Italy officially bans cruise ships from Venice effective August 1st

[bennybear]

1 hour ago, Vict0riann said:

I will be perfectly happy if our cruise starts in Trieste instead of Venice, and I won't blame @bennybear!  At the moment, we are supposed to overnight in Venice and leave at noon the next day, which would be interesting, as we have only left after dark in the past.    Many on the roll call, however, have mentioned the hotels they are staying at in Venice, they will be disappointed, or perhaps just make the necessary changes.  We are flying into Venice the day of, from England (if they will have us), so I'm not sure how it is all going to work out.  Life is an adventure!

Phew!   Lol! 

We’ve travelled extensively in Italy and have enjoyed both Trieste and Ravenna so either would be ok.   We also adore Venice so would happily return.  

[iancal]

We would always  prefer Trieste.   Two hours or so direct rail. No train change required.

[MikeD4134]

21 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

How long have we been subjected to rumors and proposed legislation to eliminate/reduce the size of cruise ships from sailing to their usual terminals in Venice?  

 

I am NOT doubting the environmental reasons for those who want to see this happen.  Yet, nothing ever seems to really happen.  I would suggest that those who are concerned about this issue pour yourself a glass of a good quality of Italian wine of your choice and have a pleasant evening.  

This is not a rumor or proposed legislation, it is the law, After August 1st no Cruise ships in Venice,  I love the wine and pleasant evening advice.

[KirkNC]

So Venice is now like Florence, Rome and other inland cities where transport is required.  Of course usually that only occurs for inland cities.

[bennybear]

2 hours ago, iancal said:

We would always  prefer Trieste.   Two hours or so direct rail. No train change required.

Depends where you fly into.  You can fly into Bologna and it’s only an hour to Ravenna.  

[rkacruiser]

1 hour ago, MikeD4134 said:

This is not a rumor or proposed legislation, it is the law,

 

Yes, so it appears.  But, it has been pointed out on other CC Message Boards that Italy is not know for long serving governments.  Lots of already disgruntled tourist related entities in Venice with this "law".  What may "law" today, may not be "law" tomorrow.

 

May I suggest pouring oneself a glass of a good quality of Italian wine, preparing a plate of canapes, and continue to be part of the audience of this long running opera.  The Fat Lady has yet to sing in my opinion.  

[RD64]

You can also fly into Trieste (TRS) Ronchi dei Legionari!

 

[kazu]

59 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

 

May I suggest pouring oneself a glass of a good quality of Italian wine, preparing a plate of canapes, and continue to be part of the audience of this long running opera.  The Fat Lady has yet to sing in my opinion.  

 

I think it’s best you pour it and accept the reality 😉. I think there is a good reason it came from Rome and I think it is here to stay.

Venice needs to protect it’s infrastructure.  I think the Fat Lady has sung and it’s about time.

[cruisemom42]

1 hour ago, rkacruiser said:

 

Yes, so it appears.  But, it has been pointed out on other CC Message Boards that Italy is not know for long serving governments.  Lots of already disgruntled tourist related entities in Venice with this "law".  What may "law" today, may not be "law" tomorrow.

 

May I suggest pouring oneself a glass of a good quality of Italian wine, preparing a plate of canapes, and continue to be part of the audience of this long running opera.  The Fat Lady has yet to sing in my opinion.  

 

I've been following this issue for a long time, and this time I believe it is going to stick. Particularly since the Italian government is loath to lose the UN funding they currently enjoy.

 

It must also be said that regardless of a few tourism unions in Venice, a majority of Italians favor such action. Even CLIA appears to be bowing to the inevitable (read last couple of paragraphs in link below):

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/italy-bans-large-cruise-ships-from-passing-through-venice-11626208397

 

 

[kazu]

2 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

I've been following this issue for a long time, and this time I believe it is going to stick. Particularly since the Italian government is loath to lose the UN funding they currently enjoy.

 

It must also be said that regardless of a few tourism unions in Venice, a majority of Italians favor such action. Even CLIA appears to be bowing to the inevitable (read last couple of paragraphs in link below):

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/italy-bans-large-cruise-ships-from-passing-through-venice-11626208397

 

 

 

Would it be too much trouble to ask you to copy and past the article? Or the last two paragraphs you are referencing?  It’s behind a paywall.  

I would be interested to read it.  

[cruisemom42]

Just now, kazu said:

 

Would it be too much trouble to ask you to copy and past the article? Or the last two paragraphs you are referencing?  It’s behind a paywall.  

I would be interested to read it.  

