Posted on behalf of Dr Pat Whelan; Almost all national parks have some sort of recreation and tourism program in their management plan. Given the small size of the BNP and the large amount of Burren landscape that lies outside the BNP, I think that consideration should be to not having any mass tourism activities (a la Killarney) within the BNP at all. Instead, the BNP should work with local landowners on the already existing tourists routes (e.g. Cliffs of Moher to Black Head and Ballyvaughan) to develop areas of tourism/recreation outside of the BNP. In some cases these could be made for tourists of limited mobility or those not interested in walking too far and they would be “gardened” so as to feature the Burren flora at very close proximity. If there were archaeological or other features on the same patch of land so much the better. Other landowners might be persuaded to develop geological interpretation trails, Burren goat farms so much so that, just like Ailwee Caves and Poulnabrone Dolmen, there would be a whole series of “must see” centres that each display different elements of the Burren for most tourists of all ages who don’t want to get their shoes muddy in the 10 minutes that they get out of the car or bus at each site. This isn’t an easy thing to organise because it is impossible for the Park Authority to ensure the quality of the experience at each site but it may be possible to do so via some form of Badge of approval which is issued by the Park Authority a bit like the Michelin Restaurant stars that are issued to restaurants of high standard. Another alternative might be something along the lines of the Irish Tourist Board Approval system. Landowners would ask to be certified by the BNP and their enterprises would be listed on the BNP website as places to visit. The advantage of this system is that it allows locals to benefit financially from the conservation of the wider Burren landscape and that the heavy tourist traffic (most of whom have only a passing interest in the features of the Burren) would be kept away from the Park area itself, thus leaving the park authority to concentrate on conservation. The downside to this is that the BNP Authority would not have a revenue stream that arises from visitors at interpretation centres or cafes but the current size of the BNP is too small to take such a facility without major changes to the road access to the park. Another downside to this is that the BNP Authority would have little real control over what was done in terms of the tourism/interpretation facilities.
Posted on behalf of Pat Whelan - addition to the last comment;
The other option is for the BNP to develop the tourism/interpretation facilities itself but on the edge of towns so as to avail of sewerage, electricity, water and a good road network. In such a case the interpretation centre should not compete with the town for services such as restaurants, souvenir shops and accommodation. In such an arrangement the interpretation centre would be seen as a magnet to draw tourists into the town thus gaining goodwill from the local population. Three centres should be set up. Each of these would have two themes – one theme common to all three centres (ie exactly the same display) but the second theme would be specific to each centre in such a way that the only way to get an overview of the Burren NP would need to visit all three. The three most obvious special themes are Vegetation; Geology (inc Turloughs), and human history (Archaeology to present day). Ideally the centre that has Burren Vegetation as its theme would be installed on an area of limestone on a town boundary which could be gardened to include a range of the notable species. Similarly, the centre dedicated to human settlement would contain a replica of an archaeological feature that children could climb all over. The Geology would be established on an area of exposed limestone pavement on the boundary of a town. The cost of this latter idea is very considerable given that land needs to be bought and buildings constructed but it should at least avoid installing structures in the BNP and installing all the infrastructure that is needed. It will also achieve buy-in into the idea by locals who will see the BNP as an asset to the tourism in their area and their own businesses.
Posted on behalf of Dr Pat Whelan;
ReplyDeleteAlmost all national parks have some sort of recreation and tourism program in their management plan. Given the small size of the BNP and the large amount of Burren landscape that lies outside the BNP, I think that consideration should be to not having any mass tourism activities (a la Killarney) within the BNP at all. Instead, the BNP should work with local landowners on the already existing tourists routes (e.g. Cliffs of Moher to Black Head and Ballyvaughan) to develop areas of tourism/recreation outside of the BNP. In some cases these could be made for tourists of limited mobility or those not interested in walking too far and they would be “gardened” so as to feature the Burren flora at very close proximity. If there were archaeological or other features on the same patch of land so much the better. Other landowners might be persuaded to develop geological interpretation trails, Burren goat farms so much so that, just like Ailwee Caves and Poulnabrone Dolmen, there would be a whole series of “must see” centres that each display different elements of the Burren for most tourists of all ages who don’t want to get their shoes muddy in the 10 minutes that they get out of the car or bus at each site. This isn’t an easy thing to organise because it is impossible for the Park Authority to ensure the quality of the experience at each site but it may be possible to do so via some form of Badge of approval which is issued by the Park Authority a bit like the Michelin Restaurant stars that are issued to restaurants of high standard. Another alternative might be something along the lines of the Irish Tourist Board Approval system. Landowners would ask to be certified by the BNP and their enterprises would be listed on the BNP website as places to visit. The advantage of this system is that it allows locals to benefit financially from the conservation of the wider Burren landscape and that the heavy tourist traffic (most of whom have only a passing interest in the features of the Burren) would be kept away from the Park area itself, thus leaving the park authority to concentrate on conservation. The downside to this is that the BNP Authority would not have a revenue stream that arises from visitors at interpretation centres or cafes but the current size of the BNP is too small to take such a facility without major changes to the road access to the park. Another downside to this is that the BNP Authority would have little real control over what was done in terms of the tourism/interpretation facilities.
Posted on behalf of Pat Whelan - addition to the last comment;
ReplyDeleteThe other option is for the BNP to develop the tourism/interpretation facilities itself but on the edge of towns so as to avail of sewerage, electricity, water and a good road network. In such a case the interpretation centre should not compete with the town for services such as restaurants, souvenir shops and accommodation. In such an arrangement the interpretation centre would be seen as a magnet to draw tourists into the town thus gaining goodwill from the local population. Three centres should be set up. Each of these would have two themes – one theme common to all three centres (ie exactly the same display) but the second theme would be specific to each centre in such a way that the only way to get an overview of the Burren NP would need to visit all three. The three most obvious special themes are Vegetation; Geology (inc Turloughs), and human history (Archaeology to present day). Ideally the centre that has Burren Vegetation as its theme would be installed on an area of limestone on a town boundary which could be gardened to include a range of the notable species. Similarly, the centre dedicated to human settlement would contain a replica of an archaeological feature that children could climb all over. The Geology would be established on an area of exposed limestone pavement on the boundary of a town. The cost of this latter idea is very considerable given that land needs to be bought and buildings constructed but it should at least avoid installing structures in the BNP and installing all the infrastructure that is needed. It will also achieve buy-in into the idea by locals who will see the BNP as an asset to the tourism in their area and their own businesses.