Saltwater Crocodiles as Tourist Attractions

This article was downloaded by: [University of Waikato] On: 05 September 2015, At: 00:30 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG

Journal of Sustainable Tourism Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsus20

Saltwater Crocodiles as Tourist Attractions Chris Ryan Published online: 29 Mar 2010.

To cite this article: Chris Ryan (1998) Saltwater Crocodiles as Tourist Attractions, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 6:4, 314-327, DOI: 10.1080/09669589808667319 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669589808667319

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

Downloaded by [University of Waikato] at 00:30 05 September 2015

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/ terms-and-conditions

Saltwater Crocodiles as Tourist Attractions Chris Ryan


Waikato Management School, The University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand and Visiting Professor, Australian International Hotel School, Canberra, Australia These study reports the results derived from a pilot research study based on a phenomenographic research approach with 50 respondents in the Northern Territory of Australia. The data permitted a perceptual map to be drawn which identifies tourist fascination with crocodiles as being based on attributes of potential threat, danger, power, links with the prehistoric, and survivorship. However the study also found that when asked to describe the Northern Territory, crocodiles did not immediately come to mind, even though, arguably, the reptile is etched upon the ethos of the ‘Top End’. However prompted responses quickly elicited mention of crocodiles. There was also a preference to see crocodiles within their natural terrain. Some evidence of a minority of tourists being prepared to mitigate their behaviours was also found, and hence this study may have wider implications.

Introduction Tourism based on wildlife has been, and continues to be an attraction (Duffus & Dearden, 1990; Orams, 1996; Shackley, 1996). Indeed, such is the growth of demand for what Duffus and Dearden call ‘non-consumptive wildlife-oriented recreation’ that they see an evolution away from the maintenance of wild-life habitats required for hunting to one where ‘wildlife management begins to accept responsibility for a wider constituency with different ideas, particularly a more biocentric view of man’s role in nature and a movement away from killing’ (1990: 214). They envisage a model of site evolution, partly based on Butler’s (1980) destination life cycle, where, over time, visitor numbers grow, but with a changing classification of visitors whereby ‘expert specialists’ become the minority and ‘novice generalists’ the majority. They also envisaged management strategies that engage in a discourse with both visitors and wildlife. Orams (1996) also offers a model of tourist–wildlife interaction. His model has three main dimensions. First, there is the spectrum of tourist–wildlife interaction opportunities. These range from animals in captive environments like zoos to animals in wild life environments like National Parks or along migratory routes via intermediate locations like Wildlife Parks or rehabilitation centres. The second dimension relates to the form of management strategies being adopted, which in turn are classified as physical, regulatory, economic and educational. The final dimension relates to the outcomes for both tourists and wildlife. Again, a continuum is described. Tourists may merely gain pleasure, or be motivated to change their behaviours. The environment may, at one extreme, simply have negative impacts minimised, to, on the other hand, there being a specific enhancing of the long-term sustainability of the site. However, neither model assesses the nature of the tourist perception of wildlife as an attraction in either general terms, or with reference to specific 0966-9582/98/04 0314-14 $10.00/0 JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM

©1998 C. Ryan Vol. 6, No. 4, 1998

314


Saltwater Crocodiles as Tourist Attraction

315

species. It is taken as a ‘given’ that wildlife is attractive to tourists, but the nature of the attraction is not analysed. Nor do the authors consider the nature of the data that are required for their models to become operative. Drawing on British experience, Cuthbertson (1993) argues that historical data is important to establish patterns of change, and also argues for the establishment of GIS specific to the sites to be managed. Kelly and Hill (1987) and Hill (1995) make a similar argument for vegetation cover in Australia. It can be contended that within any dataset an understanding of tourist perceptions may be of importance. Ryan et al. (forthcoming) argue from evidence gathered from Fogg Dam, another site in the Northern Territory, that eco-tourism is culturally determined, like much else of tourism is concerned with spectacle, and is essentially about affective and not cognitive learning. Thus, an understanding about visitor perceptions may be important in offsetting the scientific bias towards interpretation and management generally found within heritage and wildlife sites (Heron, 1991). This paper describes the findings derived from 50 respondents using an open-ended interview based on phenomenographic techniques (Marton, 1986; Prosser, 1994). It represents an early stage in the research project described below. The purpose of this article is thus limited. First, it briefly reviews the nature of the crocodile as a tourist attraction in the ‘Top End’ of the Northern Territory, Australia. It does this in two ways. Initially the nature of existing attractions based upon crocodiles is described. Subsequently it briefly refers to the literature on wildlife based tourism in order to contend that tourism based on saltwater crocodiles differs from that based on, for example, the more well known dolphin watching as described by Orams (1997). Finally the paper reports an analysis of the interviews. From this analysis a simple perceptual model of wildlife as an attraction is suggested.

