Group met in Ban Poungthao, roughly a 6 hour drive from Luang Prabang, and a 3.5 hour drive from Nong Khiaw. Team, food, and village guides were organised. Overnight in homestays. This would be the main cultural part of the tour Ban Poungthao is a nice village with attractions of its own (waterfalls, fishing, and handicrafts see description of village below). Tourists can homestay with local families. District: Access: Ban Poungthao Viengkham 6km from main penetration road at B. Paklao, total of 1 hour 15 minutes (24km) from B. Muang Moui. B. Muang Moui is 2 hours from Nong Khiaw, and 2 from Viengthong District, Houaphan. Four-wheel drive recommended on penetration road, difficult access in rainy season. Ethnicities: Lao Loum 100% Infrastructure: Road access. Micro-hydroelectricity in some households. No water 2 See Annex 2 for List of Participants 5

9 Proximity to other tourist attractions: Points of Interest: Handicrafts: Experience with tourism: Motivation: system, but village is situated on banks of river. No toilets or private bathing or accommodation facilities. About 3.5 hours from Nong Khiaw and 3 from Viengthong district, Houaphan. 30 minute walk (2km) to Tad Sanong waterfalls and swimming/picnic area. Village is 1 day walk to Nam Et Phou Loei NBCA. Tad Sanong a very picturesque waterfall with large swimming area. Villagers grill fresh fish there for guests, picnic-style. Lao-lao and lao-hai distilling, basket and table weaving, old gold-panning area. Villagers grow own cotton, thread it, and weave for their own use. Traditional medicine man, forest-product gathering. Possibility of developing treks to WCS tiger conservation area and Nam Et Phou Loei NBCA, which the village is partially responsible for managing. Cotton textiles, baskets, pa-khao (low traditional eating tables). None Very interested, if given some skills. Day 2. Ban Phoungthao (730m) to Camp 1 on Nam Khap River (900m) Departing at 8:00am the trek began with a steady climb to the top of a hill (1,200m) outside the village. The land is heavily used here and the views were of a mosaic of swidden fields at various stages of use and regrowth. After two hours, the trail entered the forest and followed the ridgeline, with some nice vistas of the mountains ahead. This old French trail is seldom used, and thus covered with low vines, thick leaf cover, and dense branches. Lunch was eaten on the trail, and the first small spring was only encountered at 3pm, so a good supply of water is needed for the day. After 7-8 hour day s walk, we reached the designated overnight spot along the Nam Khap River. The camp makers cut down many banana trees to make camp a practice that cannot be sustained for other tourists. Though this first day of trekking starts in a village, tourists will feel very quickly that they are out in a true wilderness. Day 2. Wildlife Oriental Pied Robin Coucal Bar-winged Flycatcher Fork Tailed Palm Swift Owl calling Asian Barred Owlet Fork Tailed Swift Oriental Honey Buzzard 9 other Buzzards circling Barbet calling Red Whiskered Bulbul Sooty headed Bulbul Woodpecker heard Day 3. Camp 1 (9,00m) to Camp 2 (1,080m) We broke camp and left at 8am and began walking along and in the river in gallery forest, occasionally climbing over ridges to rejoin the river on the other side. By mid morning we came to the Tham Bong cave that provided us a natural tunnel about 100m through the limestone ridge. Upon exiting the tunnel the advance team saw a group of approximately 20 Phayre s Langur (leaf/fruit eating monkeys). The next few hours were spent exploring two neighbouring caves called Tham Nok Gia (Bat Cave 1 and 2) and the carcass of a Serow (type of wild goat). The first cave entrance was a steep climb up the cliff face, then a hands and knees crawl to a narrow hallway about 1 meter wide and 5 meters high. The hallway was about 75m long. Cave 2 had a wide low entrance 1 meter high and 3 meters wide that lead to a small cavern (about 3 meter ceiling, 10m width and 30m long). Both caves had a plentiful number of Rhinolophus bats that can be examined by flashlight in their roosts. Day 3. Wildlife Phayre s Langur Serow (dead) Grey Peacock Pheasant heard Civet Bear claw marks on trees, Bear beds in treetops Forktail on stream Plumbeous water redstart Kingfisher Squirrel Tiger tracks 6

