Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: MONDAY, June 20, 1994 TAG: 9406270114
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-4 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
It already is.
As reported in Sunday's "Peril and Promise" installment on regional prospects, visitors last year spent $241 million in the Roanoke Valley alone, more if the New River Valley is included. Tourism employs 4,500 people in the valley, with an annual payroll of $57 million. The opening of Explore Park next month and reopening of Hotel Roanoke next spring are certain to raise those figures.
Nor is the question whether tourism is a good or bad thing.
It's generally good - a clean industry attracting dollars to the region without requiring a lot of new government services, such as for industrial infrastructure or schools.
But you can over-generalize. Much depends on the kind of tourism, on the available alternatives to tourism as an economic engine, and, above all, on how well the region plans for tourism.
The question, rather, is how Roanoke and Southwest Virginia can get the maximum mileage, for the least cost, out of its tourism potential.
We don't have a detailed answer, but we do have some general thoughts.
First, Southwest Virginia should make use of what it already has - mountain scenery, a generally good climate, the Blue Ridge Parkway, the universities of the New River Valley - to attract tourist and convention visitors.
On the one hand, this point implies that marketing should be more intensive. Not only do marketing budgets and operations need to be further expanded, they ought to be regionalized, served by pooled resources.
On the other hand, the point also implies caution regarding projects that may threaten to degrade or destroy what visitors come to see in the first place. Ridgeline development, for instance, might bring an immediate payoff, but at too great a long-term cost to the environment, the economy - and tourism.
Second, Southwest Virginia should build on what it has.
This is another way of saying the region should recognize and capitalize on its niche in the market. A maritime museum wouldn't make much sense in Southwest Virginia. A bigger and better railway museum in Roanoke, or a major center somewhere in the region for the study of Southern Appalachian culture and the making and sale of Appalachian craftwork, just might.
Again, we must be serious about preservation. The surest way to empty Southwest Virginia of visitors is to make the region indistinguishable from any other part of the country.
Third, let's be realistic in understanding what tourism can and can't do.
Such realism might result in a less optimistic appraisal than that of tourism's biggest boosters. But realists are apt to be friendlier to tourism than the detractors who see only traffic jams and low-wage jobs.
Appropriate planning can help prevent or alleviate the former, especially if the emphasis is on gentle eco-tourism rather than humongous plastic playgrounds. And while it's true that average wages in tourism tend to be low, that's only part of the story.
Another part is that some people - including young people looking for seasonal employment before returning to school - need those jobs. Plus, by generating more tax revenues than tax costs, tourism boosts localities' ability to recruit or retain higher-paying employment by raising their capacity to fund public services such as education, and by keeping tax rates lower than they otherwise would be.
Tourism can also raise a region's profile, which brings all sorts of benefits, some of them tangible.
Indeed, the right kind of tourism can dovetail with an enhanced quality of life for nontourists. When the sights and activities that attract visitors are much the same as what inhabitants want to be able to see and do in their region, why not make a few bucks off tourism?
by CNB