Criteria used to evaluate the sites included tourism providers or locations respecting local wildlife; employing local staff; and focusing on the outdoors with minimal impact to the natural environment. In order to stay within the theme of my blog, I'll bear in mind that the sites may not be as green as they seem. After all, vacationing itself isn't always a green act, considering the amount of fuel it takes to fling oneself to a new place. But, I'll take a look at five options they offer:
Compass Cay, Bahamas
What's Good: According to Forbes, the island supports friendly schools of sharks and does not allow fishing or taking anything. The site also encourages visitors to come prepared with food and sustain a pretty typical lifestyle. Air conditioning is provided, but not usually needed.
What's Bad: Getting there. The island's pretty isolated, so you usually need to take a small plane to get there. Also, while you're there, you access everything via boats, which are provided to each party. The website indicates that there are restaurants available five miles south of the island by boat. Also, I was a little confused by the fact that Forbes said they didn't allow fishing, but the site says they do. It seems as though getting back to nature is still pretty inefficient.
Alsek River, Alaska
What's Good: Getting in touch with nature! The trip Forbes discusses (Mountain Travel Sobek), emphasizes the amount of diverse wildlife and glacial formations you'll encounter. And it's leaving a relatively small environmental footprint. Rafting is powered by man, as is hiking, another frequent activity on the trip. It also appears that the majority of the lodging is camping, which doesn't require a lot of resources either.
What's Bad: Not a whole lot. Again, getting there is hard. Most people will have to fly to Alaska and then drive to the start of the trip. There's the potential of humans having a negative impact on the nature they're supposed to be admiring, whether they pollute or tamper with a specie in some way. The trip's not accessible to everyone looking for a green vacation. It's a moderate to difficult rafting trip, which requires a great deal of experience. Not for the faint of heart.
Santa Cruz Island, California
What's Good: Owned by the Nature Conservancy and the National Park Service, Santa Cruz Island offers a great deal to explore, from mountain peaks to deep canyons to 77 miles of coast. The island was brought back from a state of ecological collapse and now offers a variety of unique plants and animals, including the bald eagle, which was reintroduced to the island. The island allows limited visitors and does not appear to accommodate lodging, so people can include a day-trip visit as part of a larger vacation.
What's Bad: Looking at a location like this, which offers so few negatives, forces me to pick on little problematic details. As it's not a destination, Santa Cruz Island doesn't do much to encourage green vacations, as a whole. Rather, it's a chance to visit nature's bounty as a part of another vacation/lifestyle. There's a number of chances for visitors to pollute the island. Nevertheless, it's a little oasis off the coast of LA, a notoriously smog-filled city.
Campi Ya Kanzi, Kenya
What's Good: Offering a safari experience unlike any other, Campi ya Kanzi is owned and operated by the Maasai people, making the business part of a local economy. The number of sustainable options the camp provides are endless. Water collected in PVC bladders. Renewable energy sources. Conservation of the land and culture. The creation of the Maasai Wilderness Conservation Trust, which enables the development of the Maasai community through consistent investment and education.
What's Bad: Despite all of their efforts to create and sustain a close community, which is encouraged by Deep Economy, I can't help but feel awkward about this place. By offering a 5-star experience, they're inviting a very select group of individuals with a great deal of money to spend. I'm wondering whether people choose Campi ya Kanzi because they truly support its values or because they're looking for a trip that's hip and trendy. It seems to invite cultural imperialism. But, perhaps I'm being judgmental. Maybe it was the first image I found on the site, which was a group of tourists enjoying champagne while sitting on the plain. Also, traveling halfway across the world to find sustainable communities seems sort of silly. True, you will have a unique experience, but efforts to create sustainable communities are happening in your backyard.
Hotel Paraiso Cano Hondo, Dominican Republic
What's Good: Claiming eco-friendly lodging, this hotel (whose name is too long for me to type over and over) offers a variety of options to get in touch with nature, including bird-watching, hiking, touring caves, swimming, camping, and horseback riding. The location of the hotel, smack-dab in the middle of the forest, provides a unique experience of returning to a simpler way of life. The hotel also incorporates elements of the native people of the area, such as local food.
What's Bad: Perhaps it was because the website was in Spanish and I lazily used Google Translate (though I do speak Spanish). But I couldn't figure out exactly how this hotel is eco-friendly. Other than its location and the fact that it supports local traditions, the hotel seemed to be just as potentially harmful as any other. Accommodations include hot water, electricity and room service, which could garner a lot of waste.
The way Forbes compiled this list meant that sometimes their definition of green and my definition got a little twisted. Neither is better than the other. But some of these sites were intriguing to me, and I encourage anyone who's looking to learn about a different aspect of the green movement to check out eco-tourism.
I found this very interesting and thoughtful. Almost any human presence where humans do not live will be disruptive. As a real advocate of sustainability, maybe we should recommend that everyone go to Orlando, and leave these other places alone.
ReplyDeleteWho knows? Maybe the people who go to these places come back and do some good.