10 Just outside the caves was a largely intact Serow thought to have been dead for less than a month. All the internal organs were gone, and team members surmised that it had been killed by a large cat, or died after being wounded by a hunter. With the bats and Serow droppings, the cave visit was more important from a wildlife point of view than for their natural beauty. Just outside the caves is a small clearing suitable for preparing and eating lunch. After eating, the trail continues for 1 hour before veering off on a steep 2 hour climb and descent in primary evergreen hill forest to avoid a difficult river passage. The forest contained numerous wild fig trees sporting bear claw marks. The river is followed again that leads to a beautiful 4-step waterfall and swimming area. Simple rock climbing is necessary to scale the waterfall and continue up the river to the camping spot (though it would also be possible to camp at the base of the waterfall). Camp was made in a banana forest along the river at roughly 4:30pm (for an 8 hour day s hike with breaks). A fresh tiger track was found on the river bed. Day 4. Camp 2 (1,080m) to Camp 3 (1,795m) An advance team of 4 porters left at about 6:30am to drop food further up the trail then returned to Ban Poungthao. The rest of the team broke camp at 8:00am and continued walking up the Khap River. The smell of monkey and fresh monkey droppings were seen on the rocks in one location. The team diverted from the river from time to time to traverse steep hillsides to get around deep pools or sections of the river too steep to pass. At around Day 4. Wildlife Barbets calling Forktails Chestnut-Fronted Shrike Babbler 1,200m the forest got more wet and mossy, and the first leeches were encountered. Two saltlicks with numerous animal tracks and scat were passed. At about 10:30am main ascent up Phou Louey started, and lunch was at a serene WCS camp by the Houay Na Stream. From there the trail continued uphill, mostly through bamboo forest, before reaching 1,820m. Unfortunately, due to mist and rain, there were no views in the afternoon. A trail to the camp then descended 30m to a clearing with a very limited water source (Houay Khoun Creek enough for cooking and drinking only), with space for about 5 tents. It has been suggested that the Houay Na Camp would be another option for overnight. Day 5. Camp 3 (1,795m) to Camp 4 (1,200m) Summiting Departing at 8:40am the team continued our ascent in a drizzle, passing two camera trap sites, one having a history of tiger. By mid morning the trail followed a steep razor ridge that held a fresh tiger track. We then started an exciting ascent on the peak that required climbing hand and foot over mossy rock with cold windy conditions in the fog. The peak at 2,250m was reached in about 3 hours from camp, and was a beautiful foggy, mossy cloud forest. Unfortunately, there was no view this time of day though later that afternoon it did clear up. We had a short rest and lunch out of the wind and then explored the relatively flat summit for about 30 minutes before continuing down the other side. Investigation revealed numerous tiger tracks, bear claw marks on an acorn tree, and numerous piles of Guar dung. Day 5. Wildlife Partridges calling Barbets calling Grey Peacock Pheasant calling White-hooded Babbler White-eye spp. Leaf warbler spp. Tiger tracks Bear claw marks Guar dung Upon descent, at about 2,045m there was an old hunting camp with reported water that could serve as a campsite to maximise time on the summit for tour groups. The trail passed through more mossy and primary forest, though one section looked to be a site for utilisation by villagers. Portions of the trail down were extremely steep, at one point dropping more 200m in less than 0.5 7

11 kilometres. Camp was reached in about 7 hours from the start, and with the ascent and descent, made for a demanding day. The camp, on the Nam Sap River, was spacious and situated close to the top of the Thad Louey waterfalls, with an impressive drop and viewpoint. Day 6. Camp 4 (1,200m) to Ban Sakok (770m) Leaving camp at 7:45am, the descent to Ban Sakok is quite gradual, with only a few steep sections. We entered village upland hai fields around 9:30 and spent the rest of the walk in mostly open field, with occasional wooded areas in narrow sections of the long valley. Without stopping at the Thad Louey falls, the village was reached within 3 hours. Tour groups, however, will want to visit the falls, which are about 1 hour off the trail, with swimming and a campsite situated in lush natural surroundings. Ban Sakok is a simple riverside Lao Loum and Khmu village which has conservation village volunteers. The village administration was attentive in asking if there was something more they could do to improve the conditions for conservation for the mountain and village area. From Sakok, Nong Khiaw is roughly a 4 hour drive, and Luang Prabang a 7 hour drive away. SWOT Analysis of Trek This section analyses the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats associated with developing the area for tourism, and the trekking route we took itself. Strengths Good village guides and cooperation from district staff and elders Best accessible wildlife in Laos Little or no unexploded ordinance Unique unpopulated area with virgin forests for complete wilderness experience Varied terrain and trail Route has many different attractions rivers, pristine forest, waterfalls, wildlife, caves, mountains Weaknesses Many hours of walking per day little time for nature observation and interpretation All equipment and food must be carried in Long distance to trail head from Luang Prabang town Trail in poor condition in sections over rugged terrain Villagers and protected area staff have no experience with tourism Opportunities Uniqueness and exclusivity offers tour operators chance to attract a new market Jobs for villagers built into the product porters, guides, homestays necessary Product can be based and marketed on its contribution to wildlife conservation Threats Increased tiger poaching and wildlife hunting by guides or porters between treks Increased opportunity for forest destruction by trekkers, guides or porters If management and financial benefit sharing mechanisms between NPA, tour company and community not clear, income for conservation and community development will be limited POTENTIAL ITINERARIES The survey team followed one possible route through the tiger conservation area and in the NBCA, but there are other potential itineraries available. The route taken had many strong attractions, but as it stands, may be too strenuous, with overlong days, for tourists. Here, we propose several other possibilities for trekking in the area that could be tailored for different markets. Please see Map 1 for alternate routes. 8