Crocodile Attractions in the ‘Top End’ Saltwater crocodiles form part of the folklore of the Northern Territory, Australia. Within the Territory it is a local joke that the Territory’s daily newspaper always features a crocodile story on its front page, and while this overstates the case, it is true to say that rarely does a month pass without crocodile stories being reported. There is a perverse pride at the number of crocodiles being caught in the harbour (96 in 1997), and crocodiles feature in the Territory’s literature. For example the Pitjantjatjara Aboriginal poet, Bob Randall, writes in his poem ‘Hunting Crocs’ of ‘Go to the creek where the water’s dry and look for their golden eyes’ (Randall, 1997). Kaz Cooke’s novel, The Crocodile Club describes Darwin’s society where the Crocodile Club is a controlling mafia of : government and the mining companies and old-timer public servants ¼ profit driven, amoral, plundering, wall-eyed, greedy complacent old blokes with hardened arteries and bat-shit where their soul should be ¼ The Crocodile Club. A protected species. (Cooke, 1992: 72) It might be said that crocodiles have become part of the soul of the Northern Territory — a sign of its harshness and the pride in overcoming the heat and the humidity to create a thriving community. In passing, it should be noted that the use of crocodiles as a tourist attraction is not unique. Saltwater crocodiles are also


316

Journal of Sustainable Tourism

found in Northern Queensland. Additionally, the alligator (alligator mississippiensis) is featured in the tourism and popular culture of Florida. For example the University of Florida has its ‘Gator Bowl’ — the home of the University’s Gator American Football team. Spectators there raise their arms to imitate the snapping jaws of the ‘gator’. Thus, it is not surprising to find that within the Top End there exist a small number of tourist attractions based upon crocodiles. Broadly speaking, two types of crocodiles can be found in the region. These are freshwater crocodiles (crocodylus johnstoni) found in the rivers, and saltwater crocodiles (crocodylus porosus) which inhabit the rivers and estaurine reaches of the coast. Saltwater crocodiles (in Australia, widely known as ‘salties’) have also been observed swimming several kilometres from the coast out in open seas. Of the two species the freshwater crocodile is the smaller, and is far less likely to attack. Additionally, such attacks are less likely to be fatal. On the other hand the saltwater crocodile represents a potential hazard to swimmers at sea and in the rivers of the Northern Territory, and to other water users like fishermen and those camping by the side of billabongs and creeks. This is because ‘salties’ will attack even if unprovoked, and by reason of their powerful jaws, can seriously injure or kill. Each year within the Northern Territory saltwater crocodile attacks are recorded on humans, and Territoreans have learnt to be wary of these reptiles. In 1997 there were four such attacks. For example on 9 November a fisherman had his hand torn off in a crocodile attack in Arnhamland (Voss, 1997). Early in 1998 a young aboriginal boy was saved by his friends when a crocodile seized him by his leg. However, most of these attacks are due to a lack of care on the part of the person concerned. For example, camping too near billabongs or repetition of behaviour over time near water are actions which expose one to risk. Saltwater crocodiles are also larger than their freshwater cousins, and a common size to be found in the Northern Territory is between three to four metres in length. Much larger ‘salties’ can be found without too much effort, and they have been known to grow to about seven metres in length. Indeed, ‘salties’ are the largest living reptile in the world. While large, they are not slow, and can sprint up to 48 kilometres per hour over small distances. Saltwater water crocodiles found in the wild are a protected species under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) of 1973. While a threatened species they are now common in many of the rivers of Northern Queensland and the Northern Territory, especially in certain areas. Thus, in Australia they are listed as an Appendix II species (generally elsewhere they are listed as an Appendix I) and on the revised IUCN (The World Conservation Union) classification have been downgraded from being a vulnerable species to one that is characterised as ‘low risk’. The author has seen large congregations of over 30 ‘salties’ near popular fishing spots such as Shady Camp on the Mary River, and near watering holes for cattle. In the dry season they can be easily found in the Yellows Waters in Kakadu National Park, and are a popular sight for tourists who take the cruise. Indeed, Braithwaite et al. (1996: 197) report that ‘Our earlier analyses have shown that people could not get to see enough crocodiles ¼’. They argue that compared to other competing venues in the Darwin region,



