Today we visited an ecotourism business that has been operating for over 20 years, protecting 1,300 acres of forest that borders a national park and serves as a natural bridge between two protected areas. The revenue from their operations is what funds the conservation, which means that without the tourism, the forest would not be protected. That is a pretty straightforward relationship, and the way it was presented made it feel like a genuine mission rather than just a justification for running a business.

The challenge is that the model is fragile in ways that are hard to ignore. 80% of their revenue comes from one product, 75 to 80% of their visitors come from the US and Canada, and the low season creates a real dip every year. During something like the pandemic, all of that disappears at once. The alternatives to funding conservation through tourism, things like government grants, carbon credits, or private donations, exist. Still, none of them are as reliable or scalable as having people show up and pay to be there. The problem is that relying on international tourists means the conservation of a Costa Rican forest is dependent on whether Americans and Canadians feel like traveling that year, which is not exactly something you can control.

What made the presentation convincing was that the business side was never hidden. It was clear that understanding people, markets, and experience design is just as important as the conservation mission itself. They also mentioned that responsible tourism is no longer optional and is now a clear expectation of modern travelers, which actually works in their favor because their whole model is built around it. Commercializing nature is not a perfect solution, but for a place like La Fortuna with 8 competing ecotourism businesses and a short high season, it is probably the most realistic one available. Conservation needs funding, and tourism seems to be the most dependable source they have found.