We don’t get many visitors from the government on Bellamy Cay, so we were delighted recently to receive a request from an official who wanted to meet at The Last Resort to discuss government plans for the airport. It turned out the charming and articulate Dr. Birney Harrigan has been given the task of assessing the social impact of a runway extension on Beef Island and was seeking our feedback as the party most directly effected.
So far, so good: It is refreshing to see this new government consulting the people its decisions will affect before actually making them. However, as Dr. Harrigan brought out one large glossy picture after another to show us two main ideas for “the new runway extension,” I got the sinking feeling that this seemed ominously like a done deal. After all, governments don’t like to waste taxpayers’ money, do they? And those huge laminated pictures didn’t look cheap.
Either of the two plans I was shown would devastate the ecology and economy of Trellis Bay, and one would almost certainly finish The Last Resort as a business. The end of such an iconic Virgin Islands family-owned business after 40 years would, of course, be a big problem for us and a sad loss to our guests. However, in the bigger scheme of things, it could be justified if there was a greater net benefit to the rest of the VI. So if we are to be dissuaded from lying down in front of the bulldozers in protest (admittedly, a rather hazardous way to express dissent in 15 feet of water), we would like to know exactly how an expensive and environmentally destructive runway extension is really going to benefit the VI?
Direct flights?
Let’s start with the premise that the VI desperately needs to have direct flights from the United States and Europe for the tourist industry to flourish. Apparently there is a widely held perception that visitors find the VI difficult to get to and that this is seriously holding back the tourist industry. Where does this idea come from?
I searched the Internet for studies and economic data to back up this “perception,” but all I found were several papers written by government “consultants” who all gave their authoritative opinion that the VI needs a runway extension to enable long-haul direct flights, without providing one shred of evidence or economic data to support this opinion. Maybe the government has some good sound economic data tucked away somewhere: If so, we’d love to see it.
If enough consultants write enough papers, a critical mass is achieved and somehow an unsupported opinion becomes an accepted “fact.” Soon a lot of people are jumping on the bandwagon and a runway extension is the panacea for all the territory’s problems. Contractors would be inundated with work, hotels would fill up overnight, and restaurants (except in Trellis Bay, of course) would be jammed with happy diners. Forget the recession: If only we had a direct flight from Beijing twice a week, all would be well.
‘Expensive and damaging’
However, a few taxi drivers rubbing their hands at the prospect of a jumbo jet stuffed with fare-paying passengers, or an Oil Nut Bay megayacht owner who is annoyed he can’t land his oversized executive jet here, don’t constitute a logical basis for such a massively expensive and damaging project. If the government is going to gamble on our future, we need cogent and convincing evidence that this is for the greater good.
If the solution to our problems really is to facilitate direct flights from mainland US or European cities, what evidence is there that any airline will actually do this? Has the VI government secured specific undertakings from particular airlines that they will fly direct (and do so for significantly less than the present cost)? Given that the main regional US airline, American, has declared bankruptcy and is trying to sell its American Eagle division, we would hope that the government is not relying on this particular airline for assurances on future operations.
Apparently, it is graciously accepted that not all the world’s major cities would want a direct link with the VI, and so Atlanta has been identified as a likely US city from which direct flights would originate. This means that passengers from any other US or European city would have to change planes or layover here — not really all that “direct” then!
If, prior to spending tens of millions of dollars we can’t afford, the government is unable to guarantee that VI airline ticket prices will be significantly cheaper or total travel times considerably shorter, what is the point in proceeding?
Are there any cheaper and less damaging alternative options?
Why not change the perception of St. Thomas from one of being a competitor to that of being a great resource? Let the USVI have all the dirty, noisy, cut price direct flights landing on its enviably long runway — and let them also deal with the problem of putting up 300 stranded passengers when flights get cancelled overnight (how would the VI cope with this scenario?).
