The problem of El Reducto can no longer be explained as an isolated episode. The red flag has reappeared. Again. Fecal contamination once again prevents swimming at one of Arrecife's best-known beaches. And this time there is a particularly worrying element. After months of investigations, works, repairs, and explanations, the origin still needs to be sought again. Closing a beach when there is contamination is a necessary decision. What forces another debate is that the contamination reappears again and again. Because when an incident repeats itself for almost a year, it stops being just an incident. It becomes a question. And that question is no longer when El Reducto will reopen. It is why it is closed again.
Recent history is difficult to ignore. In October 2025, one of the first episodes that triggered an investigation into possible discharges in the Punta del Camello area appeared. The analyses arrived. The swimming restrictions arrived. The explanations arrived. The searches for the origin arrived. For months, the problem was attempted to be located. Until a fundamental piece of the puzzle appeared. An old sanitation collector, more than four decades old, related to several homes in the area. It was then pointed out as a possible issue caused during the pedestrianization works of Avenida Fred Olsen. Work was carried out. A bypass was proposed. The collector was acted upon. A pumping system was enabled. And finally, after approximately five and a half months, El Reducto reopened for swimming in April 2026.
It seemed like the end. It was not. In July, bacteriological contamination was detected again in Punta del Camello. The analyses returned. The closure returned. The explanations returned. On that occasion, another possible incident related to a sewage discharge pipe appeared on the table. And now, in September 2026, it is happening again. The City Council prohibits swimming again. Public Health detects fecal contamination again. And the most disturbing thing is that, according to the published information, the origin of this new episode has not yet been determined.
Here the debate really begins. Because a beach can be closed for a day. It can be closed for two. It can be closed during an emergency. What is difficult to accept is that one of the most emblematic beaches in Arrecife accumulates pollution episodes for almost a year. That after an action considered sufficient to resolve a specific focus, pollution reappears. That each episode forces the search to start again. That the institutional response is again closure. And that citizens have to wait for an analysis to say if they can return to the water.
It should be said clearly. Not everything falls on a single administration. The City Council has powers regarding sewage and urban services. The Water Consortium plays an essential role in hydraulic infrastructures. Canal Gestión participates in the management and operation
of the system. Public Health monitors the sanitary quality of bathing waters and adopts the necessary measures when there is a risk. The Insular Water Council also has relevant powers regarding water and discharges. There are many institutions around the same pipeline. And precisely because of this, there is a risk. That responsibility ends up fragmented to the point of disappearing among offices.
It is not about looking for a political culprit. It is about identifying technical responsibilities. About knowing who is responsible for each infrastructure. About knowing when it was last inspected. About knowing what actions were taken. About knowing what results they obtained. About determining why new episodes appeared after the repairs. And, above all, about knowing what will be done now to prevent the problem from happening again.
Because there is a huge difference between repairing a breakdown and solving a problem. A breakdown is repaired. A structural problem is investigated. It is analyzed. It is planned. The entire network is reviewed. It is verified that the actions work. Subsequent controls are established. And the public is informed of the results.
El Reducto needs precisely that. A global explanation. Not another specific explanation. Not another patch. Not another reopening followed by a new closure. It needs to know what is really happening under the promenade. What collectors exist. How many are old. Which connections remain active. Which pumping stations are involved. What outfalls exist. What capacity the network has. What happens when it rains. What happens when system pressure increases. And what points may be causing leaks or discharges.
Because under the sand there is not only sand. There is a network of pipes. There are decades of urban growth. There are old infrastructures. There are connections. There are pumping stations. There are collectors. There is a history of works and modifications. And that whole system has to work.
The problem is that the citizen sees none of that. They only see a flag. The red one. They see the closed beach. They see the fences. They see the signs. They see the apparently calm water. And they wonder what is happening. They also wonder how long it will last. And they begin to wonder something even more uncomfortable. If this is happening here, what is happening in other parts of the Arrecife coastline?
That question should not generate alarm. It should generate transparency. Because controlling bathing waters is not a failure. It is precisely what must be done. Detecting contamination and closing a beach when there is a risk is a public health protection measure. The real problem begins when the causes are not definitively resolved.
And here appears a contradiction that deserves an answer. El Reducto has reopened after significant actions. Investigations have been carried out. An old collector has been located. Works have been executed. A pumping system has been installed. Controls have been carried out. And, however,
fecal contamination reappears. If the first source was resolved, it must be explained what is now causing the new episode. If there are several sources, they must be identified. If the network has vulnerabilities, they must be known. And if there are obsolete infrastructures, they will have to be renewed.
It is not enough to ask when people can swim again. We must ask how long a tourist capital can coexist with a sanitation infrastructure that periodically forces the closure of one of its main beaches.
El Reducto has everything a tourist city wants to show. It has a promenade. It has hotels. It has restaurants. It has services. It has hammocks. It has umbrellas. It has visitors. It has residents. It has one of the most recognizable images of Arrecife. But a tourist beach is not protected solely with services. Nor with promotion. Nor with photographs. Nor with blue flags.
It is protected with something much less visible. With a sanitation network that works.
That is why the question should no longer be just when the green flag will fly again. The question should be different. Much more uncomfortable. Much more necessary.
What is needed for El Reducto to stop being news for its fecal waters?
Because a red flag can protect the bather for a day. But it cannot repair a pipe.
And after almost a year of closures, investigations, works, re-openings, and new episodes of pollution, perhaps the time has come to stop counting how many days the beach remains closed.
And start counting how many days a definitive solution has been pending.
Emilio José Hernández Domínguez
Professor and graduate in Information Sciences (Journalism)
Add La Voz de Lanzarote as a preferred Google source.
Stay informed with the latest current news.