317

Yellow Waters has the potential to be an important tourist site because it is high in both authenticity and enthralment. In part this is because crocodiles are fascinating creatures and can be seen in natural settings. Among the other locations where visitors can view ‘salties’ as a ‘staged’ tourist event are the ‘Jumping Crocs Cruise’ on the Adelaide River, Crocodylus Park, and the Crocodile Farm. The ‘Jumping Crocs Cruise’ consists of a boat trip along the river, and guides suspend meat from lines several feet above the water. This attracts the crocodiles who jump out of the water to seize the food, thereby providing spectacular opportunities for photograph taking tourists. The setting is natural, and the behaviour is also natural in the sense that crocodiles do jump out of water for prey on branches above the water, but Braithwaite, et al. (1996: 211) note that it ‘has little authentic to endorse it’. Crocodylus on the other hand is a research centre and has a small zoo open to the public. It is the headquarters of Wildlife Management International which has been undertaking research into breeding and other aspects of crocodile behaviour for several years. The Park has an information centre describing the reptile and its habits, and guides take visitors around breeding pens. A highlight is the feeding of the crocodiles, and again tourists can take photographs from platforms above a small ‘reserve’. The Crocodile Farm is a commercial farm located to the south of Darwin where crocodiles are kept for their skins and meat products. It is also the location where those crocodiles caught in the traps surrounding Darwin Harbour are taken. These traps are maintained by the Parks and Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory to ensure that crocodiles do not endanger ‘boaties’, swimmers and other commercial and recreational users of the harbour. Since the crocodiles are a protected species they are not killed, but are usually taken to the farm, or occasionally to Crocodylus Park. As farmed crocodiles are often not good breeding stock, these ‘wild’ crocodiles are useful for the farm. The farm specifically advertises feeding time as a good time to visit, and tourists are ‘enthralled’ with the sight of (dead) chickens (‘chooks’) being thrown to the crocodiles. Apart from these attractions, the crocodile features strongly in tourist brochures and advertising. One Darwin car hire company used a crocodile in an advertising campaign aimed at Northern European markets in tourism trade fairs in late 1997/early 1998. In personal communication the marketing manager stated that this was done because the crocodile is equated with the Territory, it reflects adventure and natural settings, evokes an image of excitement and is consistent with an image that Europeans and North Americans had of Northern Australia derived from films like ‘Crocodile Dundee’. Crocodile soft toys with wide grins can also be found in souvenir shops, and large plastic models can be found by the side of the Arnhem highway being used to advertise accommodation in much the same way as dinosaur models are used in North America at locations like Drumheller, Alberta, Canada. Saltwater crocodiles are a significant part of the tourist offering of the Northern Territory, and thus several questions arise. Some of these questions are environmental. For example, does the ‘Jumping Crocs’ cruise have an effect on the territories of the saltwater crocodile, and if so, what are the implications for breeding and hunting? The saltwater crocodile is a territorial reptile and males

318



defend their territories. Does the ease of food have any effect? What is the impact on the density of crocodiles, and does this affect other wild-life along the river? The cruise boat also attracts kites and sea eagles for food — what consequences flow from this? These issues are, in fact, to be examined at a later stage by the Northern Territory University and Wildlife Management International based in Darwin in a research project being funded by the Co-operative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism.

