Narcosis, wasn't refering to you in particular when I said some people only want to talk hype.
What I was saying is that I thought there needed to be some balance to the "sky's the limit" tone this thread had. Sorry to have rained on the parade. Guess I should let the hypsters say whatever they want.
I know the issues have been identified, and in many cases have been dealt with by the private sector parties involved. But not all issues, not all developments.
And identifying the issues and resolving them are not the same thing. As the World Bank says (see post #57 above),
2.23 Tourism policies do not take into account water quantity constraints. Current tourism policy is largely geared towards increasing the number of tourists, without taking into account the carrying capacity of the natural resource base. The case of the Bavaro-Punta Cana area, where tourism planning has not taken into account the availability of water resources, is a case in point. In the 1980s, INDRHI estimated water availability in the East to serve a maximum of 20,000 rooms, but the planned new developments will largely overcome the initial estimates.
It's an infrastructure planning issue as much as anything else. And it seems to me right now, there's plenty of talk about rapid build-up but not enough talk about how to support that build-up in the long run.
I know quite a bit about the good works of PCBR -- in fact, we're slated to do a blog on it. And about CAST, on whose board Raneiri serves. And about any other pro-active tourism industry development positive for the environment, for that matter. [We've already done blogs on Green Globe and Blue Flag, for example.] Check the thread in this Forum on reefs and diving, where I clearly say we want to discuss the positive things dive services and others are already doing. And check my remarks in other threads about the hotels often doing the most to keep the beaches clean.
I'm not anti-tourism, I'm not anti-Punta Cana, not anti-hotels, if that's what you think. I just tried to raise the water supply issue as a possible restraint on growth, and in response it was said and implied -- repeatedly -- that I was inventing or "over-dramatizing" the issue, "crying wolf." I had to respond. The issue is real and won't go away. If you want to discuss the growth potential of the region covered by this thread, you should discuss the infrastructure challenges it faces too, and not in the superficial manner it was being discussed early on in this thread.
