Not so sure the designation of this internationally important inland delta as a national park would make any difference to its preservation or restoration. National parks designations tends to bring with it eco-tourism which has the potential to cause further damage. However, if this plan came with the removal of the hydroelectric dams and the reinstatement of the lost alluvial woodland, (which would double the size of the ecosystem) , I'm all for it. But it has to be done with habitat restoration as the priority and not eco tourism €€€.
In a world where we are desperately trying to move away from fossil fuel energy, I wouldn’t be pushing for the removal of the hydroelectric plants. The ecosystem developed because of the dams, so removing them could be risky?
The Geraragh is already an EU Special Area of Conservation - which is supposedly a higher designation and level of protection than a National Park. We need to finally and properly implement the Habitats Directive in Ireland. The Gearagh needs an SAC management and restoration plan - not nice signs with ESB logos saying it’s a National Park!
Enjoying reading this discussion!
Technical Director at SLR Consulting
8moEcotourism is a great opportunity for the alignment of tourism and conservation goals. Particularly eith regard to directing tourism revenue towards habitat management costs. I would agree that nature based tourism with no inherent benefits with regard to the environment or sustainability should not be promoted in this context. But its important not to confuse nature based tourism and ecotourism when discussing potential win win scenarios for biodiversity. By definition ecotourism has inherent benefits for nature where as NBT can be damaging if managed incorrectly.