Ce to them under unnatu1 lcircumstances. In the Lencg of advertising we Wld gear tourism not to t1eaffluent but to people .fllsimple tastes who are mm to respecting our

of life. The affluent yto put pressures on ,e w frills and it is this M of demand which has “Cad the State of Maine Odiscontinue tourist rouwtion. We have also fled in speaking with toe fits that they are con— fined that tourist prom— don is ruining this

ationalPark

The two dollar fee wh- dlthe FederalfDepartment fParkS is imposing on _LI. Will have negative fiects on our already fra- fig environment. Tourists howish to avoid the fee ' iu_overflow onto the qu— aa:more remote beaches {the Province. Our lack feffective land use pol- cygives easy access to drbeaches and the gove- ent has been exacerbat- gthe problem by rebla- fig old roads to many re- tebeaches.hzThis policy

H

mt exphoitation of ev— .

Mud (expreSSed in rec--w tDepartment of Enviré am and Tourism adve— ming of places like istopher's Cross) is plorable. ‘ .

It is ironic that our m Use Commission reco- afled the practice of‘ Hung more beaches to eautomobile. “It is eve sadder that that same mm advocated an end to , efreeze on subdiVisions dthus endorsed a laiss- 'faire approach (on the tof the Provincial ernment) ...to "the- probe of commercial exploi- tion of our land for ul'ist housing.

18% we would note with eat favour the action ‘ * um Government in fre- ingland use at Cable d"Ch’eenwich and its wi- itWiess to buy up land this area to protect

fragile shores.

VIII to Basics

welfoming tourists dEL' m“ give them the right “y Our land. VThe lo- roftourism sees land ecreation ground, as yground- The logic of byg 3888 land as soil nouriShed and work-

factively promoting thfi. .,

ynookiamd cranny othhee'

mule passing out critFQIL

eofi our most beautiful“---f

3g¢omic structure’srxourfec—L ‘ -onomic priorities are_wrf ‘ '3 Ong .

-agricultural budget..

ythe‘y’Sooial'Aotion oomn‘iission and the PEICommitteeJo Da

ed. The two logics wOrk in different directions. We have to decide which one has priority and wh— ich one comes second and needs to be kept in a po— sition where one is a "handmaid" of the first. Furthermore, it is diff- icult to see-that farm— ing and fishing are sig- nificant benefits of to— urism. That is why we ought to make sure that we opt for agriculture and other basic need meeting first, and keep the meet- ing of tourist needs as secondary as possible. In this respect we are diam- etrically opposed to the P.E.I. Tourist Associat- ion's philosophy, expre- ssed,two years ago in th— eir brief to the Royal Commission on Land Use,

‘ of advocating open sale

of all land to the high— est bidder even though they attempt to cover their trails by promoting zoning. . P.E.I. already has an

'income re-distribution pr—

obl; in fact our income distribution is the second

7 most inequitable of any

province. This points to a need to change our econ—

ture could remain if they were given the necessary support. A large portion of assistance seems to be going to the high income farmers and to the Dept.‘ of Agriculture which al- one consumes 30% of the While we believe in a strong De-

..partment of Agricultureu oespecially”by comparison.»r;v

to the Department of Tour- ism. misplaced dollar in—

vestment in agriculture results in good agricul-

'tu'ral'lland "going" out ‘of- *

productions. Government expenditure should go in-

.Trc-o of de-

grmocratic maaketfhg prac—,

etices and income floors

a‘*?forifarmers;“n6ETinto co-

ifllt -

'ntinued Subsidization of

profit-oriented‘processors. Perhaps it is important to point out that many farms

,ers have chosen to remain ‘ ‘ ‘/.:‘;’:~. ‘ L in agriculture not because

they are seeking to live at the level of the "good life" but because they li- ke farming.

The apparent attractive-

4ness of now purchasing

shore property or in factmvm any property in Prince Ed- ward Island by non-reside- ents is another by—product. of tourism. In an economy

which offers little or no support to the average fa— rmer and fisherman, the lure of the dollar is extr— emely difficult to resist. A local farmer who has ex— perienced seasons of good crops but poor prices thr— ough lack of support and lack of priority for agri— culture on the part of de- cision makers, is hard put to refuse what seems to be a generous offer for his

J. I ,3 I, Family farm vacationsw ‘ appear to be a priority of

the Dept. of Teurism and not of the people. In co— nnection with this we que— stion whether or not we should be willing to set- tle for economic conditions that force farmers' famil— ies to play landlady to tourist familieslduring the

42111161331; fa¥m1483§§§§9§3u hm; 3er

If farm famiigesfiwgfit anobncjul . take in tourists, well and,.g,_ good, but on their terms. The practice of promoting the retraining of farm wives as hostesses andrca- tering managers in their own homes has a repugnant

,.

ring to it. In a similar way, if a fisherman wants

to take a visitor out fi— shing, great, but should we leave untouched the ec— onomic conditions which make the fisherman turn n that visit intoa-- commerc- egeSSary I .Wg =%ren§§t these develfipménts;in fact _ danger signs?~ I' ”'3“ "

Multi-Nationals

The much talked about . and muchiadvgrgiged extene sion of the toufist season could Open the way to the entrance of multi—national corpOrations in the tour-‘-

Many of the-farmers; «n “ who are leaving argricul—

The Cadre, December 2, 1975, page 7

ys for

World Development

ist industry of P.E.I.

It would be much healthier for us to concentrate on small business scattered throughout the province, locally owned and integra— ted with the farming/fish— ing, etc., community base than to extend the tourist season and risk the entra- nce of multi—nationals.

As a world trend, multi— national corporations are taking over more and more control from local comm— unities and individuals. They have already entered

‘ the agricultural industry

in Spite of our short gr— owing season. Besides, there are fifteen non—re— sident owners of tourist facilities which are eas- ily identifiable in the book of accomodations. Stevenson~Kellog report recommends a 200 unit ho- tel complex for.Charlottee‘ town, which appears to be

a Holiday Inn or similar complex. It is our conten— tion that we should cherish having managed without

them so far and study and learn how they grow and ta- ke over institutions in situations similar to ours, as they have done with tou- rism in the caribbean.

Transportation

Any Islanders who has mtmwlhwsmutmm— portation to and from the mainland is indeed a sens- itive matter; much more sensitive than authorities seem willing to admit. The commissioned study by the Dept. of Tourism, Parks and Conservation seems to be geared towards pleasing the visitors rather than the local: neopla— Thafiinn :: . - -~, ~, ister oft-Tourismfieels :fihat» v some of the recommendations of the 53 page report sho—

The

' uld be acted on immediately »rif the ferry systems "are

to provide first and last impressions of Prince Edwa- rd Island that are consist— ent with the quality of visitdr experience provided by the P.E.I. travel indus— ; try." Herein lies the pro- ‘ blem. It is always the vi- sitor who must be pleased

and at great expence.

Local people are conce-

Ln,rned about getting to and

from their destinations in

{fthe quickest possible time.

The ferries do a pretty go-

od job apart from the rush 7 bed tourist months. .Gran- ted, the food could be im- proved and terminal rest— aurants at Wood Islands could be left open longer. But maximum vehicle capac- ity is extremely important to local people and recom-