Monday, July 31, 2006
Ancient Canary Islands in Google Earth
Well, I may as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb, tilt at windmills and add fuel to another fire (and overdo the cliches in this post), but there is quite a ho ha brewing up over accusations of trickery going on, thanks to an agreement between Grafcan, a publicly owned local company, and Google, to show images of the Canary Islands that date back to 2002 (and older) in Google Earth.
Local green groups accuse the Canarian Government of the sort of censorship that you'd normally associate with China and say that the reason behind this is to obfuscate the extent of recent development on the Canary Islands - at least those bits that are of "special sensitivity" to the tourist market.
It appears that someone from Google came to the archipelago in August 2005 and one of their commercial directors reached an agreement, "free of economic exchanges", with Grafcan for Grafcan to provide the images. Apparently, Grafcan are the first European company to obtain such an agreement.
Although Google has up-to-date images, which, says the report, it has shown in Google Earth, obtained by NASA and DigitalGlobe, according to Grafcan, Google decided to change them to the ones dated from 2002 that the public company provided, being the most recent that Grafcan had available.
However, Bernardo Pizarro, managing director of Grafcan, says that they have received a lot of complaints from users who want to see up-to-date images.
He also says that Grafcan possesses images of the entire archipelago from 2005 and of El Hierro, La Gomera and Lanzarote from 2006. He has also told the local press that an airship will be flying within the next month to capture photos of the rest of the islands and that the company will be seeking guarantees from Google that they won't hang about over updating to these new images.
So, who knows who made the decision or why?
Meanwhile, during the last week or so, I had noticed that the images for around here had changed. I was wowed by the resolution, very evident here in this image of Garachico (Fly there), but they just seem to be better resolution versions of the same images that were shown before. I have never seen any more recent images for this area and, indeed, I can date the image that shows this house (Fly here) to somewhere between April 1999, when I moved in and November 2003, when the roof was painted - because this is the pre-painted colour. And, because there are various new buildings in the area, which simply do not appear.
Whilst I agree that there are plenty of cases where development here is definitely over-development. We don't need any more hotels, until we can fill the ones we've got, but "somehow" they just keep getting built, for instance, but thinking this through, there really seems to be no point in trying to hide the situation.
Because there are and always will be vast tracts of land on these islands that cannot be developed (until they figure out how to build on vertical cliff faces, which I'll admit, is not improbable that they would consider it), even if a casual tourist were to see vast urban areas on the coasts, as a whole, that will not seem like an alarming amount of development to the untrained eye. Besides, as soon as a tourist arrives, they will notice if there is a great discrepancy.
And, surely even the government has the intellect to realize that many people who visit the islands are regulars, that it is easier to keep the customers you've got and that conning them would be the fastest way to lose them.
Those of us who live here can see the rate of development for ourselves, so there is no point trying to hide the reality from us either. I'm with Victor Ruiz on this, who says he can see no evidence that the government is trying to "hide the numerous shameless urban developments and destruction."
Actually, I think this image gives a clue to the the real reason, that is if there is any reason at all - beyond bumbling inefficiency characteristic on these islands. The mystery white stain on that image, I understand, is a military base.
Someone, hopefully, will tell me what security it offers those bases to be be HIGHLIGHTED so clearly in white. Short of putting a bloody target image on them, I'd have thought that was the worst thing to do, but who am I to say? :)
Google Earth reemplaza las imágenes actuales de las Islas por otras de 2002
El Partido Verde acusa a Grafcan de "engañar al mundo a través de Internet"
Poca calidad de Google Earth en Canarias
El Gobierno de Canarias y los mapas de Google
Canary islands in a coalmine?
6 Comments:
Pamela wrote (on
August 01, 2006)
Yeah, I don't find 2002 to be excessively old. Be nice to have newer, but I can live with it. Personally, I don't think there is anything funny going on either.
Don't get me wrong, I am VERY concerned about the enviroment as a whole, but I do think that our greenies "cry wolf" a bit too much. Suggesting that every damn thing is an abuse is not the way to get the important issues tackled, IMHO. It's the best way to get ignored and quickly.
If I had to guess why, I'd say that Google decided to go with the best resolution, because this is what will impress the average user, as well as those being the Grafcan images within the agreement. Then, when Google get the 2006 images that Grafcan have promised, they can do a wholesale update within the bounds of their normal 3-4 year revision.
With luck, then we'll have up-to-date images that are also high resolution.
BTW, did you know that there are 16,000 new dwellings planned for Cabo Blanco in the south? After that, the "Hanging Gardens of Gigantes" (on vertical landmass) might be the only option! :-)
wrote (on
August 07, 2006)
Mmmm... to be sincere, I don't think our goverment are so smart as to have an idea like that of "let's put outdated imaginery on Google so tourist can't see what we have done". Too much elaborated... I think that, more than a conspiration, this is just another bit of how our public servants do their work....
(please forgive my bad english)
Pamela wrote (on
August 07, 2006)
There's nothing wrong with your English, Anonymous. Yes, I understand you and I think you agree with my view: that it is just the way they work - which, we British do see as inefficient. Would I go as far as to say that the local government is not smart? Gee, I am biting my tongue so hard it hurts! :)
wrote (on
August 30, 2006)
I have an image taken from Googleearth just after the update of the area of Puerto Colon in Tenerife showing the hotel La Nina and the shopping center at the other side of La Pinta. The new image shows these buildings still under construction.
Pamela wrote (on
August 31, 2006)
Goodness, the last time I was on the south of the island was almost a decade ago and La Nina and La Pinta were already well established and most of the area was developed, for that matter.
Yeah, I'm sure some of it new, but it kinda makes me wonder what they took the images with, a horse-drawn satellite maybe? :)
Dammit.
I was so impressed this week when the resolution suddenly jumped by leaps and bounds.. and wished I had that kind of resolution while I was on Tenerife (for planning purposes...)
But at the sake of hiding the truth that Tenerife (Especially La Orotava) is becoming more and more developed? What is the point? :P Not all of it will -ever- be developed (Unless one figures how to anchor a building onto a vertical landmass :P )
My recent visit was my 4th to the island, and as long as I have in-laws there, certainly won't be my last. This just sucks...
But on the other hand.. dang it if the resolution increase isn't damn SWEEET!