The attraction of crocodiles Wildlife as a tourist attraction is now an established part of the supply of tourist experiences. Orams (1997) notes that in 1983 only 12 countries offered dolphin and whale watching experiences, whereas by 1996 it was estimated 295 communities in 65 countries offered such products. Shackley (1996: 21) comments that ‘Wildlife-watching tours involving large mammals are common’. The nature of tourism as a revenue raising activity which helps protect wildlife is also well noted (e.g. Shackley, 1995). Baker (1997a) has also drawn attention to the role of tourism in sustaining national parks through revenues created through hunting. Similar arguments pertain to the maintenance of wetlands in North America where, for example, the activities of pressure groups like Ducks Unlimited have been important in sustaining breeding grounds for migratory wildfowl. For example, Ducks Unlimited in the USA has helped to conserve over 900,000 acres of waterfowl habitat (Minnesota Ducks Unlimited, 1998). It might be contended that the development of wildlife as a tourist attraction has significantly changed in the last two decades. Prior to the development of mass tourism, a major means for the viewing of ‘wildlife’ was a trip to the zoological gardens. Today zoos have to increasingly defend their role within conservation, and replicate as near as possible, a natural surrounding. Many are also having difficulties in sustaining their popularity. It can be argued that their public, now being more able to view wildlife in a ‘natural’ setting, seek the ‘zoo’ in the wild. As Shackley (1996) notes, the public require access to large mammals and exotics, and wish to touch and experience a closeness to nature. Davis et al. (1997: 266) show that docile whale sharks elicited wonder from tourists in ‘getting so close to such a large animal’. However, there has been little work undertaken on the tourist–saltwater crocodile interaction. Shackley advances one reason when she writes: The fact that many of these creatures are seen by the public as dangerous or unpleasant, rather than being sought out as the objectives of a wildlife-watching trip, means that little attention has been paid to their problems. This is exemplified by the issues facing the saltwater crocodile population of southern Florida. (Shackley, 1996: 21) Nonetheless, while few tourists would venture near a fully grown adult saltwater crocodile, local venues near Darwin do allow and encourage visitors to hold young baby ‘salties’. Even so, their jaws are bound, but tourists can feel how soft the skin of the underbelly of a crocodile is, and also find that, perhaps contrary to their initial thoughts, they are not cold and wet to hold. Nonetheless, saltwater crocodiles arguably form a different category of wildlife attraction to



319

those offered by African game parks and whale or dolphin watching opportunities. At a vernacular level it might be argued that dolphins attract through their intelligence, gorillas and monkeys through distant genetic relation, furry animals through cuddly connotation, and lions through their feline grace. Saltwater crocodiles do not possess any of these attributes. They continually possess a latent threat in that the human watcher is safe only at a distance or through a safety barrier. This colloquial approach indicates two possible intersecting dimensions. The first is perceived safety or danger; the second, human orientation within which wildlife is seen as possessing characteristics that are friendly or similar to humans, or at the other end of the scale, the animal is perceived as being un-human like. This is shown in Figure 1. It may be possible to locate animals within the matrix based on these dimensions, and three indicative examples are used to illustrate this in the Figure. Thus, for example, the saltwater crocodile is placed at the bottom right corner of the matrix as being both ‘un-human’ (reptilian) and ‘dangerous’. If this is the case, then it would be expected that tourists would reflect this when describing their attitudes towards crocodiles. At the same time, the commercial success of a business venture like the ‘Jumping Crocs Cruise’ would mean that these negative appraisals must be associated with some characteristics that attract. It might be argued that there is an inverse appeal — it is the sense of something that is both so very different from humans, and which represents a thrill associated with danger that is itself the attraction. Albert and Boyer (1991) note similar factors when considering factors relating to Grizzly bear–human interactions in Denali National Park.

Safe

Dolphin x

Human orientated

Un-human

Gorilla x

‘Saltie’ x

Dangerous

Figure 1 Classifications of wild-life appeal

320


The Study The location used for the interviews was the Northern Territory Wildlife Park. About an hour’s drive south on the Stuart Highway, the Park is a popular tourist destination maintained by the Parks and Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory. It does not feature crocodiles. The Park was selected because:


(a) it is popular with tourists who have an interest in wildlife; (b) not being a specific crocodile site it produces no bias in that tourists who are both attracted and repelled by crocodiles would be found; (c) the facilities within the Park included a cafeteria which was comfortable and was a location where people would sit and spend some time. Initiating conversation was thus easy. The interviews were carried out in March 1997. This is early in the Northern Territory’s main tourism season, but had the advantage that there was a steady trickle of visitors and noise levels in the cafeteria were never high. Conversation was again ‘easy’ for this reason, and people were not rushed. After an initial question to ascertain whether possible respondents were visitors to the Territory, the researcher introduced himself. The phenomenographic approach to research has been described by Ryan (forthcoming) as a post-positivist mode of research as its ontology and epistemology assumes a consensus external reality which can be discovered by the researcher. It is a non-directive conversational mode of research whereby the researcher seeks to ascertain the underlying structures of attitude through asking respondents to clarify and give examples of their main responses to the questions asked. The mode of questioning and its concerns are more fully discussed by Marton (1994) and Bowden and Walsh (1994). The purpose of this research was to assess the structure of visitor attitudes towards crocodiles. The reason for this study was that it was a pilot study relating to tourist interaction with, and impacts upon, crocodiles with particular reference to the Adelaide River systems as described above. As noted, this research is funded by the Co-operative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism and forms but part of wider Australian national study being conducted in the period 1998–2000. Essentially the interview consisted of simply four questions. First the respondent was asked to describe the Top End of the Northern Territory. The purpose of this question was to assess the extent that crocodiles featured in people’s imagery of the Top End. Second, respondents were asked which attractions in the Top End were the most appealing to tourists — again the purpose was to assess how frequently those featuring crocodiles would be mentioned. The third question asked the visitors to describe their feelings towards crocodiles, and then finally they were asked whether they had, or intended to visit attractions featuring crocodiles. At the completion of the interview respondents were given an A4 sheet of typed text which explained that the study was a pilot study to determine key phrases for a subsequent questionnaire. This information in itself often elicited further responses, but these additional comments do not form part of the data analysed below. The sample consisted of 20 males and 30 females. Twenty-eight came from



