Post #59043 by christiki295 on Sat, Nov 8, 2003 1:19 AM

Is the risk of development overstated? Easter Island only has a single beach, so the inability to market Easter Island makes it less likely to be marketed as a tropical beach paradise. Furthermore, if chains like Hilton really wanted to be there, they probably already would. (However, being from LA, I fully support slow growth development restrictions and building height limits.)

Also, the natural isolation as the belly button of the world and its subtropical climate will always insolate it from being overrun with tourists.

Tourism easily could benefit the local populous without turning them into crazed consumers because tourism would bring hard currency to the island, which is already the motivating factor for half the town to run to the airport everytime the Lan Chile plane lands to solicit strangers (tourists) to rent rooms in their homes.

Easter Island saw a marked increase of wealth after Kevin Costner's Rapa Nui film brought hard currency spenders to the island.

Tourism would also be beneficial to the economy because it similarly would enable the Rapa Nui to earn hard currency.

In a tourist economy, employment as a waiter, tour guide, hotel clerk or yes, even a waiter is worthwhile. This same issue is at play in many ohter resort areas: Cuba, Bali and even in the US, such as the Hawaiian islands.

Also, on the Big Island, the petroglyphs are maintained. To the contrary, I strongly suspect an increase in wealth would better enable the Rapa Nui to protect their archeological treasures.

Most of all, I want more flights than just Lan Chile's 2-3 week schedule, so visiting there would be easier. After reading your review, I, too, want to visit Kopakavana (??!), a tiki bar in the most tiki of environments. I also don't mind staying at a nice hotel on the beach.