Great Article on Overtourism - Shouldn't Cruise Lines Mix Up Their Itineraries More?

[mnocket]

Came across this article on overtourism

Cruise ships are singled out as a major concern.  First because they bring so many people all at once, and second because those visitors are "day trippers" who don't stay in the city and don't actually spend much money there. Compounding this problem is the fact that almost all of the mainstream lines visit the very same ports. It got me to thinking that maybe there was a win-win-win solution for tourist destinations, cruise lines and  cruise passengers.  Simply stated.... it's about time cruise lines get aggressive about developing new ports of call and lessening the burden on the same old, same old, ports.  I scour the new itineraries when they are released looking for something new and interesting, only to be disappointed by seeing the same ports on very similar itineraries across all of the cruise lines.  I know that expedition and luxury lines offer more variety, but they aren't the problem with overtourism (and often aren't in my budget). Given the growing problem of overtourism, don't cruise lines have a responsibility to expand their ports of call?

 

[declansdad]

I don't think the tourism operators in the current ports of call would agree with you. For many of these Islands this  would be one of if not the main source of income.

[slidergirl]

I thought that was a good article.  Modern cruise ships are ruining the ports.  Tourism has always been around and the locals have always made money off of tourism.  But, when you get 4 ships in port at the same time and 10,000 passengers disgorge from those ships to spend 4-8 hours there, most in busses or mini busses on excursions, it is an issue.   Too many tourists leave their common sense at home many times, forgetting that their trash is overwhelming a small island (like Capri now), they don't understand that someone won't take their foreign currency because it takes time for them to try to go get it converted, costing them money to do it.  I find it disgusting in Rome - everyone in their little Mercedes mini-busses rushing to one "sight", getting out and looking at something for 5-10 minutes, getting back in the mini-bus and rushing to the next checklist item.  The streets are already crowded and the air is polluted - adding all those mini-busses add to the problem.  I had to jump out of the way of one of these mini-vans as one of the clueless tourists inside decided to get out of their little cocoon and open the door without looking, almost knocking me down.  Cinque Terre is getting ruined by all the people getting off the ships at La Spezia.  There used to me maybe 1 ship every couple of weeks instead of now multiple ships on one day.  The area already was full of day trippers coming on the trains from around Italy - now it has several thousand more a day.   

 

I am fully for any port limiting the number of ships and/or passengers on any given day.  I am fully for any port or city or village wanting to impose a "day visitor" fee to help try to recover from the invasions.  

 

Large ships can't go just anywhere.  So, so they must follow in a herd to just those ports who can provide docking/tendering to those big ships.  Harmony of the Seas isn't going to be going to Anguilla or St. Barts or Little Cayman...  

[CruiserBruce]

Please identify new ports that cruise lines are not using, and you think should be. This is mentioned here from time to time, and it frequently turns out there are usually good logical, logistical and financial reasons those perceived "new ports" are not being used.

[Mike981]

I'm guessing there are a slew of logistical reasons that we are unaware of on deciding ports to visit.

 

As the article explains, it is up to the local officials to regulate and find their own cost to benefit ratio.

 

I personally don't like seeing some of the earths beautiful locations turn into another cookie cutter tourist trap. But, I don't know how you stop it if you continue to allow multiple ships with thousands of visitors each.

 

We mainly cruise the Caribbean and in port, we now tend to stay on the ship more and more. And quite honestly, enjoy it.

[clo]

57 minutes ago, slidergirl said:

I am fully for any port limiting the number of ships and/or passengers on any given day.

Dubrovnik has been notified by UNESCO that they're going to  revoke their status if they don't do something about the crowds.  I read the mayor is in favor of it.  I wonder what it would take.

Edited July 2, 2019 by clo

[slidergirl]

32 minutes ago, CruiserBruce said:

Please identify new ports that cruise lines are not using, and you think should be. This is mentioned here from time to time, and it frequently turns out there are usually good logical, logistical and financial reasons those perceived "new ports" are not being used.