321

parts of Australia outside of the ‘Top End’ and 22 were overseas visitors. Of these, eight were from the United Kingdom, four from Switzerland, three from Germany, three from Sweden, two from Eire and one from each of Japan and Fiji. The sample was a convenience sample. However, it should be noted that the data were raised from 80% of the tourists who visited the cafeteria during the four days of the research with the exception of bus parties. These last were omitted from the sample because they were subject to a time schedule which precluded long conversations. The interviews took anything from 5 to 25 minutes, with a median of 12 minutes. Analysis of the responses indicated little difference between overseas and Australian visitors and the results reported below are for the total sample. When asked to describe the Territory only two respondents made unprompted mention of crocodiles. However, another two made further references to wildlife. When prompted they mentioned birds and not crocodiles. Descriptions of the Territory were couched in terms of it being ‘hot’ and ‘humid’, but also of it being ‘awesome’, ‘spacious’, ‘vast’, ‘different’, ‘big’, ‘lush’, and ‘barren’. It was totally different to anywhere else, it retained still the sense of being a frontier, albeit populated by a friendly people. It was a ‘young’ place in many senses — the population was young, it was not a sophisticated mature place, its communities were ‘new’. However, when asked which locations within the Top End were the most attractive for tourists, crocodiles began to emerge as an unprompted response. Excluding the Wildlife Park, which was referred to by most respondents as an excellent attraction, the most popular locations were Litchfield National Park and Kakadu National Park, each being mentioned 28 times. Darwin was mentioned a total of 14 times, either simply generally or with reference to its markets, museum or wharfside. Katherine Gorge (based in another National Park) was mentioned six times. However, quite unprompted respondents spoke about specific crocodile attractions like Crocodylus Park (five mentions), the Crocodile Farm (three mentions) and the Adelaide Jumping Crocs Cruise (two mentions). A further four respondents made a general reference to crocodiles. Thus, of the 50 respondents, a total of 14 made unprompted comments about crocodiles as a tourist attraction. Another three made general references to the wildlife of the region, while three respondents interpreted the question as not meaning specific locations but spoke of the naturalness of the region, its sunsets, scenery and beauty. One German respondent spoke of the National Parks and then went on to say ‘and there are many other places, but I won’t tell you as you will want to promote them and then spoil them’. The visitors were then asked their feelings about crocodiles. One of the most commonly used words to describe crocodiles was ‘prehistoric’ in that over a third of respondents used this word. However, the most common reaction, with a series of different words being used, was that they were scary, dangerous, ferocious, and fearful. As one respondent put it ‘we are on their menu and I wouldn’t want to be near one when it was hungry’. Yet this same respondent also commented that ‘¼ they can be gentle, they take their young in their mouths — they can distinguish between caring and eating’. Another said ‘don’t go too close to them, I wouldn’t want to be attacked in the bush’. Another said ‘I hate ’em —


