Minimizing wildlife’s reaction to tourist’s or outsiders intrusion

[Taylor98]

Studies have analyzed the impact on wildlife due to visits by outsiders. The published literature has mixed information regarding the levels of human impacts on wildlife. This is because wildlife’s reaction varies among individuals within a species, from one species to another, and from one situation to the next. Roggenbuck (1992) states that the “adaptive characteristics of wildlife, the tourists’ behavior and the context of the disturbance all seem to be important” in understanding the tourism related impacts on wildlife. The hotels in Munnar have taken much care to minimize the damage to the immediate wildlife surroundings from the visitors.

Thus, the level of recreational impacts on wildlife depends not only on the number of tourists and their behavior/attitude towards wildlife but also on the nature and magnitude (frequency and intensity) of tourist activity. In addition, the many factors that may affect wildlife's reaction to tourism according to (Green & Higginbottom, 2000 and Knight & Gutzwiller, 1995 includes,

• The ecological sensitivity of wildlife habitats
• The seasonal vulnerability of wildlife (e.g., nesting, breeding, rearing)
• The animal’s individual characteristics
• Population attributes of species
• Inter- and intra-specific interactions
• The animal’s adaptability to human-induced disturbances

The behavioral response of wildlife species to tourism can have short-term and long-term effects. Generally, the immediate response of wildlife in a non-consumptive tourism situation (particularly when tourists deliberately harass them) ranges from mortality, to nest abandonment, to dramatic changes in behavior (e.g. food habits), to energy depletion (consuming their energy to flee rather than to feed). Long-term effects include population implications, i.e., changes in population density, structure and distribution.