Columnists
Where is our vision on that?
The County’s long-awaited Destination Development Strategy Report landed before Committee of the Whole last week for comment. And there is a lot to chew on in the report. How many more tourists can the County accommodate? Can it host them with a smile? Can it discourage some types of tourist while encouraging others? How much should it spend on tourism management?
The report starts from the premise that the County is the victim of its own success. So many people come here to visit that the resources to manage them aren’t all in place. We suffer from “over-tourism.” Everybody knows it. The survey evidence supports it. By how much we are over-touristed, it doesn’t say.
At the same time, we can’t agree about the importance of tourism to our local economy. The report states that tourism accounts for 32 per cent of jobs within the County, and “drives local economic growth and holds opportunities for economic expansion.” About $190 million is spent in the County by tourists (although as one councillor pointed out, very little of that goes into the County’s revenue stream). Yet the report also cites anecdotal examples of rudeness and disrespect shown towards visitors—which would seem unwise given tourism’s importance. There are also those—about whom the less said the better— who say that the best tourism is no tourism; that taxes don’t need to go up; and that things were fine as they were 50 years ago.
The immediate villain of the overtourism problem is the day tripper, who spends an average of only $74 while in the County, compared to the overnighter, who drops an average of $406 during his average 3.1 day stay, The day tripper who drives a long way to go the beach has had no guarantee, up until this year, that he’ll even be allowed on it. Now, he can pick up the phone early in the day and secure a reservation even though he lives three hours away and won’t get to the Sandbanks till after noon. But this new access tool will have a negative effect on County residents. They will lose the early bird advantage that living a short drive away in the County offers. (Where the unwanted day trippers will turn to next is when the Sandbanks get full is Doug Ford’s problem, not ours.)
The report suggests the County go after “sociallyconscious travellers, who prioritize ethical, sustainable experiences…whether they be outdoor activities, arts and culture events, [or] dining out.” It also recommends that the County go after niche markets in corporate, luxury and wellness travel. For these markets the report suggests a ‘leave it better than you found it’ ethos, referred to as “regenerative tourism.” It also recommends diversification of tourist sites within the Count
The Report also notes that gentrification, which creates an affordability problem, drives lower income workers and all the interesting people away, so you eventually risk becoming one bland middle income suburb with understaffed services. Those things will drive tourists away as well, says the report.
On top of the problems noted in the report, the County is carrying a net debt of over $31 million, and the province, not the County, controls the Sandbanks, Not ideal territory from which to launch a major spending initiative
The big takeaway from the report is that the County needs to manage its tourism in a deliberate way—left to its own devices, the tourism market will further strain an already strained situation. This requires the commitment of more resources to tourism management, especially now that the Municipal Accommodation Tax is beginning to kick in revenue.
Councillor Jamie Forrester noted at the meeting that “One of the best parks with the best beaches in all of Ontario is going to be embedded in a large scale development, Where is our vision on that?” While he raised his point in the context of the possible building of bypass roads in Wellington and Picton, the councillor raises the right question.
The County’s Official Plan, which came into effect on July 8, is filled with vision. The Destination Development Strategy Report contains a basket of recommendations for action. What council needs to do—as I think Councillor Forrester was suggesting— is bridge between the two and come up with three- to five-year tourism goals, and a budget that enables those goals to be met. That gives the subject purpose and accountability.
If only I’d phoned Parks Ontario before sitting down to write this piece, I’d be off to the beach with my guaranteed admission ticket. Now I’ll just have to take my chances.. Maybe things were better 50 years ago.
Comments (0)