 

Sorry, I was surprised that it opened for me as I am not a subscriber -- but it did. I have left out a few paragraphs that just provide background most of us on CC already have:

 

Italy 1, Cruise Ships 0. Rome Moves to Ban Cruise Vessels to Venice.
 

ROME—Italy suspended the passage of large cruise ships through the historic center of Venice, after the return of the giant vessels to the lagoon city since June reopened divisions between Venice’s tourism industry and residents who want the behemoths banned.

 

Italy’s government on Tuesday decided to stop large cruise ships from approaching Venice’s canals and piazzas until new docking sites have been built on the edges of the lagoon. Campaigners against large cruise ships have argued for decades that the vessels, and the waves and pollution they cause, damage the delicate fabric of Venice.

 

The decision by the cabinet of Prime Minister Mario Draghi resolves, for now, a long-running dispute over the lucrative cruise-ship traffic that has helped keep Venice’s economy afloat but infuriated many residents.

 

The increasingly heavy maritime traffic of recent years has prompted a mounting backlash in Venice, where many say the heavy wakes of large ships erode the fragile foundations of historic waterfront buildings.

“This is a fundamental step to protect the environmental, landscape, artistic and cultural integrity of Venice,” said Italian Transport Minister Enrico Giovannini.

 

Tuesday’s decree, which takes effect from Aug. 1, makes it unlikely that the giant ships, which for years towered over the ornate palazzos of Venice, will ever come close to famous landmarks such as St. Mark’s Square again. The Venice port authority has launched a tender for the refurbishment of the docks in an industrial zone at a safe distance from the historic center of Venice, which would serve as a temporary docking place for the cruise ships. The planned permanent solution is to build a new dock for large ships outside the entrance to the lagoon. The government hasn’t said how long that will take.

 

“I am happy and I hope that now they will set up reasonable solutions for these floating skyscrapers. I am not against them arriving in Venice, but it was about time they stopped them from passing by St. Mark’s,” said Marco Luitprandi, a 52-year-old graphic designer.

 

But Venetians who work in tourism have defended the cruise ships as a lifeline for the city.  “It’s an absurd decision. How can you stop such an activity so abruptly?” said Antonio Velleca, who works for a company moving supplies and luggage for cruise ships. “I’d like them to look at those workers who haven’t worked for the last 18 months to realize how much damage they are creating.”

 

In 2020, the city’s area lost around 200 million euros, the equivalent of $237 million, in revenue due to lack of cruise liners.

 

The journey leading to the government’s decision has been tortuous. Rome initially banned large ships from getting too close to Italy’s coast in 2012, after the cruise ship Costa Concordia ran aground off the coast of Tuscany in January of that year.

 

However, the government made an exception for Venice, until an alternative route through the lagoon could be found. Until now, large cruise ships passed about 1,000 feet from St. Mark’s Square, through the famous vistas of the Giudecca canal, to dock at a passenger port.

 

Italian authorities didn’t come up with a solution until early this year, however, when it decided to open the tender to develop the temporary alternative docking site within the lagoon. Tourists could then take smaller boats to the historic city, or take a bus to reach it via the city’s bridge to the mainland.

 

The cruise line industry welcomed the decision.

 

“The cruise industry has been supportive of a new approach for many years, so this is a major step forward,” said the Cruise Lines International Association, an industry body based in Washington. “We now look forward to progress being made towards the provision of alternative docking arrangements in time for the 2022 season.”

[kazu]

1 minute ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

Sorry, I was surprised that it opened for me as I am not a subscriber -- but it did. I have left out a few paragraphs that just provide background most of us on CC already have:

 

Italy 1, Cruise Ships 0. Rome Moves to Ban Cruise Vessels to Venice.
 

ROME—Italy suspended the passage of large cruise ships through the historic center of Venice, after the return of the giant vessels to the lagoon city since June reopened divisions between Venice’s tourism industry and residents who want the behemoths banned.

 

Italy’s government on Tuesday decided to stop large cruise ships from approaching Venice’s canals and piazzas until new docking sites have been built on the edges of the lagoon. Campaigners against large cruise ships have argued for decades that the vessels, and the waves and pollution they cause, damage the delicate fabric of Venice.

 

The decision by the cabinet of Prime Minister Mario Draghi resolves, for now, a long-running dispute over the lucrative cruise-ship traffic that has helped keep Venice’s economy afloat but infuriated many residents.

 

The increasingly heavy maritime traffic of recent years has prompted a mounting backlash in Venice, where many say the heavy wakes of large ships erode the fragile foundations of historic waterfront buildings.

