Due to the increase of tourists -70,000 visitors to the island every year- in Easter Island, Latin American correspondent Rory Carroll discusses the problem that has brought this factor to the environmental and cultural heritage of the place –that has been denounced by the islanders of Rapa Nui to the Chilean authorities- and the debate around this problem.In this case there are two positions around the issue of environmental damage and property.
In the first place the residents of Easter Island complain that the gradual increase in the inflow of tourists, has increased the damaged of the environment, because the island it is not able to sustain so many residents, as well the lack of cultural education has affected many of the monuments –moais- that have been damaged or destroyed by these tourists.
Thus, the islander wants more control over the movement and the places visited by tourists; however to the Supreme Court, this type of request it is unconstitutional because could break the law on "freedom of movement"; so the final decision was that "passes" that will detail the path of every visitor to the island will be optional
The paradox which I propose is this: Rapa Nui is part of the monument of Chile and the seven wonders of the world, but the Supreme Court of our country has not been able to make stricter laws for tourists and higher fines for them -which so far have been ridiculous- as a way to help reduce the deterioration of the place, specially the destruction of heritage; so what it´s going on here?.
for me it is obvious that beyond this unconstitutional kind of law, there are strong economic interests for the money that Easter Island brings through its tourism to our country, this view of the problem it seems ridiculous; since no measures to protect the site, very soon will be not attractive to the foreign people and will generate an irreversible damage to the heritage and identity of the islanders.
If you want to read more, check the original place of the new:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/11/easter-island-tourist-card-ruling
Due to the increase of tourists -70,000 visitors to the island every year- in Easter Island, Latin American correspondent Rory Carroll discusses the problem that has brought this factor to the environmental and cultural heritage of the place –that has been denounced by the islanders of Rapa Nui to the Chilean authorities- and the debate around this problem.
ResponderEliminarIn this case there are two positions around the issue of environmental damage and property.
In the first place the residents of Easter Island complain that the gradual increase in the inflow of tourists, has increased the damaged of the environment, because the island ww it is not able to sustain so many residents, as well the lack of cultural education has affected many of the monuments –moais- that have been damaged or destroyed by these tourists.
Thus, the islander wants more control over the movement and the places visited by tourists; however PUNCT to the Supreme Court, this type of request WW it is unconstitutional because could break the law on "freedom of movement"; so the final decision was WF that "passes" that will detail the path of every visitor to the island will be optional
The paradox which I propose is this: Rapa Nui is part of the monument of Chile and the seven wonders of the world, but the Supreme Court of our country has not been able to make stricter laws for tourists and higher fines for them -which so far have been ridiculous- as a way to help reduce the deterioration of the place, specially the destruction of heritage; so what it´s going on here?.
for me it is obvious that beyond this unconstitutional kind of law, there are strong economic interests for the money that Easter Island brings through its tourism to our country, this view of the problem it seems ridiculous; since no measures to protect the site, very soon will be not attractive to the foreign people and will generate an irreversible damage to the heritage and identity of the islanders.
If you want to read more, check the original place of the new:
aYELEN,
well done! i think it´s a bit complicated though since it is a sensible situation...
regards,
miss
p.s. you got 5.7