The microalgae against the Consortium

They have a "low" level of toxicity and have been dispersing on their own. And thank goodness. Not only because there have been no consequences to regret, but because if the island had really faced something serious with the "crisis of ...

October 7 2011 (15:48 WEST)

They have a "low" level of toxicity and have been dispersing on their own. And thank goodness. Not only because there have been no consequences to regret, but because if the island had really faced something serious with the "crisis of ...

They have a "low" level of toxicity and have been dispersing on their own. And thank goodness. Not only because there have been no consequences to regret, but because if the island had really faced something serious with the "microalgae crisis", we would have been in trouble. At least, that's what it seems like judging by the lack of coordination and the terrible communication that has surrounded this issue.

Several days after Trichodesmium (as they have finally concluded the cyanobacteria in question is called) made its appearance on the Lanzarote coast, it is still difficult to understand what dimension the institutions gave to this supposed threat. Obviously, enough to prohibit swimming on most of the island's beaches. However, precisely for that reason, it is surprising that until late Sunday night, they did not bother to send out a miserable press release (the Consortium has only sent one during this "crisis", and almost at 11 p.m.), so that the media could convey this information to society.

That is to say, despite the fact that they found out at 12 noon on Sunday, according to the Cabildo, they preferred to let people prepare the children, grab the mat, inflate the duck float and get in the car heading to any of the island's beaches, on a hot autumn day, only to arrive and find a sign prohibiting swimming. Or worse, that they didn't even see the sign, depending on the time and area they were heading to.

In fact, many Lanzarote residents went into the water last Sunday. Some, because they didn't even find out about the problem until many hours later. Others, because they ignored the prohibition, since in most areas, the institutions limited themselves to putting up the sign, but not to ensuring compliance.

Faced with any alert where the consequences are initially unknown, as was the case, the role of the administration is not easy. Above all, to decide how to maintain the balance and not create excessive alarm, as some question has happened, for example, in El Hierro in the face of the seismic crisis, nor to fall short. However, in Lanzarote, the most difficult thing has been achieved, combining both options. That is to say, they fell very short and went too far at the same time.

The example of the latter is that while they did not inform the media, so that they in turn could convey to society what was happening (lavozdelanzarote.com had to do it on its own and with unofficial sources), they were dedicated to putting up signs prohibiting not only swimming, but also fishing. Something totally incomprehensible, considering that the Public Health Department of the Canary Islands Government later assured La Voz that at no time did they convey to the Lanzarote institutions that there was any type of risk to fishing.

However, the fishermen have been disconcerted, not knowing if there was any risk in consuming the catches of the last few days, or if they could cast their rods back into the sea. That is, those who found out, of course, because within this curious protocol, signs were placed on the beaches prohibiting fishing, but no formal notice was given to professional fishermen or guilds.

Precisely at this point, there is one of the most surreal explanations that have been given from the Lanzarote Security and Emergency Consortium, to respond to the avalanche of criticism they have faced in recent days. According to the councilor, Mónica Álvarez, signs were put up prohibiting fishing not because there was a risk in the fish, but to prevent fishermen from tripping on the rocks and falling into the water. Very logical, without a doubt. Let citizens think that the fish on the coast may be contaminated, just to avoid a possible slip by a fisherman. A slip that, by the way, would have had more consequences from the blow itself than from contact with the blessed microalgae. As I said, they have achieved the dubious merit of erring by excess and by default at the same time.

And not only in how citizens have been informed, but also the institutions involved themselves. In fact, despite the fact that Public Health affirms that on Sunday they also recommended prohibiting swimming on the coast of Arrecife, from this City Council they assure that they never received the notice, and therefore did not transfer this measure to their beaches.

The Consortium, without a doubt, is not the only one that has failed. There are probably responsibilities to be shared, but the reality is that if an body has been created to coordinate all the security and emergencies of the island, it is to him that explanations must be requested. Otherwise, its existence is meaningless, at least in its political aspect.

Now, after this episode has fortunately remained in little more than an anecdote, it is inevitable to wonder if the island is really prepared to face an emergency that is truly serious. If they had had to manage the El Hierro crisis, what would they have done? Order the evacuation of the island, but only by putting up signs at the airport, and prohibiting walking on the sidewalks, lest someone trip over a curb?

Most read