322


they should all be shot — they have wreaked the swimming areas — I wouldn’t want to be visited by one when I was swimming’. Another respondent described them as ‘mean, terrifying, exciting, vicious and angry’. This last comment covers the theme adopted by a number of respondents — while frightening crocodiles commanded respect and awe. Hence the common use of the term ‘prehistoric’ — as one respondent stated, ‘they were tough survivors from a prehistoric age’. They were ‘primeval, awesome creatures’. For others they were ‘fascinating’. One respondent said ‘I find them abhorrent — they’ve been around a long time — a good survivor and it is fascinating to see one’. Another stated they were ‘quite majestic’. One way of attempting to assess these data is to try to establish relationships between the phrases and words. All of the text was typed into a computer and TM used as raw data for analysis using CATPAC software. This is a piece of neural network software used to establish patterns within written text. It proceeds by permitting the user to define ‘windows’ of text and allocates to words a weighting which becomes part of an interconnection with other words within the ‘window’. For more technical explanations see Serota et al., (1978) Lieman (1992) and Woefel and Stoyanoff (1994). The text was edited carefully to concentrate on that part of the conversation that referred specifically to crocodiles, that is comments relating to other aspects of the Northern Territory were deleted. A second stage editing was then undertaken to remove pause marks and to concentrate the text to be analysed on the adverbs and adjectives being used. This was undertaken because a purpose behind the research was to obtain key descriptors that could be incorporated into a subsequent questionnaire. It should be noted that this practice is not normally engaged in and must be done with care. A centroid clustering method was selected to emphasise the difference between clusters and the program was set to work on the most common 20 unique words. The centroid method was used because it is not sensitive to outliers and is appropriate where short chains of relationships are sufficient. The method represents objects by their centroids (the centre of gravity of the points) and is based on Euclidean distance. A dendogram was produced as shown in Figure 2. The dendogram groups the words ‘dangerous’, ‘large’ and ‘scared’ together. Another cluster appears to emerge between ‘alone’ and ‘prehistoric’ and links across to text including the words ‘awesome’, ‘amazing’, and ‘ferocious’. A series of words like ‘go’ ‘want’ and ‘wouldn’t’ cluster together and these emanate from the text when people were describing the fact that they would not wish to be near crocodiles or go too near to them. The next stage was to return to the full text and begin to examine it for the purpose of developing a perceptual map. This was undertaken using the perceptual mapping techniques described by Barnett and Woelfel (1979). Figure 3 represents a two-dimensional mapping of the data derived from a dendogram based on the most commonly used 20 keywords. The analysis for this paper was restricted to 20 keywords for the purpose of generating uncluttered diagrams, but, as discussed below, other analyses were completed. The perceptual map differs slightly from the dendogram in that logarithmic scales were used. The words ‘dangerous’, ‘ferocious’, ‘large’ and ‘scared’ relate closely to each other. The ambivalence discussed previously shows with the clustering of the words



323

Figure 2 A dendogram: centroid clustering method

‘scary’ and ‘amazing’, while the prehistoric heritage which generates respect is clearly seen in the bottom right hand cell of the diagram. As in common in textual analysis a ‘clutter’ of words emerge and in Figure 3 they relate to the ‘not wanting to be near one’ theme, although the word ‘vicious’ also emerges. The analysis was conducted with an increasing number of keywords. That is, the text was subjected to mapping by increasing the number of words to be used by drawing in those words less frequently used by respondents. As is to be expected the amount of ‘clutter’ increased but one or two further points of interest emerged. Notable among these was the emergence of the word ‘Dundee’. This reflects the film ‘Crocodile Dundee’. In the editing of the text the word ‘crocodile’ was deleted from this film title as possibly causing a confusion, but the word ‘Dundee’ was retained as a signifier of the film. However, it is difficult to immediately conclude that the Northern Territory still benefits from this film. The film, starring Paul Hogan, was released in 1986, that is over 11 years ago.


324


Figure 3 Two dimensional perceptual map of crocodiles

What might be prompting the mention is that at Adelaide River, a small community south of Darwin on the Stuart Highway (the main route to Darwin), a local tourist attraction is ‘Charlie the Water Buffalo’. This animal was used in the film and is famous for its very large horns. It might be that many tourists travelling north are having a memory triggered by this attraction, and thus will mention the film as an evocation of the Territory. Word association brings it to the fore when discussing crocodiles in the Territory. The map that emerged implied that the association, if this is what is happening, further reinforces the image of the crocodile as a dangerous creature. Finally, the respondents were asked whether they would visit a crocodile attraction. Of the 50 respondents six stated ‘no’ and one ‘was not sure’. The remaining 43 respondents provided 49 answers as shown in Table 1. Of those not wishing to go to a crocodile attraction one said, ‘I like seeing the crocodiles in the wild but I wouldn’t go to a tourist attraction — that’s something else — its not natural’. Among the comments made about the ‘Jumping Crocs Cruise’ were ‘I’d go to the Jumping Crocs, but no other’, ‘I’d go to the Jumping Crocs — but it isn’t really the way to see them though’ and ‘I’d go to the Jumping Crocs — I don’t like zoos’. Another said ‘I suppose people would go to the Jumping Crocs — but its a side show really’. Fewer comments were made about Crocodylus Park, but such comments tended to recognise the educational aspects of the Park.


