PUTTING LIMITS ON SITES
Locales ration access, levy fines to preserve attractions for residents and future generations.
Travelers love Hawaii. Peru’s Machu Picchu is a heart throb too. Venice, Italy? Yes, per favore. But our passion for these places has a downside: too many people visiting, too much wear and tear on the destination.
That passion is destroying the objects of our affection, leaving destinations in a quandary.
How can they show off their best attractions — the very sites that contribute enormous amounts of revenue — without damaging or destroying the things that move people to see for themselves?
And how do destinations avoid affecting the quality of residents’ lives as the parade of people continues to grow?
Take Hawaii. Last year, nearly 10 million tourists visited the islands, setting a record. The economic impact is unquestionable, but with the masses come traffic congestion and damage to the quality of the experience at some sites, never mind the site itself, said James Mak, a retired University of Hawaii economics professor.
The growth in tourism increases demands on infrastructure and creates a greater need for law enforcement to handle the masses; the number of people who misbehave, sometimes badly, also increases.
Amsterdam, a city of a million but expecting 20 million visitors this year, has seen hooligans turn it into, as NPR described it, a “naughty Disneyland” where drunken tourists vomit and urinate on residents’ properties.
Not as offensive but just as brazen was the couple who used their camp stove to make themselves a cup of coffee on Venice’s historic Rialto Bridge, the BBC reported. These members of the coffee generation, just two of more than 30 million people who visit the city each year, were fined more than $1,000.
These are examples of “overtourism,” a word that has gained momentum as the devastating effects of uncontrolled visitation have increased.
The term, Mak said, means locals or tourists believe visitor numbers have reached levels that reduce the quality of life or the quality of the tourist experience.
“For residents, those are really significant costs,” he said. “And so more and more people in tourist destinations are saying ‘Enough is enough.’ Yes, we understand that tourism brings economic benefits, but tourism also disturbs our way of life and we need to look for a balance between those two.’ ”
The key, Mak said, is an overall tourism management plan. For instance, Hanauma Bay, a popular snorkeling destination on Oahu, limits tourism by charging an admission fee and shutting access once its 300 parking spaces are filled. Likewise, Maui’s popular Haleakala, where tourists view a spectacular sunrise, now requires reservations.
The problem extends far beyond Hawaii.
Machu Picchu has a ticketing system that means you can see the Incan citadel in the morning or the afternoon, and once you have left the premises, you may not reenter. Also, visitors must be accompanied by a guide.
If you’re visiting the fragile Galápagos, Ecuador’s tourism star, you’ll need to follow the rules closely. That includes staying at least 6 feet from wildlife and sticking to the paths.
In Venice, fines are levied for infractions (besides morning coffee) such as feeding pigeons, jumping in canals and wearing swimsuits in the city.
Beginning Oct. 26, visitors may no longer climb Australia’s Uluru rock.
Visitors don’t always react well to restrictions. But, said Sue Kanoho, executive director for the Kauai Visitors Bureau, “When they see the place … it speaks to your heart. You’ll understand why we’re trying to protect it.”