ECONOMIC Prepared by EarthCheck & IMPACT REPORT Lucid Economics

Regarding the proposed $10m Queens Park Nature Centre extension

Contents Executive Summary ...... 1 Introduction...... 9 Purpose of the Report ...... 9 Project Methodology ...... 10 The Current Situation: An Overview of Queens Park Nature Centre & the current tourism landscape ...... 10 The Current Situation: An Overview of Queens Park Nature Centre & the Current Tourism Landscape ...... 11 History ...... 12 Vision, Mission and Objectives for QPNC ...... 13 Our Vision ...... 13 Our Mission ...... 13 Achievements ...... 13 Our Strategies ...... 13 Alignment with Ipswich City Council Policies and Objectives ...... 14 Environmental, Cultural & Community Policy Alignment ...... 14 Alignment with State, Regional and Local Tourism Policy and Strategy ...... 15 Alignment with State and Federal Policy ...... 17 Implications ...... 17 Current Visitors to QPNC ...... 19 Data collection and visitor surveying: Methodology ...... 19 Community Survey ...... 20 Data Collection ...... 20 Respondent Profile ...... 20 Visitor Survey ...... 21 Data Collection ...... 21 Visitor Profile ...... 21 Key results of the two surveys ...... 22 Satisfaction with QPNC ...... 22 Expenditure ...... 22 QPNC Facilities ...... 23 Improvements ...... 23 Future proposed activities ...... 23 Implications ...... 24 Current Tourism Demand ...... 25 Visitor Profile ...... 26 Demand for Animal-based Experiences ...... 27 Australian Zoo/ Animal-based Tourism ...... 27 Queensland’s Zoo/ Animal-based Tourism Sector ...... 29 Trends in Zoo/ Animal-based Tourism Market (Overnight Segment) in Brisbane...... 31 Implications ...... 31 Profile of Typical Zoo and Animal-based Visitors – National Level ...... 32 Age ...... 32 Day-trippers ...... 33 Implications ...... 40 Current QPNC Visitation and Expenditure ...... 41 Current Economic Impact of QPNC ...... 42 Economic impact modelling ...... 43 Current Economic Impact within the Ipswich Council area ...... 43 Current Economic Impact within Queensland and Australia ...... 44 Current Situation Summary: Social and Economic Benefits of Zoo Tourism & QPNC 45 The Opportunity: Queens Park Nature Centre & Discovery Hub Masterplan ...... 46 The Opportunity ...... 47 Implementation Timeline ...... 47 Market Positioning of QPNC ...... 48 Potential Impact of the QPNC Upgrade Outlined in the Masterplan ...... 50 Estimating future visitation and expenditure from Ipswich Council residents...... 50 Estimating the future economic impact from visitation from outside the Ipswich Council area ...... 50 Estimated Economic Impact the year of completing the QPNC upgrades ...... 55 Cost benefit Analysis ...... 56 Modelling Approach ...... 56 Definition of Costs and Benefits ...... 56 Results ...... 58 Community Benefits of Implementing the Master Plan ...... 58 Environmental Outcomes ...... 59 Challenges ...... 59 Funding options ...... 61 External Funding and Support ...... 61 Operating partnerships ...... 62 Additional commercial development ...... 62 Philanthropy and donations ...... 62 Co-sharing of the building with partner organisations or other Council functions ...... 62 Reference list...... 63

Appendix A: Case Studies Best Practice – Case Studies most relevant to QPNC General case studies of comparable parks Case Study 1: Lone Pine Koala Sanctuary, QLD Case Study 2: Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary, QLD Case Study 3: Daisy Hill Koala Centre, QLD Case Study 4: Billabong Sanctuary Townsville Potential for paid experiences Appendix B: Survey Question Transcripts (Online & in person) Appendix C: Survey Results Summary (Online & in person) Appendix D: Overall Ipswich Visitor Market Analysis Appendix E: Current Economic Impact Appendix F: Estimation of future revenue

DISCLAIMER The information and recommendations provided in this report are made on the basis of information available at the time of preparation and the assumptions outlined throughout the document. While all care has been taken to check and validate material presented in this report, independent research should be undertaken before any action or decision is taken on the basis of material contained in this report. This report does not seek to provide any assurance of project viability and EarthCheck accept no liability for decisions made or the information provided in this report.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Front cover image courtesy of Ipswich City Council. EarthCheck would like to thank Ipswich City Council officers for their support during the project, in particular, Project Manager, Alistair Tavares, and the Visitor Centre staff and volunteers who led Visitor Centre interviewing.

Executive Summary In response to the recently completed Queens Park Nature Centre & Discovery Hub Master Plan, Ipswich City Council (ICC) commissioned an impact assessment report detailing the potential economic and community benefits and opportunities related to the $10m extension of the Queen’s Park Nature Centre, which is a member of The Zoos and Aquarium Association of Australasia. This document provides a summary of the impact assessment. Current Economic and Social Benefits of Queens Park Nature Centre

Visitor Numbers ▪ Precise annual visitor numbers to the QPNC are provided by the traffic counters installed at the entrance of the park. Based on complete 2018 twelve-months performance, QPNC will attract an estimated total of 140,522 visitors in 2019. ▪ Visitor surveying conducted as part of this study indicated that o 45% (rounded) of visitation is from outside the Ipswich Council area – currently an estimated 63,617 visitation is annually from outside the Ipswich Council area. o 55% (rounded) of visitation is generated from Ipswich residents – currently an estimated 76,905 visitation is annually from Ipswich Council residents.

Visitor Expenditure ▪ A program of visitor surveys conducted during this study estimated that total visitor expenditure within QPNC is $774,770; with expenditure from visitors from outside the Ipswich Council area being $309,652 and from Ipswich Council residents being $465,117. ▪ The total additional expenditure (outside the centre) in the Ipswich economy by visitors from outside the Ipswich Council area who attended QPNC is estimated to be $2.5 million.

Total Economic Impact In line with accepted economic impact assessment procedure, to estimate the net economic impact of the QPNC to the local economy, only expenditure inside the Ipswich Council area by external visitors is taken into account.

Direct Economic Impact Direct, industrial & consumption economic impact $2.81m Output $4.65m Output Ipswich Council Area $1.22m Value-Add $1.97m Value-Add 20 Jobs 25.5 Jobs $5.74m Output Queensland $2.45m Value-Add 29.5 Jobs $6.54m Output Australia $2.83m Value-Add 32 Jobs

The Important Role of Queens Park Nature Centre in Ipswich’s Visitor Economy

Development of QPNC is a priority project (short term) in the City of Ipswich Destination Management Plan 2019-2023. Improving and enhancing the facility and wider Queens Park precinct as an attraction of regional significance is seen a key driver for what is a rapidly growing visitor economy. QPNC is already a leading visitor attraction, having been awarded the TripAdvisor Hall of Fame accolade after receiving a certificate of excellence for each of the previous 6 years.

A Rapidly Growing Ipswich Visitor Economy Over a five-year period, visitors to Ipswich increased at an average of 13.2% per annum to reach nearly 1.9 million visitors in the financial year 2019. The growth of visitors to Ipswich surpassed that of Brisbane and Queensland during the same period (9.1% and 6.5% respectively).

Annual average growth of visitors to Ipswich, Brisbane and Queensland (FY2015-2019)

16.0% 14.2% 13.2% 13.2% 14.0% 12.0% 10.3% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% Daytrip visitors Domestic overnight Inbound visitors Total visitors visitors

Ipswich (C) Brisbane Queensland

Figure I. Annual average growth of visitors to Ipswich, Brisbane and Queensland

Ipswich has exceeded average growth rates for the Brisbane Region and Queensland as a whole across all three segments – day visitors, domestic overnight and international.

▪ Daytrip visitors were the most significant contributors to visitors flows to Ipswich (76%) as well as the fastest segment in terms of visitor growth (14.2% p.a. since the past five years). After a decline in FY2016 (-2.5%), daytrip visitors grow very strongly in FY2018 (21.8%) and FY2019 (22.1%). ▪ Domestic overnight visitors play a significant role in the Ipswich visitor economy, generating approximately 45% of total expenditure in the region during FY2019. During the period of FY2015-2019, domestic overnight visitors increased at an average of 10.3%, compared to 7.2% in the Brisbane Region and 6.7% for Queensland as a whole. ▪ International visitors to Ipswich have increased strongly since 2017. Overall, the annual average growth of this segment between FY2015 and 2019 was 13.2%, compared to 7,5% of Brisbane and 5.9% of Queensland.

Community and Visitor Sentiment towards Queens’s Park

Visitor survey responses regarding Queens Park demonstrated that the Park and its facilities are strongly valued by the local community and visitors:

Page 2 of 63

▪ Over 94% of respondents to the community survey indicated they were either satisfied or very satisfied with Queens Park. ▪ Over 96% of visitors surveyed indicated they were either satisfied or very satisfied with Queens Park. ▪ Educational opportunities, viewing nature and a great place to visit with friends and relatives were cited as what visitors and residents liked most about QPNC.

▪ For community respondents to the survey who hadn’t visited the park during the last year, low awareness, and no motivation for a second visit were cited as the primary reasons for choosing not to visit.

Contribution to Council Policy and Objectives

QPNC’s current Vision, Mission and Strategies align closely with a range of Ipswich City Council policy and strategy, including Cultural Policy, Destination Management Plan, Conservation Estates and Reserves Management Policy and Infrastructure Asset Management Policy. QPNC can further align through the incorporation of additional cultural heritage (including indigenous), sustainable environmental conversation and community education activities within the park.

Page 3 of 63

Potential Economic and Social Benefits of Upgrading Queens Park Nature Centre through Delivery of the Masterplan

Estimated Visitor Numbers for the upgraded QPNC Based on masterplan concepts and case-study based assumptions, it is estimated that the upgraded visitor centre has the potential to grow visitation and expenditure after all masterplan concepts are implemented in FIY 2024/2025.

▪ Based on market norms derived from case study analysis, it is estimated that visitation from outside the Ipswich Council area has the potential to grow from its current based by 106%1 with 23% of visitors estimated to participate in paid VIP experience options. These assumptions result in QPNC (FIY 2024/2025) attracting an estimated o 141,210 visitation from outside the Ipswich Council area, o with 32,393 participating at one of the paid experiences. ▪ Based on the estimated resident population growth in Ipswich2 the following growth assumptions are estimated for QPNC after all masterplan concepts are implemented in FIY 2024/2025 o 105,591 visitation from Ipswich residents o with 24,2223 participating at one of the paid experiences.

Estimated increase in visitation after completing the QPNC upgrades

150,000 141,210

105,591 100,000 76,905 63,617

50,000

0 Visitation from outside of Ipswich Visitation from Ipswich residents

FIY 18/19 FIY 24/25 (upgraded QPNC)

Figure II. Estimated increase in visitation after completion of QPNC upgrades

1 Before applying 106% to the current visitor numbers from outside the Ipswich Council area, the current visitor numbers got extrapolated to the FIY 2024/2025 using the TFC report 2019. 2 Based on the projected population, by local government area, Queensland, 2016 to 2041 medium series (ABS, 2018) 3 With 23% (rounded) of visitors are estimated to participate in paid VIP experience options. Page 4 of 63

Estimated Visitor Expenditure for the upgraded QPNC ▪ Via a program of visitor surveys conducted during this study and application of market norm prices for paid VIP experiences, it is estimated that the total visitor expenditure within QPNC will grow from $0.77 million (FIY 18/19) to approximately $3.87 million (FIY 24/25); with expenditure from visitors from outside the Ipswich Council area estimated to be $2.14 million and from Ipswich Council residents estimated to be $1.73 million. This significant increase in expenditure can be mainly attributed to introducing paid VIP experiences into QPNC (Figure III).

Figure III. Estimated expenditure components inside QPNC

▪ The total additional expenditure (outside the centre) in the Ipswich economy by visitors from outside the Ipswich Council area who will attend QPNC is estimated to increase from $2.5 million (FIY 18/19) to approximately $5.54 million (FIY 24/25) (Figure IV).

Figure IV. Estimated expenditure in the Ipswich Council area from visitors from outside the Ipswich Council area

Page 5 of 63

Total Economic Impact for the upgraded QPNC

For the estimation of total net economic impact for the upgraded QPNC, again, only expenditure inside the Ipswich Council area by external visitors is taken into account.

Ipswich Council area (upgraded QPNC)

Direct impact within the Ipswich Council area FIY 18/19 FIY 24/25 (upgraded QPNC) $2.81m of output $7.69m of output $1.22m of value-add $3.31m of value-add 20 jobs 54 jobs Direct, industrial and consumption impact FIY 18/19 FIY 24/25 (upgraded QPNC) $4.65m of output $12.77m of output $1.97m of value-add $5.40m of value-add 25.5 jobs 70 jobs Table I. Comparison estimated total economic impact within the Ipswich Council area FIY 18/19 and FIY 24/25 (upgraded QPNC) Queensland and Australia (upgraded QPNC)

The increased economic activity generated from the upgraded QPNC within the Ipswich council area has the potential to increase the positive effect on the wider Queensland and Australian economy, which is estimated in the following.

Direct, industrial and consumption impact in Queensland FIY 18/19 FIY 24/25 (upgraded QPNC) $4.65m of output $15.72m of output ($12.77m of output within Ipswich + $2.95m additional output), $1.97m of value-add $6.73m of value-add ($5.40m of value-add within Ipswich + $1.33m additional value-add) 25.5 jobs 82 jobs (70 jobs within Ipswich + 12 additional jobs) within Queensland Direct, industrial and consumption impact in Australia FIY 18/19 FIY 24/25 (upgraded QPNC) $4.65m of output $17.93m of output ($15.72m of output within Queensland + $2.21m additional output) $1.97m of value-add $7.77m of value-add ($6.73m of value-add within Queensland + $1.04m additional value- add) 25.5 jobs 88.5 jobs (82 jobs within Queensland + 7 additional jobs) within Australia) Table II. Comparison total economic impact within Queensland and Australia FIY 18/19 and FIY 24/25 (upgraded QPNC)

Cost Benefit Analysis for QPNC Enhancements Additional to the economic impact estimations discussed previously that has been derived from an input-output modelling (economy.id), a cost-benefit analysis was also conducted to provide an objective assessment if the $9.9 million investment into the QPNC upgrades would be overall economic and social beneficial for the Ipswich Council area.

Page 6 of 63

The Cost Benefit Analysis is solely based on visitation and expenditure from outside the Ipswich City Council area. The common economic assumption underlying this approach is that only expenditure from outside the Council area brings an additional economic benefit to the area.

Driven by estimates of $2.14 million operational income in the first year of operation and $2.42 million in GVA, at the selected real discount rate of 7% for this project, the analysis yields a Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) of 2.4 indicating that it is economically desirable and provides a net benefit. Under the baseline scenario (without project scenario), none of the identified benefits would be captured nor any of the costs incurred. As such, the scenario with the project provides positive economic and social benefits. Discount Rate (4%) Discount Rate (7%) Discount Rate (10%) Benefits Operating Revenue $29.37 $23.14 $18.72 Tourism Benefits $33.42 $26.34 $21.31 Total Benefits $62.79 $49.48 $40.04 Costs Capital Costs $9.49 $9.14 $8.81 Operating Costs $14.18 $11.18 $9.04 Maintenance Costs $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 Total Costs $23.69 $20.33 $17.87 Net Present Value NPV $39.10 $29.15 $22.16 Benefit to Cost Ratio BCR 2.7 2.4 2.2 Cost Benefit Analysis Summary (The timeframe for this assessment is 20 years, which is the useful life of the infrastructure and assets created by the project)

Community Benefits

Based on the scale of facility outlined in the QPNC Masterplan, and review of similar types of facilities, opportunities available from successful development and operation of an upgraded QPNC has the potential to help nurture a range of community benefits while also providing additional reasons to visit for both domestic and international visitors to the region.

Feedback from the surveys conducted during the study reinforced the need for the Centre to remain a free entry facility if it is to continue to delivery community benefits. This is an important consideration as the principal visitor audience and primary beneficiaries will continue to be Ipswich residents.

The nature of the proposed freemium model for the enhanced QPNC means that it can play an especially powerful role in terms of generating community benefit (educational and social benefits) and in attracting visitors and follow-on dispersal/expenditure throughout the region. The $10m investment in the QPNC has the potential to deliver extensive benefits for local communities, generate direct expenditure which supports Nature Centre operations, encourage spending among CBD businesses and disperse visitation and expenditure throughout the region. The onsite and online visitor surveys conducted during preparation of this study demonstrated that visitors spent an estimated average per travel party of $17.75 in the Centre and $138 throughout the Ipswich region.

Page 7 of 63

Positioning of Queens Park Nature Centre

It is necessary to consider the positioning of QPNC relative to future consumer demand. Good practice throughout the wildlife and zoo sector is clearly moving towards conservation and environmental goals being at the heart of business plans, and providing the rationale for keeping wild animals in captivity. The QPNC Master Plan sets out a bold vision based on environmental and indigenous culture education, very much in line with these sector trends. Given this situation, there is merit in considering positioning of the Centre based on the social enterprise model.

Social enterprises can be non-profit, for-profit or hybrid businesses that exist to benefit the public and community and are established to address a range of cultural, social and environmental issues. In this sense, the suggested ‘freemium’ pricing model for the centre can achieve a good fit with the objectives of a social enterprise – maintaining strong community engagement while generating revenue which helps further the delivery of environmental, educational and community objectives.

Survey feedback demonstrates that Ipswich communities have a strong affinity with the Nature Centre, however, going forward, the Centre will need to continue to grow profile and recognition among communities and target visitor markets. Actions which build a clear identity for the Nature Centre distinct from the broader Queens Park can play an important role in maximising economic potential and achieving Master Plan objectives.

Page 8 of 63

Introduction Situated in the heart of Ipswich along Queen Victoria Parade, the Queens Park Nature Centre (QPNC) is nestled in the heart of Ipswich’s oldest formal park, Queens Park. The Centre features a range of Australian wildlife, lush landscaped gardens and exhibits that have been recreated to represent local bushland and flora communities. The Centre is open six days a week and currently attracts an average pf over 140,000 visitors per year.

Queens Park Nature Centre & Discovery Hub Master Plan sets out a vision for major enhancement to Park infrastructure and experiences including new and improved koala, wallaby and platypus enclosures. Additional enhancements such as interactive displays and increasing the size of the enclosures are also envisaged. Purpose of the Report In response to the Queens Park Nature Centre & Discovery Hub Master Plan, this report provides assessment of the potential community and economic benefits and opportunities related to the proposed $10m extension of the Centre.

Analysis has been informed by primary research with Nature Centre visitors and Ipswich communities undertaken during preparation of the report. This primary research has be supplemented with an extensive program of secondary data analysis to support identification of visitor demand and the resulting economic and community benefits of a $10M expansion to the Centre.

This report also provides an analysis of current policy and strategy - alignment of proposals with extant policy and strategy can be utilised to support future potential funding bids to support development of the Centre.

Page 9 of 63

Project Methodology Alongside a detailed review of the current QPNC masterplan, the preparation of this report commenced with a desktop review of Council’s strategic policies and plans relevant to the Centre’s development, and available tourism data at National, State and, where available, local levels.

With limited raw data available specifically detailing the demographic profile of the current QPNC visitor mix or sentiment and spend data regarding the proposed QPNC upgrade, phase two of analysis focussed on gathering the necessary financial, policy and data inputs required to inform economic and social analysis for the Centre’s current operation and proposed future delivery. This included:

▪ Entry way visitor traffic count analysis; ▪ Visitor market review; ▪ Key stakeholder consultation; ▪ Development and delivery of online (targeting Ipswich residents) and in-person visitor surveys; and ▪ Competitor benchmarking/ identification of appropriate case study exemplars.

Delivery of the onsite visitor survey was particularly important in that it provided the means of establishing an understanding of QPNC’s current visitor market and customer sentiments towards the Centre. Key qualitative and quantitative outputs identified included:

▪ Profile of visitors to the Centre i.e. origins, socio-demographic information etc; ▪ Visitor motivations; ▪ Satisfaction with the QPNC visitor experience; ▪ Expenditure (within the venue and elsewhere in the Ipswich economy); ▪ Awareness of, and participation in other leisure and tourism experiences in Ipswich; ▪ Testing of sentiment towards the new concepts for the Nature Centre identified in the Masterplan; and ▪ Reaction towards the concept of potentially introducing fee-charging for the new enhanced QPNC experience.

Using the information gathered during the review stages 1 and 2, visitor sentiment, spend, and intent data was then utilised in modelling to estimate the potential economic impact of the QPNC upgrade. Economy.id modelling was used to identify potential impacts, covering construction and operational phases (per annum).

Construction benefits are forecasted on Economy.id’s modelling of the proportion of construction costs which are likely to be captured by the local area and residents of the Ipswich Region. The impacts include: ▪ Output effects ($m) ▪ Value-Add (additional production over and above the intermediate goods and services used). ▪ Jobs/FTE (jobs could be full-time or part-time, with FTE estimates therefore generally lower)4

The report concludes with a review of potential funding opportunities to support development and identification of a set of observations based on the results of the feasibility, including the future environmental, cultural and leisure based educational opportunities of the development that may also extend to the broader region.

4 Construction phase jobs are typically full-time, therefore only one impact table is required. Page 10 of 63

The Current Situation: An Overview of Queens Park Nature Centre & the Current Tourism Landscape

Page 11 of 63

History 1858

The connection between Queens Park and the Ipswich community have deep 1962 roots that can be traced back to the park’s initial conception. In 1858 the residents of Ipswich held a public meeting calling on the governor of NSW to grant them th land for “a Public Park Recreation Ground and Botanic Gardens”. By the 16 of September 1858 the request was granted, and a Board of Trustees was appointed 4 years later in 1962. On May 8th, 1962 a Deed of Grant for 207 acres and 14 2 perches (approximately 840,000 m ) was recorded, described as a “Reserve for Public Recreation and Gardens”.

Jumping forward to 1910, the park Curator Mt Turley was offered an emu as a 1910 donation to the park. With Turley having already amassed several other native animals including a wallaby and later a cassowary in 1913 this may have been the 1913 beginnings of a nature reserve in the area. According to historians, this was the earliest mention of the establishment of a nature centre within Queens Park.