 Did you read my last sentences?   The new large ships can't go just anywhere.  And, having 4+ ships in a port at the same time is not fun for all those hoping for a "private" experience.    There are a few places over in Spain that are trying to attract cruises, but I believe the first batch of passengers were like "there's nothing here to check off our list."   People seem to be more interested in the "must see" spots or hunkering down at some beach bar than exploring the local environs.   

 

The smaller ships of yesteryear could stop and tender at those cute little places.    A cruise line or a consortium of lines would have to approach a port and negotiate if the port wants thousands of day trippers or not...maybe this is why we have those "private islands" where the cruise lines can put their passengers.

[mnocket]

1 hour ago, CruiserBruce said:

Please identify new ports that cruise lines are not using, and you think should be. This is mentioned here from time to time, and it frequently turns out there are usually good logical, logistical and financial reasons those perceived "new ports" are not being used.

I believe there are many many coastal areas around the world that offer beautiful and interesting experiences.  Cruise lines tend to all focus on a subset of these that are well known.  It's a safe bet.  People recognize the names.  However this focus on the same group of ports has contributed to the growing problem of overtourism. 

 

What are possible alternatives?  They are far too numerous to itemize.  All it takes is an open mind, a bit of curiosity and a map.  Take for instance the south of France.  Instead of Nice, Cannes, Toulon, etc., how about Saint-Raphaël, Montpellier, Bandol, Arles, Sète, and many more?  Might it take some investment to develop some of these ports for cruise ships?  Yep.  Might some of them be tender ports?  Yep.  Addressing these and other issues is what the Business Development departments of companies do.  Heck, some cruise lines are now developing Caribbean ports from scratch as "private islands".

Edited July 2, 2019 by mnocket

[ontheweb]

We live in a county that has long depended on tourism, and then basically the bottom fell out. Believe me if the tourists stop coming, you will hear a totally different tune.

[slidergirl]

I take some vacations at my friend's cottage down in Cocoa Beach, FL.  10 minutes to Port Canaveral.  CB and the surrounding area was a mellow, kind of a hippie-surfer area.  Port Canaveral has developed to take in more ships.  I was there a month ago when Harmony of the Seas was docked - it held more people in it than when 2 smaller Carnival ships and a Disney ship together ported there.  There was one day not quite 2 months ago when there were FIVE ships in PC at the same time.  One of them had to dock at the commercial port because there wasn't enough room at the cruise port.  All those people looking for excursions out of PC/CB to go to Kennedy Space Center or the Land of the Mouse.  A couple of the restaurants/bars at the port maybe got business if the people were willing to sit there and get drunk while looking at nothing (well, if they saw SpaceX's drone ship come back with a booster rocket maybe they saw something).   An example of a port getting larger but people getting off the boat and going somewhere else than spending money in town.

[slidergirl]

6 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

We live in a county that has long depended on tourism, and then basically the bottom fell out. Believe me if the tourists stop coming, you will hear a totally different tune.

I live in a resort town.  When the economic bottom fell out in the mid-2000s, we felt it big time.  But, as things always happen, it worked out and we are thriving.  It's quality, not quantity that keeps things going.  

 

Being out in the boonies of NY, and the hippies that made pilgrimages to Woodstock and Bethel are dwindling, and people wanting to keep their road trips some other places (the "been there, done that" syndrome"),  and ramping up of the popularity again of the Hudson River Valley, I can see how Monticello has lost some of it's glitter.   Build some luxury boutique hotels to compete with HRV...  The Super 8 and Best Western aren't going to compete.  Demographics change - more families don't want to camp/fish/hike in the wooded area anymore.  

Edited July 2, 2019 by slidergirl

[evandbob]

2 hours ago, slidergirl said:

I live in a resort town.  When the economic bottom fell out in the mid-2000s, we felt it big time.  But, as things always happen, it worked out and we are thriving.  It's quality, not quantity that keeps things going.  

 

Being out in the boonies of NY, and the hippies that made pilgrimages to Woodstock and Bethel are dwindling, and people wanting to keep their road trips some other places (the "been there, done that" syndrome"),  and ramping up of the popularity again of the Hudson River Valley, I can see how Monticello has lost some of it's glitter.   Build some luxury boutique hotels to compete with HRV...  The Super 8 and Best Western aren't going to compete.  Demographics change - more families don't want to camp/fish/hike in the wooded area anymore.  

