La Palma: Preservation versus Prosperity
Posted Sunday, February 04, 2007, 4:44 PM by Lonely Planet
Sarah Andrews considers golf courses in the Canary Islands...
Uke is not what you could call soft-spoken. As he leads a dozen hikers huffing and puffing along the 19-kilometre Ruta de los Volcanes (Volcano Route), he entertains us with a seamless stream of commentary about the Canary island of La Palma. "These pine trees can survive lava flows," he tells us. "The island's last eruption was in 1971... lush vegetation earned La Palma the nickname 'the pretty island'..." But what Uke seems most interested in are the big changes coming to this small Spanish island.
Uke is not what you could call soft-spoken. As he leads a dozen hikers huffing and puffing along the 19-kilometre Ruta de los Volcanes (Volcano Route), he entertains us with a seamless stream of commentary about the Canary island of La Palma. "These pine trees can survive lava flows," he tells us. "The island's last eruption was in 1971... lush vegetation earned La Palma the nickname 'the pretty island'..." But what Uke seems most interested in are the big changes coming to this small Spanish island.
We should enjoy La Palma while we can, he warns. It is still relatively untouched by mass tourism, but if local politicians have their way, huge new hotel complexes could replace the banana plantations that currently drive 80 percent of the local economy.
Mass tourism would strain the island's fragile water supply and increase prices, sending even more people to other islands or the mainland for jobs. And it would alter the natural beauty that is La Palma's main attraction; in fact, part of the trail we're hiking on would be covered by one of five proposed golf courses (there are currently no golf courses on the island's 1800 square kilometres).
Mass tourism would strain the island's fragile water supply and increase prices, sending even more people to other islands or the mainland for jobs. And it would alter the natural beauty that is La Palma's main attraction; in fact, part of the trail we're hiking on would be covered by one of five proposed golf courses (there are currently no golf courses on the island's 1800 square kilometres).
The conflict on La Palma is the problem facing many rural areas: preservation versus prosperity. The one thing everyone agrees on is encouraging development while protecting natural resources. But how?
In any case, the island is bracing for change. The airport will triple its capacity to more than 3 million by 2010. New hotels are being built as I type. And politicians and islanders alike are debating a far-reaching tourism development plan that would allow the construction of ports, golf courses and hotel complexes, some in supposedly protected natural areas. Green groups, like Ecologistas en Acción, say the plan would "irreversibly alter the values and beauty that makes La Palma a unique tourist destination." Asemblea Ecologista is collecting signatures against the plan. Both groups claim mass tourism only benefits land speculators and hotel chains.
But politicians say development will bring new jobs and higher incomes. Islanders are divided. Some, like Manuel Lorenzo, president of the Canary Banana Growers' Association, thinks the tourism growth "is good for the island and can exist alongside banana crops." Only time will tell.
Labels: Europe, Sustainable and responsible tourism
Join the Discussion:
2 Comments:
Is the blogger trying to have it both ways? Travel writers earn money from selling guidebooks and travel stories, thus encouraging people to travel there. So she's telling us she's worried and maybe people shouldn't travel to the places she's writing about. Well, how about doing your bit and not writing about them at all?
'Preservation' too often means higher prices for those people who can afford to go there. The pro-preservation advocates usually have more than a hint of elitism about them. EG, this place is lovely, how lucky I am for coming here, but won't it be awful when all the idiots not as sensitive as I pour in here. It's a way of saying, wow, I'm so switched-on and sensitive, the locals are fortunate I'm here and not the unwashed rabble. The irony being, of course, that to the locals every visitor is just another tourist.
Lastly, why does everyone take NGOs so seriously? They get treated like modern-day prophets. Most of them are basically left-wing groups representing a so-called 'community' of themselves, without any sort of accountability for their activities. NGOs never have to see if their objectives are being met, or face scrutiny by public bodies, or need to worry if they're giving a biased, slanted view of an issue. OF COURSE they'll object to development, because that's what they always do.
I'm not saying every attractive spot like La Palma needs to be concreted over, but there needs to be a more intelligent analysis of the issues and the players beyond the simplistic Preservation vs Progress approach employed but this blog's somewhat hypocritical and mildly guilt-stricken author.
Non-govenment organisations ARE accountable, to their members and to their funders. They are not all left wing and many are religious. In my experience, they are not opposed to development but instead offer a different approach which is based on empowering local communities and strengthening local econimies.
Post a Comment
« Read more on the blog homepage