By 1936, new enclosures were built to house animals including swans and 1936 dingoes. Later, other animals were introduced including koalas, kangaroos and birds.

1999 Stage One of the QPNC that exists today was opened in 1999 with 2009 marking the opening of a world class bilby enclosure and its inclusion in the International Bilby Breeding Program.

Most recently, in December of 2018 Ipswich City Council completed the Queens Park Nature Centre & Discovery Hub Masterplan which details a proposed $10m 2018 extension of the Queen’s Park Nature Centre. It aims to incorporate additional 2019 animal exhibits such as koala, wallabies and platypus enclosures, interactive displays and an upgrade of the existing enclosures.

Page 12 of 63

Vision, Mission and Objectives for QPNC

Significant work has recently been completed in defining the Vision, Mission and Objectives of the Nature Centre and Queens Park more broadly.

The Ipswich Nature Centre Visioning Plan 2019 -2024 “provides a guide for investment in the enhancement of the Ipswich nature Centre over the next 5 years”. As the results of a stakeholder and community consultation process, the plan defines the Park’s Vision, Mission, Achievements and Objectives (expressed as Our Strategies) as follows: Our Vision To be Ipswich’s premier tourist experience offering unique, inspiring and educational visitor experiences on Ipswich’s cultural heritage, native flora and fauna, and the natural areas of our ecologically diverse City. Our Mission 1. Provide an up‐close, personal and educational interaction with Australian Wildlife and Ipswich’s Iconic Species

2. Enhance the overall visitor experience of the Ipswich Nature Centre using smart technology and well‐designed enclosures to communicate the environmental and cultural heritage values of Ipswich

3. Act as a gateway to the conservation estates and reserves across the City as key habitat areas for native flora and fauna

4. Promote the Ipswich Nature Centre as a premier tourist destination in Queensland

Achievements ✓ Oldest Council owned zoo in Queensland – operating since 1936 ✓ The only free zoo in South East Queensland located within 1 hour of over 1.3 million people ✓ Number 1 tourist experience in Ipswich on TripAdvisor ✓ Trip Advisor Certificate of Excellence winner ✓ Up to 300,000 visitations per year

✓ 800m2 free flight aviary with walk through access ✓ Over 185 different native animals and birds on display representing over 43 species ✓ Zoo and Aquarium Association Accredited Zoo ✓ A member of the International Bilby Breeding Program

Our Strategies 1. Building upon existing facilities and elements 2. Establishing a legible circulation and way finding network 3. Visitor experience: a habitat-based approach 4. Celebrating the fauna and flora of habitats of Ipswich’s natural estate 5. Developing a multi layered engaging interpretative experience 6. Respecting and revealing all cultural heritage 7. Establishing a strong identity and character through built form

Page 13 of 63

Alignment with Ipswich City Council Policies and Objectives

Environmental, Cultural & Community Policy Alignment The proposed Nature Centre can contribute to a range of City Council policies and strategies including; Cultural Policy, Conservation Estates and Reserves Management Policy and Infrastructure Asset Management Policy. A review of Council’s policy framework highlights the following areas of relevance.

ICC’s Cultural Policy highlights the need to facilitate a cohesive sense of civic pride within Ipswich, encourage participation, attendance and creative production from the diverse communities of Ipswich and position Ipswich as a confident, innovative and creative place to live, work and visit. Research demonstrates that residents are the key current audience for the centre and that the centre is valued by residents as an important local amenity. Enhance of QPNC has the potential to build additional local support and contribute to civic pride.

ICC’s Conservation Estates and Reserves Management Policy is focused on enabling responsible natural area management. By providing educational areas and experiences for locals and visitors, the Centre can encourage those who have attended to engage with managing the overall health and well- being of the community, biodiversity and character of Ipswich. More specifically, by encouraging people to become actively involved with natural area management, the Centre would allow the community to:

i. protect, manage and enhance the diversity of local indigenous flora and fauna communities; ii. protect, manage and enhance water quality and processes in natural watercourses and groundwater; iii. protect, manage and enhance ecosystem services provided by the natural environment; iv. promote and provide for sustainable nature based recreational opportunities; and v. promote and provide scientific and educational enquiry into the natural environment.

Alignment of the Centre to this policy would go hand in hand with ICC’s Environmental Protection Policy, providing an approach for environmental protection which is holistic and integrated into community/visitor behaviour and understanding. Thus, fulfilling Council’s obligation’s to “work actively with the Ipswich community and other stakeholders to enhance the environmental quality of Ipswich City” and “advocate on behalf of the community for improved environmental outcomes”.

Furthermore, the establishment of a Nature Centre within Ipswich would fulfil Ipswich Council’s commitment to “manage its assets in a sustainable manner, with due regard to community values and cultural significance, and the provision of a safe working environment”, as stated in the Infrastructure Asset Management Policy. This commitment would be fulfilled by constructing an infrastructure asset which facilitates community ideals to value landscapes and objects of cultural and environmental significance. As a result, this commitment will also be championing asset management best practice.

Development of the Centre would also have the potential to support ICC’s Environplan Program and Levy Policy by assisting Council to achieve its strategic goal to “care for our environment” and ensure “important areas of native vegetation and habitat are conserved” as outlined in the Corporate Plan 2017-2022. This will be achieved by ensuring the wide number of native flora and fauna which support the lifestyle, liveability and livelihoods of the region are conserved and displayed in a manner which community/visitors can actively engage with and better understand. In doing so, terrestrial nature conservation values within the city will be managed and maintained for future generations. The Centre

Page 14 of 63 further aligns with the Corporate Plan by capitalising on South East Queensland (SEQ)’s economic advantages in key export orientated industries; including tourism, knowledge and education.

The Centre will further provide a contributory asset to addressing Council’s commitments outlined within the Master Planning of Open Space Policy. Ipswich Council is committed to plan a flexible and functional open space network that provides for the active and passive recreational needs of residents and visitors to the City. Therefore, the establishment of a Nature Centre would provide a recreational space/facility which encompasses reserve and conservation estate values, constituting an integral aspect of Ipswich City’s open space network; providing major benefits to its residents and a major attractor of visitors to the region.

Aligning with the Queensland Ecotourism Plan 2016-2020, the Centre would facilitate the protection and conservation of natural assets, a key priority identified for ecotourism planning. The Centre would further align with the recurring messages of:

i. Engage in genuine collaboration with community sectors and Traditional Owners, by combining natural and indigenous assets to educate community sectors; and ii. Recognise and incentivise high-quality, certified ecotourism operators; by promoting the advantages of the Nature Centre.

Alignment with State, Regional and Local Tourism Policy and Strategy

State Government

With the Nature Centre’s important role as a visitor and community leisure facility, tourism policy alignment at Queensland level is an important consideration.

Queensland’s Advancing Tourism 2016-2020 strategy highlights the importance of tourism to the Queensland economy with the QPNC contribution most aligned to the strategy priority of “Develop(ing) new and refreshed ecotourism, nature-based and cultural heritage products and experiences” specifically through “development of Indigenous, cultural and heritage tourism products, events and experiences across the state.”

Also, with 2020 marking the end of the strategy period, it can be reasonably assumed that a new policy direction will be established in the near future. Ensuring that any proposed upgrades to the QPNC align with the goals of an upcoming strategy would be strategically beneficial to Council, particularly if there is opportunity to promote the masterplan as a potential priority project.

Brisbane Marketing

The recently released (September 2019) Brisbane Visitor Economy Vision 2031 provides a strong focus for new tourism experience opportunities for the region. The vision is articulated through a concise and document for tourism in 2031 to align with economic development and community aspirations of partner Councils, industry partners and key stakeholders. Visiting the Hinterland only represents 14% of visitors to Brisbane, presenting a key opportunity to increase share through investment in key tourism infrastructure projects such as QPNC. Articulated through six strategic priorities (Figure 1), Ipswich can further align with the greater Brisbane goals of: ▪ Of securing an additional $6.5 billion p.a. In visitor expenditure (above forecast growth); ▪ Driving conversion of visitors passing through into overnight stays; ▪ Developing new experiences and provide additional reasons to visit; and Page 15 of 63

▪ Increasing dispersal and capture visitor spend and stay, whilst working in partnership with greater Brisbane councils.

Figure 1 – Brisbane VES2031 Objectives

Successful development and delivery of the QPNC Masterplan has the potential to contribute directly to objective 5 – Unlocking the potential of Australia’s nature capital. Achieving Vision 2031’s economic objective requires the region to deliver on its unfulfilled tourism potential - $6.5b in visitor spend p.a. in addition to forecast growth. Nature and wildlife experiences have been identified as having the potential to contribute $900m of this target.

Ipswich City Council

Looking specifically at Ipswich City Council’s Destination Management Plan 2019-2023, a series of priority actions and a framework of performance measures to guide the efforts and resources of Council have been identified in the following areas: ▪ Investment, Planning and Advocacy; ▪ Attractions and Experiences; ▪ Tourism Industry Cluster Development; ▪ Events; ▪ Marketing; and ▪ Transport and Access Ipswich has established a complimentary positioning in the South East Queensland destination mix. These experiences and Ipswich’s accessibility make it an ideal daytrip, weekend and short-break destination for residents and visitors in the South East Queensland region. The plan notes that the Ipswich region is well placed to continue to improve its position in the South East Queensland visitor market by enhancing its profile and developing its experiences.

Page 16 of 63

Ipswich Nature Centre is included as a key action with the short term goal of “Contributing to the successful delivery of the Ipswich Nature Centre Master Plan improving and enhancing the facility and wider Queens Park precinct as an attraction of regional significance.”

Alignment with State and Federal Policy

Despite several zoning and planning regulations relevant to broader Queens Park, the primary purpose of the nature centre can be best categorized as a zoo. At the Commonwealth level, zoos principally must comply with the Quarantine Act and the Wildlife Protection (Regulation of Imports and Exports) Act 1982. In Queensland, zoos operate under the provision of the Nature Centre Conservation Regulation Act (1994) the purpose of which is to:

“promote an understanding of the ecology and conservation of wildlife by a system of licensing that enables persons to - (a) exhibit wildlife at premises stated in the licence in permanent enclosures in a way that - (i) gives the public information about the ecological role of the wildlife, and (ii) promotes education about, and the conservation of, wildlife, and (b) keep and use wildlife for a film or television production that promotes an understanding of the ecology and conservation of wildlife".

To operate, a zoo must obtain a Wildlife Exhibitor Licence and be inspected by Conservation Officers of the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service prior to licensing and thereafter, and meet minimum standards for the keeping and exhibition of wildlife.5

Implications Strengths

▪ QPNC’s current Vision, Mission and Strategies align closely with a range of Ipswich City Council policy and strategy, including Cultural Policy, Conservation Estates and Reserves Management Policy and Infrastructure Asset Management Policy. QPNC can further align through the incorporation of additional cultural heritage (including indigenous), sustainable environmental conversation and community education activities within the

park. ▪ Both the Queensland Government’s Advancing Tourism Strategy and Brisbane Visitor Economy Strategy 2031 highlight the creation of additional reasons to visit and activating the region as key to capturing future visitor growth. Development of the Nature Centre has the potential to add a new attraction which contributes to delivery of the Brisbane Visitor Economy Vision 2031’s objective of ‘unlocking the potential of Australia’s Nature Capital’.

Weaknesses

▪ To align with current regulations, significant staffing, animal welfare and maintenance costs are required. The resulting high costs mean that community zoos often need to rely on a combination of entry fees, public sector funding and philanthropy. QPNC is a no cost activity and has very few paid attractions. Ipswich Council may need to consider additional revenue sources to offset these costs.

Opportunities • QPNC’s current Vision, Mission and Strategies align with those of Ipswich City Council current policies. QPNC can further align through the incorporation of additional cultural heritage (including indigenous), sustainable environmental conversation and community education activities within the park. 5 http://www.zooreach.org/ZooLegislation/Australia/Introduction.pdf • It can be reasonably assumed that Queensland will be looking to update its Advancing Tourism Strategy in the immediate future. Ensuring that any proposed upgradesPage 17 to of the 63 QPNC align with the goals of an upcoming strategy would be strategically beneficial to Council, particularly if there is opportunity to promote the masterplan as a potential greater Brisbane priority project. Opportunities

• QPNC’s current Vision, Mission and Strategies align with those of Ipswich City Council current policies. QPNC can further align through the incorporation of additional cultural heritage (including indigenous), sustainable environmental conversation and community education activities within the park. • It can be reasonably assumed that Queensland will be looking to update its Advancing Tourism Strategy in the immediate future. Ensuring that any proposed upgrades to the QPNC align with the goals of an upcoming strategy would be strategically beneficial to Council, particularly if there is opportunity to promote the masterplan as a potential greater Brisbane priority project.

Threats ▪ The role of Zoo’s has changed over time from being predominantly entertainment focused to be more education and conservation focused. This is in response to both regulatory changes and visitor expectations. Ensuring the Nature Centre aligns with these values is vital if Queens Park is to evolve in line with current policy and regulation.

Page 18 of 63

Current Visitors to QPNC

Data collection and visitor surveying: Methodology To overcome the limited visitation and visitor sentiment data available for QPNC, two visitor surveys were developed during this study to provide information on: ▪ Visitation frequency and trends (including repeat visitation); ▪ Travel group size, general demographic questions and place of origin; ▪ Reason for visit; ▪ Satisfaction with current QPNC; ▪ Time and money spent during the visit and where spending occurred; ▪ The respondents perceived appeal, time spent and value of key paid tourism experiences that may be incorporated as part of the upgrade; and ▪ Suggested future improvements. A total of 1,132 responses were received from the online survey and 350 responses were collected from the in-park survey (figure 1). Both the in person and online surveys received a high completion rate of over 64% for the online survey and over 94% for the in-person survey.

Response rates exceeded the targets set for the study (n=1000 for the online survey and n=250 for the in-park survey). Transcripts of both these surveys have been included as Appendix B.

Figure 1- Visitor Survey Reach (Online & in person)

The information gathered from these surveys was used in the formation of both the impact and cost benefit analysis models undertaken for this report. Community sentiment data specifically gathered from Ipswich residents will also be useful in determining the value placed on the nature centre by the community. Questions were also asked relating to the public’s interest and propensity to undertake paid experiences such as those detailed in the Queens Park Nature Centre & Discovery Hub Masterplan as well as the monetary value they placed on these experiences.6

6 It should be noted that the question only presented the experiences as concepts, with little detail or accompanying imagery. As such analysis does not take into account the differing opinions of respondents based on what they imagine the final experience would be when asked how much they might pay for the experience. Page 19 of 63

Community Survey Data Collection During September 2019 an online survey was distributed to Ipswich residents, and promoted via Ipswich Council channels including Facebook Sponsored Posts, Council databases and via serval articles published in the local newspaper. This survey focused on gathering information on community sentiment, satisfaction and general visitation trends regarding QPNC. With most respondents located from within Ipswich, data gathered from this survey was used to help articulate the community benefit provided by the Nature Park currently and into the future. Respondent Profile Nearly all respondents are from Australia (99%) with 73% of the respondents live within the Ipswich Council area and 26% outside of Ipswich but in Queensland.

Figure 2 - Place of residence Community Survey respondents The community up-take of the centre is positive with approximately 50% visiting it once a quarter and around 20% visiting it even once a month. Only 6% of the respondents visited QPNC for the first time.

From the community respondents who visited the nature centre during the last year, 55% are aged between 30 and 44. Only 6% are over 60 years old (Figure 5). Furthermore, nearly 60% are parents with young children living at home, followed by couples (26%). Align with this information, around 60% visited the QPNC together with their children.

Figure 3 – Age breakdown and Life Stage of community respondents who visited the QPNC within the last year Page 20 of 63

Visitor Survey Data Collection A second version of the survey was developed specifically to collect a representative in-park sample of information from visitors to QPNC. This survey focused more heavily on actual spending and travel habits of the participants during their journey, including travel party size and their views regarding the paid experiences proposed as part of the potential upgrade.

Council Visitor Centre staff and volunteers carried out interviewing on the 15-minute survey on iPads from key visitor hotspots within QPNC including the exit point of the walkway and the onsite café. Interviewing took place between 9 September 2019 and 5 October 2019 to take advantage of higher than average visitation over the school holiday period. Visitor Profile Nearly all respondents are from Australia (96%) with 52% of the respondents live within the Ipswich Council area. Most visitors outside of Ipswich are from Queensland (40%): 4% are from other Australian states and only 3% from overseas.

Figure 4 – Place of residence Visitor Survey respondents 70% of the visitors are aged under 45, with 33% being between 30 and 39 years old. Overall, the age profile of the visitors is similar to the community respondents. Nearly 50% of the visitors travel together with their children to experience QPNC, followed by 30% with friends or relatives.

Figure 5 – Age breakdown and Travel Party of the Visitor Survey Page 21 of 63

The survey results suggest that most visitors come on a weekday (70%) and spend 30 minutes to 1 hour inside the QPNC (60%). 25% of the visitors stay with 1 to 2 hours a little bit longer. Main motivator to visit the QPNC is to spend a day out with friends (75%), followed by the possibility to connect with nature (30%) and relaxation (25%).

For 62% of the respondents visiting the QPNC was the sole reason to travel to Ipswich, which highlights the importance of the centre as a drawcard for Ipswich and to bring additional revenue to the council area.

Key results of the two surveys Satisfaction with QPNC The overall community sentiment regarding QPNC is highly positive, with over 94% of respondents from the community survey indicated they were either satisfied or very satisfied with the experience. Also the vast majority of respondents from the visitor survey are satisfied with the QPNC (96%); the number of people who are very satisfied is with 74% even higher than in the community survey (60%). The high satisfaction rates align with the extremely high recommendation level of 99% for both surveys. As one respondent said “Without hesitation. I recommend it all of the time to colleagues at work with young families or grandkids as an affordable outing. It’s clean, easy to get to, with ample parking, and lots to do. I love it!”

Furthermore, 80% of the community respondents value the QPNC as an important local facility and 71% highly agree that the QPNC become part of iconic Ipswich.

Figure 6 – Satisfaction rate for the Queens Park Nature Centre Expenditure Around 80% of the respondents from both surveys spend money in the onsite cafeteria, with the average spent being approx. $20. QPNC visitors spend additional money offsite in Ipswich, mainly for food/drinks, entertainment and entry fee to other local attractions. Online respondents mentioned several times that they also budget for a donation to the Nature Centre during their visit. Taking into account that 60% of the visitor survey respondents only come to Ipswich due to the QPNC, the expenditure means additional economic benefit for the Ipswich council area that would be missed otherwise. Page 22 of 63

The onsite and online visitor surveys conducted during preparation of this study demonstrated that visitors spent an estimated average per capita of $17.75 in the Centre and $138 throughout the Ipswich region. QPNC Facilities Next to the Nature Centre, most visited facilities include the playground (approx. 55%), the café (approx. 50%) and the Nerima Gardens (approx. 32%).

Survey respondents are associating the QPNC facilities mainly with a great place to visit with friends and relatives, an opportunity to view wildlife and enjoy the outdoors.

Figure 7 – Respondents association with the QPNC Improvements Despite the overall positive feedback, 33% of respondents had suggestions for improvements, that can be divided into the three main categories of animals and enclosures, education and facilities.

Several respondents suggested “more animals” and that enclosures should be updated as “some of the enclosures seems to be a bit small” or because children could not easily see the animals due to their height.

People also suggested enhancing the educational experience, implementing aspects such as ”interactive educational activities”, “…an interactive app to learn things about the animals, hear what they sound like etc.”, “staff to provide more knowledge”, “specific kids activities” and “guided tours”.

Another common aspect was improvements regarding the facilities, such as “more seats”, “toilet facilities within the Nature Centre”, “more car park space”, “trees and shaded areas” and they mentioned that “walkaways are not very pram friendly and some areas are hard to navigate altogether”. Future proposed activities The survey included a question regarding the level of interest and willingness to pay for potential future experiences. The activities most respondents are interested in are wildlife encounters (90%), animal feeding (85%) and animal nursery (80%). However, around 40% of people would expect these experiences to be free and the majority of people would be only willing to spend less than $20 for

Page 23 of 63

them. Respondents are willing to spend most money on being a zookeeper for a day with around 35% saying they would pay more than $40 for the experience.

Least interesting experiences are function/events space hire, animal live streaming and overnight camps.

Implications

Strengths

▪ Visitors to QPNC showed strong satisfaction levels. ▪ 99% of visitors interviewed would recommend QPNC currently as a place to visit. ▪ The majority of visitors travel to Ipswich solely because of the QPNC.

▪ High community sentiment with the vast majority value the QPNC as an important facility and think it belongs to iconic Ipswich. Weaknesses

▪ Several respondents cited animal enclosure upgrades as a development need within the park. ▪ Several respondents indicated that additional interactive, child friendly activities and amenities (such as nature play) should be incorporated into the park. ▪ Ipswich’s distance from an international airport restricts the centre’s access to international markets (including inbound travel groups). ▪ QPNC infrastructure is aging and, in some cases, required frequent repairs. Opportunities ▪ Visitors spent on average $20.67 on eating and drinking on site per person at QPNC. ▪ Almost all respondents stated that they would consider additional spending on new paid experiences. ▪ There was high interest shown on incorporating new or upgraded experiences into QPNC. ▪ Additional investment can be leveraged on marketing and promotion, particularly to school and other tour groups. ▪ Several visitors indicated they would be interested in seeing additional native animals at the park. Threats ▪ Although levels of interest were high, respondents noted that they would be prepared a pay a relatively low (less than $20) or no fee for a number of potential experiences (animal feeding/ live animal streaming/ educational activities for children). ▪ Many of the experiences (such as event space hire or overnight camps) which respondents would be prepared to pay a larger ticket price for, received the lowest interest levels/ were on average the least appealing to visitors. ▪ With added animals and animal enclosures comes an added cost in keeping these animals, as well as strict regulations. Covering operational costs will need to be considered in any upgrades, as well as anticipated demand/ price points.

Page 24 of 63

Current Tourism Demand

Coupled with the specific research commissioned directly for this report, utilising the existing research of Tourism Research Australia is another valuable tool in quantifying current and future demand.

This section first gives an overview of Ipswich’s generator tourism market, before looking at Zoo Tourism at a National and State level to define the visitor profile of those most likely to visitor QPNC.

