Jump to content

Italy Bans Cruise Ships from Venice


sail1658
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 7/17/2021 at 10:08 PM, Will Work for Tiramisu said:

If I had to guess, maybe the Italians will decide to let large cruise ships enter the lagoon as if going to Marghera, and (gasp!) dredge a new passage to allow said ships to cut diagonally NE over to the existing cruise port

 

When I studied the map, that was a thought that occurred to me.  But, dredging would take some time to do as well as many Euros.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/17/2021 at 7:12 PM, cruiseej said:

I offer this post and particularly a map I created which you might find helpful in understanding the relationship of where cruise ships have previously sailed and docked versus where they will now need to go.

 

Thank you for doing this!  The map is quite helpful.

 

On 7/17/2021 at 7:12 PM, cruiseej said:

The government's decision to enact the immediate cruise ship ban creates a scramble to solve issues which have been on the table without consensus or action for decades now. So there are many questions which will need to be answered in the weeks and months ahead!

 

This is why I am dubious about their plan.  Maybe "immediately" in Italian will be defined differently than in English?

 

 

On 7/17/2021 at 7:32 PM, Hlitner said:

As to Marghera being a temporary solution, I suspect that because of the political situation in Italy, the budget limitations of their government, and the inability of the Italian Government to move forward with major projects.

 

Additional reasons why I am dubious.

 

On 7/17/2021 at 10:08 PM, Will Work for Tiramisu said:

but I don't think you've heard the last from the people in Venice whose livelihoods are reliant on tourists arriving by (or departing on) boats.  

 

Agree.  But, if the citizens of Venice voices are as ineffective in their government as ours are in our Government at times, it may not be an important factor for "the powers that be" to be concerned.  

 

On 7/17/2021 at 7:58 PM, cruiseej said:

Maybe the Italian government will take a page from the US budget book, and just spend the money it doesn't really have. 😉

 

I think they already are.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/17/2021 at 10:08 PM, Will Work for Tiramisu said:

If I had to guess, maybe the Italians will decide to let large cruise ships enter the lagoon as if going to Marghera, and (gasp!) dredge a new passage to allow said ships to cut diagonally NE over to the existing cruise port.

 

This idea has been considered and rejected. The concern is that dredging the shallow lagoon to crate a deep channel for cruise ships would be an environmental disaster. There's actually an existing channel between Marghera and the the Giudecca Canal. It's called the Vittorio Emanuele III, but it isn’t deep enough, and would need dredging. But according to an Italian scientist, they believe that in the areas around the Marghera industrial area, below the first meters of sediment, it’s very polluted. If they started dredging, they might dredge and stir up very polluted sediment. “It could release substances whose toxicity we don’t know… and could enter the lagoon and be contaminating,” said the scientist. For now at least, this idea is moot; in the earlier April government decision about cruise ships, the Italian senate said no to the dredging of the canal.

 

Another plan at one time proposed a dredging a new channel parallel to the Giudecca Canal on the other side of the island of Giudecca -- call it the "St. Mark's bypass" 😉 -- but that would require significantly more dredging. And almost no one, from UNESCO to scientists to environmentalists, want more dredging. The Venetian Lagoon is a fragile ecosystem that depends on flushing by tides from the Adriatic Sea to carry out sewage, maintain a balance between sea and fresh water, and nourish underwater life. Experts have called for reducing the average depth of the Lagoon and restoring salt marshes where possible; a new shipping channel would be the exact opposite of that. Cruise ships in the already-reinforced Giudecca Canal actually do less damage stirring up sediment than dredging a new channel would do. 

 

There are no easily solutions, which decades of disagreement and inaction attest to.

 

It's worth noting that the Cruise Lines International Association, the cruise industry trade association, has been supportive of finding an alternative to sailing the route from which cruise ships have now been banned. The president of CLIA, who is Italian, said, “We’ve been asking for 10 years to have somewhere else to go, and finally we are on track to get it, so we’re very upbeat – it’s the first time in 10 years that we’re seeing tangible progress." But where? Marghera? It's a solution with many questions, not the least of which is that UNESCO -- remember, it was their pressure which finally prodded the government to issue last week's cruise ship ban -- wants the cruise ships out of the Venice lagoon, and Marghera is inside the lagoon. But any other solution, such as a proposed new cruise ship terminal at the north end of the island of Lido, is at least 5, and more likely 10 or more, years away. A decision on proposals isn't due until the end of June 2023, there's no assurance there will be money and support for whatever idea wins the competition, and any plan would take years to design and build.

 

Meanwhile, confusion reigns. In an article last week, CNN reported that the deputy mayor of Venice said that ships would be rerouted to Marghera this summer, while the CLIA president said emphatically that  the berths at Marghera would not be ready: “There’s going to be nothing this year, all this scramble is to get Marghera ready for next year. I think this is it for this season, full stop.”

