MHNP: conservation vs absolutism

THE debate over the future of the Margalla Hills National Park (MHNP) has become a proxy battle between conservation and development. On one side are those who argue that all commercial activity must be eliminated from the park. On the other are those who see the park as a public asset that should accommodate recreation, tourism and economic activity. The reality, however, lies somewhere in between.

The question is not whether the Margalla Hills should be protected but whether protection requires a blanket prohibition on all recreational and commercial facilities, or whether it can be managed through a carefully regulated model to achieve both ecological conservation and economic value.

Around the world, the most successful national parks have demonstrated that conservation and recreation are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are often interdependent. Revenue generated from tourism and visitor services frequently funds conservation, supports local livelihoods and builds public constituencies for environmental protection.

The US offers some of the best examples. Yosemite National Park, one of the world’s most celebrated protected areas, contains hotels, lodges, restaurants and visitor facilities operating within the park. Yet Yosemite remains a global model of conservation because human activity is confined to designated zones and managed under strict environmental regulations.

Successful conservation is built on management, not prohibition.

The same principle applies in Yellowstone and the Grand Canyon. Both parks host millions of visitors annually and contain lodging, dining facilities and recreational infrastructure. Their success lies not in excluding people but in managing them. Visitor numbers are monitored, access is regulated, infrastructure is concentrated in specific areas and conservation objectives guide all decisions.

Europe follows similar approaches. Many protected landscapes in countries such as Switzerland and Austria integrate tourism infrastructure with environmental stewardship. Mountain lodges, cable cars and visitor facilities coexist with conservation because development is restricted to carefully designated zones and subjected to rigorous environmental standards.

Asia provides equally compelling examples. Malaysia’s Kinabalu National Park, a Unesco World Heritage Site, operates under a concession system that allows restaurants, lodges and tourism services while maintaining strict ecological safeguards. Visitor numbers are capped through permits, waste is removed from sensitive areas, and facilities are required to comply with stringent environmental regulations. In China’s Wuyishan National Park, tourism services operate alongside conservation objectives through carefully controlled zoning, ecofriendly transport systems and revenue-sharing mechanisms that support environmental protection.

The lesson from these examples is clear: successful conservation is built on management, not prohibition.

This is particularly relevant for Pakistan. The Margalla Hills are undoubtedly important, but they are neither the country’s largest nor its most ecologically sensitive protected area. Pakistan is home to far more fragile ecosystems that continue to host significant human activity.

The Central Karakoram National Park contains some of the world’s highest peaks, glaciers and critical watersheds. Deosai National Park supports unique alpine ecosystems and endangered wildlife. Lake Saif-ul-Malook, situated in a highly sensitive watershed above Kaghan Valley, attracts hundreds of thousands of visitors annually. Every summer, roads are clogged with vehicles, hotels operate at capacity and tourist numbers far exceed those seen in the Margallas. Yet discussions about conservation rarely focus on these areas with the same intensity. The problem is not the presence of people. It is poor management.

Pakistan’s environmental governance often relies on a binary choice between unrestricted activity and total ban. What is frequently missing is the institutional capacity to regulate, monitor and enforce.

A more sensible approach for MHNP would begin with science. Carrying capacity assessments should determine how many visitors specific locations can accommodate without causing ecological damage. Entry quotas, reservation systems and seasonal restrictions can then be introduced where necessary.

Environmental impact assessments and independent ecological audits should become mandatory for all existing and future facilities. Water consumption, wastewater treatment, solid waste disposal, noise levels and traffic impacts should be continuously monitored. Facilities that fail to comply should face penalties, suspension or closure.

A modern concession model could also be adopted. Under such a system, the government would retain ownership and control of park land while allowing private operators to provide visitor services under strict environmental conditions. Contracts would prohibit expansion, require zero-discharge wastewater systems, mandate waste removal from the park and tie operating licences to environmental performance.

Equally important is institutional reform. Protected areas should be managed by qualified professionals with expertise in ecology, wildlife biology, environmental planning and park management. Decisions should be grounded in science rather than administrative convenience or political considerations.

The principle of ‘do no harm’ should govern human activity using strict zoning to ensure that facilities contribute to conservation rather than undermine it.

The future of the Margalla Hills should not be framed as a choice between nature and people. National parks exist not only to protect biodiversity but also to connect citizens with nature. Well-managed recreations that link ecology with economy can strengthen public support for conservation while generating resources for park maintenance and local livelihoods.

The challenge facing Pakistan is therefore not whether restaurants, lodges or recreational facilities can coexist with conservation. Around the world, they already do. The challenge is whether we can build institutions capable of enforcing the rules that make such coexistence possible.

Good management, scientific planning and professional oversight can ensure that human activity remains compatible with conservation objectives. The real threat to Pakistan’s environment is the chronic inability to implement and enforce systems that allow human activity and nature to thrive in tandem.

The writer is climate policy analyst.

aisha@csccc.org.pk

Published in Dawn, June 19th, 2026