Over a five-year period, visitors to Ipswich increased at an average of 13.2% per annum to reach nearly 1.9 million visitors in the financial year 2019. The growth of visitors to Ipswich surpassed that of Brisbane and Queensland during the same period (9.1% and 6.5% respectively).

Annual average growth of visitors to Ipswich, Brisbane and Queensland (FY2015-2019)

16.0% 14.2% 13.2% 13.2% 14.0%

12.0% 10.3% 10.0%

8.0%

6.0%

4.0%

2.0%

0.0% Daytrip visitors Domestic overnight Inbound visitors Total visitors visitors

Ipswich (C) Brisbane Queensland

Figure 4 - Ipswich Visitor Market Growth

Ipswich has exceeded average growth rates for the Brisbane Region and Queensland as a whole across all three segments – day visitors, domestic overnight and international.

▪ Daytrip visitors were the most significant contributors to visitors flows to Ipswich (76%) as well as the fastest segment in terms of visitor growth (14.2% p.a. since the past five years). After a decline in FY2016 (-2.5%), daytrip visitors grow very strongly in FY2018 (21.8%) and FY2019 (22.1%). ▪ Domestic overnight visitors play a significant role in the Ipswich visitor economy, generating approximately 45% of total expenditure in the region during FY2019. During the period of FY2015-2019, domestic overnight visitors increased at an average of 10.3%, compared to 7.2% in the Brisbane Region and 6.7% for Queensland as a whole. ▪ International visitors to Ipswich have increased strongly since 2017. Overall, the annual average growth of this segment between FY2015 and 2019 was 13.2%, compared to 7,5% of Brisbane and 5.9% of Queensland.

Additional information on Ipswich’s visitor market is presented in Appendix D

Page 25 of 63

Visitor Profile Visiting friends and relatives was observed as the main reason for travel to Ipswich in 2018 (48.4%). This market also experienced strong growth in visitor numbers over the last five years, growing at an average of 21.95% per year. Over the same period, holiday makers constituted 25.1% of the total visitors in Ipswich.

Major age groups of visitors to Ipswich include seniors (over 55 years old) at 33.6% and young visitors (under 25 years old) at 22.5%. The under 25 age group showed a significant increase in visitor flows, at 45.7% per year between 2014 and 2018.

91.9% of the domestic visitors to Ipswich resided in Queensland. Visitors from Brisbane, Gold Coast and Southern Queensland Country contributed a majority of intra-tourism market of Ipswich (57.7%, 19.7% and 18.9% respectively).

In associations with dominant age groups, visitors to Ipswich were mainly single or married seniors (36.3%). 34.4% of the total visitors to Ipswich were parents with kids, and, based on the visitor profile of zoo tourists, this segment serves as the most prominent potential visitor market for the QPNC.

Ipswich's Socio-Demographic Vistor Segments (2018)

28.7%

36.3%

34.4%

Young single/middle aged couples without kids Parents with kids Older single/married

Figure 5 - Ipswich Visitor Lifecycle (2018)

Page 26 of 63

Demand for Animal-based Experiences

Australian Zoo/ Animal-based Tourism Nationally, around three in every hundred visitors in Australia visit a zoo, wildlife park or aquarium during their trip across the country. During 2018 almost 8 million visitors were reported to visit zoos, wildlife parks or aquariums across Australia (Figure 6). Visitor numbers to these attractions have increased 7.1% per year over the last five years, outpacing general visitors to Australia (5%). This increase is mainly driven by day-trippers, with an annual average growth rate of 8.8% within this sector from 2014-2018 (compared to 4.7% for overnight domestic visitors and 7.8% for international visitors). By 2023, it is estimated Australian zoos, wildlife parks and aquariums will welcome 1.5 million additional visitors7.

Visitor Numbers to Zoos/Wildlife Parks/Aquariums in Australia 2014- 2023 10,000,000 9,000,000 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 7.1% 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 0 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Number of visits to Australian zoos/wildlife parks/aquariums (historic) Number of visits to Australian zoos/wildlife parks/aquariums (projected)

Figure 6 - Visitor Numbers to Zoos/Wildlife Parks/Aquariums in Australia 2014-2023

The Australian zoo tourism sector8 is equally shared among daytrip, overnight domestic, and international visitors. In 2018, the daytrip and overnight domestic segments accounted for 32% of the market, while international visitors contributed 36%. Subsequently, the visitor mix within the zoo tourism sector is more evenly distributed than the general tourism sector (Figure 7).

7 Forecast is performed using the Tourism Forecast Reference Panel of Tourism Research Australia 8 Within the scope of this report, zoo tourism, which is a popular and traditional part of wildlife tourism, refers to a sort of tourism experience associated with visitors’ visitations to zoos, wildlife parks, and aquariums. Page 27 of 63

Visitor Mix Between Zoo Tourism and General Tourism in Australia in 2018

2.7%

31.8% 36.2% Day-trippers 33.0%

Overnight domestic visitors 64.4% 31.9% International visitors

Figure 7 - Visitor Mix Between Zoo Tourism and General Tourism in Australia in 2018

The potential contribution of zoos, wildlife parks, and aquariums to the Australian tourism economy is promising, as visitors to these attractions are more likely to take a longer trip and spend more during their visit. As such, during 2018 overnight domestic travellers who visited zoos, wildlife parks, and aquariums during their trips stayed 1.7 times longer than general overnight domestic visitors (6.2 nights versus 3.6 nights). Similarly, international travellers visiting zoos, wildlife parks, and aquariums stayed 1.2 times longer than general inbound visitors (38.4 nights versus 32.1 nights). Furthermore, domestic visitors to zoos, wildlife parks, and aquariums were recorded to spend 1.3 times more, with day-trippers spending on average $138 daily and overnight domestic visitors spending $249 on average per night.

Australian zoos, wildlife parks, and aquariums significantly shape the experience of international visitors. During 2018, almost 34 out of every 100 international visitors to Australia visited zoos, wildlife parks, and aquariums. Additionally, the average participation rate of inbound tourists to local attractions9 was 18%, whereas the average participation rate of inbound tourists to different visitor experience at destinations was 15%. Accordingly, zoos, wildlife parks, and aquariums were regarded as a ‘must-do’ local experience among international visitors.

However, the popularity of zoos, wildlife parks, and aquariums among domestic visitors is less favourable. Despite being a core experience sought by these markets, compared to other activity groups such as social activities, outdoor/nature activities, heritage/art/culture experience, local attractions including visitations to zoos, wildlife parks and aquariums were rated least favourable among domestic visitors (Figure 8).

9 Local activities, in alignment with the available data from the IVS and NVS surveys of Tourism Research Australia, consist of 11 component activities: Visit amusements / theme parks; Visit wildlife parks / zoos / aquariums; Go on guided tours or excursions; Go to markets; Take tourist trains; Visit wineries; Take charter boats/cruises/ferries; Visit a health spa/sanctuary/well-being centre; Visit farm gates; Visit breweries; and Visit distilleries.

Page 28 of 63

Participatory Rates of Daytrippers and Overnight Domestic Visitors to Different Activity Groups in 2018

56.7% Social activities 11.0%

4.7% Outdoor/nature activities 2.4%

3.0% Culture/heritage/art experience 1.3%

1.8% Local attractions 0.7%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0%

Overnight domestic visitors Daytrippers

Figure 8 - Participatory rates of day-trippers and overnight domestic visitors to different activity groups in 2018

Queensland’s Zoo/ Animal-based Tourism Sector In 2018, overnight tourists who visited zoos or animal-based visitor attractions generated a total of $3.9B expenditure Queensland. Within a state context, Queensland’s market trends in zoo tourism are similar to those at a national level. In 2018, there were nearly 2.4 million visitors to zoos, aquariums and wildlife parks in Queensland, of over half were international visitors (51.5%). Using the Tourism Forecast Panel of Tourism Research Australia, it was projected that an average of 63,000 international visitors, 16,000 overnight domestic visitors and 17,000 day-trippers per annum will be added to Queensland’s zoo tourism sector, contributing an estimated 2.8 million visitors by 2023 (Figure 9).

Queensland's Visitors Visiting Zoos, Aquariums or Wildlife Parks During Historical Period (2014-2018) and Projected Period (2019-2023) 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 - 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Daytrippers (historic) Daytrippers (forecasted) Overnight domsetic visitors (historic) Overnight domsetic visitors (forecasted) Inbound visitors (historic) Inbound visitors (forecasted) Total Visitors (historic) Total Visitors (forecasted)

Figure 9 - Queensland Visitation during 2014-18 and projected period 2019-23

Page 29 of 63

Day trippers (22% of visitors compared to 52% for international visitors and 26.4% for overnight domestic visitors), tended to increase in volume faster than other visitor segments. Over the past five years, Queensland’s zoo day-trippers experienced an annual average growth rate of 11.7%. This growth was higher than that of general day-trip visitors (3.7%), overnight domestic tourists (5.2%) and zoo international tourists (6.6%) (Figure 10).

The Annual Average Growth Rates of Zoo Tourism and General Tourism in Queensland (2014-2018) 14.0% 11.7% 12.0% 10.0% 7.2% 8.0% 6.6% 7.2% 5.2% 5.6% 6.0% 4.4% 3.7% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% Daytrippers Overnight domsetic visitors Inbound visitors Total Visitors

Annual average growth rate of animal-based tourism Annual average growth rate of general tourism

Figure 10 - Annual Average Growth Rates of Zoo Tourism

Visitation to zoos, aquariums and wildlife parks attracted more international visitors than domestic visitors (Figure 9), with Queensland’s international visitors, ranking zoo visitation as one of the most sought-after activities. This is in contrast with the Queensland domestic market who are less likely to choose to partake in zoo tourism during their holiday in Australia.

Participatory Rates to Zoos, Aquariums or Wildlife Parks Among Different Visitor Segments

50% 44.3% 40%

30% 22.3% 19.1% 20%

10% 4.0% 6.3% 1.2% 0.7% 2.6% 1.8% 0% Queensland's day-trippers Queensland's overnight domestic Queensland inbound visitors visitors

Participatory rate of visitors to zoos, aquariums or qildlife parks Averaged participatory rate of visitors to local attractions Averaged participatory rate of visitors to various tourism activities

Figure 11 - Annual Average Growth Rates of Zoo Tourism

Page 30 of 63

Trends in Zoo/ Animal-based Tourism Market (Overnight Segment) in Brisbane Within a local context, there were 639,13110 overnight zoo tourists to Brisbane in 2018, an increase of 10.3% per annum since 2014. Of these visitors, 87% were international and 13% were overnight domestic visitors. This trend contrasted greatly with the general overnight tourism market of Brisbane, where overnight domestic visitors represented a majority of the market (84%).

By 2023, it is estimated 794,247 overnight visitors to Brisbane will visit zoos, aquariums or wildlife parks. During inbound visitor trips, 42.3% inbound visitors to Brisbane visited zoos, aquariums or wildlife parks. Contrastingly, the participation rate of overnight domestic visitors to Brisbane was 1.2%. This ratio was much lower in comparison to Queensland and Australia (2.6% and 2.4% respectively).

Inbound zoo tourists to Brisbane tend to spend a similar number of nights as general inbound tourists (21 nights versus 20 nights). Overnight domestic zoo visitors stayed 2.3 times longer than general overnight domestic travellers (6.7 nights versus 3 nights). In 2018, overnight zoo tourists generated a total of $ 1.3 billion of expenditure in the region.

Implications Strengths ▪ Ipswich’s general visitation has increased by 13.9% annually since 2014. This growth in

visitation and subsequently, the tourism market will be crucial to the success of the Nature Centre. As a result of increasing visitation, tourism expenditure has increased 9.7% per year during the last five years. ▪ Around 3% of all visitors in Australia visit a zoo, wildlife park, or aquarium during their trip across the country and the sector is growing nationally by 7.1% p.a. and by 7.2% p.a. in Queensland. ▪ Within a local context, there were 639,1311 overnight zoo tourists to Brisbane in 2018, an increase of 10.3% per annum since 2014. Of these visitors, 87% were international and 13% were overnight domestic visitors. Weaknesses ▪ Ipswich’s does not currently attract many international visitors with their tourism market

driven mostly by daytrip visitors which amounts to 73% of the total visitors during 2018. Similarly, 91.9% domestic visitors to Ipswich resided in Queensland, highlighting a strong reliance on intra-state tourism. Opportunities ▪ At a national level, the appeal of zoos with international visitors is in stark contrast to general visitation trends, attracting 33.5% additional share. This suggests that zoos are a strong attractor of international tourists to Australia which presents an opportunity for In 2018, IpswichQPNC towelcomed capture a largertotal of proportion 1,618,961 ofvisitors this market. to the region, Data indicates increased that 13.9% that annually visitors tosince 2014. zoo attractions, particularly international visitors are more likely to take a longer trip and spend more during their visit. it Threatsis expected there will be 1,845,535 travellers visiting the region 20231. In associations▪ Ipswich’s with internatio dominantnal age reach groups, is limited visitors at presentto Ipswich which were may mainly limit singlethe future or married potential seniors to (36.3%). 34.4%capture visitors this market to Ipswich without were significant parents investmentwith kids, and, in marketing, based on experiences the visitor profileand of zoo tourists, thissupporting segment tourism serves asinfrastructure. the most prominent potential visitor market for the QPNC.

10 Based on a three-year average trending Page 31 of 63

Profile of Typical Zoo and Animal-based Visitors – National Level Age In general, Australian zoo tourism tends to attract younger tourists. During 2018, 63.4% of visitors to zoos, aquariums and wildlife parks were under 45 years old, compared to 48% of general visitors within this age range. Meanwhile, only 22.4% of zoo tourists were older than 55 years (compared with 34.7% of Australia’s general visitors). A similar trend was observed in zoo tourism within Queensland. During 2018, 60.3% of visitors were under 45 years old, as opposed to 22.1% of visitors who were over 55 years old.

Across Australia, zoo tourists aged 30 to 39 increased in volume the fastest over the last five years (12% compared to the 7% annual average growth rate of zoo tourism). Zoo tourists aged from 35 to 39 were the fastest growing zoo tourism visitor group in Queensland in terms of visitor volume, with an average annual growth rate of 15.8%.

Lifecycle Younger aged tourists and families with kids were the largest visitor group to Australian zoos, aquariums and wildlife parks during 2018, followed by young/ middle-aged singles or couples without kids. This was contrasted by the visitor lifecycles of general tourists in Australia during 2018, which was mainly driven by older single/married travellers (36.7%) (Figure 12).

Socio-demograpic Groupings of Visitors to Zoos and Animal- based Tourism Attractions in 2018 (Australia)

45% 41.0% 40% 35.0% 36.7% 35% 30.6% 32.2% 30% 24.1% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Young single/middle age Parent with kids Older single/married couple with no kids

Zoo tourism General tourism

Figure 12 – Socio-demographic Groupings of Visitors to Zoos and Animal-based Tourism Attractions in 2018 (Australia)

Purpose of the Visit Australian zoo tourism heavily relies on the leisure market. In 2018, 92.5% of zoo tourists visited for a holiday or to meet friends and relatives.

Page 32 of 63

Trip Purposes of Zoo Tourists in 2018

General tourism 46.4% 29.9% 14.4% 10.1%

Zoo tourism 72.6% 19.9% 3.9% 5.8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Holiday Visiting friends and relatives Business Other reason

Figure 13 - Trip Purposes of Zoo Tourists in 2018

Other Travel Patterns of Day-trippers, Overnight Domestic Visitors, and International Visitors to Zoos, Aquariums and Wildlife Parks11 Day-trippers Typical travel patterns of day-trippers to zoos, aquariums or wildlife parks were illustrated in Figure 9.

Typical travel patterns of day-trippers to zoos, aquariums or wildlife parks

Visitors from Victoria mostly contributed to total daytrip visitors to zoos, aquariums or wildlife parks in Australia (25.8%), followed by Queensland (20.85), Western Australia (19.7%) and New South Wales (18.7%).

One out of every ten Queenslanders visited zoos, aquariums or wildlife parks during the year 2018

Weekend trips accounted more than half of total daytrip flows to zoos, aquariums or wildlife parks (54% at Australian level and 50% at Queensland level)

Figure 14 - Typical Travel Patterns of Day-trippers to Zoos, Aquariums or Wildlife Parks

Excluding visitors to zoos, aquariums, or wildlife parks, zoo tourism day-trippers usually took part in social activities (eating/dining out, sightseeing, visiting friends/relatives, shopping and doing BBQs) and nature-based activities (visiting national parks and botanical gardens, bushwalking) (Figure 15). This trend was also relevant in the case of Queensland zoo tourism (Figure 16).

11 Analysis on participated activities of zoo tourists, which was interpreted in Figures 11, 12, 14, 15, 18 and 19, was based on unpublished, raw records extracted from the IVS and NVS surveys of Tourism Search Australia. The recorded year was the year ending December 2018. Page 33 of 63

Other Activities of Tourism Daytrippers to Zoos and Animal- based Attracions in Australia in 2018

Eat out / dine at a restaurant and/or cafe 59%

Sightseeing/looking around 32%

Visit friends & relatives 15%

Visit national parks / state parks 13%

Go to the beach 12%

Go shopping for pleasure 10%

Bushwalking / rainforest walks 8%

Picnics or BBQs 7%

Visit botanical or other public gardens 7%

Figure 15 - Other Activities of Tourism Day-trippers to Zoos and Animal-based Attractions in Australia in 2018

Other Activities of Zoo and Animal-based Tourism Daytrippers in Queensland in 2018

Eat out / dine at a restaurant and/or cafe 60.5%

Sightseeing/looking around 28.9%

Visit friends & relatives 21.1%

Go to the beach 18.4%

Go shopping for pleasure 13.2%

Visit botanical or other public gardens 13.2%

Figure: 16 - Other Activities of Tourism Day-trippers to Zoos and Animal-based Attractions in Queensland in 2018

Page 34 of 63

Overnight Domestic Visitors

Figure 17 visualises the typical characteristics of overnight domestic travellers visiting zoos, aquariums or wildlife parks during 2018 in Queensland and Australia.

Typical Characteristics of Overnight Domestic Visitors Visiting Zoos, Aquariums or Wildlife Parks in 2018 in Australia and Queensland.

The most popular travel party type was parents with kids (38% and 42.3% for Australia and Queensland respectively)

High seasons of overnight trips to zoos, aquariums or wildlife parks were during school holidays (July, January and October)

62% of overnight trips to zoos, aquariums or wildlife parks in Queensland were taken during Winter and Spring

Most overnight domestic visitors were from households with annual income of $100K and above (69% nationally and 61% for Queensland respectively)

New South Wales generated the most overnight domestic visitors to zoos, aquariums, or wildlife parks (33.8%), followed by Victoria (23.55) and Queensland (19.8%) New South Wales was the state with the most overnight domestic visitations to zoos, aquariums, or wildlife parks (33.8%), followed by Victoria (23.55) and Queensland (19.8%) 42.4% of overnight domestic visitors to Queensland’s zoos, aquariums or wildlife parks were Queenslanders, of which half was contributed by residents of Brisbane region.

Figure 17 - Typical Characteristics of Overnight Domestic Visitors Visiting Zoos. Aquariums or Wildlife Parks in 2018

Page 35 of 63

Figures 18 and 19 illustrate the favourite activities of overnight domestic zoo tourists across Australia and Queensland. Social and city-based activities were the most popular, followed by nature-based activities which attracted the most overnight domestic zoo tourists.

Top Activities of Overnight Domestic Tourists to Zoos and Animal- based Attractions in Australia in 2018

Eat out / dine at a restaurant and/or cafe 78.7% Sightseeing/looking around 49.2% Go to the beach 42.5% Visit friends & relatives 37.2% Go shopping for pleasure 34.3% Visit national parks / state parks 26.4% Pubs, clubs, discos etc 25.3% Bushwalking / rainforest walks 21.7% Visit museums or art galleries 17.9% Go to markets 16.6% Go on a daytrip to another place 14.7% Visit history / heritage buildings, sites or… 13.1% Visit botanical or other public gardens 11.4%

Figure 18 - Top Activities of Overnight Domestic Tourists to Zoos and Animal-based Attractions in Australia in 2018

Top activities of overnight domestic tourists to Zoos and Animal- based Attractions in Queensland in 2018

Eat out / dine at a restaurant and/or cafe 82.3% Go to the beach 63.1% Sightseeing/looking around 57.7% Go shopping for pleasure 38.8% Visit friends & relatives 36.5% Visit national parks / state parks 28.5% Bushwalking / rainforest walks 26.9% Pubs, clubs, discos etc 25.8% Go on a daytrip to another place 22.3% Go to markets 21.5% Exercise, gym or swimming 13.5% Visit museums or art galleries 13.5% Go on guided tours or excursions 11.5% Visit amusements / theme parks 11.5%

Figure 19 - Top Activities of Overnight Domestic Tourists to Zoos and Animal-based Attractions in Queensland in 2018

Page 36 of 63

The visitor profile of overnight domestic tourists to zoos and animal-based attractions in Brisbane12 is presented in Figure 20.

Visitor Profile of Overnight Domestic Tourists to Zoos and Animal-based Attractions in Brisbane

The largest travel group was families (parents with kids) (32%)

Mainly travelled to Brisbane for holidays (53%) or visiting friends and relatives (41%).

62% of overnight trips to zoos, aquariums or wildlife parks in Queensland were taken during Winter and Spring

33.7% of overnight domestic visitors are from Queensland and 31% of them were from New South Wales

Preferred to take part in local attractions and social activities (eating/dining out, sightseeing, shopping)

Visitor preferred to take the trip during summer school holiday - Jan (23.5%) rather than in winter break – July (15.1%, Spring break – Oct (14.2%) or Autumn break – Apr (11.6%)

Figure 20 - Visitor Profile of Overnight Domestic Tourists to Zoos and Animal-based Attractions in Brisbane

12 The analysis was based on three-year average 2016-2018. Activity sets were extracted from 93 samples of the NVS surveys obtained in three years. Page 37 of 63

Australian Inbound (International) Profile of Visitors to Zoos and Animal-based Attractions (2018)

54% were young singles/middle aged Mainly travelled alone (42%) couples without kids

Key source markets were China 49% were aged 34 and younger (20%), UK (11%), USA (9%), Germany (6%) and Taiwan (6%) Were usually interested in in local attractions and social activities 91% travelled for leisure purpose (eating/dining out, sightseeing, shopping)

Figure 21 - Australian Inbound (International) Profile of Visitors to Zoos and Animal-based Attractions (2018) Country of Origin

Visitors from five major markets (China, New Zealand, UK, USA, and Japan) dominated the zoo tourism market within Australia during 2018. However, the share of these major markets was variable amongst these sources of inbound zoo tourism (Figure 22).