 

What a mess!

 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, a mess it is.  Venice is improbable from the get-go; early inhabitants of the area, in order to avoid attack from the never-ending marauders coming from sea and land, took shelter on the sand bars or whatever describes the low-lying ground just above the usual level of the Venetian lagoon (that is now Venice and the various other islands), and decided they presented a more secure place to live and raise a family than the mainland did.  As any person has seen who has cruised in the Mediterranean or Adriatic or Atlantic coast of Europe, or probably most of the rest of the world that developed ports during the period before airplanes were invented, efforts to resist attack from adversaries arriving by sea (looting pirates or competing political entities (very little difference, btw)), were ever present.  One strategy was to locate trading centers inland a ways, so there was a chance to provide early warning that raiders were coming (as in rowing up the canals).  Fortifications located on the Mediterranean or Adriatic (or Atlantic) tended to all look the same - same threat, same means of attacking, so same defensive walls you see all over.  Various famous middle ages architects specialized in design of these fortifications; they had a lot to do with how you could shoot arrows (later blunderbusses) down on attacking people.  (Thus the "spiky" appearance of these forts (short for fortifications) in plan view.)

 

Early Venetians, once established on the islands, obviously had salt water in their veins, and were creatures of the sea.  They were in a position to take control of the (then) HUGELY profitable trade between the far east and Europe, which was mostly dependent on overland trade, as it had been for centuries.  Venetians became expert boat builders, and had a successful governance system combined with a good banking system, so that they could become probably the world's best maritime power.  To the degree they could control trade (by ship) in the Adriatic and eastern Mediterranean, they had a hugely profitable operation.  This is what funded the incredible buildings in Venice.  May I suggest, for those of you interested in this, reading Roger Crowley's "City of Fortune".  Venice's fortunes were all wrapped up in the whole east/west conflict, Christian/Islam, the Crusades, etc..  The end of the Venetian hegemony occurred when Vasco de Gama demonstrated that you could sail from the Atlantic coast south, around the African continent, and up and east to the Asian markets.  This devalued the overland route, and the value of controlling that trade collapsed in a short period.   And that was the end of Venice's golden period.  

 

One can make a case for stopping all cruise ships, and preserving Venice as the unique remnant it is of a grand period now past.  But things are rarely so simple.  Lots of Venetians want to stay in their current business.  In some perfect world, maybe Venice would be only accessed by boat - tear out the causeway; no cars, no trains, no busses.  But - hard to resist the momentum of lots of people making lots of money.  Hard to say how this one will play out, but I would be surprised if Venice returns to the pre-current era situation.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Will Work for Tiramisu said:

One can make a case for stopping all cruise ships, and preserving Venice as the unique remnant it is of a grand period now past... I would be surprised if Venice returns to the pre-current era situation.  

 

I think it's worth noting that while the cruise ship business is important to Venice, cruise ship passengers represent only a modest portion of the tourist market for the city. Venice is estimated to have 20 million visitors a year, of which only 1.25 million are cruise ship passengers. Cruise ship business is estimated to account for about 3% of Venice's GDP. Cruise passengers contribute only 18 percent of the tourism economy.

 

Even if cruise ships completely and permanently were to disappear from Venice -- an unlikely outcome, I think -- Venice will continue to attract millions of visitors every year. Cruise day visitors impact only a small number of restaurants and shops, and if cruises depart from nearby cities, many cruise passengers will continue to visit Venice pre- or post-cruise because the Venice airport will continue to be the primary gateway to the region. Hotels, restaurants, shops and tourist attractions will survive. Some may take a hit, but the removal of cruise travelers would not hugely change Venice nor be responsible for preserving Venice for posterity. In fact, many in Venice would welcome fewer travelers. As tourism has swelled in recent decades, central Venice has lost half its residents as homes and apartments have converted to attract the more profitable tourist trade. The local government is working to reverse depopulation and create more sustainable local non-tourist-dependent businesses. 

 

Venice faces more significant issues with sinking (ever so slowly), flooding (from larger and more intense storms due to climate change), and rising sea levels (which pose the largest existential threat). Removing cruise ships may help the environment, but it is just a small piece of "saving" Venice. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the map that cruiseej made again, there is a deep water channel along a large island just Northeast and connected to the deep water channel that leads to the Giudecca Canal.  Just a suggestion by me.

 

Ships anchor in that area and use their tenders (or larger purpose built tenders) to ferry guests and luggage to/from the present cruise ship terminal.  

 

Such an operation has been done in the past when suitable docking facilities were not available for ships.  For example, Cherbourg, France where trans-Atlantic liners, i.e. Titanic, would anchor and large tenders would transfer the passengers from shore to ship.  