325

Table 1 Crocodile locations mentioned Location Jumping Crocs Cruise Crocodylus Park Crocodile Farm Kakadu — Yellow Waters Shady Camp Cairns See ’sweetheart’ in museum

Number of mentions 16 14 11 6 2 1 1


Note: ‘Sweetheart’ is a preserved large saltwater crocodile featured in the Darwin Museum.

Discussion It appears that there is some support for the model proposed in Figure 1, but the model is incomplete in that it fails to capture the ambivalence felt by tourists about crocodiles — the fact that people are fascinated by a creature that is repellent to many because of its potential threat to humans. What also emerges is the respect felt by many towards a creature which has survived for aeons — it is a living link with the prehistoric. These themes might be of use to operators in devising brochures. What the research also uncovered was a second form of ambivalence — and that was to the nature of attractions based on crocodiles. There were, among the comments of a minority of respondents, a feeling that while the Jumping Crocs Cruise was of interest, it had perhaps a bit too much of the circus about it. Some people felt uneasy about the way crocodiles were prompted to ‘perform’ for photograph taking tourists. The fact that this is felt by at least a segment of tourists is of interest for the next stage of the research. This is being designed to link attitudes towards crocodiles with more general environmental issues. In 1994 and 1997 surveys of environmental knowledge, attitudes, skills and behaviours were undertaken in New South Wales (EPA, 1997), and the results will provide a comparative base for the forthcoming research. Certainly the result seems to supports the contention made by Braithwaite et al., (1996) that there exists a demand for wildlife within a natural, unspoilt and authentic environment. Products which do not meet these criteria may cause some dissatisfaction. Such a feeling is of interest in that it supports Orams’s arguments that educative approaches can bring about attitudinal change with behavioural implications — that is, these visitors would not visit this particular sight (Orams & Hill, 1996). Hence this study may have implications beyond its immediate geographical location and concerns. If this is the case then it can only mean that while greater stress upon natural environments might occur if tourists wish to view wildlife there exists a potential sub-sector who may be prepared to mitigate their role as spectators at eco-tourism sites (Ryan, forthcoming). The issue thus may arise as to how strong are the environmentally aware feelings of tourists — will they be strong enough to deny themselves the opportunity to view creatures like crocodiles? Can perhaps operators capitalise on this by offering substitute learning products like

326



Crocodylus Park? The answers to such questions are important to the development of a wildlife management and tourism programme, and such questions will be within the domain of future studies by the Co-operative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism in Australia. For example, the author is currently undertaking a study that seeks to assess levels of environmental awareness using the NEP scale with attitudes to wildlife tourism and actual visit behaviours. If it appears that visitors are prepared to mitigate their activities out of a sense of concern about the environment, then it might mean that the concerns expressed by Butler (1990) and Wheeller (1991, 1993) as to eco-tourism extending and not mitigating environmental stress may need to be reconsidered.