The Market Shares of Major Inbound Tourist Markets to Zoos, Aquariums or Wildlife Parks in Australia in 2018

18.0% 16.3% 15.5% 16.0% 14.8% 14.0% 12.0% 10.3% 10.0% 8.7% 8.6% 8.1% 8.0% 6.2% 6.5% 6.0% 5.1% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% New Zealand Japan China United States of United Kingdom America

Zoo tourism General tourism

Figure 22 - Visitor Profile of Zoo Overnight Domestic Tourists to Brisbane

Page 38 of 63

Top Activities of Zoo Inbound Tourists in Australia in 2018, who Visited Zoos and Animal-based Attractions

Eat out / dine at a restaurant and/or cafe 96.2%

Go shopping for pleasure 88.4%

Sightseeing/looking around 87.2%

Go to the beach 84.0%

Visit national parks / state parks 68.7%

Go to markets 63.1%

Visit botanical or other public gardens 57.7%

Visit museums or art galleries 49.0%

Visit history / heritage buildings, sites or monuments 48.8%

Pubs, clubs, discos etc 44.1%

Charter boat / cruise / ferry 38.9%

Bushwalking / rainforest walks 36.0%

Figure 23 - Top Activities of Inbound Tourists in Australia in 2018 who Visited Zoos and Animal-based Attractions

Top Activities of Inbound Tourists to Queensland in 2018 who Visited Zoos and Animal-based Attractions

Eat out / dine at a restaurant and/or cafe 97.4%

Sightseeing/looking around 92.0%

Go to the beach 91.6%

Go shopping for pleasure 91.0%

Visit national parks / state parks 71.1%

Go to markets 65.7%

Visit botanical or other public gardens 58.9%

Charter boat / cruise / ferry 50.5%

Pubs, clubs, discos etc 49.8%

Bushwalking / rainforest walks 49.2%

Visit museums or art galleries 48.3%

Visit history / heritage buildings, sites or monuments 46.3%

Go on guided tours or excursions 41.1%

Figure 24 - Top Activities of Inbound Tourists to Queensland in 2018 who Visited Zoos and Animal-based Attractions

Page 39 of 63

Australian vs Queensland Inbound Visitor Profile (2018)

Zoo inbound tourists tended to travel alone (40.2% and 34.1% inregards to Australia and Queensland accordingly)

Most of them was first-time visitors (57.9% across Australia and 64.6% in the case of Queensland)

Most of them were free and idependent travellers (64.7% across Australia and 57.6% for the case of Queensland)

Figure 25 - Other Characteristics of Zoo Inbound Tourists in Australia and Queensland in 2018

Implications Strengths ▪ The demographic of zoo visitors is diverse, ranging from young families to seniors. There is a correlation between Ipswich’s current visitor market and the demographics of domestic, interstate and international zoo tourists ▪ Zoo tourism attracts a higher than average proportion of international visitors, who spend on average more than domestic or day trip tourists. ▪ Eating out / dining at a restaurant / café is the top activity of International, Domestic and Day Trip zoo tourists. QPNC has an opportunity to provide for this market.

Weaknesses

▪ For International and Domestic Tourists, going to the beach is considered a top interest of Zoo Visitors, with Ipswich located inland this may drive visitors to Zoos closer to the Gold Coast Opportunities ▪ The largest travel party type of Domestic zoo tourists is families with young children and the second most prominent reason for travel is visiting friends and relatives (VFR). These markets are also strong in Ipswich’s general visitor market and are key opportunities for QPNC. ▪ QPNC represents a key leisure-based activity for Ipswich, in an uncrowded market, that can be further developed. ▪ 42.4% of overnight domestic visitors to Queensland’s zoos, aquariums or wildlife parks were Queenslanders, of which half was contributed by residents of the Brisbane region. This presents a key opportunity for Ipswich, as it is within an hour drive away from Brisbane City

Threats ▪ 91% of international zoo tourism visitors travelled for leisure purposes. Ipswich currently has limited leisure activities available when compared to the neighbouring locations of the Scenic Rim, Brisbane and the Gold Coast which could detract international visitation.

Page 40 of 63

Current QPNC Visitation and Expenditure

Visitation Precise annual visitor numbers to the QPNC are provided by the traffic counters installed at the entrance of the park. Based on complete 2018 twelve-months performance, QPNC will attract an estimated total of 140,522 visitors in 2019.

To estimate the visitation from people outside the Ipswich Council area compared to the visitation from Ipswich Council residents, the information from the visitor survey conducted as part of this study was evaluated regarding the visitors’ current place of residence. This information indicated that

o 45% (rounded) of visitation is from outside the Ipswich Council area – currently an estimated 63,617 visitation is annually from outside the Ipswich Council area. o 55% (rounded) of visitation is generated from Ipswich residents – currently an estimated 76,905 visitation is annually from Ipswich Council residents.

Visitor Expenditure The visitor survey entailed questions detailing the spent of the visitors inside the QPNC, spent in the onside Café, and additional expenditure in the Ipswich Council area. The average expenditure for each travel party was calculated13 and then multiplied by the number of travel parties14.

For Ipswich Council residents, solely the expenditure inside the QPNC was calculated, assuming that the money they spent in Ipswich (outside the QPNC) would have been spent by them anyway; for example, for shopping or visiting a local restaurant.

• The total annual expenditure inside the QPNC from Ipswich residents is estimated to be $465,117.

For visitors from outside the Ipswich Council area, the following expenditure for inside and outside the QPNC was estimated.

▪ The total annual expenditure inside the QPNC from visitors from outside the Ipswich Council area is estimated to be $309,652 (see Table 1). ▪ The total annual additional expenditure outside the QPNC but in the Ipswich Council area is estimated to be $2,496,721 (see Table 2).

Table 1 - Total Estimated Expenditure inside QPNC (Café) from visitors outside the Ipswich Council area

13 This was calculated using the average dollar value for each answer category of the questionnaire. For example, for the answer category $25-$50, the average of $37.50 was taken. 14 To calculate the number of travel parties, the proportion of each travel party was calculated from the information of the visitor survey. For the travel party category “With Kids”, “With Friends” and “Other”, average travel party size was taken from Tourism Research Australia. Page 41 of 63

Table 2 - Total Estimated Expenditure outside the QPNC from visitors outside the Ipswich Council area

The current annual total expenditure, from Ipswich residents and visitors from outside the Ipswich Council area, inside the QPNC is estimated to be $774,770.

Current Economic Impact of QPNC

In line with accepted economic impact assessment procedure, to estimate the net economic impact of the QPNC to the local economy, only expenditure inside the Ipswich Council area by external visitors is taken into account.

The analysis of the current economic impact of the QPNC was estimated using the economy.id modelling of economic impact.

The current revenue from visitors outside of the Ipswich Council area15 was estimated using the estimated visitation from outside the Ipswich Council area and their expenditure inside the QPNC and outside the QPNC but inside the Ipswich Council area.

To estimate the economic impact as precisely as possible, the total expenditure was split into different categories, based on information from the visitor survey. The Economy.id modelling was then able to take the structure and dynamics of the different industries into account16.

Table 3 - Expenditure Categories for the Estimated Expenditure inside the QPNC from visitors outside the Ipswich Council area

15 Only visitors from outside the Council area are used for this report to calculate the economic impact of QPNC as they bring additional revenue to the region. 16 Note, the expenditure for long-distance travel was excluded from the economic impact estimation as visitors are highly likely to spend this amount of money outside the Ipswich Council area Page 42 of 63

Table 4 - Expenditure Categories for the Estimated Expenditure outside the QPNC from visitors outside the Ipswich Council area

Economic impact modelling The key data inputs used to estimate the current economic impact of the QPNC are the revenue per economy.id category shown in tables 3 and 4. Economy.id is modelling the annual economic impact which is likely to be captured by the local area and residents of the Ipswich Region. The impacts include:

▪ Output effects ($m) ▪ Value-Add (additional production over and above the intermediate goods and services used). ▪ Jobs (jobs could be full-time or part-time)17

Three levels of impact are estimated:

1. Direct impacts – the direct increase in output due to the initial capital expenditure 2. Supply-chain impacts – demand for intermediate goods (‘industrial impact’) 3. Consumption impacts – additional expenditure due to the increase in wages and salaries associated the direct and supply-chain output impacts (‘consumption impact’).

Current Economic Impact within the Ipswich Council area

The revenue from visitors to the QPNC from visitors outside the Ipswich Council area create the following economic impact.

▪ The revenue generated within the QPNC supports a total of 3.3 local jobs, $0.22m of value- add and $0.55m of output within the Ipswich Council area (direct, industrial & consumption

impact combined). ▪ The additional revenue (tourism benefit) spent outside the QPNC supports a total of 22 local jobs (rounded), $1.75m of value-add and $4.10m of output within the Ipswich Council area

(direct, industrial & consumption impact combined).

Regarding the total economic impact from revenue spent inside and outside the QPNC, the direct impact is estimated to be $2.81m of output, $1.22m of value-add and 20 (rounded) jobs within the Ipswich Council area.

Taking the industrial and consumption impact into account, the activity results in $4.65m of output, $1.97m of value-add, and 25.5 jobs (rounded) within the Ipswich Council area.

17 FTE estimates would be generally lower. Page 43 of 63

Current Economic Impact within Queensland and Australia The economic activity generated from the QPNC within the Ipswich Council area has the potential to have a positive effect on the wider Queensland and Australian economy, which is estimated in the following.

▪ Within Queensland, the activity is estimated to support a total of (direct, industrial and consumption impact) o $5.74m of output ($4.65m of output within Ipswich + $1.09m additional output), o $2.45m of value-add ($1.97m of value-add within Ipswich + $0.49m additional value-add), o 29.5 jobs (rounded) (25.5 jobs within Ipswich + 4 additional jobs) within Queensland.

▪ Within Australia, the activity is estimated to support a total of (direct, industrial and consumption impact) o $6.54m of output ($5.74m of output within Queensland + $0.8m additional output), o $2.83m of value-add ($2.45m of value-add within Queensland + $0.38m additional value-add), o 32 jobs (rounded) (29.5 jobs within Queensland + 2.5 additional jobs) within Australia.

Model limitations and use of outputs

Economy.id economic impact modelling is based on input-output analysis for the relevant areas and is therefore subject to several qualifications based on the restrictive assumptions which underpin it. Notwithstanding such qualifications, the modelling is widely used by the public sector nationally and has been for an extended period.

It is possible to focus on certain impacts when making decisions about an investment or evaluating the effectiveness of a previous investment. For example, the low end of the range would represent direct impacts and the high end of the range would reflect total impacts including supply-chain and consumption effects with the least leakage.

The economy.id impact summary tables and accompanying commentary provided in the following sections of this report list each of the impacts separately, which together combine to provide an estimate of the overall impact.

All values in the economy.id tables are expressed in $2018/19, while the discussion of these outputs uses these values escalated $2019/20 for consistency with the model inputs.18

18 CPI is provided for capital cities. Brisbane CPI is used for the purposes of this analysis. Page 44 of 63

Current Situation Summary: Social and Economic Benefits of Zoo Tourism & QPNC

Desktop research, TRA data analysis and the two QPNC Surveys have revealed benefits, challenges, opportunities and threats facing the zoo tourism sector and QPNC specifically. A summary of these findings and implications have been detailed in the SWOT below.

Strengths Weaknesses ▪ QPNC’s current Vision, Mission and Strategies align ▪ To align with current regulations, significant staffing, animal with those of Ipswich City Council current policies. welfare and maintenance costs are required. The resulting high ▪ Ipswich’s general visitation has increased by 13.9% costs mean that community zoos often need to rely on a annually since 2014. This growth in visitation and combination of entry fees, public sector funding and subsequently, the tourism market will be crucial to the philanthropy. QPNC is a no cost activity and has very few paid success of the Nature Centre. Due to increasing attractions. Council may need to consider additional revenue visitation, tourism expenditure has increased 9.7% per sources to offset these costs. year during the last five years ▪ Ipswich’s does not currently attract many international visitors ▪ Around 3% of all visitors in Australia visit a zoo, wildlife with their tourism market mainly driven by daytrip visitors park or aquarium during their trip across the country which amounts to 73% of the total visitors during 2018. and the sector is growing nationally by 7.1% p.a. and by Similarly, 91.9% of the domestic visitors to Ipswich resided in 7.2% p.a. in Queensland. Queensland highlighting a strong reliance on intra-state ▪ The community and visitors to the QPNC are extremely tourism. satisfied and have visited recently ▪ Several respondents cited animal enclosure upgrades as a ▪ 99% of visitors interviewed would recommend QPNC development need within the park currently as a place to visit ▪ Several respondents indicated that additional interactive child ▪ The demographic of zoo visitors is diverse, ranging from friendly activities and amenities (such as nature play) should be young families to seniors. There is a correlation incorporated into the park. between Ipswich’s current visitor market and the ▪ Ipswich’s distance from an international airport restricts the demographics of domestic, interstate and international centre’s access to international markets (including inbound zoo tourists. travel groups) ▪ Regarding the total economic impact from revenue ▪ QPNC infrastructure is aging and, in some cases, requiring spent inside and outside the QPNC, the direct impact is frequent repairs. estimated to be $2.81m of output, $1.22m of value-add and 20 (rounded) jobs within the Ipswich Council area. Taking the industrial and consumption impact into account, the activity results in $4.65m of output within the Ipswich Council area as well as $1.97m of value- add, which accounts for 69% of the total value-add of $2.83m Australian-wide. Within the Ipswich Council area, this activity supports a total of 26 jobs (rounded), which accounts for 79% of the total jobs supported Australia-wide (32; rounded). ▪ Opportunities ▪ Threats ▪ Educational nature-based, cultural and environmental tourism ▪ The role of Zoo’s has changed over time from being is a growing tourism visitor market Ipswich can do more to predominantly entertainment focused to be more education leverage this opportunity at QPNC and conservation focused. This is in response to both regulatory ▪ QPNC can further align through the incorporation of additional changes and visitor expectations. Ensuring the Nature Centre cultural heritage (including indigenous), sustainable aligns with these values is vital if Queens Park is to evolve in environmental conversation and community education line with current policy and regulation. activities within the park. ▪ Ipswich’s international reach is limited at present time which ▪ At a national level, the appeal of zoos with international visitors may limit the future potential to capture this market without is in stark contrast to general visitation trends, attracting 33.5% significant investment in marketing, experiences and supporting additional share. This suggests that zoos are a strong attractor tourism infrastructure. of international tourists to Australia which presents an ▪ Many experiences were given a value of less than $20 or no cost opportunity for QPNC to capture this market. Data indicates which may represent a low revenue margin depending on the that that visitors to zoo attractions, particularly international net cost of the experience visitors are more likely to take a longer trip and spend more ▪ Many of the highly valued experiences (such as event space hire during their visit. or overnight camps) were also on average the least appealing to ▪ The community spent on average $20.67 per person on eating visitors. Post upgrade, growing these high value activities may and drinking on site at QPNC and almost all would consider be difficult with the current visitor market. additional spending on new paid experiences. ▪ Several other popular nature centres and zoos existing within ▪ There was high interest shown on incorporating new or the greater Brisbane and Gold Coast region upgraded experiences into QPNC ▪ With added animals and animal enclosures comes an added cost ▪ Additional investment can be leveraged on marketing and in keeping these animals, as well as strict regulations. Covering promotion, particularly to school and other tour groups operational costs will need to be considered in any upgrades. ▪ Several visitors indicated they would be interested in seeing additional native animals at the park

Page 45 of 63

The Opportunity: Queens Park Nature Centre & Discovery Hub Masterplan

Page 46 of 63

The Opportunity

Completed in December 2018, the Queens Park Nature Centre & Discovery Hub Masterplan aims to present an integrated Master Plan that “will guide future development within this environmentally focussed precinct” (page 6). The vision of the park is “to be Ipswich’s premier tourist experience offering unique, inspiring and educational visitor experiences on Ipswich’s cultural and Aboriginal cultural heritage, native flora and fauna and the natural areas of our ecologically diverse City.” With the objectives including: ▪ Provide an up-close, personal, and educational interaction with Australian wildlife and Ipswich’s Iconic species ▪ Enhance the overall visitor experience of the Ipswich Nature Centre using smart technology and well-designed enclosures to communicate the environmental, cultural and the Indigenous values of Ipswich ▪ Act as a gateway to the conservation estates and reserves across the City as key habitat areas for native flora and fauna as well as Aboriginal cultural landscape values. ▪ Promote the Ipswich Nature Centre as a premier tourist destination in Queensland

To meet these objectives, key areas of development proposed in the Master Plan are focussed on 5 core areas: ▪ Discovery Centre ▪ Platypus Centre ▪ Koala Centre ▪ Habitat Centres ▪ Backyard and Nocturnal Experiences

Over these areas, upgrades will incorporate several bold new enclosures providing state of the art habitats for existing and new native species exhibits along with upgraded visitor amenities, green space and experiences covering both environmental and indigenous culture education. Implementation Timeline Implementation of the master plan has been proposed to occur over distinct stages. For the purposes of analysis, it is assumed that each constriction period would occur, in order, over a one-year period giving the master plan a 3-year construction timeline, beginning in 2020.

Figure 26 - Implementation timeline

Page 47 of 63

Market Positioning of QPNC

Scope of this project does not include an analysis or detailed commentary on the market demand for individual experiences recommended in the masterplan. However, it is appropriate to consider positioning of the centre relative to consumer demand and existing nature and wildlife visitor attractions in the marketplace.

In line with the updating of State and Federal Policy, so too has the core role of zoos evolved over time. A 2014 report published by the Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) highlights that “Despite their popularity, their traditions, and their place in our recreational history, in recent years zoos have undergone considerable change in both their structure and function. They have seen their survival as being dependent upon their changing direction and becoming a relevant part of today’s society, and as such have developed three important justifications for keeping wild animals in captivity: conservation, education and research”19 (Tribe, 2014) The paper highlights two core challenges facing the sector: financial viability and ethical credibility.

Policy and Financial Viability

To ensure the care of captive animals aligns with State and Federal legislation involves considerable investment in qualified staff, food, and ensuring enclosures are maintained to an acceptable level. This is to ensure that the requirements by law are met and to appease public perception in an increasingly discerning and ethically conscious visitor market. Similarly, community focused centres, such as Queens Park must also ensure that admission fees do not detract from visitor numbers while still covering regulatory and other operating costs. This balance often requires reliance on public funding arrangements or philanthropic donations.

Policy and Ethical Credibility

Despite a shift from core values of entertainment and leisure to conservation and research, there is still a growing demographic which hold the opinion that any zoos, in their present form, “provide stressful living conditions and are unnecessary” (Tribe, 2014). Given enough public pressure, zoos may face further restrictions through updates in policy and legislation resulting in the closure of those unable to conform to future requirements.

This issue is now particularly relevant - wildlife tourism positions are increasingly having to move towards a sustainable presentation. The storyline behind keeping animals in captivity needs to have strong conservation and research-based rationales if they are to remain relevant. These attributes also link closely with potential funding sources to support visitor centre development and operations. TEQ has recently launched its new tourism brand direction, with sustainability at its core - while only recently announced it is reasonable to expect that ‘tone of voice’ in marketing activity will evolve, and increased prominence will be given to sustainable experiences which deliver on the brand vision.

Distinct Positioning from Competitors

The Brisbane Tourism region and South East Queensland as a whole benefits from having a range of animal and wildlife-based experiences already in place – these include large-scale internationally- focused commercial ventures such as Australia Zoo, Lone Pine Koala Sanctuary and Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary, National Park-based experiences (David Fleay Wildlife Park, Daisy Hill Koala Centre) and Local Government managed centres (Boondall Wetlands) and Government-managed environmental education centres. Well-established commercial ventures such as Lone Pine, Australia Zoo and

19 https://sustain.pata.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/WT14_Tribe-CaptiveWildlife.pdf Page 48 of 63

Currumbin perform an effective role at the top end of the market and it is unlikely that QPNC would compete directly for trade with these types of businesses. Based on analysis of TRA data, visitor interest (particularly from international markets) in wildlife experiences remains strong. Levels of experiences, fees charged, and focal experiences vary significantly throughout these destinations. QPNC when fine-tuning implementation of its masterplan will need to carefully consider its niche positioning within this market if it is achieve its tourism objectives.

Positioning of Queens Park Nature Centre as a Social Enterprise

It is necessary to consider the positioning of QPNC relative to future consumer demand. Good practice throughout the wildlife and zoo sector is clearly moving towards conservation and environmental goals being at the heart of business plans, and providing the rationale for keeping wild animals in captivity. The QPNC Master Plan sets out a bold vision based on environmental and indigenous culture education, very much in line with these sector trends. Given this situation, there is merit in considering positioning of the Centre based on the social enterprise model.

Social enterprises can be non-profit, for-profit or hybrid businesses that exist to benefit the public and community and are established to address a range of cultural, social and environmental issues. In this sense, the suggested ‘freemium’ pricing model for the centre can achieve a good fit with the objectives of a social enterprise – maintaining strong community engagement while generating revenue which helps further the delivery of environmental, educational and community objectives.

Survey feedback demonstrates that Ipswich communities have a strong affinity with the Nature Centre, however, going forward, the Centre will need to continue to grow profile and recognition among communities and target visitor markets. Actions which build a clear identity for the Nature Centre distinct from the broader Queens Park can play an important role in maximising economic potential and achieving Master Plan objectives.

Page 49 of 63

Potential Impact of the QPNC Upgrade Outlined in the Masterplan

Estimating future visitation and expenditure from Ipswich Council residents. Visitation Based on masterplan concepts and case-study based assumptions, it is estimated that the upgraded visitor centre has the potential to grow visitation and expenditure after all masterplan concepts are implemented in FIY 2024/2025.