 

Such an arrangement would be a "win" for the cruise guests since they would have the experience of sailing through the Giudecca Canal and a "win" for Venice since the large ships would not be traveling through those waters.  It also seems to me to be a much more inexpensive and a more practical solution to the issue than anything else that I have read that has been proposed.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, there is one obvious solution which hasn't had much discussion.  Venice should add a mooring tower for landing large dirigibles at the current cruise port, which has all the infrastructure needed.  Ships can go to Marghera, or Ravenna, or Trieste, off load their human cargo (carry luggage to or from Venice or airport by truck), and the pax are loaded on said dirigible (suitably designed to satisfy the most fanciful Venetian aesthetic), and they are quietly whisked to (or from) Venice.  Still use the airport, travel to and stay in Venice, just outsource the big ships to other ports, and people get a nice air trip with spectacular views of Venice, the lagoon, the Adriatic to the south, the hills rising to the Alps.  Not a wave in the lagoon is displaced, no dredging - presto!!  I'd raise a glass of Prosecco in that dirigible!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Will Work for Tiramisu said:

Well, there is one obvious solution which hasn't had much discussion.  Venice should add a mooring tower for landing large dirigibles at the current cruise port, which has all the infrastructure needed.  Ships can go to Marghera, or Ravenna, or Trieste, off load their human cargo (carry luggage to or from Venice or airport by truck), and the pax are loaded on said dirigible (suitably designed to satisfy the most fanciful Venetian aesthetic), and they are quietly whisked to (or from) Venice.  Still use the airport, travel to and stay in Venice, just outsource the big ships to other ports, and people get a nice air trip with spectacular views of Venice, the lagoon, the Adriatic to the south, the hills rising to the Alps.  Not a wave in the lagoon is displaced, no dredging - presto!!  I'd raise a glass of Prosecco in that dirigible!! 

Oh the humanity!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/20/2021 at 4:44 PM, rkacruiser said:

Such an arrangement would be a "win" for the cruise guests since they would have the experience of sailing through the Giudecca Canal.

 

It's already quite easy for any visitor to Venice to sail down the Giudecca canal, and see it at a "human" scale (as well as having a typically Venetian experience) -- just catch a ride one of the several vaporetti lines that transit it or the Grand canal. One of the great experiences of Venice, and quite inexpensive.

 

I cannot see Venice wanting add a complement of dozens of tenders from each ship entering and leaving these canals daily. They are already often clogged with the boats necessary for Venice's daily needs -- private boats, vaporetti, water taxis, construction barges, delivery boats, trash collection boats, fire and police vehicles, not to mention gondolas....

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A similar thread on the European Ports / Venice thread intimates a further ruling in that there is now a maximum length (590ft) enforcement.

interesting comments about MSC as well. Check in at Venice and get bussed elsewhere to board!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A limit of 590 feet would still allow smaller ships like the Silver Wind and Silver Cloud to use the existing port -- but that doesn't solve the situation for almost all the cruise ships and passengers who have visited Venice by cruise ship.

 

Several cruise lines already use Trieste or Ravenna (both about 2+ hours by bus) for embarkation instead of Venice, and I'd guess it's likely there will be more of that at least next year while the Italian authorities work to expand the number of cruise ship berths available at the industrial port of Marghera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2021 at 11:25 PM, cruisemom42 said:

It's already quite easy for any visitor to Venice to sail down the Giudecca canal, and see it at a "human" scale (as well as having a typically Venetian experience) -- just catch a ride one of the several vaporetti lines that transit it or the Grand canal. One of the great experiences of Venice, and quite inexpensive.

 

A good thought.  Thanks.  

 

On 7/21/2021 at 11:25 PM, cruisemom42 said:

I cannot see Venice wanting add a complement of dozens of tenders from each ship entering and leaving these canals daily. They are already often clogged with the boats necessary for Venice's daily needs -- private boats, vaporetti, water taxis, construction barges, delivery boats, trash collection boats, fire and police vehicles, not to mention gondolas....

 

My post was an attempt to just offer another suggestion that has been "tried and well tested" that was viable in the previous Century.  Sometimes, what "is old becomes something that is new".  Your points are well made. 

 

On 7/20/2021 at 9:37 PM, Will Work for Tiramisu said:

Venice should add a mooring tower for landing large dirigibles at the current cruise port

 

Surely, you are not serious!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/23/2021 at 5:05 PM, rkacruiser said:

 

A good thought.  Thanks.  

 

 

My post was an attempt to just offer another suggestion that has been "tried and well tested" that was viable in the previous Century.  Sometimes, what "is old becomes something that is new".  Your points are well made. 

 

 

Surely, you are not serious!  

 

5 minutes ago, Will Work for Tiramisu said:

Am I serious??!!

Is the Bear Catholic?

