Community survey results Living with World Heritage Background and Highlights 2002/2003 Understanding community and visitor attitudes Survey highlights The Wet Tropics World Heritage Area covers an area of 1. Support for the World Heritage Area is steadily 900,000 hectares from Townsville to Cooktown in north increasing. Queensland. About 350,000 people live within 50km of 1992 51% strong support 17% oppose the World Heritage boundary, and an additional two 2003 58% strong support 12.4% oppose million people visit the region each year. 2. There is strong recognition of the quality of life The Australian Government’s listing of the World benefits from the World Heritage Area. Heritage Area in 1988 was met with hostility from the Queensland Government and many regional The most important advantages related to general communities, which lost access to timber and other quality of life issues, rather than actual visits or forest resources. In 1992, the Wet Tropics Management economic benefits. Authority was formed to oversee management of the 3. Perceived disadvantages are declining. World Heritage Area. Less than 20% of respondents identified The Authority’s role is to set policy and coordinate disadvantages associated with living near the World management of the World Heritage Area. It does not Heritage Area. directly manage land. About 80% is managed by the 4. The community is concerned about on-ground Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, while another management and consultation. 300 landholders manage the remaining 800 sq.km. One of the Authority’s goals is to foster community The community is not satisfied with the current understanding and support for the World Heritage standard of on-ground management. Feral pests and Area. In particular, it is charged with giving the World human activities are their greatest concerns. Heritage Area “a function in the life of the The majority of residents felt consultation and community”. communication between management agencies and In order to understand and assess community the community could be improved. attitudes, the Authority commissioned community surveys in 1992, 1993 and 1996 (AGB McNair). Issues for managers Neighbouring landholders were surveyed in 1999 (AC The surveys also highlighted the following issues that Nielsen). From 2001 to 2003, the Authority expanded require greater focus from the Authority and the land these studies to ensure community views would feed management agencies: into management of the World Heritage Area. The L The majority of residents believed they were latest research was undertaken by Dr Joan knowledgeable about the World Heritage Area, Bentrupperbäumer and Dr Joseph Reser from the but many are unaware of its boundaries and how Rainforest CRC and James Cook University. Their it is managed. findings are based on two surveys: L The differing roles of the Authority and other land L A visitor survey of over 2,500 visitors at 10 key management agencies is poorly understood. visitor sites in 2001 and 2002. L The community gave a mixed response to the L A community survey of 788 residents living in 70 issue of Aboriginal co-management of the World regional towns and suburbs in 2002 and 2003. Heritage Area. While 58% of residents were supportive, 42% were opposed. 2 Living with World Heritage Awareness and Support The community is very Why were the rainforests made a World Heritage Area? aware of the existence of the World Heritage Protection/conservation 46 Natural/geological 26 Area and strongly Preservation 15 Political 7 supports its Aesthetic 3 Community well being 2 protection. Residents Business opportunities 0.5 Indigenous/cultural 0.5 view the World 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percentage of responses Heritage Area as an integral part of their Further findings landscape, lifestyle L 93% of residents are aware that most of the rainforests in this region of north Queensland are part of a World Heritage Area. and community. L Over 82% indicated they are slightly / moderately knowledgeable about the World Heritage Area. Responses suggest a strong sense of I Importance of the World Heritage Area collective ownership and responsibility. Very important 54 Considerably important 23 Moderately important 10 Somewhat important 9 Slightly important 2 Not important 2 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percentage of responses Further findings L Participants from the southern Wet Tropics region (Cardwell to Townsville) felt the World Heritage Area was less important than northern participants. L There are regional differences in community attitudes. eg. Residents from the southern I Support for World Heritage listing Wet Tropics region (Cardwell to Townsville) recorded the lowest support for World Heritage listing. Strongly support 58 L Moderately support 20 There are age and gender Slightly support 10 differences. eg. The 12% of Slightly oppose 5 residents who still oppose Moderately oppose 2 the World Heritage Area are Strongly oppose 5 likely to be 50 to 60 year-old males who have lived in the 0 20 40 60 80 100 region for over 30 years and Percentage of responses live in rural or rural residential areas. 