Summary
 

This expedition was diverse in the projects it covered and large in the number of people it involved. Despite the logistical difficulties inherent in such an undertaking, Project Elgon 1997 was on the whole a success from the research point of view. As with Project Elgon ‘96, the team found much evidence of anthropogenic stress in the northern sectors and around the Park’s perimeters. This is seen clearly not only through direct contact with the people themselves, but also through study of the Park’s flora and fauna. The working relationship with Makerere University which was continued from 1996, and the interaction with local people (research aside), such as those who guided us to Wagagai Peak on completion of our research, also contributed to the overall success of the expedition in general.
 

As regards tourism and its development on the mountain, caution is advised. Tourism is generally regarded as a good thing by both the local people and the park management, but there are problems with, for instance, the accomodation of larger groups of tourists which can lead to animosity between hosts and guests. The project on local community perceptions of ‘ecotourism’ concludes that ‘the costs borne by the communities are great relative to the benefits received’ in terms of economic input to the area by tourists. However, with a policy of encouraging smaller numbers of ‘ecotourists’ who individually spend large amounts of money, it is concluded that tourism on the mountain is currently in a ‘sustainable’ state. Thus, as regards the direct study of tourism, tourists and local people, our general conclusion is one of cautious optimism.

With respect to the flora and fauna there seems to be less optimism and some of the problems inherent in ecotourism on Mount Elgon and in general are highlighted by our findings here. Given that ‘different plant species react differently to human trampling’, it is recommended that footpaths, used by tourists, locals, and their livestock, where possible be restricted to areas where the vegetation is most resistant to trampling. Furthermore, it is recommended that footpaths be stabilised where possible and that closed footpaths should remain so for at least one year to allow the vegetation to recover sufficiently. It is not hard to see how problems can arise if such recommendations are to be successfully carried out. For instance, if one were to restrict travel on footpaths in the Sasa area, which is the most popular route taken by tourists, this could put added pressure on other areas, such as Piswa, which is in the northern area, already known to be under anthropogenic stress. Restriction of travel in certain areas may have an adverse effect on the tourism industry in the area, with knock-on effects on the local economy. While the local people may now, to a certain extent, perceive themselves as natural resource protectors rather than resource users, it is easy to see how further restriction of their movements for conservation reasons, and also the restriction of the movements of tourists in the park, who provide income for the local people, may cause more problems than it solves.

This is not to say that the current situation in which the vegetation has been found should continue if we are to conserve both the plant communities and the fauna that depend upon them. The 1996 project showed that grazing, for instance, alters the species composition of plant communities, and now this expedition has highlighted the problems caused by human trampling. The effects of such anthropogenic stresses can be seen in both the bird study and the small mammal study, with a lower than average proportion of forest-dependent bird species being found in the heavily grazed Piswa area next to the Benet grasslands (which may or may not be natural, but which are certainly kept at an artificial climax by the extensive grazing that occurs there); and higher individual abundances of small mammal species in the less disturbed forest areas.

It is clear from the above that the key to conserving Elgon’s wildlife, which the local people are well aware is the key to attracting tourists into the area, hinges on conservation measures that focus on the vegetation. The effects that disturbance to the vegetation has on the mountain’s fauna can be clearly seen from the results presented in the preceding sections. One might argue, of course, that tourists are not particularly interested in small mammals. In fact, birdwatching is not the most popular attraction for the average tourist either, with most of the more ‘charismatic’ species being elusive and difficult to spot (this was true of our own observations; some of the most attractive species we found are known as ‘undergrowth skulkers’ and not readily visible unless trapped). However, many tourists did find the flora itself to be one of the main attractions of Mount Elgon, and this may be one of many reasons to develop tourism in the area with plant conservation in mind. Indeed, the local people recognise that they are as dependent upon the survival of the mountain’s flora as any bird or shrew, given the effects of plant destruction on soil erosion, changes to the water supply, and so on.

In short, the park management have no easy task ahead of them. If conserving the flora is the key to successfully integrating the needs of the local people, the tourists, and the biological communities of Mount Elgon, then it might seem obvious to recommend things like ‘restrict the footpaths to areas where the vegetation is most resistant to trampling’, or ‘restrict the grazing in such a way that no single area is under more pressure than other areas’. However, to do these things may compromise the needs of tourists and local people, which for the purposes of ecotourism and conservation are inextricably intertwined with, and yet paradoxically at odds with, the needs of the biological community. One local summed up the problem all too succinctly:

(Bodda man).

This may seem like a somewhat cynical and pessimistic viewpoint. However, the unfortunate truth is that conservation, ecotourism development, and the successful integration of the two with the needs of local people do require adequate funding. On a more positive note, it can be clearly seen that the local people not only recognise the need for conservation in order to benefit from a sustainable ecotourism programme and other factors such as increased rainfall and reduced soil erosion, but are also willing to conserve the biological community for its own sake. It would seem that, given these findings, tourism on the mountain does indeed offer great potential; what is needed is that this potential should be realised as far as possible.
 

Return to Project Elgon '97