12 Itinerary 1. Itinerary 2. Itinerary 3. Itinerary 4. Itinerary 5. Itinerary 6. Ban Poungthao to Ban Sakok over Phou Louey Mountain. (5 nights/6 days.) One night homestay, 4 nights camping. Very strenuous and challenging, but with strong wilderness and wildlife appeal. (This is the itinerary taken by the survey team as detailed above). Ban Poungthao to Ban Sakok. (6 nights/7 days.) Day 1 homestay in Ban Poungthao, Day 2 camp at Nam Khap river, Day 3 camp at base of waterfall, Day 4 Houay Na camp, Day 5 Hunter s camp, Day 6 Nam Sap camp. This route would provide the same wilderness opportunities but with less strenuous treks each day. (Same route, but different camping sites and extra night.) Ban Phoungthao to Ban Sakok. (5 nights/6 days.) This would simply take out the last camp, meaning the last day would be longer, and groups would be pressed to return to Luang Prabang the same day. (Same route and camping sites as above, but after Hunter s camp and lunch at Tad Louey Falls, return to Ban Sakok and end.) Ban Nawen to Ban Sakok. (4 nights/5 days.) Day 1 Ban Nawen, Day 2 Tad Huay Kaneng waterfall, Day 3 Houayna Camp, Day 4 Hunter s camp, Day 5 Lunch at Tad Louey waterfalls on way to Ban Sakok. Ban Poungthao to Ban Nawen. (6 nights/5 days.) Day 1 Ban Poungthao, Day 2 Nam Khap river, Day 3 camp at base of waterfall, Day 4 Houay Na camp, Day 5 Tad Huay Kaneng waterfall, Day 6 Ban Nawen. Loop trek from Ban Sakok back. (1 night/2 days.) If any tour operators are interested in these routes, surveys can be arranged to see the sites and work out details. NEEDED INPUTS There are several activities that will need to be done before this area is tourist-ready. The first and vital step is to bring these proposed trekking routes to tour operators, to invite interest. If there are any companies willing to commit to developing and promoting a sustainable tourism product in this area, there are several activities that WCS, the LAP-LP, and government can do to support the initiative. 1. Set regulations for operating tourism within the NPA (permits, garbage disposal, cutting forest, noise, group size, frequency of visits, etc.). 2. Agree on mechanisms to allocate money between the NPA and a Tiger Conservation Fund, communities, local government and tour companies. 3. Provide village training on environmental conservation, ecotourism, nature interpretation and wildlife guiding following recommendations tested by WCS in other NBCAs (Hansel and Vannalath 2003) and hospitality. 4. Improve trails through bushy sections, focusing on removal of low vines, trip vines, overhanging vegetation, and providing hand/foot holds in steep sections. 5. Establish semi-permanent camping sites in suitable locations. 6. Provide regular reports on the impact of wildlife tourism on tiger conservation by monitoring change in tiger and pretty abundance, and tiger and prey poaching, relative to change in village and protected area benefits from wildlife tourism over time. BASIC CONDITIONS Tourism in national protected areas is still in the early stages in Laos, and as yet, there are no regulations to govern its development. Tourism activities in the Nam Ha NBCA in the north of Laos have been successful, but have yielded limited funds and capacity for improved protected 9

