Should we, as vegetarians, (some of us because of environmental issues), take care to preserve the fragile ecological systems that remain in endangered areas like tropical rainforests? Perhaps exposing groups of people to evangelize our cause is worth the possible damage that a tour group can create.
I will readily admit that most of these groups are quite vigilant about leaving the area of their tour undisturbed. On a past tour of the Puerto Rican rainforest, my husband was given a half-hour presentation regarding the care that should be taken while visiting the area. Tour members were instructed not to leave the marked path, to leave the vegetation and animal life undisturbed and to leave no trash or food debris in their wake. As an added precaution, the guides rechecked all areas where the tour had passed through.
The path itself was merely made of trampled dirt. The path in itself was a blemish in the otherwise pristine forest, but in as non-invasive a way as possible. The group was also instructed to have no contact with native animals other than visual. Even if the wait was long, they were told not to attempt moving any animal which crossed their path. I'm sure this was for their safety as well as for the animals'.
At one point in the tour, a footbridge was necessary to get the group across a stream. In an attempt to create a bridge that was the most harmonious with the surrounding vegetation, the construction was done with harvested materials from the forest itself. But is this really the least destructive tour method or is it just what the natives think urban tourists want to see? A rough hewn log bridge lashed together with vines is something out of an Indiana Jones film.
What if, by constructing the bridge, the guides had inadvertently allowed a crawling insect or small animal to the other side of the stream where it had never before been introduced? Could the seemingly-insignificant action of crossing a stream have irrevocably altered the balance of species on that side of the stream?
Go To Page: 1 2
