Tourism is experiencing rampant growth in the Galapagos. Tourism is also the reason for human population explosion in the islands (due to immigration from the mainland). Before Ecuador erodes the very resource on which it relies--the Galapagos National Park and Marine Reserve--it should do what few have done: look at the past and project into the future.
Tourists come to Galapagos to see the wildlife, not the night life or the edifices. They currently pay $100 just to enter the park, but they would pay more. Galapagos should take a leaf out of the Bhutan book: they have had strict limits on the growth of tourism since 1974 when tourism began--in recent years allowing fewer than 8000 visitors ear that each paid $200 per night (which covers room and board).
At the moment, the powers that be are discussing a cap on Galapagos tourism. With only talk, Galapagos will be the next Weeki Wachi Springs, Florida. With action, the archipelago will continue to be a Shangri-la (though they still have to figure out what to do about fishing).
- Log in to post comments
jennifer...
first of all, thanks for the great posts from the galapagos! i'm green with envy as it has been almost a decade since i last visited... your posts highlight the unfortunate changes in progress that i witnessed during my stay there...
i agree completely that the galapagos vistors should (and willingness to pay surveys demonstrate they will) pay more in tourism fees to further offset management costs for the marine park... and i know several tourism carrying capacity studies have been carried out to understand what appropiate volume of tourism various galapagos destinations can bear...
but i don't think bhutan makes a compelling model for a practical future... from simply a cost analysis, galapagos will always be a better "deal" for the average (ie not megawealthy) ecotourists... a quick expedia search showed economy class roundtrip travel from san francisco to quito to galapagos ranging from US $1067.70 to $1203.70... (this is just air fare, so tack on an additional US $1465 for an inexpensive 9 day island cruise to perhaps $4500 for a more "plush" boat)...
by comparison, roundtrip travel to bhutan from san francisco (using either bangkok or calcutta as the entry point) will cost anywhere from US $2341 to an amazing $7683 (on singapore airlines)... somewhat beyond the economy travelers purse, i'd wager... and while you are absolutely spot-on that on the ground accomodations are capped at US $200, there are other costs that must be incurred...
a few colleagues who recently returned from bhutan were surprised to find that bhutan enforces the national dress code, known as driglam namzha, on non-nationals while in numerous public tourism destinations during daylight hours... certainly the rule is enforced more rigorously in some districts than others, but to visit the temples and other major bhutan cultural treasures, the dress code set them back approximately US $2000 each... on the plus side, i've seen the national attire upon their return and it's exquisite... certainly no system is likely to be perfect... but i'd argue that the bhutan model makes sense solely from the tourism volume and accomodation caps end of things...
cheers and safe travels...
Thanks for the comments, Rick. I agree that Galapagos, while 700 km from the Ecuadorian shore, is still close enough to the U.S. that it will always get experience traffic and higher demand than the mountaintop Bhutan. But I also think that a tourism cap and an increase in price will at least ensure that tourism does not continue to grow at such an alarming rate and will amount in some level of quality control.
Of course, this is also why we need good park guides...but as I am sure you are aware, most guides are pretty complacent. When I was just out in the islands, I saw a baby sea lion crawl into the lap of a German tourist. Our guide said nothing and everyone just stood there taking photos!
What's more is that the Powers That Be talking about opening DIRECT flights from Miami to the island of Isabela! This will not only result in increased tourism (on one of the less developed islands) but will also mean that mainland Ecuador will not benefit at all from Galapagos tourism (at present, all visitors must fly through Quito AND stay at least one night there). I hope that former visitors to Galapagos--such as you and me--can stay involved in the 'progress' being made in the islands and even somehow manage to voice our concerns...
I think people differ greatly on this issue. For example, if it were completely unidentifiable as my own, I would have no problem with a picture of my naked ass being posted on the Internet. Others would be absolutely horrified by the prospect.