The tourism dilemma

I spent this past weekend sunning and swimming at the Laguna de Apoyo. It's about an hour outside of Managua - but a little tricky to get to as you have to take 2 buses and only about 3 buses a day go down into the laguna. My first attempt at getting to the laguna cost about 4 hours and two really bad blisters. But I've since learned and the trip was more efficient this time.
The view from the lagoon is quite spectacular - clear water, tons of trees, so much greenery you can't even see the road you drove in on.
We stayed at a hostel called The Monkey Hut which was highly recommended by backpackers and tourists.
The hostel was pretty packed with people coming for the day and all 20 or so beds were booked for the weekend.
But a kayak trip along the lagoon reveals that the rest of this beautiful space is rather underdeveloped. There were a few nice hotels but they all seemed pretty empty. It is kind of eerie and sad seeing a waterfront restaurant ready to serve about 50 people..with only 2 guests.
But it's the quiet and the lack of development that is so appealing.
The obvious fear is that with more development and tourists the beauty will disappear. The sound of the howler monkeys will be drowned out by jet ski motors. And a tourist will steal your towel when you go to the bathroom. The local culture gets lost when you try to attract the "rich white people."
But then again, the tourism industry can be good for the economy. Nicaragua's economy relies a lot on agriculture, which can be a fickle friend. With unpredictable weather patterns, and the fluctuating food prices, it is common to hear of a farmer who lost his crop and income for the year. Wouldn't it be a good idea for the country to diversify and develop it's tourism industry?
So what's the solution? Is tourism really a bad thing? Is it possible to find the best of both worlds?