A controversial proposal is making waves in the Canary Islands, where officials are considering a bold move to fine 'reckless' tourists for emergency services use. This comes after a series of recent emergency operations that have left authorities calling out tourists for their disregard for safety advisories.
Fernando Figuereo, the general director of emergencies, made a strong statement, emphasizing that 'the emergency is not free.' He highlighted the cost of rescue operations, with an hour of helicopter use exceeding $2,000. Figuereo believes that those who act recklessly should bear the financial burden, not those who suffer accidents through no fault of their own.
The Canary Islands, a popular tourist destination, saw a staggering 18.4 million visitors in 2025, according to government data. With such high footfall, the government is now working on amending the Civil Protection and Emergencies law to address this issue.
But here's where it gets controversial: Figuereo cited an example of tourists ignoring red flags on beaches, leading to water accidents. He proposes that the Canary Islands Police, present on all islands, should play a role in identifying and fining these reckless individuals.
In January, a tragic incident occurred when a 23-year-old tourist fell in a hard-to-reach area while hiking on the Los Gigantes cliffs, leaving them in critical condition. Additionally, the body of a missing tourist was recovered off southern Lanzarote, with their companions nearby. These incidents highlight the potential consequences of reckless behavior.
And this is the part most people miss: emergency rescues and searches are not just about the cost. They also involve significant resources and personnel, such as dive teams, firefighters, helicopters, maritime rescue resources, and police. In the case of the three tourists who ventured into a closed-off area, all these services were deployed to ensure their safety.
So, is it fair to fine tourists for their reckless actions? Or should emergency services be free for all, regardless of the circumstances? Let us know your thoughts in the comments. This proposal certainly sparks an interesting debate, and we'd love to hear your opinions on it!
