|
June 30 2006 at 09:08AM
By Mark MacKenzie
Khmer Rouge soldiers used the ornate sandstone sculptures on the sides
of Phnom Bakheng for target practice during the wars of the 1970s and
1980s. But the damage done to the temples of the Angkor Wat complex
did not end with the arrival of peace. Instead, the political
settlement in Cambodia merely opened the gate to an army of rampaging
tourists.
The celebrated temple complex, built in the 10th century, is not the
only ancient monument to be suffering under an onslaught of visitors,
but it is one of the more vulnerable. It currently draws about one
million tourists a year, but estimates suggest that over the next few
years visitor numbers could swell to as many as five million a year.
Such an increase in traffic is something the ancient sandstone
structures are ill-equipped to cope with, according to John Stubbs,
vice-president for field projects with the World Monuments Fund. A
not-for-profit conservation organisation based in New York, the WMF
was founded in 1965 with, says Stubbs, a simple mandate: to raise
public awareness and save significant historic buildings throughout
the world.
The WMF oversees 250 projects in 83 countries, preserving significant
sites from the ravages of time. And Angkor Wat is on the critical
list. Phnom Bakheng, a five-tier temple perched on a 65m-high hill, is
one of the most imperilled of the 40 or so monuments in the area. The
most prominent feature for several miles, Phnom Bakheng at sunset is
regarded as the quintessential Angkor experience. And therein lies the
problem.
"The complex has had a fairly rough life," says Stubbs. Even before
the Communist guerrillas started shooting at it, the temple had to
endure centuries of neglect in the humid jungle. Angkor Wat was placed
on Unesco's list of World Heritage sites in 1992 after centuries of
wear and tear had taken their toll.
Chief among Phnom Bakheng's problems is the parlous state of the
temple's sandstone veneer. "It's falling away like icing falling off a
cake," says Stubbs. And an ever-growing army of marauding tourists
hardly helps. "Tour operators promote it more than they should and the
numbers are getting out of control. There's a need to manage visitors
as many don't appreciate how delicate the structures are."
Angkor's appeal makes it unlikely that operators will remove it from
itineraries any time soon, but the fragility of the complex is not
entirely lost on the industry. At least not according to Natalie
Lewis, programme manager for Southeast Asia with Cambodia specialist
Audley Travel. "The guides we use are aware of the duty that tour
operators have," she says.
The company was responsible for 1 000 room-night bookings in Siem
Reap, Angkor's feeder town, last year and Lewis welcomes information
on threats to specific monuments. "It's the kind of detail that
doesn't always filter back to us," she says. "It's difficult to
restrict our clients' movements when everybody else is doing it. We
monitor the situation and try to respond where appropriate."
After a recent ban on large coaches travelling through temple areas,
for example, Audley began to encourage visitors to take in the sights
by bike.
The WMF has spent the past 18 months devising a full restoration
programme for Phnomh Bakheng. Stubbs puts the cost of repairs to the
temple at about $3-million. That is a lot for the WMF; its annual
global budget, mostly raised from corporate and other donors, is only
about $60m.
"There are various options but we're looking at a restoration that
will last for 100 years," says Stubbs. "To a certain extent, we're
trying to fool time but theoretically you can extend the life of
almost anything depending on the nature of the fabric. In the short
term, we'd like to see tourists directed to alternative sunset
venues."
Audley Travel already promotes community projects among some of
Angkor's lesser-known temples such as the Rolus group. "Heritage
tourism is a double-edged sword," says Stubbs. "Visitor revenue is
often a saviour and so there's always a great scramble for that money.
The downside is over-touristed sites such as at Phnomh Bakheng, where
the visitor experience is compromised."
"It's a difficult balancing act," concedes Lewis. "Angkor is a site
everyone should see at some point in their life but at the same time
it needs to be looked after."
top |