Acknowledgements The author wishes to thank the Research Office of the Northern Territory University for a small grant to undertake this work, and to Professor Greg Hill of the University and the CRC for Sustainable Tourism for the provision of further funds to continue this research. Correspondence Any corrrespondence should be directed to Chris Ryan, Tourism Programme, Waikato School of Management, The University of Waikato, Hillcrest Road (Gate 7), Private Bag 3015, Hamilton, New Zealand ([email protected]). References Albert, D.M. and Boyer, R.T., (1991) Factors related to grizzly bear–human interactions in Denali National Park. Wildlife Society Bulletin 19, 339–349. Baker, J.E. (1997a) Development of a model system for touristic hunting revenue collection and allocation. Tourism Management 18 (5), 273–286. Baker, J.E. (1997b) Trophy hunting as a sustainable use of wildlife resources in southern and eastern Africa. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 5 (4), 306–321. Barnett, G.A. and Woelfel, J. (1979) On the dimensionality of psychological processes. Quality and Quantity 13, 215–232. Bowden, J.A. and Walsh, E. (1994) Phenomenographic Research: Variations in Method — the Warburton Symposium. Melbourne: RMIT. Butler, R.W. (1990) Alternative tourism: Pious hope or Trojan Horse? Journal of Travel Research 3, 40–45. Braithwaite, D., Reynolds, P. and Pongracz, G. (1996) Wildlife Tourism at Yellow Waters — Final Report. CSIRO Division of Wildlife and Ecology, Darwin and Northern Territory University, Darwin. Cooke, K. (1992) The Crocodile Club. Sydney: Allen and Unwin. Cuthbertson, M. (1993) A database for environmental research programme. Journal of Environmental Management 37, 291–300. Davis, D., Banks, S., Birtles, A., Valentine, P. and Cuthill, M. (1997) Whale sharks in Ningaloo Marine Park: Managing tourism in an Australian marine protected area. Tourism Management 18 (5), 259–272. Duffus, D.A. and Dearden, P. (1990) Non-consumptive wildlife oriented recreation: A conceptual framework. Biological Conservation 53 (4), 213–231. EPA NSW, (1997) Who cares about the environment in 1997? EPA Social Research Series, Environmental Protection Agency, NSW. Heron, P. (1991) The institutionalisation of leisure: Cultural conflict and hegemony. Loisir et Société 14 (1), 171–190. Hill, G.J.E. (1995) Remote sensing, GIS, and the CRC for sustainable development of tropical savannas: What are the implications for Northern Australia? Proceedings of the



327

2nd North Australia Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Systems Forum, 18–20 July, Darwin. Kelly, G.D. and Hill, G.J.E. (1987) Updating maps of climax vegetation cover with Landsat MSS data in Queensland, Australia. Photogramm‘etric Engineering and Remote Sensing 53 (6) 633–637. Lieman, J. (1992) Using a neural network (CATPAC) to map the conceptual structure of verbatim responses. Paper presented at the Advanced Research Techniques Forum of the American Marketing Association, Lake Tahoe, Nevada. Marton, F (1986) Phenomenography — a research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. Journal of Thought 21 (3), 28–49. Marton, F. (1994) Phenomenography. In T. Husén and T.N. Postlethwaite (eds) The International Encyclopaedia of Education (pp. 4424–4429). Oxford: Pergamon. Minnesota Ducks Unlimited (1998) Mission Statement, http://www.mtn.org/mndu/. Orams, M.B. (1996) A conceptual model of tourist–wildlife interaction: The case of education as a management strategy. Australian Geographer 27 (1), 39–51. Orams, M.B. (1997) Historical accounts of human–dolphin interaction and recent developments in wild dolphin based tourism in Australasia. Tourism Management 18 (5), 317–326. Orams, M.B. and Hill, G.J.E. (1996) Controlling the eco-tourist in a wild dolphin feeding program: Is education the answer? Journal of Environmental Education 16 (1), 3–8. Prosser, M. (1994) Some experiences of using phenomenographic research methodology in the context of research in teaching and learning. In J.A. Bowden and E. Walsh (pp. 31–43) Phenomenographic Research: Variations in Method — the Warburton Symposium. Melbourne: RMIT. Randall, B. (1997) Hunting crocs. In K. Reed-Gilbert (ed.) Message Stick — Contemporary Aboriginal Writing (p. 62). Alice Springs: Jukurrpa Books. Ryan, C., Hughes, K. and Chrigwin, S. (forthcoming) ‘The gaze’, spectacle and ecotourism. Annals of Tourism Research. Ryan, C. (forthcoming) Tourist experiences, phenomenographic analysis, post-postivism and neural network software. The International Journal of Tourism Research (formerly Progress in Tourism & Hospitality Research). Serota, K., Cody, M., Barnett, G. and Taylor, J. (1978) Precise procedures for optimizing campaign communication. In B. Ruben (ed.) Communication Yearbook I (pp. 425–442). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. Shackley, M. (1996) Wildlife Tourism. London: International Thomson Business Press. Voss, N. (1997) Hand torn off in croc attack. Sunday Territorean, 9 November. Wheeller, B. (1991) Tourism’s troubled times: Responsible tourism is not the answer. Tourism Management 12 (2), 91–96. Wheeller, B. (1993) Sustaining the ego. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 1 (2), 121–129. Woefel, J. and N.J. Stoyanoff (1994) CATPAC: A neural network for qualitative analysis of text. Paper presented at the Australian Marketing Research Association, Melbourne.