To estimate the Ipswich residents’ visitation after the upgrades are completed in FIY 2045/2025, a conservative approach was applied that takes the estimated resident population growth in Ipswich20 as the visitation growth factor with no additional stretch applied. This conservative approach is made in part due to the information gathered from the visitor survey that indicates that those Ipswich residents visiting the QPNC are doing so on a regular basis. (Therefore, visitation numbers are higher than the actual visitor numbers.) However, in practical terms, experience from similar developments suggests that levels of local interest and visitation are likely to be heightened during the initial operational period.

After all masterplan concepts are implemented in FIY 2024/2025, the visitation from Ipswich residents is estimated to be 105,591. Case study research indicates that around that 23% (rounded) of visitors are estimated to participate in paid VIP experience options in Australian Zoos and wildlife experiences, hence, 24,222 residents are estimated to participate at one of the paid experiences.

Visitor Expenditure ▪ A program of visitor surveys conducted during this study and based on market norm prices for paid VIP experiences, it is estimated that the visitor expenditure from Ipswich residents within QPNC will increase to $1.73 million. This tremendous increase in expenditure can be mainly attributed to introducing paid VIP experiences into QPNC.

Estimating the future economic impact from visitation from outside the Ipswich Council area Modelling of potential economic impact has been based on a series of assumptions:

1. Timing of Masterplan Implementation ▪ A 3.5 -year construction timeline is assumed, beginning in 2020/2021 and finishing in 2024/2025. In addition to the improved infrastructure, facilities and amenities, enclosures and animals it is envisaged that there will be a number of paid experiences in the QPNC that will create an additional revenue stream inside the park.

20 Based on the projected population, by local government area, Queensland, 2016 to 2041 medium series (ABS, 2018) Page 50 of 63

2. Additional Experiences ▪ The visitor survey included questions regarding future planned paid experiences in the QPNC. From the information regarding how likely visitors would participate at certain proposed paid experiences a list of seven experiences was identified that were most popular among the current visitors. Furthermore, a price was estimated for each of these seven future paid experiences taking into account how much current visitors would be willing to pay for each experience and market prices for similar experiences in Australian Zoos (such as Lone Pine, Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary, Australia Zoo, Adelaide Zoo, …). The table below details the experiences and estimated prices for the additional future revenue stream.

Table 5 – Estimation of future paid experiences and prices

3. Base visitor numbers ▪ Base visitor numbers for determining tourism impact (excludes local residents) is 63,617 and assuming the share of total visitors to Ipswich would stay around 3.37% in the following years, the escalated visitors to the QPNC in 2024/2025 is estimated to be 68,549. This visitation number has been taken as the basis to estimate the visitation growth after the completion of the Masterplan in 2024/2025.

Table 6 – Number of people visiting Queens Park outside of the Ipswich Council area escalated from the current visitation (Forecasted tourism growth from TFC, National Forecast Table 2017)

Page 51 of 63

4. Case study analysis as the basis for determining growth

Based on QPNC’s size, location, brand promise and operating model, the following four operations were selected as being most closely aligned the master plans vision post-upgrade.

Competitor Distance from Distance Pricing Model Brisbane CBD from QPNC Ipswich Queens 39.6km (30- 0km Free entry (gold coin donations accepted) Park, QLD 45mins) (~0mins) Lone Pine Koala 12.4km 30.9km Daily: Adult-$42, Child-$25, Concession- Sanctuary, QLD (~22mins) (~33mins) $25, Family-$65-$88 & Yearly 96.7km Daily: Adult-$49.95, Concession-$39.95, Currumbin (~1hr, 11mins) 113km Child-$39.95, Family (2A+2C)-$149.95, Wildlife Sanctuary, *21.4km from (~1hr, Family (2A+3C)-$172 QLD* the Gold Coast 25mins) Daisy Hill Koala 28.2km 48.6km Free entry Centre, QLD (~33mins) (~52mins) Daily: Adult $23.50, Child (4 to 17 years 90km inclusive) 10.70 (under 4 years) $5.90, (~1hrs, 106km David Fleay Wildlife Concession $15.50, Family (2 adults, 2 15mins) (~1hrs, Park* children) $60.50 Annual Pass - (Adult, Child, *15.8km from 19mins) Concession, Family) $47.15, $21.55, $31.20, the Gold Coast $120.10 Table 7 – Case studies identified for this report

QPNC Location

QPNC’s potential for future growth is influenced by its beneficial location in close proximity to Brisbane. In 30-45 minutes drive by car visitors could travel from Brisbane CBD to the QPNC.

Map 1 – Proximity of QPNC to Brisbane CBD (Google Maps)

Page 52 of 63

Potential growth assumptions of visitation

Using data obtained through desktop research and staff interviews revealed information regarding both the pre-upgrade visitor numbers, and post upgrade increase experienced immediately after the major works occurred. These have been detailed in the table below:

Case scheduled Proposed Implementation Visitation Visitation Growth Study works start investment timeline pre- post- date upgrade upgrade David January 2014 $1.2m 2 years 17,000 28,000 64.7% Fleay Wildlife Park Daisy Hill June $3.3m 4 months 65,000 161,200 148.0% Koala 2017 (Stage 1) Centre, QLD Table 8 – Information of investment and visitation growth case studies

Reviewing these two examples shows the potential of a $1m+ upgrade potentially resulting in an annual visitor growth rate of between 64.7% and 148%. Several key contributing factors should be noted however when considering these case studies:

▪ Both nature parks described in the case studies has a comparatively low base visitation level when compared to QPNC. Similarly, the facilities and experiences available pre-upgrade were limited. This low base and high injection of investment in these parks may have contributed to the immediate spike in visitor numbers. ▪ The Daisy Hill Koala Centre upgrade was scheduled to occur just before the 2018 Gold Coast Commonwealth Games. The added international visitation of this major event may have influenced the spike in visitor numbers due to the Centre’s close proximity to the Gold Coast. ▪ The investment in these parks is between $8.8m and $6.7m less than what is proposed for QPNC, the higher investment in QPNC may result in a higher growth rate in visitors.

On analysis of these case studies and when considering these factors, the QPNC growth potential of a $10m upgrade a stretch target of 106% visitor growth after the first year of completion has been assumed within this range. This represents the midpoint between both case studies and reflective of a $10m in a nature park of this size.

5. Visitor Participation Rates in Paid VIP Visitor Experiences ▪ Review of Tooronga, Monarto and Adelaide Zoos demonstrated that average visitor participation rates for VIP experiences was 23%. This average rate was taken as a reasonable basis for QPNC assumptions.

Table 9 – Indicative participation rates of Zoo visitors in paid experiences

Page 53 of 63

6. Estimating future visitation and expenditure

The visitation growth for visitors from outside the Ipswich Council area is based on identified case study (impact of investment in nature/wildlife-based attractions) ratios. The visitation from outside the Ipswich Council area for the first year after completing the upgrades is estimated to be 141,210 (106% growth applied) with 32,393 visitors participating at one of the paid experiences (23%). For each of the following years (FIY 2025/2026 – FIY 2044/2045) the growth rate of the TFC, National Forecast Table 2019 was applied.

Table 10 – application of a 106% growth rate to the visitors in 2024/2025

Table 11 – Estimated future visitation and participation at experiences (TFC, National Forecast Table 2019)

Visitor Expenditure ▪ A program of visitor surveys conducted during this study and based on market norm prices for paid VIP experiences, it is estimated that the visitor expenditure from visitors from outside the Ipswich Council area within QPNC will increase to $2.14 million. This tremendous increase in expenditure can be mainly attributed to introducing paid VIP experiences into QPNC. ▪ The total additional expenditure (outside the centre) in the Ipswich economy by visitors from outside the Ipswich Council area who attended QPNC is estimated to increase from $2.5 million (FIY 18/19) to approximately $5.54 million (FIY 24/25).

For the expenditure from visitors from outside the Ipswich Council area, the projected visitation numbers were used to calculate the expenditure for each year until FIY 2044/2045. The resulting estimated revenue (see appendices E and F) has been utilised as a key input into Cost Benefit Analysis

Page 54 of 63 calculations (detailed in the next section). Moreover, the revenue estimations were used to model the economic impact for each year using economy.id modelling of economic impact.

Estimated Economic Impact the year of completing the QPNC upgrades For the estimation of total economic impact for the upgraded QPNC, again, only expenditure inside the Ipswich Council area from visitors coming from outside the Ipswich Council area is taken into account.

Total Economic Impact within the Ipswich Council area

Direct impact within the Ipswich Council area FIY 18/19 FIY 24/25 (upgraded QPNC) $2.81m of output $7.69m of output $1.22m of value-add $3.31m of value-add 20 jobs (rounded) 54 jobs (rounded) Direct, industrial and consumption impact FIY 18/19 FIY 24/25 (upgraded QPNC) $4.65m of output $12.77m of output $1.97m of value-add $5.40m of value-add 25.5 jobs (rounded) 70 jobs (rounded) Table I. Comparison total economic impact within the Ipswich Council area FIY 18/19 and FIY 24/25 (upgraded QPNC) Economic Impact for Queensland and Australia

The increased economic activity generated from the upgraded QPNC within the Ipswich council area has the potential to increase the positive effect on the wider Queensland and Australian economy, which is estimated in the following.

Direct, industrial and consumption impact in Queensland FIY 18/19 FIY 24/25 (upgraded QPNC) $4.65m of output $15.72m of output ($12.77m of output within Ipswich + $2.95m additional output), $1.97m of value-add $6.73m of value-add ($5.40m of value-add within Ipswich + $1.33m additional value-add) 25.5 jobs (rounded) 82 jobs (rounded) (70 jobs within Ipswich + 12 additional jobs) within Queensland Direct, industrial and consumption impact in Australia FIY 18/19 FIY 24/25 (upgraded QPNC) $4.65m of output $17.93m of output ($15.72m of output within Queensland + $2.21m additional output) $1.97m of value-add $7.77m of value-add ($6.73m of value-add within Queensland + $1.04m additional value- add) 25.5 jobs (rounded) 88.5 jobs (rounded) (82 jobs within Queensland + 7 additional jobs) within Australia)

Page 55 of 63

Table II. Comparison total economic impact within Queensland and Australia FIY 18/19 and FIY 24/25 (upgraded QPNC)

Cost benefit Analysis Additional to the economic impact estimations discussed previously that have been done via input- output modelling, a cost-benefit analysis was conducted to reveal if the $9.9 million investment into the QPNC upgrades would be overall economic and social beneficial for the Ipswich Council area.

The Cost Benefit Analysis is solely based on visitation and expenditure from outside the Ipswich City Council area. The common economic assumption underlying this approach is that only expenditure from outside the Council area brings an additional economic benefit to the area. Modelling Approach Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) is an analytical tool used to inform decisions regarding complex investment projects. A CBA has advantages over other modelling techniques (like an Economic Impact Assessment), in that a CBA seeks to measure not just the net benefits but also the net costs of a project. Equally, through a CBA framework, it is possible to measure multiple costs and benefits derived from a project.

This CBA was carried out using a discounted cashflow (DCF) approach to analyse all costs and benefits that would occur if the project were to proceed. In this sense, two scenarios were considered, a baseline (‘without the project’) scenario and a ‘with the project’ scenario. The CBA considered the effect of real costs and benefits, which excludes inflation, taxes or subsidies.

The geographic boundary for this assessment is the Ipswich City Council local government area.

In a CBA framework, decisions are made based on two criteria; net present value (NPV) and the benefit cost ratio (BCR). The NPV shows the difference between the present value of all future benefits and all future costs. The BCR is calculated by dividing the present value of future benefits by the present value of the future costs. In such a manner a project is deemed ‘desirable’ if the NPV is positive and the BCR is above ‘1’. In general, if the NPV is negative and the BCR is below ‘1’, the project is deemed as undesirable as the future costs will outweigh the future benefits. Definition of Costs and Benefits The timeframe for this assessment is 20 years, which is the useful life of the infrastructure and assets created by the project.

The following costs and benefits have been considered:

Costs

• Capital costs • Maintenance costs • Operating costs

Benefits

• Operating revenues • Tourism benefits

Capital costs have been estimated by VEE as highlighted in the Queens Park Nature Centre & Discovery Hub Master Plan. Operating costs have been estimated using historical analysis of actual operating costs, which have been adjusted to account for the new experiences, accounting for

Page 56 of 63 labour, materials and plant and equipment usage. Maintenance has been estimated by Council based on historical evidence of maintenance on Queens Park.

Operating revenues have been estimated using future anticipated sales of food and beverage on site, which has been based on historical analysis of actual outcomes. Future tourism benefits are based on the survey conducted of actual visitors to Queens Park and their expenditure within the local economy (outside of Queens Park). Both future revenues and tourism benefits are based on anticipated future demand, which has been based on analysis of historical data as well as analysis of various case studies and broader visitation data for these types of assets across Australia.

Wherever possible actual historical data has been used as well as results of the visitor survey, so as to best represent future potential outcomes.

Capital Costs As highlighted in the Master Plan, the redevelopment of Queens Park is expected to cost $10 million (ex GST).

Project Stage Costs (ex GST) Stage 1 $3,353,507 Stage 2 $1,066,579 Stage 3 $3,880,838 Stage 4 $1,299,130 Stage 5 $304,032 Total $9,904,086 Table 18: Queens Park Redevelopment Capital Expenditure

Maintenance Costs Maintenance costs have been estimated by Council to be $25,000 per year, based on evaluation and analysis of past maintenance costs.

Operating Costs Operating costs have been estimated by Council through analysis of historical data and estimates (based on this historical analysis) of future anticipated operating costs (post expansion).

Operating Revenues Future operating revenues are based future expenditure of visitors for food and beverages available on site as well as future anticipated ticketed experiences. Prices for future ticketed experiences has been based on similar type of experiences in other similar attractions. Food and beverage expenditure has been based on the visitor survey and existing visitor expenditure patterns.

Tourism Benefits Tourism benefit have been estimated based on existing visitor expenditure patterns (outside of Queens Park), which have been derived from the visitor survey. This expenditure in Ipswich (outside of Queens Park) has been calculated based on the future net increase of visitation to Queens Park after the redevelopment (which has been based on the case study analysis). Only the direct gross value added of this expenditure has been used as this value accounts for input costs and net of taxes, thereby focusing on only the net increase in value from the increase in visitation.

Page 57 of 63

Costs Description Assumptions Source Costs Capital Capital required to develop and Expenditure deliver the redevelopment $9.90 million VEE (2018) $1.03 million in the first year, Operating Increased costs associated with escalated based on future Ipswich City Costs operating the expansion visitor growth Council (2019) Increased costs associated with the Ipswich City Maintenance maintenance of the expanded Park $25,000 per year Council (2019) Benefits Increased revenues generated onsite $2.14 million in the first year, Operating from ticketed exercises as well as escalated based on future Visitor Survey, Revenue food and beverage sales visitor growth EarthCheck Increased visitor expenditure in $2.42 million in GVA terms, Ipswich from the anticipated in the first year, escalated Visitor Survey, Tourism increase in visitation (post the based on future visitor EarthCheck, ID Benefits redevelopment) growth Consulting Table XX: Definition of Costs and Benefits, Queens Park Redevelopment Results The results of the CBA for the Queens Park Redevelopment are highlighted in the following table.

Discount Rate (4%) Discount Rate (7%) Discount Rate (10%) Benefits Operating Revenue $29.37 $23.14 $18.72 Tourism Benefits $33.42 $26.34 $21.31 Total Benefits $62.79 $49.48 $40.04 Costs Capital Costs $9.49 $9.14 $8.81 Operating Costs $14.18 $11.18 $9.04 Maintenance Costs $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 Total Costs $23.69 $20.33 $17.87 Net Present Value NPV $39.10 $29.15 $22.16 Benefit to Cost Ratio BCR 2.7 2.4 2.2 Table XX: Present Values of Costs and Benefits, 2020 – 2043 ($m) At the selected real discount rate of 7% for this project, the analysis yields a Benefit to Cost Ratio (BCR) of 2.4 meaning that it is economically desirable and provides a net benefit. Even at the higher discount rate of 10%, the project still yields a positive NPV and BCR. At 7% discount rate, for every $1 in costs associated with the project, there are $2.43 of benefits.

Under the baseline scenario (without project scenario), none of the identified benefits would be captured nor any of the costs incurred. As such, the scenario with the project provides positive economic and social benefits.

Community Benefits of Implementing the Master Plan The social benefits of zoo and animal-based tourism have been widely documented both in Australia and internationally. As explored previously in this report, an upgrade to the Queens Park Nature Centre would likely not only create opportunities for additional visitor spend and wider economic

Page 58 of 63

impact within the City of Ipswich but also contribute significantly to community placemaking, activation and educational outcomes.

Based on the scale of facility outlined in this concept, and review of similar types of facilities Social opportunities available from successful development and operation of an upgraded QPNC could include:

• Upgrade and expansion of a highly valued community facility which provides the opportunity to grow understanding and awareness of environmental, conservation and cultural issues. • Activation provides the opportunity to grow participation in outreach and research programs. • With appropriate language and programming content, there is an opportunity to reach out to priority community groups. • Contributing to overall quality of life, liveability and civic pride. • Providing the opportunity to build an active volunteering community. • School and university engagement.

Environmental Outcomes With a strong environmental focus, potential benefits and outcomes include: • Growing awareness, understanding and appreciation of the environments and wildlife that are on residents’ doorsteps. • Showcasing the best of Ipswich’s native flora and fauna. • The centre can create a new vehicle for partnerships and engagement with community groups – for instance Karawatha and IndigiScapes have provided hubs for partnerships with art and conservation organisations in their respective areas. • Acting as a hub/focal point for other environmental programs.

Challenges While this type of impact is speculative at this stage, and requires the QPNC as a whole to be successful in driving new leisure day visits, it does demonstrate the role that a new facility such as a nature centre can play in building overall leisure appeal for Ipswich residents.

As previously noted, the opportunity to develop the centre on a fee-charging/ ticketed model is challenging. Factors to consider include;

▪ There is a clear differentiation in the market. At one end, are large commercial visitor attractions who deliver high quality experiences, with ticket prices ($50+), reflecting the level and quality of experience. The majority of SEQ animal-based experiences are at the opposite end of the market – most public-sector education or discovery centres currently in the market operate on a free entry model. As such, competing as a commissionable or fee charging visitor attraction is likely to challenging, especially in the initial period of operation. ▪ Where local people are a target audience alongside visitors, as demonstrated in visitor survey responses, free entry continues to be important consideration. Community and environmental objectives would be difficult to meet if the Centre operated on a ticketed basis. ▪ To enable any park retail or food and beverage operations be viable as standalone operations and attractive to commercial partners, free access is needed. Operating on a ticketed basis would reduce visitor flow/ numbers considerably. ▪ To warrant a ticketed entry fee, the level of experience required would require significantly larger investment in the building size and depth of visitor experiences. It is highly likely that the scale of development required would require a range of partners and external funding, potentially including State or Commonwealth partners.

Page 59 of 63

It is recommended that the most appropriate balance would be achieved by the Centre operating on a freemium model, with free entry and charging for events, VIP experiences or particular experiences (exhibitions etc.) where market demand demonstrates that income would be sufficient to offset costs and/or generate a surplus.

Page 60 of 63

Funding options

As business propositions, with the exception of the largest, iconic tourism attractions (such as Australia Zoo), nature centres such as QPNC tend to be public sector investments that deliver on a range of policy outcomes, with operational strategies based around generating income which minimises net investment or operating costs.

Stakeholder feedback from the community has indicated a desire to keep the core QPNC experience as cost free, with this view currently mirrored by Council. As explored in the sections above, Council are open to moving to a “freemium” model with premium education and leisure experiences offered at cost, as an additional form of income to offset operational costs. Outside of Council, other potential sources of funding that may be available to fund both capital investment and ongoing operational costs could include: ▪ External grants; ▪ Operating partnerships; ▪ Additional commercial development which would generate rental income; ▪ Philanthropy and donations; and ▪ Co-sharing of the building with partner organisations or other Council functions.

Each of these opportunities face their own advantages and limitations, expanded on below. External Funding and Support Typically, public sector grant funding is a strong option for financing capital expenditure projects, however less applicable to off-setting ongoing operation expenditure. Equally important is the alignment of the project to the relevant funding stream, ensuring eligibility and in often cases, the ability for Council to either provide match funding or produce a compelling case for exemption.

EarthCheck’s review of current grant regimes, indicates that external funding opportunities are likely to be limited in the short term.

Building Better Regions Fund (BBRF) is the most common source of federal source of grants which can support tourism infrastructure grant programs, providing that projects can show clear economic and community benefit. In the case of QPNC, the park’s location in central Ipswich makes demonstrating economic impact in the BBRF-eligible parts of the City challenging. Significant evidence would need to be provided of the flow-on effects benefiting the communities surrounding Ipswich that fall within the eligible zones – based on evidence gathered during this study, it is believed that given the competitive nature of BBRF, the opportunities to develop a successful grant application would be limited. Round 4 of the fund, which opened November 2019, also has a prerequisite to support drought-impacted communities, which may further limit the competitiveness of a central Ipswich-based grant application.

The Attracting Tourism Fund (ATF) is the only major Queensland Government tourism infrastructure grant program currently live in market that may align with QPNC. Projects which meet the objectives of the ATF must fall into one of the following categories:

• Catalytic products, experiences and infrastructure projects

• New or expanded international access projects.

Projects must be capable of significantly increasing international overnight visitation, expenditure and jobs for Queensland and also demonstrate long-term benefits to Queensland. The upgrade or extension of existing infrastructure will only be eligible where the project can demonstrate a significant increase in tourism benefits to Queensland. Page 61 of 63

While aligning with the objectives of this fund are within QPNC’s scope, the strong focus generating new international visitation will require a strong business case to be made.

Grant regimes evolve on an ongoing basis, and with the next Queensland state election due to take place in October 2020, it is reasonable to assume that new experience support programs may be confirmed, therefore it is important to review opportunities on an ongoing basis. It is likely that similar economic fundamentals will apply around new visitation, expenditure and support for jobs. Operating partnerships Environmental/educational nature centres rarely operate as fully commercial enterprises. In the majority of cases, venues are developed and managed directly by the public sector – national park agencies and local governments are often the leading players. Where enterprises are run as not-for- profits or contract managed by private companies, frequently it is the public sector has made the initial capital investment via grant aid. During the development of this report for example, stakeholder feedback from the National Trust of Australia (Queensland) revealed a desire to explore partnerships surrounding the management of the QPNC. With the Trust already successfully managing Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary and open to negotiating entry fee subsidies for Ipswich residents, this opportunity may be key to a long-term management solution for Council beyond the initial capital investment and construction period.