 

Monticello NY had glitter at one time?  Darned if I can remember when.  I lived down the road in Monroe for ten years or so, never saw any "glitter"  in any town along Rte 17.

[iancal]

This is one reason why we are cruising less in retirement.  We get cabin fever on cruises that are longer than 18-21 days.  We have either been on many of the standard cruises under that length or the cruises visit places we would much prefer to visit on a land trip.  We have traveled in the Med far more times than we have cruised.  It is to the point where we will not even consider the cruise unless the price is amazing or we want a break from land travel.   It might be different for us ten years hence.

[DirtyDawg]

I'm sure that once the cruising public gets fed up with the same old ports and stops booking those cruises, the cruise lines will find new ports to visit but more importantly, to generate new bookings and cash flow. Perhaps the cruising public will lose interest faster if local authorities jack up port fees and taxes to discourage over-tourism. Cruise lines are in business to make money, not save the planet from over-tourism. Until their bottom lines are threatened don't count on the cruise lines themselves to solve the over-tourism problems in today's ports.

Edited July 3, 2019 by DirtyDawg

[slidergirl]

39 minutes ago, evandbob said:

 

Monticello NY had glitter at one time?  Darned if I can remember when.  I lived down the road in Monroe for ten years or so, never saw any "glitter"  in any town along Rte 17.

Well, if people went to it and the county depended on tourism, there had to have been something there.   I lived in Pennsylvania for 12 years and I never even heard of taking a trip to Monticello... But, later, I sure did want to visit Bethel one specific summer!!!

 

[Tom47]

1 hour ago, evandbob said:

 

Monticello NY had glitter at one time?  Darned if I can remember when.  I lived down the road in Monroe for ten years or so, never saw any "glitter"  in any town along Rte 17.

😊😊. The Marvelous Mrs Maizel!

[navybankerteacher]

1 hour ago, evandbob said:

 

Monticello NY had glitter at one time?  Darned if I can remember when.  I lived down the road in Monroe for ten years or so, never saw any "glitter"  in any town along Rte 17.

I guess as being sort of on the the southern fringe of the Catskills resort area it had some  business - but “glitter”?

 

That area seems to have faded - even The Red Apple Rest a bit further south on Rte. 17 is gone.

 

[ldubs]

7 hours ago, CruiserBruce said:

Please identify new ports that cruise lines are not using, and you think should be. This is mentioned here from time to time, and it frequently turns out there are usually good logical, logistical and financial reasons those perceived "new ports" are not being used.

 

Geneva?  😀😀😀

[CruiserBruce]

11 hours ago, mnocket said:

I believe there are many many coastal areas around the world that offer beautiful and interesting experiences.  Cruise lines tend to all focus on a subset of these that are well known.  It's a safe bet.  People recognize the names.  However this focus on the same group of ports has contributed to the growing problem of overtourism. 

 

What are possible alternatives?  They are far too numerous to itemize.  All it takes is an open mind, a bit of curiosity and a map.  Take for instance the south of France.  Instead of Nice, Cannes, Toulon, etc., how about Saint-Raphaël, Montpellier, Bandol, Arles, Sète, and many more?  Might it take some investment to develop some of these ports for cruise ships?  Yep.  Might some of them be tender ports?  Yep.  Addressing these and other issues is what the Business Development departments of companies do.  Heck, some cruise lines are now developing Caribbean ports from scratch as "private islands".

And you know these ports want to expand their port/cruise operations? 

[ontheweb]

12 hours ago, slidergirl said:

I live in a resort town.  When the economic bottom fell out in the mid-2000s, we felt it big time.  But, as things always happen, it worked out and we are thriving.  It's quality, not quantity that keeps things going.  

