There is a picture: A polar bear is lying lifeless on a beach. On the shore, in the background, stand three guards, talking to each other. One of them has a gun hanging casually on his shoulder.
This powerful image has made people question the motivation (动机) for this kind of tourism, or ecotourism. Does our proximity (接近) to large animals in the wild, frequently caused by a desire for exciting images, lead to such animals becoming accustomed to human contact? If that is the case, surely the losing side will end up paying the price for such proximity.
To my sorrow, I have recently returned from a trip to Svalbard, and stood two weeks ago on the very beach where the bear was shot. The bear's death should never have happened. Was the beach examined beforehand? Was there access to flares (照明弹) to scare off a bear that appeared suddenly? These are standard measures for any operator. The incident is probably the result of a terrible systematic (制度的) failure.
However, the incident should not deny the value of ecotourism. In its best form, this kind of travel has very little influence, or indeed has a positive effect, on the environment where it takes place. This can be achieved by making financial donations to conservation groups, providing income to local communities, or ensuring protection of certain areas or animals. In Svalbard, visitors become ambassadors (大使 ) for the endangered polar bear, increasing awareness of the fact that the far greater danger they are facing is the sea ice melt in the Arctic Ocean.
Ecotourism is an expanding market that brings benefits as well as challenges to the regions around the world in which it operates. Simply closing off these regions is not the answer.