Ferry service
All the VI needs to do is ensure a fast, comprehensive and convenient ferry and air service to meet the passengers who are travelling on to the VI. It is ridiculous that the last ferry leaves Charlotte Amalie as early as 4:15 p.m., thus precluding an onward connection for any passenger who lands in St. Thomas after 3:30 p.m. It also makes little sense that several ferries all leave more or less at the same time.
A lot of our guests arrive by ferry from St. Thomas, and few seem to have any complaints about this other than the difficulty of finding flights that arrive early enough to meet the last VI ferry. They generally find the 45-minute trip a pleasant cruise through the islands (certainly better than a two-hour layover in some US hub airport).
A huge public investment is already earmarked for a large (and presumably, given the cost, shiny) West End ferry terminal, but what is the point in doing this and then simultaneously trying to minimise ferry traffic from St. Thomas? Do one or the other (or neither). Scheduled late ferries from Charlotte Amalie — underwritten, if necessary — would be considerably cheaper and less damaging than a runway extension estimated at up to $70 million (which we all know would probably cost considerably more). Streamlining customs and immigration procedures at the port of entry would be a big help, too.
Looking at other Caribbean countries, there is no marked correlation between affluence and runway length. Most people would agree that St. Barths is a prosperous and pleasant place (its 2008 per capita gross domestic product was $37,000), yet it has one of the shortest and most difficult runways in the Caribbean. Visitors to St. Barths tend to fly into St Maarten’s international airport and then take a small plane or a ferry. Few people would advocate destroying the very pretty bay at the end of the runway with a large, ugly landfill.
Economic comparisons
Haiti, on the other hand, is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere (its per capita GDP is $1,300), and it has a 10,000-foot runway. In 2008 the VI, with a 4,600-foot runway, was the 10th richest country in the world by per capita GDP ($38,500), while St. Thomas, with a giddy 7,000-foot runway, came in at a less impressive $14,000 per capita GDP.
Attempting to get larger numbers of visitors to a destination quicker and cheaper by destroying the very thing that attracts them in the first place doesn’t make any sense. The VI has been blessed with unique and magical natural beauty, yet some residents seem hellbent on sacrificing their inheritance to this blind and voracious god called “Development.”
To be a high-end destination, we don’t need to do too much — less is definitely more, and it’s why people seek out the VI in the first place. The problem with “diversifying” is that it can lead to bad compromise. It’s why Ferrari doesn’t make mini-vans and Michael Jordan was better off playing basketball than baseball. Imagine Picasso being told he should learn to drive a forklift in case “the art thing” didn’t work out?
Maybe we should have a VI national airline to overcome some of the shortcomings in existing airline schedules? Though it has to be asked why, if there is such strong demand for VI flights, did American Eagle cut its flights so drastically in 2011? A drop in tourist arrivals may not be due to “difficulty getting here.” Instead, it could have something to do with the massive recession in the world economy.
We could also look to technology for a solution. There are already aircraft capable of carrying much larger passenger loads that are able to land safely on the current runway. The big aircraft manufacturers are continuing to develop ever more efficient long-haul/short-takeoff-and-landing (STOL) aircraft, so before we mortgage our children’s future and destroy their natural heritage any further why not also look into other innovative technological solutions to this problem?
In the end our “gut feeling” is that this runway extension is probably a done deal. All the public consultation will just add a gloss of accountability to a decision already taken. The “experts” advocate it and special interest groups are demanding it. Money will be borrowed and diverted from other projects (the new hospital?), and Trellis Bay will disappear under a pile of rubble. Hopefully, we’re wrong, but in the meantime, here on Bellamy Cay, we’d better start planning for life after the bulldozers move in.
Still, on the brighter side, It’s going to be one heck of a closing party. In the meantime, remember the lyrics to Joni Mitchell’s song “Big Yellow Taxi,” which was first performed in 1970, about same the time The Last Resort started out:
“Don’t it always seem to go
That you don’t know what you’ve got
Till it’s gone?
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot.”
{fcomment}