Letters | 3 ways Hong Kong can keep the golden goose of ecotourism healthy

Thailand’s Similan Islands are a case in point. They are open to visitors only for a few months every year, so that marine life has adequate time to recover. Hong Kong could consider the same by monitoring coral reefs, identifying the period when they are weakest, and imposing limits on swimming and snorkelling in certain areas around the Sai Kung islands accordingly.

When it comes to nature conservation, another concern is the recurring cost of monitoring coral reefs. This could give rise to controversy over whether public money would be better spent on social welfare. Thailand appropriately charges tourists a fee to enter the Similan Islands. Similarly, the Maldives imposes a green tax on tourists staying in resort hotels. This user-pays principle is quite fair and necessary to ensure the government has ample funding for conservation work.

Furthermore, in the Maldives, islands are leased to developers for resort development. While at first glance this policy seems to run counter to nature conservation, it is effective in limiting non-hotel guest access to the islands. Given that marine biodiversity is the biggest selling point of their hotels, these developers have an extremely strong incentive to keep the surrounding coral reefs in good shape. Many hotels are known to engage in coral reef restoration.

In Hong Kong, locals and tourists are finding their way to remote places like the Ninepin Islands, Crooked Island and Pak Lap Tsai. The challenge of overtourism might soon spread from Sharp Island to other islands in Sai Kung. Hong Kong has been gifted with natural treasures and there is real money to be made in ecotourism. The last thing we want is for this opportunity to threaten our environment. A solution that can balance ecological protection, prudent use of public money and economic development is urgently needed.