Our forest has remained mostly intact, and I think there is a simple reason for that: local people are not allowed to enter. Only tourists and their guides may go inside. This means there is less cutting and gathering than there might otherwise be.
Illegal cutting still happens from time to time, and bushfires sometimes damage the trees. But many local people would not enter the forest casually anyway. We believe it belongs to our ancestors. Traditionally, a person should perform the proper ceremony before going inside.
In that sense, our beliefs were already protecting the forest before tourism rules were introduced. Being completely excluded from it is different from choosing to respect it.
Tourism has also changed the way we deal with rubbish. In the past, there was a large belt of waste in the bush. We were told that tourists found it unpleasant to see. Now households collect their own rubbish and burn it from time to time.
The chief makes sure people follow the new rules. He inspects houses and gives a warning when a household is not clean. If the family ignores the warning, it must pay a fine.
Most people keep their houses clean because they do not want to pay the chief’s fine.
The system has improved the appearance of the village, but it has not solved everything. Some people still throw rubbish into the bush. Almost no households have toilets, so most residents also use the bush. Families generally have a separate bathroom where they can wash, but that is not the same as having a toilet.
I have mixed feelings about attracting more tourists. Personally, I do not especially want larger numbers of visitors. More people would bring more pressure and change.
At the same time, I understand that the community needs income and jobs. Tourism may also encourage investment in the things we urgently need.
Roads and public transport are serious problems, especially during the rainy season. Travelling becomes difficult, and reaching markets or services outside the village is unreliable. I hope tourism income—or government attention created by tourism—will eventually help improve this.
A forest protected by keeping local people outside is not the same as a forest protected with their agreement.
I want the forest to survive. I also want the community’s beliefs and relationship with the forest to be recognised as part of that protection.
Tourism may bring the jobs and better roads we need, but development should respect the people who already care for this place. Protecting nature works best when local people are treated as partners, not simply as a threat.