13 area management and biodiversity conservation. Currently, the minimum management costs of the Nam Et-Phou Louey NBCA are USS$40,000 per annum. On the other hand, the illegal trafficking of a single male tiger fetches US$70,000. As a foremost wilderness and tiger conservation area in the region, it is vital that tourism in the NEPL NBCA is initiated in a sustainable way. A model for conservation-oriented tourism in this area could set a strong example for the rest of the country. The following preliminary management mechanisms have been agreed for the NEPL NBCA: Tour companies will be required to pay a minimum of US$20-40 per person per day to operate in the NBCA. This money will go into an independent Tiger Conservation Fund, to be managed jointly by the NEPL Authorities and Wildlife Conservation Society. This fund will be used for tiger conservation activities and park management, including patrolling, community education, research and documentation (i.e. camera traps). The tour company must obtain a permit from the Provincial Tourism Office in conunction with the NEPL NBCA authorities before taking tourists to the NEPL NBCA. The NPA Authorities/District will then meet the tour companies to check paperwork and the group before they enter the park. These are rough steps to begin the process many other details will need to be worked out once a tour company partner has been chosen. However, the objective will be the same to ensure the sustainable management of the NEPL NBCA. CONCLUSIONS The Nam Et-Phou Louey NBCA, as one of the foremost wilderness areas of Laos, has the potential to be developed as an exclusive tourism destination, catering to a market currently under-exploited in the region. Wilderness, hiking, and wildlife enthusiasts would be drawn to an area that has seen so little human utilisation, and no tourism activities whatsoever. Of course, this market would be extremely specialised, due to the remoteness of location, demands of the trek, and length of time required. However, tourist products would have the unique selling point of passing through a premier tiger conservation area, and could truly live up to marketing of tourist contribution to wildlife conservation. Of course, very specific management and financial distribution mechanisms would need to be agreed upon by all parties, mandating the involvement of a tour company that s willing to commit to genuine sustainable tourism activities. 10

14 Annex 1. Citations Davidson, P A Wildlife and Habitat Survey of Nam Et Phou Louey NBCA, Houaphanh Province Lao PDR: Addendum February CPAWM/WCS Cooperative Project DOF Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Lao PDR. Hansel, T. and S. Vannalath Conservation Principles for Protected Area Management and Ecotourism. Pages 56, Wildlife Conservation Society, Vientiane. Hedemark, M. and P. Phetmixai Survey for potential ecotourism products in the Nam Et- Phou Louey NBCAs. December Wildlife Conservation Society, Vientiane. Hedemark, M., M. Newport and T. Gujadhur The second survey for potential ecotourism products in the Nam Et-Phou Louey NBCAs. A report to Nam Et-Phou Louey National Biodiversity Conservation Area and the Luang Prabang and Houaphan Tourism Offices. May Wildlife Conservation Society, Vientiane. ICEM Economic benefits of protected areas: Field studies in Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam. Review of Protected Areas and Development in the Lower Mekong River Region. International Centre for Environment Management, Indooroopilly, Queensland. Johnson, A., C. Vongkhamheng, M. Hedemark and T. Saythongdum The status of Tiger, Prey and Human Tiger Conflict in the Nam Et - Phou Louey National Protected Area Lao PDR. December Wildlife Conservation Society, Vientiane. MAF Nam Et-Phou Louey NBCA Management Plan. Prepared by the Houaphan and Luang Prabang Teams with technical support by the Department of Forestry and Department of Planning. MAF and DANIDA. MAF/LSFP Review of the National Protected Area System in Lao PDR, compiled by William Robichaud, Clive. W. Marsh, Sangthong Southammakoth and Sirivanh Khounthikoummane. Division of Forest Resource Conservation Lao-Swedish Forestry Programme Vientiane Lao PDR Ounekham, K. and Inthapatha, S Important bird areas in Lao P.D.R. Vientiane: Department of Forestry, BirdLife International in Indochina and the Wildlife Conservation Society Lao Program. Rogers, P., S. Phimpinith., P. Ladouanglerd Houaphanh, Birth-Place of the Lao Peoples Democratic Republic: A Provincial Tourism Action Plan. A report for Netherlands Development Organization September 2004, Vientiane Lao PDR. SNV Survey Report: Tourism Potential of Selected Villages in LAP-LP Target Areas. Vientiane, Lao PDR. Southammakhot, S The protected area system in Lao PDR: Country Status Report In: The World Commission on Protected Areas 2nd Southeast Asia Regional Forum, Pakse, Lao PDR, 6-11 December, 1999: Volume II, Papers Presented. (A. Galt, T. Sigaty and M. Vinton, eds). IUCN. Vientiane. 11

15 Annex 2. List of Survey Participants 1. Bouathong Xayavong NBCA 2. Seechan Khanthalasay Ban Sakok, NBCA/WCS 3. Thavisouk Saythongdum WCS 4. Michael Hedemark WCS 5. Martin Newport US Embassy 6. Siphone Mithmaithee LAP-LP, Viengkham District 7. Somneuk Panyasith Viengkham District representative (Doctor) 8. Khonsavan Jelaka Luang Prabang PTO 9. Tara Gujadhur SNV, Luang Prabang PTO 10. Phouvanh Phetmixai Houaphan PTO. 11. Bounmee Poungthao (head guide) 12. Chanthee Poungthao (guide) 13. Bounthieng Poungthao (porter/guide) 14. Dteui Poungthao (porter/guide) 15. Pheng Poungthao (porter/guide) 16. Thavieng Poungthao (porter) 17. Thapanh Poungthao (porter) 18. Lee Poungthao (porter) 19. Mai Poungthao (porter) 12

16 Annex 3. Photos 13