Pigeon Point

[Alan Cb]

Hi Steve Fifield

I did not read your reply before replying to Steve Wooler.

I'm very sorry to hear that Pigeon Point Beach Club has deteriorated, but I can only assume that it was subsequent to our visit there in Feb 2002. It sounds to me, that all the bickering between the fisherman, the THA and Pigeon Point Beach Club has taken it's toll, and I guess that makes some people happy, although obviously not the the staff and visitors to Pigeon Point.

Did you think of voicing your complaints in writing, directly to the Ansa McAL Group ? No harm in doing so.

Nevertheless, I also intend to go there on my next trip, whether it has changed ownership or not, to see for myself what it's like. If I find that it is as bad as you have painted, or worse, I probably won't go back again, and if it's still under Pigeon Point Beach Club ownership, I would certainly write a (constructive) letter of complaint directly to the Ansa McAl Group.

I hope that things will have improved by the time that you revisit Pigeon Point in 2005, and that you have a thoroughly enjoyable time there with your kids.

Alan CB

[Paul Tallet]

I have posted my opinions regarding Pigeon Point on previous strings in this site and so I won't repeat them.

Having read Alan's views though, I suppose there is no harm visiting Pigeon Point if you are prepared to ignore the obvious harm that has been done to that area ... it is a free world after all for the dominant humans.

The real point is this ... it has taken just a few decades to virtually destroy an area of outstanding natural beauty ... I am not talking about what has happened between 2002 and 2004 and it does not take a Rocket Scientist to see evidence of the damage with sharp lumps of dead coral being washed up on the beach everyday.

In a nutshell ... Pigeon Point is now a pretty looking facade.

It will take 100's and maybe 1000's of years to restore this area to it's former state ... assuming of course that the effects of global warming do not slow this down further.

It is then ironic that a private consortium chose to monopolise the place and then put up fences and interfere with the natural landscape ... then Steve W's point ... the Government takes over ... the omens are not good for the future.

Pigeon Point should be declared a no-go area for it to be able to recover ... I know that is impossible and that there are many other beautiful places in the world under the same circumstances.

As visitors, we should be falling over ourselves to protect these places as best we can ... there may be none around in the future and at this rate.

So ... carry on using Pigeon Point, turn it into the Tobago Riviera ... If people wish to ignore the continued abuse of this once beautiful place then so be it ... I can then only hope that Pigeon Point can play it's part in protecting the other more naturally beautiful areas and beaches on this incredible island.

In this world I guess that is a price which, regrettably, would be worth paying ... I wonder of the locals agree?

[Alan Cb]

As far as I'm aware, Pigeon Point has been privately owned for many decades, and there have been at least 3 different owners. The interference with the natural landscape by the provision of an access road and beach facilities pre-dates the present owners, although the cutting down of trees, and erecting of razor-wire fencing are another matter.

The boycotting of Pigeon Point in an attempt to return it to it's original, natural condition, is totally impractical, as is the banning of people from the area. In fact the acquisition/purchase of Pigeon Point by the THA/Government will significantly increase the number of visitors, perhaps by as much as an order of magnitude, unless the THA is prepared to limit access (visit frequency) by imposing an entrance fee.

A more practical, positive approach would be to aid the regeneration of Pigeon Point, perhaps for example, by a programme of replanting of trees and foliage that have been lost, and to ensure that facilities provided, blend in, and are compatible with the ecology of the area. That should not take hundreds or thousands of years.

As regards turning it into a "Tobago Riviera", and thereby allowing to "play it's part in protecting the other more naturally beautiful areas and beaches" (you cannot be serious), I think that the biggest danger to Tobago's natural state, is tourism itself. One only has to look at what has happened to Barbados over the last 40 years.

Tobago currently has a No. tourist visitors/year per capita ratio of about 70%, and No. tourist visitors per sq.mile of 5.8, compared to about 214% and 69, respectively for Barbados, and at the present rate of tourist development, it won't take long for Tobago to reach the Barbados levels.

Therefore, the obvious conclusion would seem to be, to control, and moreso, limit tourism development; but of course tourism currently is, or at least should be, Tobago's major source of foreign income, and potential economic independance / viability, although with the increasing level of foreign ownership and probable payment &/or repatriation of tourist funds abroad, I really wonder how much Tobago really benefits/will benefit from tourism.

In the meantime, I would still recommend visiting Pigeon Point.

[Paul Tallet]

Alan

I agree that there are no logical solutions.

Your arguments make sense but you have answered your own side of the debate with your point about the revenues ... on that basis we are indeed stuck between a rock and a hard post aren't we?

However, it really is no good accepting these situations ... whilst the political environment and tourist demand is most likely to win in all cases ... all we can do as individuals is the best we can to protect the environment ... it can make that little bit of difference.

I personally believe that I am helping Pigeon Point's cause by not being there and I and my family feel very comfortable with that.

I would respectfully decline your recommendation to go there.

Regards