“This is a fundamental step to protect the environmental, landscape, artistic and cultural integrity of Venice,” said Italian Transport Minister Enrico Giovannini.

 

Tuesday’s decree, which takes effect from Aug. 1, makes it unlikely that the giant ships, which for years towered over the ornate palazzos of Venice, will ever come close to famous landmarks such as St. Mark’s Square again. The Venice port authority has launched a tender for the refurbishment of the docks in an industrial zone at a safe distance from the historic center of Venice, which would serve as a temporary docking place for the cruise ships. The planned permanent solution is to build a new dock for large ships outside the entrance to the lagoon. The government hasn’t said how long that will take.

 

“I am happy and I hope that now they will set up reasonable solutions for these floating skyscrapers. I am not against them arriving in Venice, but it was about time they stopped them from passing by St. Mark’s,” said Marco Luitprandi, a 52-year-old graphic designer.

 

But Venetians who work in tourism have defended the cruise ships as a lifeline for the city.  “It’s an absurd decision. How can you stop such an activity so abruptly?” said Antonio Velleca, who works for a company moving supplies and luggage for cruise ships. “I’d like them to look at those workers who haven’t worked for the last 18 months to realize how much damage they are creating.”

 

In 2020, the city’s area lost around 200 million euros, the equivalent of $237 million, in revenue due to lack of cruise liners.

 

The journey leading to the government’s decision has been tortuous. Rome initially banned large ships from getting too close to Italy’s coast in 2012, after the cruise ship Costa Concordia ran aground off the coast of Tuscany in January of that year.

 

However, the government made an exception for Venice, until an alternative route through the lagoon could be found. Until now, large cruise ships passed about 1,000 feet from St. Mark’s Square, through the famous vistas of the Giudecca canal, to dock at a passenger port.

 

Italian authorities didn’t come up with a solution until early this year, however, when it decided to open the tender to develop the temporary alternative docking site within the lagoon. Tourists could then take smaller boats to the historic city, or take a bus to reach it via the city’s bridge to the mainland.

 

The cruise line industry welcomed the decision.

 

“The cruise industry has been supportive of a new approach for many years, so this is a major step forward,” said the Cruise Lines International Association, an industry body based in Washington. “We now look forward to progress being made towards the provision of alternative docking arrangements in time for the 2022 season.”

 

Thank you so much ♥️ 

 

And it explains a lot to those going to Venice.

 

Really appreciate you taking the time and effort 👍 

[ski ww]

Any thing from HAL yet on what will replace Venice as an arrival or departure port? 

[Nodakboiler]

Our PCC said he doesn’t find out anything until the public does!

[voyageur9]

Cruisers on mass market lines (like HAL) should get used to being banned or, at least, discouraged. Venice is just the beginning. (Although Key West tried.) 

 

Low-spending hordes coming ashore in their thousands to invade -- especially -- small, often fragile, cities like Dubrovnik and Venice can expect to be increasingly shunned. The bring lots of problems and very little value because the cruise lines have -- successfully -- cornered most of the revenue ashore. 

 

Unlike solo and small group travelers who overnight and dine and wander and shop, the masses of daylong cruise visitors that invade places like Venice are increasingly regarded as undesirables. That's only partially because of the scant revenues they leave behind. They also overwhelm and overcrowd and thus diminish the intrinsic value of those special places.

 

None of which is inherently bad. It's the market at work. Smaller ships (or groups or individuals) will increasingly be welcomed in highly-sought after locales like Venice while the hoi polloi on mass market lines will be funneled into cruise line owned fake 'destinations' which already proliferate in the Caribbean and are seemingly designed to avoid any actual interaction with the local societies while corralling the shore-side revenues.  

 

This traveler applauds the belated but admirable decision by Rome to spare Venice the damage and indignity of cruise ships and their hordes. Perhaps Carnival Corp should create a ersatz Venice (a la Vegas) for its various lines on an Aegean islet.

[rkacruiser]

The practical logistics of getting passengers from/to any alternative port, the economic impact on the businesses of Venice, the fact that Marghera has no suitable cruise terminal facilities available for guests and the "plan" is to have such available along with proper docking facilities for a cruise ship by the cruising season 2022 makes me very skeptical about this "decision" by the Italian Government.  Remember, this action also provides for Italian Government financial support for impacted Venice businesses by the loss of the revenue that cruisers/cruises provide.  From where is the Lira for that coming?  Italy is not known as one of the better financially situated of the nations in the European Union.  