Other operating partnerships could include the education section, particularly research-based agreements with Universities or technical colleges. A Journal Article by V, Beri et al. (2010) highlights that while zoos are not unique places of conservation and scientific research, larger zoos undertake research that supports broader scientific endeavours and support research. With conservation and climate research also a major focus area of research institutions, an education partnership with a University partner may be another opportunity. Expansion of the endangered bilby breeding program or incorporation of a Koala hospital for example may be an opportunity for investigation. Additional commercial development Depending on tenue and land use regulations, investigating the opportunity for leased commercial opportunities within QPNC may be another funding opportunity available for Council’s consideration. With QPNC’s central Ipswich location and high current visitor numbers, the park has the potential to be attractive investment opportunity for a range of commercial purposes including retail, other tourism experiences etc. Philanthropy and donations Key to many community assets that are unable to compete financially is an added reliance on philanthropy. With QPNC currently operating in this space is should be considered whether added focus in this area is required. Investment in a fulltime fundraising officer as part of the QPNC upgrade could for example provide the necessary return on investment to fund the ongoing management of park facilities. Expansion of the “Sponsor an Animal” concept, which garnered relatively high interest by survey respondents, could be achieved through a targeted social media campaign or increased marketing investment. Co-sharing of the building with partner organisations or other Council functions Designed more as a cost saving initiative rather than a revenue generating activity, Council could consider incorporating additional office space into the centre upgrade and leasing this to Council staff and partner agencies. This opportunity should however be met with caution to minimise the potential for development of a false economy, should Council eventually move locations again in the future.

Page 62 of 63

Reference list

Brisbane Marketing (2019) Brisbane Visitor Economy Vision 2031 [online] Available at: https://www.choosebrisbane.com.au/invest/visitor-economy-2031?sc_lang=en-au

Business.qld.gov.au. (2019). Exhibiting animals in Queensland | Business Queensland. [online] Available at: https://www.business.qld.gov.au/industries/farms-fishing-forestry/agriculture/exhibiting-animals/exhibiting- animals-qld [Accessed 27 Nov. 2019].

Community development Branch Community & Cultural Services Department (n.d.). Community Crime prevention and safety plan. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Department of Environment and Science (2018). Annual Report 2017-2018. Queensland Government, pp.22-79.

Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning (2019). Shaping SEQ South East Queensland Regional Plan 2017. Brisbane: Queensland Government.

Department of National Parks, Sport and Racing (2015). Best Practice Ecotourism Development Guidelines. Queensland Government.

Department of Tourism, Major Events, Small Business and the Commonwealth Games (2016). Queensland Ecotourism Development Toolkit. Queensland Government.

Ipswich City Council (2015). Advance Ipswich. Ipswich.

Ipswich City Council (2015). Ipswich Nature Conservation Strategy 2015. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Ipswich City Council (2015). Nature Conservation Strategy. Ipswich: Ipswich.

Ipswich City Council (2016). City of Ipswich Open Space and Recreation Strategy. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Ipswich City Council (2017). Annual Report 2017–2018. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Ipswich City Council (2017). Economic and Workforce Development Plan 2018-2019. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Ipswich City Council (2017). Health and Amenity Plan Managing compliance to achieve positive outcomes for the Ipswich community 2018-2019. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Ipswich City Council (2017). Our community: Demographic profile of Ipswich (2016). Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Ipswich City Council (2018). City of Ipswich Destination Management Plan. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Ipswich City Council (2018). Parks and Reserves Guide. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Ipswich City Council (2019). City of Ipswich 2019–2020 Budget at a Glance. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Ipswich City Council (2019). City of Ipswich Sustainability Strategy. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Ipswich City Council (n.d.). 5 Year Corporate Plan 2017-2022. Ipswich.

Ipswich City Council (n.d.). 2018-2019 Operational Plan. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Ipswich Integrated Water Management (2015). Integrated Water Strategy 2015-2031. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Ipswich Integrated Water Management (2015). Ipswich Integrated Water Strategy. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Pearce, J., Wright, J., Stroud, P. and Urbanowicz, S. (2018). Queens Park Nature Centre and Discovery Hub Master Plan. Ipswich: Ipswich City Council.

Seto, J. (2004). Queens Park Ipswich. Australian Garden History, 16(3), pp.4-8.

Tribe, A. (2001). Captive Wildlife Tourism in Australia. WILDLIFE TOURISM RESEARCH REPORT SERIES: NO. 14. CRC Sustainable Tourism

Page 63 of 63

Appendix A: Case Studies Case studies were utilised to survey industry leaders to provide an indication of best practice techniques utilised by successful operations within the industry. By understanding the techniques utilised by these leaders, they can be incorporated into forecasting impacts to provide a more robust and accurate representation of the scale and type of impact the Centre will have once fully operational.

This report has two sections:

1. Best Practice – Case Studies most relevant to QPNC – Key examples of infrastructure upgrades at comparable nature park operations and the associated effects on visitation. 2. General Case Studies – More detailed general case studies on Queensland Nature Centre/ Wildlife Park’s. These also include any relevant pricing information and key Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats.

Best Practice – Case Studies most relevant to QPNC Aside from a review of Ipswich’s current and future visitor market and conducting an analysis of national and State zoo tourism trends, another method for estimating the potential impact of an upgrade to QPNC is through best practice competitor analysis.

Best practice case studies were developed to explore successful and comparable operations, highlighting the specific elements and price structures utilised in the management of these facilities. Identifying these elements will help create an informed understanding of the scale and type of impact the Centre could expect post upgrade.

Competitor Set Based on QPNC’s size, location, brand promise and operating model, the following four operations were selected as being most closely aligned the master plans vision post upgrade.

Competitor Distance from Distance Pricing Model Brisbane CBD from QPNC Ipswich Queens 39.6km (30- 0km Free entry (gold coin donations accepted) Park, QLD 45mins) (~0mins) Lone Pine Koala 12.4km 30.9km Daily: Adult-$42, Child-$25, Concession- Sanctuary, QLD (~22mins) (~33mins) $25, Family-$65-$88 & Yearly 96.7km Daily: Adult-$49.95, Concession-$39.95, Currumbin (~1hr, 11mins) 113km Child-$39.95, Family (2A+2C)-$149.95, Wildlife Sanctuary, *21.4km from (~1hr, Family (2A+3C)-$172 QLD* the Gold Coast 25mins) Daisy Hill Koala 28.2km 48.6km Free entry Centre, QLD (~33mins) (~52mins) Daily: Adult $23.50, Child (4 to 17 years 90km inclusive) 10.70 (under 4 years) $5.90, (~1hrs, 106km David Fleay Wildlife Concession $15.50, Family (2 adults, 2 15mins) (~1hrs, Park* children) $60.50 Annual Pass - (Adult, Child, *15.8km from 19mins) Concession, Family) $47.15, $21.55, $31.20, the Gold Coast $120.10

Research into the above case studies has particularly focused on examples of planned upgrades to visitor experiences where visitation data exists both pre and post the scheduled works. Examples that potentially align to the proposed Nature Centre upgrade include:

- David Fleay Wildlife Park: The park released a Master Plan in 2014 which proposed a total of around $1.2 million in upgrades to the park. As of 2019 the majority of these initiatives have been successfully implemented. The proposed upgrades included: ▪ Increased signage ▪ An upgraded amphitheatre ▪ New native animal experiences including new or upgraded Koalas, Kangaroo and Crocodile enclosures ▪ A pontoon to allow visitors to arrive via ferry (not yet completed) ▪ Expanded educational programs and visitor attraction strategies resulting in a 13% growth in visitor numbers1

- Daisy Hill Conservation Area: In April 2018 Daisy Hill Koala Centre successfully completed a $3.3m upgrade of its Koala Centre which included: ▪ Upgraded enclosures which can accommodation additional koalas ▪ Upgraded visitor facilities and audio-visual equipment ▪ A 790 metre disability friendly path and wheelchair accessible barbecue

Potential growth assumptions Using data obtained through desktop research and staff interviews revealed information regarding both the pre-upgrade visitor numbers, and post upgrade increase experienced immediately after the major works occurred. These have been detailed in the table below:

Case scheduled Proposed Implementation Visitation Visitation Growth Study works start investment timeline pre- post- date upgrade upgrade David January 2014 $1.2m 2 years 17,000 28,000 64.7% Fleay Wildlife Park Daisy Hill June $3.3m 4 months 65,000 161,200 148.0% Koala 2017 (Stage 1) Centre, QLD

Reviewing these two examples shows the potential of a $1m+ upgrade potentially resulting in an annual visitor growth rate of between 64.7% and 148%. Several key contributing factors should be noted however when considering these case studies:

▪ Both nature parks described in the case studies has a comparatively low base visitation level when compared to QPNC. Similarly the facilities and experiences available pre-upgrade were limited. This low base and high injection of investment in these parks may have contributed to the immediate spike in visitor numbers.

1 Department of Environment and Science 2018-2019 Annual Report (web) available at: https://www.des.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0030/92784/annual-report-2018-19.pdf

▪ The Daisy Hill Koala Centre upgrade was scheduled to occur just before the 2018 Gold Coast Commonwealth Games. The added international visitation of this major event may have influenced the spike in visitor numbers due to the Centre’s close proximity to the Gold Coast. ▪ The investment in these parks is between $8.8m and $6.7m less than what is proposed for QPNC, the higher investment in QPNC may result in a higher growth rate in visitors.

On analysis of these case studies and when considering these factors, the QPNC growth potential of a $10m upgrade a stretch target of 106% visitor growth after the first year of completion has been assumed within this range. This represents the midpoint between both case studies and reflective of a $10m in a nature park of this size.

General case studies of comparable parks Case Study 1: Lone Pine Koala Sanctuary, QLD

“World’s First and Largest Koala Sanctuary”

Overview

Lone Pine Koala Sanctuary is located 12km from Brisbane City and has 130 koalas, making it the world’s first and largest koala sanctuary. Additionally, it is home to 100 species of Australian native wildlife. You can hold koalas, hand feed kangaroos, in addition to meeting a wide variety of Australian wildlife, “in a beautiful and natural setting”.

Location 708 Jesmond Rd, Fig Tree Pocket QLD 4069

Opening 9am-5pm every day, including all QLD public holidays (ANZAC Day/25th April: 1:30- Hours 5pm) Tickets Daily Passes: • Adult - $42 • Child - $25 • Concession - $25 • Family (2AD + 3CH) - $88 • Mini Family (1AD + 3CH) - $65 Yearly Passes: • Adult - $70 • Child - $50 • Concession - $50 • Family (2AD + 3CH) - $185 • Mini Family (1AD + 3CH) - $145 *Plus, yearly pass members benefits, such as discounts for guests, souvenirs & food/drinks, subscriptions to e-newsletters with exclusive specials & event invites, etc. Visitor In 2018, ~250,000 visitors/year from around Australia and the world. Numbers PAID Koala Opportunities: Experiences • Meet a Koala – stand next to koala, held by Wildlife Officer (FREE) • Hold a Koala – start at $25/person & include professional printed photograph & high-resolution download • Wild Encounter: Koala – start at $120/person & includes holding a koala & learning about the species during a 45-minute experience, with limited places (i.e. only 6 guests/encounter) FREE Daily Daily Schedule: Interactive Shows and Activities: Shows & • Wild Lorikeet Feeding: 9:45am & • Hand-feed kangaroos & wallabies: Activities 4pm 9am-4:30pm • Barn Animal Encounter: 10am • Hand-feed lorikeets: 9:45am & 4pm • Free Flight Raptor Show: 10:30am & • Sheep Dog Show: 11am, 1pm & 12:30pm 3:30pm • Sheep Dog Show: 11am, 1pm & • Free Flight Raptor Show: 10:30am & 3:30pm 12:30pm • FREE ‘Meet a Koala’: 11-11:30am • Raptor Hold & Professional Photo: • Koala Keeper Talk: 11:30am &2pm 10:45am & 12:45pm • Snake Photos: 12pm • Snake Hold & Professional Photo: • Snake Keeper Talk: 1:30pm 12pm • FREE ‘Meet a Koala’: 1:30-2pm • Platypus Keeper Talk: 2:30pm • Tasmanian Devil Keeper Talk: 3pm

Map

Getting Located 12km from Brisbane City: There • Which is about a 15-minute drive; • Taxi: ~ $4.40 + $2.17/km • Public Bus: ~ $1.32-$28.90 • River Cruise: o Mirimar boat cruise: “Mirimar II” going for 75-minutes OR “Koala Express” going for 35-minutes: ▪ Return trip & park entry: Adult - $80, Concession - $65, Children - $48, Family (2 adults & up to 3 children) - $220 ▪ One-way: Adults - $66, Concession - $52, Children - $48, Family - $220

History

Opened in 1927, Lone Pine Koala Sanctuary initially acted as a safe refuge for sick, inured and orphaned koalas, when they were being culled for the trade of fur. This safe refuge was founded by Claude Reid, who knew something had to be done to protect one of Australia’s most iconic species. Selling Points

Positive Change:

Lone Pine invites both domestic and international visitors to not only see native Australians animals, but to also connect and learn, leaving them feeling inspired to make small yet positive changes in their daily lives to help protect the native wildlife and habitats in their own backyards.

They are committed to maximising positive environmental and social impacts of their operations, through ways such as:

a) Water & energy efficiency, b) Biodiversity, c) Communication; and

d) Planning

In addition, they cooperate with their employees, suppliers and customers to set a new standard in “environmental wildlife management”, which contributes to building a “stronger Lone Pine and a safer, cleaner more sustainable Australia”.

Sustainability:

Lone Pine have created a Green Team who research and evaluate their environmental impacts and work towards minimising this through changes to resource consumption, such as:

a) Energy: geothermal power, solar power, water, building design and procedural changes b) Waste: recycling coffee cups (such as the “tip, slip & slip” initiative) c) Transport d) Green Shop

Social Initiatives:

Lone Pine have also created a set of social initiatives to help them engage with the local community and uses these opportunities to promote sustainability practices and conservation

a) Supporting local businesses b) Celebrating good workmanship c) Knowledge is sharing d) Enhancing lives of local community e) Volunteer programs f) Donations

Research:

Lone Pine conducts various internal and collaborative projects across multiple filed, such as: wildlife, plants, visitor studies and education. Some specific examples include:

a) Wildlife Research: Koala, Mary River Turtle & Reptiles to Captivity b) Visitor Evaluation: Exhibit signage and Digital signage c) Brisbane Koala Science Institute was a $2 million Brisbane-council funded research institute developed at the Sanctuary

“World-class science and research facility” which includes “two full-time research staff, a research laboratory, and a ‘Koala Biobank’ (koala frozen tissue repository)”, which works to enhance collaboration with the science community through the facility’s meeting spaces, seminar hall and library.

Awards/Recommendations/Certifications/Accreditations:

“At good wildlife organisations guests experience happy, healthy animals and engaged staff. Guests can support conservation and enjoy educational opportunities”.

“We hope you also:

a) Don’t just see animals, but meet them b) Connect emotionally with nature c) Experience habitats d) Understand that protecting habitats is protecting wildlife e) See and hear information relevant to you and your part of the world f) Share your memories #lonepinekoala”

Excursions:

Both excursions and education programs are available for domestic kindergartens, primary schools, high schools and vacation care centres.

Program are available to international students who book via a domestic school; for international students who are not booking through a domestic school, need to email booking enquiry. Main Challenges

Koalas, Chlamydia and Culling:

Chlamydia (which potentially originates in livestock) spreading to areas south of Brisbane, which led scientists to begin to consider culling as necessary in infected populations. However, primarily due to development pressures (such as habitat loss and fragmentation), koalas in Queensland, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory have been listed as vulnerable under federal law.

Reluctant to change food sources:

Their love of “Manna Gums” means they will stay in those bare trees rather than moving and adapting to another species. “Koalas keepers [from San Diego Zoo] consider them complex and sometimes challenging… with a wide range of personalities and attitudes. Their sole sustenance is eucalyptus, making them hard for many zoos to keep, but perfect for zoos who are compatible to growing the trees.

Transferring koala joeys to surrogate Mum’s pouch:

Marsupials are different from other mammals, as they are born a foetus and thereby complete their development in the pouch rather than the womb, which they can stay in for up to 6 months. Lone Pine performed potentially an “Australian-first medical procedure”, whereby they transferred a 2-day-old koala into the pouch of a surrogate mother; while it was highly risky, it saved that baby koala’s life.

A study conducted by the Animal Welfare Science Centre at the University of Melbourne found that “koalas displayed to the public are disturbed by noisy and up-close encounters with human visitors; the more visitors within a 5m radius of the koalas, the more vigilance behaviour koalas displayed, which puts them in an alert state”; the louder the noise, the more likely koalas interrupted their normal daytime activity and adopted vigilant posture”.

So, what can be done about this? Rangers can attempt to minimise disturbances through the adoption of different visitor management strategies. “Balance needs to be achieved between visitor experience and education on one hand and animal welfare on the other”.

Overseas transfer of koalas:

Previous attempts to initiate self-sustaining koalas’ populations overseas (or even outside of their original habitat) has been significantly unsuccessful, with one of the major contributing factors being

inbreeding, However, when the “Conditions for the overseas transfer of koalas” and the approval according to “species management principles”, it has become much more successful, safe and sustainable. Additionally, it is the careful preparation and close communication channel between the (Australian) exporter and the importer which have led to these successes.

a) Proximity to Brisbane River, such as runoff of rubbish, fertilisers, etc. b) Heat spikes – Lone Pine like several other Queensland Zoos have challenges associated with severe heat wave conditions during Queensland Summers. This added stress affects many of the animals including the large flying fox population located within the sanctuary.

Relevance to Queens Park:

• Added incentives for entering a yearly membership rather than simply a daily one • Potential for a city cat (public transport) to go to the terminal where the more expensive boats also go – however this might also increase competition and take away business for this company who have an alliance with the Sanctuary • Research opportunities (even by external bodies) within the facility – even the potential to apply for funding for a research facility dedicated to a significant species in the area (as Lone Pine has done for koalas) • International students needing to book via domestic school or needing to email directly to book: potential for enhanced direct partnerships with international educational facilities • No real mention of what the Sanctuary is doing to preserve Indigenous Knowledge – potential for educational link between Scientific and Indigenous Knowledge, especially with the native animals and plants

Case Study 2: Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary, QLD

Overview

Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary has conserved native wildlife and nurtured local indigenous heritage for more than 70 years. As a “regional treasure” it has educated and entertained families and tourists from around the world. Therefore, the “animal attraction” has been at the core of Gold Coast’s history, offering the iconic wild rainbow lorikeet feeding in addition to providing a home to an extensive range of “big, small, flourishing and endangered” native Australian animals.

Location 28 Tomewin St, Currumbin QLD 4223

Opening 8am-5pm daily (excluding Christmas & ANZAC Day) Hours Tickets General Admission: • Adult - $49.95 • Concession - $39.95 • Child - $39.95 • Family (2A+ 2C) - $149.95 • Family (2A+ 3C) - $172 1 Year Membership: • Single: o Adult - $75 o Concession - $65 o Child - $65 • Household: o Household - $229 o Household Concession - $189

Visitor • Over 500,000 in 2016/17 Numbers • 25,442 students (2.6% increase since 2015/16) • Achieved a profit of $169,393 to budget of $170,803 FREE Shows • Wildskies Free Flight Show: 11:20 & 2:30 & Times • Lorikeet Feeding: 8am & 4pm • Blinky Bill’s Studio Adventure: From 9:30am • Big Fang Theory: 10:45am • Australiana: 10:45am & 2pm • Crocodile Behaviours Show: 1pm • Aboriginal Dance Show: 3:30pm PAID • Koala Experience - $49 Encounters • Koala Photo - $29/photo & • Koala Nursery Experience - $59 Experiences • Capybara Encounter - $39 • Cotton-Top Tamarin Encounter - $45 • Dingo Encounter - $29 • Echidna Encounter - $29 • Possum Encounter - $29 • Dingo Walk - $39 • Behind the Scenes - $15 • Bird Training - $29

• Segway Safari (including admission): Adult - $69.50, Concession - $65, Child - $62.50 • Treetop Challenge: Adult - $69, Concession - $59, Family (2A+2C) - $230 • Wildlife Hospital Tour - $500 (includes entry, 1/day, up to 4 people) Map

Getting • Traveling by car: dedicated carpark with fees applied ($10 parking goes to There supporting Currumbin Wildlife Hospital) • Alternative free street parking • Bus transfers (no pricing available)

History

The beginning of Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary was first by beekeeper and flower grower, Dr. Alex Griffiths, who wanted to find a way to protect his “prized blooms”. By feeding the lorikeets, he was able to distract them from their previous source of nectar and floral quarters to wombaroo nectar with honey. He then went to open the “Currumbin Bird Sanctuary”, which quickly became one of the Gold Coast’s most popular family attractions. The “farmed model railway” attraction was constructed in 1964, growing the Sanctuary’s animal diversity. In 1989 the Currumbin Wildlife Hospital was founded and remains today. Finally, the Currumbin Wildlife Hospital Foundation was initiated in 2010 to support the rising demands placed on the hospital, aiming to raise $1 million each year to treat and research wildlife.

Selling Points

Trusts/Certifications/Associations/Hospitals:

Conservation: a) Conservation Projects: participates in 16 conservation projects to help save species from extinction, such as the Bilbies, Tasmanian Devils, Koalas and Cassowaries b) Research Projects: belief that “prevention is better than cure”, thereby collaborating with universities of the Gold Coast to participate in vital research, to help save animals such as koalas and the endangered Long-beaked Echidna of Papua New Guinea from extinction c) Conservation Plan 2019-2025: provides an overview of current contributions to vital conservation projects, vision and goals; “Make every effort towards wildlife conservation and ensure that our children have the opportunity to see wildlife” – Alex Griffith 1973 (founder of Sanctuary).

