visitors' lengths of stay all declined over the previous year. The previous year was not very good but early figures for the usually weak winter months were encouraging.

It is true that these days people are booking later and later because Bermuda is becoming a "break'' destination as opposed to the main holiday of the year.

Tourism is a very fickle mistress and one month of decline does not necessarily indicate a bad year. However, any decline is disappointing when there were expectations that 1997 would demonstrate a turn-around in tourism.

The explanation may well be a relatively warm winter in the United States, just as it was here, which did not provoke people to grab a few days away from the freeze. It is difficult to judge what impact the labour stoppages had but we felt at the time and we still feel that any "trouble'' causes travel agents to send clients elsewhere. Tourism cannot be turned on and off at will and it cannot be tampered with without unhappy results. Huge amounts of hard work by tourism representatives overseas can begin to show results only to have the work negated by events in Bermuda. That too may be what happened to March figures.

Indications are that April figures will be about the same as last year with May set to show an improvement but June bookings are "disappointing'' compared to June 1996, according to the Bermuda Hotel Association.

All in all, the picture is not a happy one. We do understand that it is difficult to turn around a long term erosion in a short time. Bermuda's tourism had been eroding since 1981. Just like any other business or organisation, when the rot sets in it is difficult to stop. However there is bound to be disappointment because there was an expectation that tourism had bottomed out and was showing some signs of improvement.

The enthusiasm and dedication of the Minister of Tourism, David Dodwell, and the activity going on in hotels themselves gave cause for optimism for 1997.

There is still time but it is now clear that recovery will not be easy. We have criticised the "Let Yourself Go'' campaign from the beginning as not being representative of what Bermuda offers visitors. Yet Bermuda has been told that the campaign would show good results. We still have to wonder if "Let Yourself Go'' is putting off people who know Bermuda's reputation and therefore know that the campaign is not representative of Bermuda. It is unlikely to attract new people to Bermuda because they would probably be happier letting go in places like Las Vegas.

In recent months Bermuda has received a good deal of very valuable publicity in magazines and newspapers. That publicity, written by experienced travel writers, reflects Bermuda as it is. Anyone who reads it knows that there is a great contrast with erect wind socks and suggestions of sex on the beach. So, what message is Bermuda sending?