 

It is a situation of environmental concern vs. economics vs. practicality.  

 

23 hours ago, kazu said:

 

I think it’s best you pour it and accept the reality 😉. I think there is a good reason it came from Rome and I think it is here to stay.

Venice needs to protect it’s infrastructure.  I think the Fat Lady has sung and it’s about time.

 

I care about our--and their--environment.  I have seen photos Piazza San Marco,  where I have been, under water.  It's hurtful to see such.  For how many years, have plans to remedy such a situation been proposed?  For how many years have such plans never come to fruitation?    

 

22 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

It must also be said that regardless of a few tourism unions in Venice,

 

Italian Unions ought not to be ignored in the approval of these plans.  There will also be such Unions in Marghera that are supposed to prepare the 2022 cruises facilities.  Will all of these groups be on the same page as the Italian Government's plan?

 

If the Italian Government would suddenly change--as some have done--what happens to this plan for Venice?  

 

23 hours ago, kazu said:

I think the Fat Lady has sung

 

Respectfully to you, I am not really sure that the Fat Lady has arrived at the theater yet.  There is going to be more to this story, I think.  

 

 

[kazu]

1 hour ago, rkacruiser said:

If the Italian Government would suddenly change--as some have done--what happens to this plan for Venice?  

 

 

Hopefully Venice is still saved. It’s fragile and it’s time we remembered that cruisers cannot destroy cities or their environment.  If you want to see Venice go pre-cruise so you can really see it or do a land tour.  You will never see the real Venice on a one day stop on a cruise ship.

 

Quote

Respectfully to you, I am not really sure that the Fat Lady has arrived at the theater yet.  There is going to be more to this story, I think.  

 

 

 

And respectfully back, I think she has sung and I hope she has.  Venice needs protection.  It’s being destroyed.  

It is time environment prevails over economics.  It’s one of the prettiest sail ins and sail aways but unless it can be done without destroying the city they have struggled to save for years,  it’s not worth it.  The city deserves to be protected.  

I hope you are wrong and the fat lady has sung.  Venice’s infrastructure is difficult with the water and tides.  They don’t need any added grief from cruise ships.

That’s just my opinion and I stand by it.

[nocl]

3 hours ago, voyageur9 said:

Cruisers on mass market lines (like HAL) should get used to being banned or, at least, discouraged. Venice is just the beginning. (Although Key West tried.) 

 

Low-spending hordes coming ashore in their thousands to invade -- especially -- small, often fragile, cities like Dubrovnik and Venice can expect to be increasingly shunned. The bring lots of problems and very little value because the cruise lines have -- successfully -- cornered most of the revenue ashore. 

 

Unlike solo and small group travelers who overnight and dine and wander and shop, the masses of daylong cruise visitors that invade places like Venice are increasingly regarded as undesirables. That's only partially because of the scant revenues they leave behind. They also overwhelm and overcrowd and thus diminish the intrinsic value of those special places.

 

None of which is inherently bad. It's the market at work. Smaller ships (or groups or individuals) will increasingly be welcomed in highly-sought after locales like Venice while the hoi polloi on mass market lines will be funneled into cruise line owned fake 'destinations' which already proliferate in the Caribbean and are seemingly designed to avoid any actual interaction with the local societies while corralling the shore-side revenues.  

 

This traveler applauds the belated but admirable decision by Rome to spare Venice the damage and indignity of cruise ships and their hordes. Perhaps Carnival Corp should create a ersatz Venice (a la Vegas) for its various lines on an Aegean islet.

You have cruise lines building larger and larger ships, sending as many ships as will fit into any given port without any consideration of the impact upon the local community (or for that matter the impact on the quality of the experience for the cruise passenger) until it reaches the point where the cruise ships passengers are viewed more like a hoard of locusts descending upon the community, instead of an economic benefit for the majority.

 

 

[chengkp75]

10 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

It is a situation of environmental concern vs. economics vs. practicality.

From figures I've seen, despite the hordes of tourists you see in St. Mark's Square, tourism only accounts for 11-12% of Venice's GDP.  Heavy industry (shipbuilding, oil refining, power plants) and manufacturing account for the majority of Venice's income.  Remember, Venice includes areas on the mainland, including Marghera, and its lucrative port operations.  While cruise tourism only accounts for 3% of GDP, that is a significant portion of the tourism income, so some businesses on the islands will be impacted by the cruise ship ban, but this may also be offset by those same cruise tourists arriving by bus from Marghera, or them relocating closer to the new terminal.  Also, with less ecological pressure on the lagoon and marshes, there may be a tax savings due to less remediation expense, so Venice may come out ahead.  A study I saw said that tourism raises the prices on things, and so has accelerated the migration of population from the islands of Venice, and that reducing tourism may slow that population loss.