Wildlife Hospital:

The hospital works to treat, rehabilitate and release sick, injured and orphaned native wildlife. It admits more than 11,000 animals each year, which is a service provided to the community free of charge.

Education: a) Education Excursions: experiences for primary, secondary, tertiary and ESL groups, with a link to the Australian Curriculum (such as lessons plans being available online); additionally, “Wildlife in Wheels” can travel to P-12 groups – contact for pricing b) Community Courses: Aussie Wildlife Course, Advanced Aussie Wildlife Course, Insight into Vet Nursing, Australian Mammals: Our Backyard Buddies, Animal Training and Conditioning, Cooking on Country: Food Adventure and Planting for Wildlife: prices range from $325-$350 c) School Holiday Programs: Wild Adventures, Themed Days, Mini Adventures and Inclusive Adventures: prices range from $15-$55.

“Get Involved”: a) Adopt an Animal: donation assists in care, feeding and release of native animal: Bilby - $50/year, Echidna - $100/year, Wombat - $150/year, Koala - $200/year; b) Volunteering: three long-term volunteering programs to support the Sanctuary and/or the Wildlife Hospital operations: Park Volunteer, Wildlife Volunteer Program, Hospital Volunteer c) Memberships: National Trust Membership which can be used at this and other listed destinations around Australia and the world.

Container Refund Scheme:

This “reverse vending machine” will assist the Sanctuary to decrease the number of containers that would otherwise go into general waste

a) The machine is Queensland’s first commercial container refund scheme b) It helps both increase environmental awareness, such as through recycling, and provides the public with an opportunity to make a conscious individual choice to achieve a community level goal

c) Furthermore, the funds raised from the scheme will be fed back into the Sanctuary’s sustainability initiatives. Main Challenges

Queensland Government’s translocation policy:

a) Current policy: koalas can only be translocated 5km from where they came from and is only allowed to be done if it involves a scientific research program b) Issue: only being allowed to translocate 5km easily puts them back in dangers, i.e. 5km is not far enough, meaning they are still being exposed to risks such as people, dogs and cars; however, if a policy is changed there will be additional risks exposed, such as further koala habitat destruction; furthermore, according to Currumbin Wildlife vet, translocation should only be used as a last resort. • Cost to treat koalas with chlamydia: a) It costs $7,000 to treat a koala, then if they recover from the infection and need to be kept at the hospital for roughly 6-8 weeks. a) An additional challenge to this is maintaining the supply of suitable eucalypt leaves, which is made worse as koalas from different areas are brought in who favour different eucalypt species as their main diet. b) In 2018, the hospital admitted 10,000 patients, with only 2 vets and 18 nurses working 7 days/week, placing a significant pressure on them. c) Overall, to run the Sanctuary is highly costly, with growing financial pressure of injured animals and expanding conservation activities – article interviewing local car rental company who are encouraging the local community and businesses to recognise the fundamental non-profit work that the Sanctuary does, and how to support it through ways such as direct donations, adopting animals, donation of castoffs (such as old towels, sheets or wetsuits – which are used to make anaesthetic masks), corporate partnerships, and of course endorsing and recommending the Sanctuary to others. Relevance to Queens Park

• Option at bottom of page for different languages opens opportunity for international visitors to understand information site, thereby encouraging them to visit • Accessibility Statement: “suitable access for our guests, whatever their individual needs may be” – allowing equality of access • Inclusion of “Aboriginal Dance Show”: however, there is also potential to expand on this in ways such and the incorporation of Local Indigenous Knowledge into native animal and plant exhibits • Parking fee contribution to conservation: charging a price so people don’t take advantage of the parking spaces but making the most of this charge by feeding it back into conservation • Option to “Adopt an Animal”: an indirect way for locals and tourists to have a positive impact, which allows them to feel as though they are making a positive contribution while not needing to directly interact with the animals (minimising potential stress placed on the animal from the alternative) • Container Refund Scheme: a Queensland first initiative, which has various environmental benefits, such as reducing waste to landfill and the creation of additional funding for further environmental initiatives in the Sanctuary

Case Study 3: Daisy Hill Koala Centre, QLD Overview

Daisy Hill Koala Centre is situated amongst 435ha of open eucalypt forest, exhibiting a large outdoor koala enclosure and numerous interactive displays, it centres its operations around learning about koalas and their conservation. Known to be a popular “bushland retreat for people”, the area is not only home to koalas but also to many other native animals.

Location Regional Park, 253 Daisy Hill Rd, Daisy Hill QLD 4127

Opening 9am-4pm daily (except Christmas Day, New Year’s Day and Good Friday) Hours Tickets Free entry Visitor In 2018, 400,000 visitors to the Daisy Hill conservation area/year, 65,000 visited the Numbers koala centre. More than 60% of locals visit the park each month, thereby being highly valued by its locals. Experiences • Daily Wildlife Officer talks: Wildlife Officers deliver talks daily at 11am & 2pm, which provide information about koalas and their conservation;

• Private talks: Centre staff additionally deliver “koala-focused” talks to schools & groups within the Centre *To attend a Wildlife Officer talk or enquire about a private talk, a booking form needs to be completed • Two different level viewing boardwalks *Visitors are not able to handle or pat the koalas • “Fun and informative displays” in the centre, allowing visitors to learn more about them, in addition to: o Short films in the “Woodland Theatre” o Koala’s life cycle & biology o Signs & symptoms of sick or injured koala o Contribution to koala conservation o Queensland government contribution to their conservation o Other Queensland species Maps

Getting By car (instructions given on website) There

History

The centre was originally built by the Queensland Government to be a dedicated koala education facility. It was opened to the public in 1995, significantly refurbished in 2009 and most recently in 2018. Selling Points

• Located in the Daisy Hill Conservation Park • Have recently undergone $3.3 million upgrades, which according to the Environment Minister Leeanne Enoch, will improve “visitor experience” and “boost the centre’s capacity to house koalas’ long term”. • Visitors are not able to handle or pat the koalas: which is good because it doesn’t cause the koalas any stress (as indicated in the previous case study) however it takes away a significant selling point

to the centre – the opportunity to directly interact and form a personal connection with the animals, which might lead to a willingness to contribute to their conservation • Use of drones to enable koala monitoring and population assessment, to ultimately safeguard their long-term survival and sustainability.

Main Challenges

• In 2016, when Logan City Councillor Graham Able visited the Centre with some overseas visitors, he said it was “an embarrassment”” – “there was only one live koala in the enclosure and a stuffed koala”; “If council is fair dinkum (about tourism) it needs to pressure the (State) Government to get more koalas”, such as bringing koalas from the Redlands to Daisy Hill to prevent them from being killed on roads – but is it really that easy? (Referring to the points made in the previous case study about the challenges surrounding relocating koalas) a) Mayor Pam Parker agreed that more facilities cold be developed to make “a more touristy destination” however Cr Lisa Bradley noted that carparking would need to be addressed before any further developments (as it currently spills out to neighbouring streets) (and then potentially a café) b) The inclusion of more facilities would ensure the area appeals to a broader audience c) Significant research involving the community was being undertaken to determine a balance between recreation and conservation; opportunity to grow local economy through tourism related koala centre visitation and outdoor recreation activities. Relevance to Queens Park

• Ramp access to all areas except the “Treetops Tower” a) “Springwood MP Mick de Brenni (ALP): “first of Queensland’s national parks to include a 790-meter disability friendly path and wheelchair accessible barbecue”. ▪ Potential to transfer this idea to Queens Park upgrade to allow for equity of access • “Traditional owners of the land… were engaged to oversee the work, which was part of the Daisy Hill Koala Bushland Coordinated Conservation Area Management Statement”. a) Good example of how Traditional Owners can be incorporated into the planning and management of the upgrade • Varied uses for the conservation area, such as mountain biking, horse riding, picnic area, BBQ facilities, walking tracks, on a “shared-trail” network. • Appeals to a wider audience meaning that some people who come to visit may be not actually be coming to see the koalas however might notice them and become interested in them while they are there – this indirect target audience are able to be more influenced than those purposely coming to see the koalas, as koala conservation might not presently be on their agenda prior to visiting

Case Study 4: Billabong Sanctuary Townsville

Overview

Billabong Sanctuary Townsville is a family-owned and operated business, which is committed to ensuring “every visitor receives personal attention”. They dedicate themselves to conservation, education and entertainment, which is evident in the past, present and future operations.

Location 11 Country R, Nome QLD 4816

Opening 9am-5pm every day of year (except Christmas Day) Hours

Tickets Entry Prices: • Adults - $38 • Children - $25 • Family (2A + 3C) - $110 a) Additional Child - $22.50 • Pensioners - $35 • Seniors/Students - $35 • Backpackers - $35 • LOCALS OFFER: a) “Bring in 2 out of town adult visitors and 1 local adult get FREE entry to equal or lesser value!” • Annual Membership: a) Family (2A+ 5C) - $175 b) Family (1A + 5C) - $135 c) Additional child (same family) - $33 d) Adult - $75 e) Child - $50 Visitor In 2018, their visitation numbers had increased by 5%, getting approximately 150 on Numbers an average day and then about 250 on a busy one – which equates to approximately 54,600/year. Experiences FREE Interpretive Shows, Feeding & Handling: PAID: • Showcasing Australia’s unique animals., • Pose with Koala on Pole - including: $15 o Cassowaries • Holding Koala Photo - $30 o Koalas • Wombat OR Reptile - $24 o Wombats • Multiple Photos/Animals - o Crocodiles $44-$54 o Lizards • Personal Croc Feeding - $99 o Snakes • Freshies Croc Feeding - $10 o Parrots • Exclusive Wildlife o Birds of Prey Experiences - $100 o Dingoes Maps

Getting • Driving - easy to find (about 17kms south of Townsville) There • Taxi - ~$60 one-way (4 passengers) or ~$90 (10 passengers) – encourages visitors to get together with friends or fellow backpackers to share the cost • Bus Transfers – McMillians Bus Charters Townsville picks-up and drops-off passengers from places all around Townsville: Adult - $65, Child - $45, Backpacker/Student - $60, Aus. Pensioner/Senior - $60, Family (2 adults, 3 children) - $180 • Crikey Trikey Joy Rides - $70 one-way OR $130 return, for one or two people

History

The idea of the Sanctuary was established more than 30 years ago, when couple Bob and Del Flemming “dreamed about building their own wildlife park” and “establishing a sanctuary for native animals in their natural habitats”. In addition, previous teacher Bob realised that he could have a much greater impact on educating students about conservation than in a classroom. They worked very hard over the years to build the Sanctuary from ground up, including their collection of animals. It was opened to the public in 1985 and have continually added animals to their collection over the years. Selling Points

Award-winning Eco-Tourism Attraction:

They are now recognised as “fully accredited Advanced Ecotourism Attraction”, have welcome approximately 1 million visitors, with various other awards, such as the 2007 Queensland Tourism Award for best Tourism Attraction.

Main Challenges

Cyclone Yasi Hammered the Park:

Forcing them to close for 10 weeks to re-build; although, this created a positive opportunity to “give the park a facelift”, with the support from the local community also other wildlife parks. However, no animals were lost in the storm.

Animal Attacks & Associated Media Coverage:

In 2016, a Sanctuary crocodile bit its owner on the arm, which sparked significant media coverage on the topic and prompted questions surrounding how and why they are kept in captivity. Relevance to Queens Park

• “Local Offer”: smart incentive to not only encourage local but also non-local visitors to Sanctuary • Discounted backpacker entry fee: encourages people not from the area (i.e. tourists) to visit the Sanctuary • Encourages car/taxi-pooling: which is both environmentally friendly and encourages backpackers (i.e. tourists) to come along • Natural disaster prone-developments: need to have plans in place to ensure impacts from natural disasters are avoided, minimized or responded to in an efficient manner

Potential for paid experiences Based on case study analysis, it was found that there are opportunities for a range of paid or VIP experiences as part of the QPNC offering. Most animal-based visitor attractions whether paid or free entry offer these sorts of experiences.

Paid experiences will typically involve behind the scenes experiences, and meeting holding animals, and learning about animal husbandry in a private viewing, rather than public.

Examples of experiences include a Wild Encounter (meet and hold a koala, learning about the species during a 45minute experience for $120pp.). Additionally, opportunities exist for paid experiences through photo opportunities ($29 per photo), Segway tours ($69.50 per adult) and wildlife hospital tours ($500). Paid experiences typically involve getting involved with a unique animal, exposing the participant and educating the specifics of a species.

Typical selling points of similar attractions were identified as creating positive change, sustainability, research, social initiatives, excursions, education and getting involved. Selling points such as these provide added incentives for entering a yearly membership rather than single day pass.

More specifically, creating positive change invites domestic and international visitors to connect and learn, leaving them inspired to make small, yet positive changes in their daily lives or perspectives on protecting native wildlife and habitats within their own backyard.

Sustainability was a selling point as it demonstrates the operation is evaluating their environmental impact and work towards minimising resource consumption, encouraging visitors to undertake or become more educated on how they can do the same and experience a feeling of conserving intrinsic assets. Internal research such as this may be furthered through wildlife research, visitor evaluations and the development of a research institute. Furthermore, social initiatives are utilised to:

▪ Support local businesses; ▪ Celebrate good workmanship; ▪ Facilitate knowledge sharing; ▪ Enhance community liveability; and ▪ Collect donations

Educational excursions provide an opportunity to package the experience for various groups including, primary, secondary, tertiary and ESL groups. Examples of excursions include community courses, school holiday programs and curricular education excursions. Getting involved is an important aspect of the selling points of the experience as it is often how people engage with the attraction that sets it apart. Subsequently, getting involved may be encouraged through ‘Adopt an Animal’ programs (donations to assist in the care, feeding and release of an animal), volunteering and memberships.

Findings of the best practice case studies further revealed some of the main challenges when establishing a similar operation. main challenges identified include:

• Meeting the requirements for keeping the animals and ensuring they are treated properly for any medical conditions. • Transportation of animals. • Adhering to government legislation and policy (Queensland Government’s translocation policy). • Provision of adequate animal exhibits. • Natural disasters. • Animal attacks and associated media coverage.

Appendix B: Survey Question Transcripts (Online & in person)

Please see the following pages.

Nature Centre (Queens Park) Visitor Experience and Expectation Survey Introduction Welcome

EarthCheck on behalf of Ipswich City Council, would love to gather insights and feedback about your experiences and perceptions of the Queens Park Nature Centre to help inform our planned initiatives and future development.

This survey will take approximately 15 minutes to complete.*

As a thank you for your valuable time, at the completion of the survey, you will have the opportunity to go into the draw to win 1 of 10 double passes to an upcoming Nature Centre Animal Encounters Experience!

*Your responses will be used solely for research purposes. Your responses are anonymous and your personal information will be kept confidential and in accordance with the Information Privacy Act 2009 and Council's Privacy Statement.

1 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Visitor Experience and Expectation Survey The Queens Park Nature Centre Experience

1. How often do you visit the Queens Park Nature Centre?

Once a week Once a year

Once a month First time visitation

Once a quarter

2. In which Month and Year did you visit Queens Park Nature Centre

Month Year Date

3. When was your most recent trip to Queens Park Nature Centre (hereafter your trip)?

On a weekday

On a weekend

2 4. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, whom did you travel with?

Alone

With partner/spouse

With kids

With friends/relatives

Other (please specify)

5. The Queens Park Nature Centre was the sole reason for your travel to Ipswich?

Yes

No

3 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Visitor Experience and Expectation Survey

6. If visiting Queens Park Nature Centre is not your primary reason for visiting Ipswich, please indicate the main reason for your visit.

A holiday

Visiting friends and relatives

Doing business

Other (please specify)

4 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Visitor Experience and Expectation Survey

7. Which of the following reasons motivated you to visit the Queens Park Nature Centre? (Please select all that apply)

A day out with family/friends Connection with nature

Exploring a new place Relaxing/refreshing

Escaping daily life Educational experience

Other (please specify)

8. Apart from the Queens Park Nature Centre, where did you visit during your trip? (Please select all that apply)

Sightseeing/looking around Ipswich CBD

Bushwalks/other nature-based activities

Culture-heritage based activities

Social activities (visit friends/relatives, eating/dining out, …)

I only visited Queens Park

Other (please specify)

5 9. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, how long did you spend at:

30 minutes to 1 Under 30 minutes hour 1 hour to 2 hours 2 hours to 3 hours 3 to 4 hours + The Nature Centre (hours): Queens Park (hours): Ipswich (not including your time spend in Queens Park or the Nature Centre) (hours or days if more than 24 hours)

10. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, what facilities did you visit? (Please select all that apply)

Nature Centre

Playground

Café

Environmental education Centre

Nerima Gardens

Bowls Club

Incinerator Theatre

Outdoor chapel

Lions Lookout

Council Nursery

Other (please specify)

6 11. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, which of the following items did you spend money on and approximately how much did you spend? (Please select all that apply)

Under $25 $25 to $50 $50 to $75 $75 to $100 $100 + Eating/drinking onsite (at Queens Park cafeteria) ($) Eating/drinking off-site in Ipswich ($) Shopping at Ipswich ($) Entry fee to local attractions ($)

Other (please specify)

12. On your trip to Queens Park Nature Centre, which of the following items did you spend money on and approximately how much did you spend?

$10 - $50 $50 - $100 $100 - $150 $150 - $200 $200 + Accommodation at Ipswich ($) Long-distance transportation (such as shuttle bus, regional trains, etc) Local transportation (such as bus, taxi, Uber, etc.) ($) Entertainment activities

Other (please specify)

13. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, to what extent did you agree with 7 the following statement about your experience? From 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree)

1 2 3 4 5 I saw native fauna from throughout the region I learnt more about the linkages between the fauna and local history

The displays reflected the natural habitats of the region well I was well informed about what to expect by the time I started the journey through the Centre I had a good view of animal displays Information about species was well presented and easily interpreted The animal exhibits were arranged in a logical experiential order

8 1 2 3 4 5 Facilities within the Nature Centre were accessible and clean

14. How satisfied were you with your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre?

Very dissatisfied Satisfied

Dissatisfied Very satisfied

Neutral

15. From the experience in your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, would you recommend the Nature Centre as a place to visit? And what is the main motivation for this answer?

Yes, mainly because... No, mainly because...

16. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, was there anything you think of that can be improved?

17. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, was there anything you would like to see further developed?

9 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Visitor Experience and Expectation Survey Expectations for a Future Visit to Queens Park Nature Centre Assuming you are planning to visit the Queens Park Nature Centre in the near future:

10 18. For the following experiences, how interested are you? How much time would you spend at the experience; and how much would you spend on the experience?

Level of Interest Time Spent Spend Educational Tours (including back of house tours, guided walks and wildlife encounters) Wildlife Encounters Animal Feeding

Animal Photo

Animal Live Streaming Animal Nursery Experience Be a Zookeeper for a day Educational Activities for Children Wine and Wildlife Evenings Life at Night Tours Function/ Events Space Hire Overnight Camps on special events Sponsor an Animal Other (please specify)

11 19. Do you have any other comments to help growth the Queens Park Nature Centre in future?

12 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Visitor Experience and Expectation Survey Demographic Information

20. Which of these age groups do you fall within?

16 - 19 50 - 54

20 - 24 55 - 59

25 - 29 60 - 64

30 - 34 65 - 69

35 - 39 70 - 74

40 - 44 75 and over

45 - 49

21. What gender do you identify with?

Female Gender variant/non-conforming

Male Prefer not to say

Transgender

22. What is your current place of residence?

In Australia, please specify your postcode If overseas, please specify the country name

13 14 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Visitor Experience and Expectation Survey Personal Information This section requests the interviewee's personal information. Please respectfully request they fill in the following section and hand them the survey device so they may answer the questions.

23. Are you currently:

Working full-time

Working part-time

Casual

Studying

Unemployed, or looking for work

Mainly undertaking home duties

Retired or on a pension

Other (please specify)

24. Which of the following best describes your current life stage?

Young single (under 35) Matured couple (35+), children have left home or no kid Mature single (35+) Parent with young children (under 15) Young couple (under 35) without kids living at home

Parent with children aged 15+ living at home

15 25. Which of the following annual household income bracket’s do you fall into?

$1 - $9,999 $85,000 - $99,999

$10,000 - $24,999 $100,000 - $114,999

$25,000 - $39,999 $115,000 - $129,000

$40,000 - $54,000 $130,000 - $149,000

$55,000 - $69,999 $150,000 - $199,000

$70,000 - $84,999 $200,000 and more

16 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Visitor Experience and Expectation Survey Thank you for your time participating in the survey! If you would like to enter the draw for your chance to win a Double Pass to an Animal Encounters Experience at the Nature Centre, please provide your best day time contact details below.

As mentioned, please be assured that all of the answers you provided will be kept in the strictest confidence. Any contact details you provide here will be kept separate to your survey responses, and will only be used to contact the winner of the prize draw.

26. If you wish to enter the prize draw, please enter your name and preferred day time contact method below (Terms and conditions for the prize draw can be found here):

Name

Email Address

27. Please tick the checkbox if you wish to subscribe to the Discover Ipswich Magazine.

Subscribe to Discover Ipswich Magazine

17 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Community Experience and Expectation Survey Introduction Welcome

EarthCheck on behalf of Ipswich City Council, would love to gather insights and feedback about your experiences and perceptions of the Queens Park Nature Centre to help inform our planned initiatives and future development.

The survey is being undertaken as part of an economic impact study required to see the Nature Centre upgraded with the support of State or Federal Government funding. While the Ipswich Nature Centre is the oldest and only free zoo in southeast Queensland it has had no major updates in more than a decade. The masterplan for the upgrade includes expanding the Nature Centre and creating a riverine and wetland area, forests, a nocturnal enclosure and backyard animal precinct. A koala and platypus enclosure are also part of the $9 million upgrade to keep pace with increased visitation.

This survey will take approximately 15 minutes to complete.*

As a thank you for your valuable time, at the completion of the survey, you will have the opportunity to go into the draw to win 1 of 10 family passes, valued at $30 each, to an upcoming Nature Centre Animal Encounters Experience!

*Your responses will be used solely for research purposes. Your responses are anonymous and your personal information will be kept confidential and in accordance with the Information Privacy Act 2009 and Council's Privacy Statement.