3 Living with World Heritage Advantages & Disadvantages Personal advantages Further findings Good to know it’s there, that it exists L The two most important personal advantages A quality living environment were related to quality of life, rather than Rest & Relax actual visits or use. Recreational opportunities Social opportunities L 75% felt these benefits were considerably/ Indirect economic opportunities very important. Direct economic opportunities L The two lowest rated personal advantages 123456 were indirect economic opportunities (eg. food Not Important Important outlets, accommodation) and direct economic opportunities (eg. tour operator, ranger). Community advantages Further findings Clean air & water L The most important community advantages Plant & animal protection relate to environmental protection and Scenic landscape protection associated benefits of the World Environmental awareness & knowledge Heritage Area. Economic opportunities L Once again, economic benefits were seen 123456 as less important, but nevertheless they Not Important Important were still rated moderately/considerably important. Over 80% felt there were no disadvantages. For the remainder the disadvantages were: 25 Further findings Rules, regulations, restrictions 17 L The main disadvantage in Political issues 5 Personal disadvantages 7 Community disadvantages 5 1996 was the loss of jobs Management issues 8 and damage to local 7 Infrastructure issues 3 economies (36%). 2 Industry, agriculture issues 17 23 Feral plants & animals, pests 12 11 “A wonderful Environmental issues 1 8 connection with Economic / employment issues 21 14 Community issues 14 nature, flora and 01020304050 fauna, sight Percentage of responses and sound.” 4 Living with World Heritage Threats I What are the three most serious threats to the World Heritage Area? Feral animals & plants, pests 31 Human activity within the WTWHA 28 Human activity outside the WTWHA 22 Management issues 7 Political issues 6 Other 4 Natural hazards / disasters 2 01020304050 Percentage of responses Further findings L The most frequently reported environmental threat was “feral animals and plants” followed by “human activity within the World Heritage Area”. L Over 50% of responses related to human activities. L The community perception is that the majority of threats are only being addressed to a slight extent. I What do you expect from the agencies responsible for World Heritage management? Protection / Conservation / Preservation 31 There is strong Maintenance / Care / Upkeep 16 Accountable / Effective management 15 concern for the well Education / Public relations / Promotion 12 Regulatory 7 being of the World Access 5 Resource management 4 Heritage Area. Infrastructure 4 Informed / Knowledgeable 2 Human impacts of Strategic management 2 Balanced management 1 development, rural 01020304050 Percentage of responses industries and feral species are matters of serious concern. I Are World Heritage attributes being adequately protected or managed? 100% 80% Further findings L Very few respondents believe World 60% Heritage attributes are being fully 40% protected or managed. L 20% Considerable or full extent Feral animals and weeds were Slight or moderate extent perceived to be the least well managed. 0% Not at all or very little Protecting Protecting Protecting Managing Controlling L The community is not satisfied with biodiversity scenic wetlands and feral animals weeds the current standard of on-ground landscapes waterways management. 5 Living with World Heritage Visits by residents When did you last visit the World Heritage Area? In the last 6 months 66 7 to 12 months 19 1 to 2 years 5 2 to 5 years 3 More than 5 years 7 020406080100 Percentage of responses How often do you visit? Every day 12 Every week 12 Every month 26 Every three months 50 020406080100 Percentage of responses “To chill out, cool down and Further findings be surrounded L 85% have visited the World Heritage Area. by nature” L More than 65% visited within the past six months. L 50% of the local community visit 1-4 times per year. Who are the visitors? L There are estimated to be 4.65 million visits each year to 100 of the World Heritage Area’s visitor sites. Many are repeat visits by local residents. L Regional residents were the main visitors making up 40% of the total numbers at most visitor sites. L The average visitor age was 36 years. Overseas visitors are significantly younger than local and domestic visitors. L The majority of visitors are travelling as families or small groups. L The busiest months are October, January and from May to a peak in August. Domestic Visitors 26% Residents 40% International Visitors 34% 6 Living with World Heritage Visits by residents I What was the main reason for your visit? Activity 56 Experience 36 Other 6 Educational 2 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percentage of responses L Activity: Recreation, sightseeing, camping, bush walking, swimming. L Experience: To have a break, rest and relax, admire, appreciate, enjoy the environment, to experience tranquillity.