 

Being out in the boonies of NY, and the hippies that made pilgrimages to Woodstock and Bethel are dwindling, and people wanting to keep their road trips some other places (the "been there, done that" syndrome"),  and ramping up of the popularity again of the Hudson River Valley, I can see how Monticello has lost some of it's glitter.   Build some luxury boutique hotels to compete with HRV...  The Super 8 and Best Western aren't going to compete.  Demographics change - more families don't want to camp/fish/hike in the wooded area anymore.  

Actually, this is a big year for Bethel as it is the 50th anniversary of Woodstock. (We were at the site just this past Saturday and bought tickets for Jackson Browne this coming weekend.) 

 

But for years and years as the local tourist economy faded, both the county and the locals in Bethel did everything they could to keep people who wanted to come up and see that site away.  (BTW, it is now an official historical site.) In addition to concerts there, there is also a museum there with a permanent exhibit of the sixties and specifically the Woodstock concert. This year there is also an exhibit comparing the present to then. I spoke to the museum curator a few times, and told him that there is a fundamental flaw in that it skips from 1969, specifically from the concert, to the present without any in between. It totally skips everything the county did to discourage anything from ever happening there. For instance, Max Yasgur, who owned the land and made a wonderful speech caught on the film, was driven out of the county by his neighbors. The curator agreed with me and said that that history was important and they should do something to show it in the future. (The site only became Bethel Woods and a museum and concert site because the county billionaire (he invented cable tv) bought the land.

 

For as long as I can remember, we were only going to be saved by a casino. Now we have one, but it is somehow losing incredible amounts of money.

[FlyerTalker]

20 hours ago, slidergirl said:

There are a few places over in Spain that are trying to attract cruises, but I believe the first batch of passengers were like "there's nothing here to check off our list."   People seem to be more interested in the "must see" spots or hunkering down at some beach bar than exploring the local environs.  

 

A huge amount of "chicken and egg" on display. 

[FlyerTalker]

19 hours ago, mnocket said:

Heck, some cruise lines are now developing Caribbean ports from scratch as "private islands".

 

And if you don't believe that the reasoning is that they would control 100% of the guest's spending, I have both a bridge and some swampland to sell you.

[sail7seas]

23 hours ago, mnocket said:

Came across this article on overtourism

Cruise ships are singled out as a major concern.  First because they bring so many people all at once, and second because those visitors are "day trippers" who don't stay in the city and don't actually spend much money there. Compounding this problem is the fact that almost all of the mainstream lines visit the very same ports. It got me to thinking that maybe there was a win-win-win solution for tourist destinations, cruise lines and  cruise passengers.  Simply stated.... it's about time cruise lines get aggressive about developing new ports of call and lessening the burden on the same old, same old, ports.  I scour the new itineraries when they are released looking for something new and interesting, only to be disappointed by seeing the same ports on very similar itineraries across all of the cruise lines.  I know that expedition and luxury lines offer more variety, but they aren't the problem with overtourism (and often aren't in my budget). Given the growing problem of overtourism, don't cruise lines have a responsibility to expand their ports of call?

 

 

 

 

That is true for Caribbean The Caribbeann has just so many ports and though Carnival  corp is trying hard to develop more.   All the private islands in Bahamas that the various cruise lines developed   helped, as did Costa Maya,  Roatan etc

Too many ships, too few ports.

 

If you leave the  Caribbean here is a big, big world out thre weith huge numbers of ports.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 3, 2019 by sail7seas

[iancal]

We are spending six weeks touring the Greek Islands in Sept/Oct. 

 

We are not even considering spending time in Santorini or Mykonos.   We were there years ago and again quite recently on a cruise.  Turned us off completely.  Lots of other islands to visit and spend time that are less crowded and more enjoyable.

[navybankerteacher]

6 minutes ago, iancal said:

We are spending six weeks touring the Greek Islands in Sept/Oct. 

 

We are not even considering spending time in Santorini or Mykonos.   We were there years ago and again quite recently on a cruise.  Turned us off completely.  Lots of other islands to visit and spend time that are less crowded and more enjoyable.

If by “touring” you mean going from island to island and spending nights on the islands you would have a chance to experience  worthwhile time on the islands after the cruise crowds leave .  A lot of the islands are overcrowded during port calls.