1 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Community Experience and Expectation Survey

1. Have you visited the Queens Park Nature Centre since last year?

Yes

No

2 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Community Experience and Expectation Survey The Queens Park Nature Centre Experience

2. How often do you visit the Queens Park Nature Centre

Once a week Once a year

Once a month First time visitation

Once a quarter

3. When was your most recent trip to Queens Park Nature Centre? (Hereafter your trip)

On a weekday or weekend? In which month and year? (MM/YY)

4. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, whom did you travel with?

Alone

With partner/spouse

With kids

With friends/relatives

Other (please specify)

3 5. The Queens Park Nature Centre was the sole reason for your travel to Ipswich?

Yes

No

4 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Community Experience and Expectation Survey

6. If visiting Queens Park Nature Centre not your primary reason for visiting Ipswich, please indicate the main reason for your visit.

A holiday

Visiting friends and relatives

Doing business

Other (please specify)

5 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Community Experience and Expectation Survey

7. Which of the following reasons motivated you to visit the Queens Park Nature Centre? (Please select all that apply)

A day out with family/friends Connection with nature

Exploring a new place Relaxing/refreshing

Escaping daily life Educational experience

Other (please specify)

8. Apart from the Queens Park Nature Centre, where did you visit during your trip? (Please select all that apply)

Sightseeing/looking around Ipswich CBD

Bushwalks/other nature-based activities

Culture-heritage based activities

Social activities (visit friends/relatives, eating/dining out, …)

I only visited Queens Park

Other (please specify)

6 9. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, how long did you spend at:

The Nature Centre (hours): Queens Park (hours): Ipswich (not including your time spend in Queens Park or the Nature Centre) (hours or days if more than 24 hours):

10. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, what facilities did you visit? (Please select all that apply)

Nature Centre

Playground

Café

Environmental education Centre

Nerima Gardens

Bowls Club

Incinerator Theatre

Outdoor chapel

Lions Lookout

Council Nursery

Other (please specify)

7 11. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, which of the following items did you spend money on and approximately how much did you spend? (Please select all that apply)

Eating/drinking onsite (at Queens Park cafeteria) ($) Eating/drinking off-site in Ipswich ($) Shopping at Ipswich ($) Entry fee to local attractions ($) Accommodation at Ipswich ($) Long-distance transportation (such as shuttle bus, regional trains, etc.) ($) Local transportation (such as bus, taxi, Uber, etc.) ($) Entertainment activities ($) Other (please specify) ($)

12. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, to what extent did you agree with the following statement about your experience? From 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree)

1 2 3 4 5 I saw native fauna from throughout the region

8 1 2 3 4 5 I learnt more about the linkages between the fauna and local history The displays reflected the natural habitats of the region well I was well informed about what to expect by the time I started the journey through the Centre I had a good view of animal displays Information about species was well presented and easily interpreted The animal exhibits were arranged in a logical experiential order Facilities within the Nature Centre were accessible and clean

9 13. How satisfied were you with your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre?

Very dissatisfied Satisfied

Dissatisfied Very satisfied

Neutral

14. From the experience in your most recent trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, would you recommend the Nature Centre as a place to visit? And what is the main motivation for this answer?

Yes, mainly because... No, mainly because...

15. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, was there anything you think of that can be improved?

16. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, was there anything you would like to see further developed?

10 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Community Experience and Expectation Survey

17. As you haven’t visited the Queens Park Nature Centre since last year, what are the main reasons? (Please select all that apply)

I am unaware of the facilities in this place

I visited the place a long time ago and haven’t been motivated to visit again

I am not interested in nature and wildlife attractions

I have better options for things to do elsewhere

Others (please specify)

11 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Community Experience and Expectation Survey Perception of the Queens Park Nature Centre

18. You associate the Queens Park Nature Centre with... (Please select all that apply)

A great place to visit with friends and relatives

An opportunity to view wildlife

An interactive learning experience on native habitats

A place where I can enjoy the great outdoors

Other (please specify)

19. To what extend to you agree with the following statement? From 1 (Extremely Disagree) to 5 (Extremely Agree)

1 2 3 4 5 I value the Queens Park Nature Centre as an important local facility The Queens Park Nature Centre become part of iconic Ipswich

12 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Community Experience and Expectation Survey Expectations for a Future Visit to Queens Park Nature Centre Assuming you are planning to visit the Queens Park Nature Centre in the near future:

20. How interested are you in the following experiences? From 1 (Least Interested) to 5 (Most Interested)

1 2 3 4 5 Back of House Tours Guided Walks Self-guided Digital Tours Wildlife Encounters Animal Feeding Animal Photo Animal Live Streaming Animal Nursery Experience Be a Zookeeper for a day Educational Tours (escorted by experts)

Educational Activities for Children

13 1 2 3 4 5 Wine and Wildlife Evenings Life at Night Tours Corporate Events Overnight Camps on special events Adopt an Animal

Other (please specify)

14 21. How long would you expect to spend at these experiences?

Under 30 Minutes 30-60 Minutes 1-2 Hours 3-4 Hours Over 4 Hours Back of House Tours Guided Walks Self-guided Digital Tours Wildlife Encounters Animal Feeding Animal Photo Animal Live Streaming Animal Nursery Experience Be a Zookeeper for a day Educational Tours (escorted by experts) Educational Activities for Children Wine and Wildlife Evenings Life at Night Tours Corporate Events Adopt an Animal

Other (please specify)

15 22. How much are you likely to spend on these experiences? (as an adult, before any concessions)

Free Under $20 $20-$40 $40-$60 $60+ Back of House Tours Guided Walks Self-guided Digital Tours

Wildlife Encounters Animal Feeding Animal Photo Animal Live Streaming Animal Nursery Experience Be a Zookeeper for a day Educational Tours (escorted by experts) Educational Activities for Children Wine and Wildlife Evenings Life at Night Tours Corporate Events Overnight Camps on special events Overnight Camps on special events Adopt an Animal (Monthly Fee)

16 Other (please specify)

23. Do you have any other comments to help growth the Queens Park Nature Centre in future?

17 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Community Experience and Expectation Survey Demographic Information

24. Which of these age groups do you fall within?

15 - 19 50 - 54

20 - 24 55 -59

25 - 29 60 - 64

30 - 34 65 - 69

35 - 39 70 - 74

40 - 44 75 and over

45 - 49

25. What gender do you identify with?

Female Gender variant/non-conforming

Male Prefer not to say

Transgender

18 26. What is your cultural background? (Please indicate which cultural background you most identify with)

Australian Vietnamese

Aboriginal South African

Torres Strait Islander Scottish

Both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Sudanese

New Zealander Fijian

English Dutch

Samoan Chinese

Indian German

Filipino

Other (please specify)

27. What is your current place of residence?

In Australia, please specify your postcode If overseas, please specify the country name

19 28. Are you currently:

Working full-time

Working part-time

Casual

Studying

Unemployed, or looking for work

Mainly undertaking home duties

Retired or on a pension

Other (please specify)

29. Which of the followings best describes your current life stage?

Young single (under 35) Matured couple (35+), children have left home or no kid Mature single (35+) Parent with young children (under 15) Young couple (under 35) without kids living at home

Parent with children aged 15+ living at home

30. Which of the following annual household income brackets do you fall into?

$1 - $9,999 $85,000 - $99,999

$10,000 - $24,999 $100,000 – $114,999

$25,000 - $39,999 $115,000 - $129,000

$40,000 - $54,000 $130,000 - $149,000

$55,000 - $69,999 $150,000 - $199,000

$70,000 - $84,999 $200,000 and more

20 21 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Community Experience and Expectation Survey Discover Ipswich Newsletter

* 31. Are you subscribed to the Discover Ipswich Newsletter? Please note: To be eligible for the prize giveaway, you must be subscribed to the Discover Ipswich Newsletter.

Yes

No

22 Nature Centre (Queens Park) Community Experience and Expectation Survey Thank you for your time participating in the survey! If you would like to enter the draw for your chance to win a Family pass, valued at $30 each, to an Animal Encounters Experience at the Nature Centre, please provide your best day time contact details below.

As mentioned, please be assured that all of the answers you provided will be kept in the strictest confidence. Any contact details you provide here will be kept separate to your survey responses, and will only be used to contact the winner of the prize draw.

32. If you wish to enter the prize draw, please enter your name and preferred day time contact method below (Terms and conditions for the prize draw can be found here):

Name

Email Address

33. Please tick the checkbox if you wish to subscribe to the Discover Ipswich Magazine.

Subscribe to Discover Ipswich Magazine

23 Appendix C: Survey Results Summary (Online & in person)

Queens Park Nature Centre Summary survey results report Reach 1,482 respondents

80% 20% 1,132 online¹ respondents 350 visitor² respondents

Online Visitor Place of residents Place of residents Overseas Overseas 2% 3%

Australia Australia 98% 97%

Australia Overseas Australia Overseas

¹online: Respondents to the online visitor survey distributed through a combination of Ipswich city Council database, Facebook marketing and local media ²visitor: Survey conducted in person by Council staff and volunteers within Queens Park Nature Centre Reach 1,482 respondents

80% 20% 1,132 online¹ respondents 350 visitor² respondents

Online Visitor Place of residents Place of residents Overseas 2% 4%1%1%

Overseas Australia 34% 60%

Australia 98% Very Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Australia Overseas Very Dissatisfied

¹online: Respondents to the online visitor survey distributed through a combination of Ipswich city Council database, Facebook marketing and local media ²visitor: Survey conducted in person by Council staff and volunteers within Queens Park Nature Centre DISSATISFIED

VERY VERY 3.50% SATISFACTION WITH QUEENS PARK NATURE CENTRE NATURE PARK QUEENS WITH SATISFACTION 1.35% DISSATISFIED

0.00%

0.68% NEUTRAL

Community Visitor 0.60%

3.90% SATISFIED 22.00%

33.61% VERY SATISFIED VERY

74.00%

60.47% Online reach

WHOM DID YOU TRAVEL WITH

56.69%

17.42%

11.17%

10.31% 4.42% 1.43% Whom did you travel with? travel you did Whom

13.14%

48.00%

30.29% Visitor reach

7.14% Place of residence (online respondents)

0.7% Overseas 25.6% outside Ipswich (98.9% from Queensland in total)

73.3% Ipswich 99.3% of the community respondents are from Australia, only 0.7% are from overseas.

0.1% Victoria n=1132 0.3% New South Wales Place of residence (visitor respondents)

3.1% Overseas 40.2% outside Ipswich (91.7% from Queensland in total)

51.5% Ipswich 96% of the visitor respondents are from Australia, only 3.1% are from overseas.

0.6% Tasmania

2.1% Victoria n=1132 1.5% New South Wales *0.9% did not specify their place of residence. Strengths

79% of those surveyed had visited Online Queens Park since the beginning of 2018 Over 94.2% of respondents to the online survey indicated they were either satisfied or very satisfied Have not visited in with Queens Park the last year 21%

Visitors Have visited in the last Over 95.9% of visitors surveyed year indicated they were either 79% satisfied or very satisfied with Queens Park Visitation

How often do you visit the Queens Park Nature Centre?

Community Survey Visitor Survey Strengths

99% of visitors interviewed would recommend the Nature Centre as a place to visit.

Most visited facilities for both Online and Visitor respondents:

The Nature Centre The Playground The Café

Community: 93.31% Community: 57.45% Community: 52.74% Visitors: 93.55% Visitors: 52.20% Visitors: 48.39% Other facilities

Environmental Nerima Gardens Bowls club Incinerator Theatre education centre

Online: 25.99% Online: 45.59% Online: 0.46% Online: 1.37% Visitor: 17.65% Visitor: 19.33% Visitor: 0.00% Visitor: 0.84%

Outdoor chapel Lions Lookout Council nursery

Online: 5.02% Online: 10.18% Online: 8.51% Visitor: 2.52% Visitor: 3.36% Visitor: 7.56% 71.59% A great place to visit with friends and relatives

79.53% An opportunity to view wildlife

Respondents associate the 51.74% An interactive learning experience on native Nature habitats Centre with:

59.06% A place where I can enjoy the great outdoors

6.82% Other Motivation to Visit Which of the following reasons motivated you to visit the Queens Park Nature Centre?

Community Survey Visitor Survey Expenditures

• Online respondents spent on average $20.67 on eating and drinking onsite (at Queens Park cafeteria) and an average of $28 on eating and drinking off-site in Ipswich.

• Online respondents mentioned several times that they also budget for a donation to the Nature Centre during their visit.

• Of the Visitor respondents 77% spent under $25 on eating and drinking onsite and off-site. 3.91% spent over $100 on shopping in Ipswich. How much would you spend on the experience? (Visitor)

Sponsor an Animal

Overnight Camps on special events

Function/ Events Space Hire

Life at Night Tours

Wine and Wildlife Evenings

Educational Activities for Children Free Under $20 Be a Zookeeper for a day $20 - $40

Animal Nursery Experience $40 - $60 $60+ Animal Live Streaming

Animal Photo

Animal Feeding

Wildlife Encounters

Educational Tours (including back of house tours, guided walks and wildlife encounters)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Most valued activities

Wine and Wildlife evenings Overnight Camps Life at Night tours

77.3% would likely pay 76.8% would likely pay 76.5% would likely pay for this experience. for this experience. for this experience.

20% would pay $40 - 30.4% would pay $40 - 8.2% would pay $40 - $60 $60 $60

4% would pay over $60 11.6% would pay over 1.2% would pay over $60 $60 Least valued activities

Animal Live Streaming Educational activities Animal Feeding for children

69.2% of 53.7% of 44.6% of respondents would respondents would respondents would expect this to be a expect this to be a expect this to be a free experience free experience free experience Interest levels in proposed activities How interested are you in the following experiences?

Sponsor an Animal

Overnight Camps on special events

Function/ Events Space Hire

Life at Night Tours

Wine and Wildlife Evenings

Educational Activities for Children Least Interested Not Interested Be a Zookeeper for a day Neutral Animal Nursery Experience Slightly Interested Most Interested Animal Live Streaming

Animal Photo

Animal Feeding

Wildlife Encounters Educational Tours (including back of house tours, guided walks and wildlife encounters) 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Most interesting activities

Wildlife Encounters Animal feeding Animal Nursery experience

Over 89.6% of Over 85% of Over 80.4% of respondents to the respondents to the respondents to the visitor survey visitor survey visitor survey indicated they are indicated they are indicated they are either slightly either slightly either slightly interested or most interested or most interested or most interested in this interested in this interested in this proposed activity. proposed activity. proposed activity. Least interesting activities

Function/Events space Animal live streaming Overnight camps on special hire events

23.9% of 19.6% of 17.1% of respondents to the respondents to the respondents to the visitor survey visitor survey visitor survey indicated they are indicated they are indicated they are least interested in least interested in least interested in this activity. this activity. this activity. On your trip to the Queens Park Nature Centre, was there anything you would like to see further developed? “Upgrade some of the animal enclosures. Some are a little small or could have things added to the environment in the cage to make it more appealing to not only the public but the animals themselves.”

“More interactive activities for the kids.”

“It would be good to see a larger variety of animals and a child friendly set of signs along with the informational signs.”

“Within the area maybe a better wet area for the kids, a few more obstacles for the kids or an update of equipment.” Evaluation of the comments Comments

”Interactive educational activities would be great.” “More animals”

“More maps of where you are within the habitat displayed “I would pay up to $25 to participate in a group photography inside the nature park in addition to the main gate.” workshop.”

“More trees in the park, more shaded areas.” “I would rather pay a one up inclusive price to all.”

“Keeping it free entry is a great idea.” “More animals in the unused enclosures.”

“More car park spaces.” “Staff to be able to have more knowledge of every animal.”

“Not necessarily free, but some options could be a small donation.” “More advertising to let people know it exists.” SWOT

 The main reasons community hasn’t  99% of visitors interviewed would visited the park last year is because of recommend the Nature Centre as a low awareness of the facilities in the place to visit. W place, no motivation for a second visit S  Most visited facilities for both or they have better options for things Community and Visitors are the Nature Weaknesses to do elsewhere. Strengths Centre, the playground and the Café.  96.9% of the visitors are from Australia, only 3.1% are from overseas.

 40.16% of the visitors will spend 1-2  High reliance on public funding in hours on Wine and wildlife evenings order to remain a free experience  76.8% of the respondents would likely  Changes in legislation regarding O pay for Overnight camps on special T keeping of native animals events Threats  Potentially unsustainable cost-benefit Opportunities  Respondents would like to see more ratio for the delivery of new paid interactive activities for children. experiences based on low interest.

Appendix D: Overall Ipswich Visitor Market Analysis

Visitors Over a five-year observation, visitors to Ipswich increased at an average of 13.2% per annum to reach nearly 1.9 million visitors in the financial year 2019. The growth of visitors to Ipswich surpassed that of Brisbane and Queensland during the same period (9.1% and 6.5% respectively).

Annual average growth of visitors to Ipswich, Brisbane and Queensland (FY2015-2019)

16.0% 14.2% 13.2% 13.2% 14.0%

12.0% 10.3% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% Daytrip visitors Domestic overnight Inbound visitors Total visitors visitors

Ipswich (C) Brisbane Queensland

Daytrip visitors were the most significant contributors to visitors flows to Ipswich (76%) as well as the fastest segment in term of visitor growth of the region (14.2% p.a. since the past five years). After a decline in FY2016 (-2.5%), daytrip visitors to Ipswich started increasing at 8.1% in FY2017, despite the overall decline of daytrip visitors in Brisbane and Queensland. The growth of daytrip visitors to Ipswich continued dramatically in FY2018 (21.8%) and FY2019 (22.1%).

Year on year growth of daytrip visitors to Ipswich, Brisbane and Queensland 25.0% 21.8% 22.1% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 8.1% 5.0% 0.0%

-5.0% -2.5% -10.0% 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 Ipswich (C) -2.5% 8.1% 21.8% 22.1% Brisbane 15.8% -4.7% 8.5% 17.4% Queensland 7.0% -4.1% 9.1% 12.6%

Domestic overnight visitors play a significant role to tourism economy of Ipswich, generating nearly half of tourism expenditure (44.8%) in the region in FY2019. During the period of FY2015-2019, domestic overnight visitors increased at an average of 10.3%, compared to 7.2% at Brisbane and 6.7% at the Queensland levels. Within this period, FY2018 experienced the highest year on year growth, at 41%, before slightly drop to 14.7% in FY2019.

Year on year growth of domestic overnight visitors to Ipswich, Brisbane and Queensland

50.0% 41.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 14.7% 10.0% 3.3% 0.0%

-10.0% -15.5% -20.0% 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 Ipswich (C) 3.3% -15.5% 41.0% 14.7% Brisbane 1.2% 11.1% 5.7% 8.2% Queensland 1.2% 5.3% 6.0% 12.2%

International visitors to Ipswich steadily increased since FY2017, with year on year growths in FY2017, 2018 and 2019 were 32.5%, 2.6% and 41.9% respectively. Overall, the annual average growth of this segment between FY2015 and 2019 was 13.2%, compared to 7,5% of Brisbane and 5.9% of Queensland.

Year on year growth of inbound visitors to Ipswich, Brisbane and Queensland

50.0% 41.9% 40.0% 32.5% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 2.6% 0.0% -10.0% -20.0% -20.8% -30.0% 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 Ipswich (C) -20.8% 32.5% 2.6% 41.9% Brisbane 9.5% 5.0% 9.3% 3.4% Queensland 10.9% 6.0% 5.3% 0.1%

Visitor Nights The number of visitor nights in Ipswich during the period of FY2015-2019 also experienced a growth of 3.4% p.a., but at a lesser degree than Brisbane and Queensland (4.6% and 5.3% respectively).

Annual average growth of visitor nights of Ipswich, Brisbane and Queensland (FY2015-2019)

8.0% 7.4% 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.4% 3.0% 1.5% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% Domestic overnight Inbound visitor nights Total visitor nights visitor nights

Ipswich (C) Brisbane Queensland

Domestic overnight visitor nights recorded an increase of 1.5% annually since FY2015. The growth of domestic overnight visitor nights in Ipswich fluctuate over the period.

Year on year growth of domestic visitor nights to Ipswich, Brisbane and Queensland Ipswich (C) Brisbane Queensland 12.7% 10.8%

9.1% 8.5% 7.2% 6.8% 5.6%

1.2% 1.3%

-1.9% -2.6% -4.7%

2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19

International visitor nights experienced a decline in FY2016 (-22.6%) and FY2017 (-7%), then increased remarkably in FY2018 (32.6%) and FY2019 (35.9%). Overall, this segment increased at 7.4% per annum since FY2015, higher than Brisbane (3.9%) and Queensland (2.4%)

Year on year growth of inbound visitor nights to Ipswich, Brisbane and Queensland

Ipswich (C) Brisbane Queensland 35.9% 32.6%

9.6% 3.6% 4.1% 3.2% 3.0% 1.0% 0.9%

-1.2% -7.0%

-22.6% 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19

Appendix E: Current Economic Impact

Economy.id modelling for the current economic impact

Appendix F: Estimation of future revenue

The following explains the estimation of revenue and economic impact taking the year 2026/27 as an example. The following calculations were undertaken for each year 2024/25 – 2044/45.

1. The future estimated visitation for 2026/27 is 144,593 visitors and the participation rate for the paid experiences are 33,169 participants.

2. To calculate the revenue generated from the paid experiences, the participation rate (33,169) was applied to the seven experiences, taking the share according to the visitor survey (increasing popularity of experience, increasing share). Then the number of participants get multiplied with the estimated price to calculate the revenue. The total revenue for 2026/27 from the paid experiences is $1,491,274. This figure will be used for the revenue generated inside the QPNC.

3. To calculate the expenditure of visitors in the Ipswich Council area, and inside the QPNC (Café), the estimated visitation for 2026/27 (144,593) get applied to the number of parties and average expenditure per party size according to the current spending pattern from the visitor survey. Revenue outside the QPNC is $5,674,695 and inside only for Food& Beverage (excluding experiences) is $703,796.

4. To calculate the expenditure categories, the revenue for inside and outside the QPNC gets applied to the current share for each category (information from the visitor survey). For inside QPNC, the revenue generated from the paid experiences gets added into the category “Arts & Recreation”.

5. The revenue per category is the input for the economy.id modelling of economic impact.