 

Having learned years ago about the damages that large ships cause to the lagoons and marshes of Venice, and knowing from hydrodynamics the effects of pushing these large ships through the small canals of Venice, with it's ancient foundations, I've always felt that it was insanity to allow these cruise ships into Venice.  Sorry if that's not popular.

[cruisemom42]

16 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

Italian Unions ought not to be ignored in the approval of these plans.  There will also be such Unions in Marghera that are supposed to prepare the 2022 cruises facilities.  Will all of these groups be on the same page as the Italian Government's plan?

 

Isn't that a bit like saying we should let the wolves weigh in as to whether or not the sheep should roam loose or be kept protected?

• Venice residents (not involved in tourism) significantly favor changes. Many have already "voted with their feet" and left the city. If that trend is not reversed, it will become a hollowed-out version of itself, a stage-set much like a Disney World attraction. Already many local hotels, restaurants and shops are run not by Venetians (or even Italians).
• UNESCO has reprimanded Italy for not doing enough to protect Venice's unique buildings and setting (to the point of threatening to withdraw funding and make an example of them).
• There is a real danger (as evidenced by at least two incidents in the last couple of years) of cruise ships causing damage quite directly by hitting docks, boats, etc. in the narrow Giudecca passage.
• Underwater, foundations are being damaged by the passage of ships as well -- as referenced by chengkp75 above.
• It is not merely the foundations of Venice that are being impacted by the passage of large cruise ships. The fragile ecosystem of the lagoon in which Venice sits has, according to ecologists, already seen changes and damage that -- if not checked -- may soon be irreversible. It would be rather like the US letting cruise ships sail through a protected wildlife area such as the Everglades.
• Most Italians also favor these changes.

Venice is literally being loved to death. The problem with making a decision is figuring out which of the several possible alternatives is best all around and which will not cause additional unforeseen effects. If there was a clear-cut and advantageous alternative, I suspect the decision would've been made quite a while ago.

 

Given that the cruise sector represents a quoted 3.2% of Venice's local gross domestic product, it seems like a no-brainer that the impact to the city would not be huge. Venice depends far more on independent visitors and those on bus-tours and day tours than on cruise ship traffic. 

[bennybear]

16 hours ago, kazu said:

 If you want to see Venice go pre-cruise so you can really see it or do a land tour.  You will never see the real Venice on a one day stop on a cruise ship.

This!   We have visited more than six times and have done the overnight on the ship with the long haul to get into the main part of the city and we have stayed in several hotels for a few nights.  But the absolute best is to stay in an apartment for a week, you can experience Venice like a true local, with back canal stores and bakeries, and evening uncrowded walks.  

[rkacruiser]

18 hours ago, nocl said:

You have cruise lines building larger and larger ships, sending as many ships as will fit into any given port without any consideration of the impact upon the local community (or for that matter the impact on the quality of the experience for the cruise passenger) until it reaches the point where the cruise ships passengers are viewed more like a hoard of locusts descending upon the community, instead of an economic benefit for the majority.

 

 

 

There are those Alaska citizens, particularly those in the Southeastern part of the State, who view the arrival of tourist season as you describe.  

 

My Nephew who lives in Alaska has told me for some time that there is a "love-hate" view of cruise tourism.  

[rkacruiser]

2 hours ago, cruisemom42 said:

Venice is literally being loved to death.

 

That is a very true statement.  

 

Thanks to you as well as chengkp75 and kazu for your well written and thoughtful posts.  

 

2 hours ago, bennybear said:

But the absolute best is to stay in an apartment for a week, you can experience Venice like a true local, with back canal stores and bakeries, and evening uncrowded walks.

 

I have only had one experience visiting Venice and that was a port stop during Amsterdam's 2008 World Cruise.  It was a two day stop.  Visited San Marco Square and that area as well as Murano and Burano Islands.  My visit only whetted my desire for another, longer visit.  Your comment is so correct.  And, it applies to every city/locale that I have visited if one really wants to "absorb" the vibe of that community.  

[bennybear]

A picture is worth…….

 

 

[ontheweb]

On 7/13/2021 at 1:44 PM, iancal said:

It really should have been done years ago after the larger cruise ship started to arrive.

And now Carnival Corporation has sold off or sent to scrap the smaller ships on many of their lines.