US$100,000 a year, huh?
I find it unfortunate that you think such a practice is acceptable or even worse laudable. This isn't just a discussion about diving or fishing rights, but in my opinion this just smacks of the kind of neo-colonialist thinking that ends up getting the local communities resentful (in the long term view) of foreigners in the kind of context as Indonesia's.
You can explain away US$100,000 a year, new roads, schools etc as the benevolent resort's way of helping the (as you say, small) local communities. Perhaps those initiatives do indeed help the local people.
But the bottomline is the same. We are talking about the locals' land, their reef, their fishing rights, and ultimately their lives that we are changing. And THEY are now simply being told and then PAID OFF to stay off their land, their reef and their fish, and yes, to change the ways in which they live. And all so that a bunch of tourists could come in and dive.
Perhaps the way this should be done is to actually help the local communities develop real ownership of what's essentially, traditionally and inherently THEIRS anyway?
I'm paraphrasing: Give them fish, and they'll be dependent on you for the rest of their lives. Teach them to fish, and they'll come away with a lifetime skill.
I love diving and get happy when I see a healthy fish-filled reef. But I don't think the locals should be given cash and told to stay away, and not given anything else that's more basic in terms of furthering the common goal of keeping the reef and fish healthy.
And yes, I don't blame the locals for taking cash, as I do understand that given their previous lives, there would be some benefits they are seeing now. My point is that their benefits would ultimately be far greater had they been given the opportunity to actually DIRECTLY benefit, as opposed to now where they are completely dependent on handouts from the resort operators.
What if the resort closes down due to bankruptcy or other reasons? What are the villagers going to do then? Would the resort people care that perhaps the locals are going to bomb the reef and go back to overfish the area? How sustainable is that?
This model is NOT just a STRANGE way of keeping the reef healthy. Ultimately, this is a short-sighted measure designed to maximise returns for the resort operators and tourists who visit, at the expense of the people who should have ultimate rights over the area, who under this scheme get shooed away to do damage elsewhere. It amounts to "It's OK if you don't take care of the environment, just as long as you don't do it in the areas that we've bribed you off from." If you think that's great, and if you want to support such efforts, then yeah, cheers to you and happy diving.