Does a Pope poop in the woods?

 

And stop calling me Shirley!!!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“I cannot see Venice wanting add a complement of dozens of tenders from each ship entering and leaving these canals daily. They are already often clogged with the boats necessary for Venice's daily needs -- private boats, vaporetti, water taxis, construction barges, delivery boats, trash collection boats, fire and police vehicles, not to mention gondolas....“

 

On a serious  note , would this cause such a problem? I don’t think it would, The actual dredged channel is quite narrow and crossing that would be the main issue. The port authorities would refer the tenders to the collision regulations esp. about deep draft vessels in a channel. They do have a VTS system in operation there. 
https://www.guardiacostiera.gov.it/mezzi-e-tecnologie/Documents/manualiVTS/VTS_Venezia_Users_Handbook_version_sep_2017.pdf 

 

 

Look at the English Channel and look at the amount of high speed traffic that crosses the authorised traffic separation zones. No problem if professionals act professionally.

Edited by MBP&O2/O
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@MBP&O2/O I have now read dozens of articles about Venice and cruise ships and the possible solutions which have been discussed for the past 20 years or so -- and trust me that none of them involve anchoring cruise ships offshore and using their tenders to move passengers into central Venice and the airport. 

 

The closest to that was a plan for a new cruise ship terminal at the north end of the Lido island, the northern entrance to the lagoon. In this plan, cruise ships would dock there and transfer passengers to double-decker vaporetto-like boats which would run via diesel engines through part of the lagoon and switch to electric engines near central Venice; others which would go to the airport. There's an interesting animated video of that plan somewhere that I cannot locate right now. But the plan was rejected years ago. Something like it might resurface as part of the current competition to come up with a permanent cruise ship solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the day, Oregonians were worried (justifiably, as it turned out) that we would be overrun by immigrating Californians.  (Don’t Californicate Oregon)  Our famous then-Governor McCall said “By all means come, visit, but don’t stay.”  Interesting, desirable places can be "loved to death”, Venice being probably the best example, although most tourists don’t want to move there.  Elsewhere in these august forae, I have expressed my wife and my strategy, which is to go to a popular place, and avoid the top 3 things.  All the tourists taking selfies will be there, you’ll still see lots of great stuff (with smaller crowds).  One can apply this to a museum, such as go to Louvre, but don’t see Mona Lisa.  Or, go to Paris and avoid Eiffel Tower, Louvre & Champs d’Elyssee.  Or Rome, avoid Colliseum, Vatican and Spanish Steps (or Trevi Fountain).  One can apply this to a country:  Go to Italy, avoid Venice, Rome & Florence.  (or maybe Pisa!)  

 

Venice is a problem with no easy solutions - it can never be Disneyworld (set up to deal with the masses, including underground tunnels for all the support staff), nor should it want to be.  Setting cruises aside for a moment, to some degree people need to be educated that Italy (or France, or Spain, or lots of other places) are full of wonderful places to go that have less of the same tourist trap qualities.  After our first visit to Venice, I pledged we would never go back, in deference to the tourist problem.  However, a cruise came up that was exactly what we wanted to do, so back we went.  So - do as I say, not as I do!  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Will Work for Tiramisu said:

Go to a popular place, and avoid the top 3 things... Go to Italy, avoid Venice, Rome & Florence.

 

I think with some research and planning one can often work around the crowds without needing to skip the most popular attractions. 

 

For instance, three years ago we were doing a Seabourn cruise out of Venice. We stayed in the city for two days before the cruise. The morning of the cruise, we got up, had an early breakfast, and walked a short distance from our hotel to the Doge's Palace -- one of the top attractions at St. Mark's Square -- just when it opened. We were able to breeze through without crowds as we were ahead of the tour group surge. We got back to our hotel to pick up our luggage, take a boat to the cruise port, and board in time for a relaxing lunch looking back at the city.

 

Yes, there are many great places to visit in Italy other than Venice, Rome and Florence -- but why deny yourself the opportunity to see some of the world's wonderful places? Time of year, day of week, time of day -- all have a major impact on crowds and when to best see certain cities or sites in those cities. (I'll agree that there are some things which are over-rated and probably not worth the effort -- seeing the Mona Lisa is a good example -- but I can't imagine going to Paris and not seeing the Eiffel Tower, Louvre and Champs d’Elysee, skipping the Colosseum in Rome, never seeing Florence, etc. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were in Florence last year .. four days as Italy went into lock down.

There were more police than tourists around the Duomo … 

 

Agree about the Mona Lisa … disappointing in my opinion … not to my taste.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cruiseej said:

I think with some research and planning one can often work around the crowds without needing to skip the most popular attractions. 

 

I agree.  And, I have done that in areas where the tourist hordes are bad. 

 

3 hours ago, cruiseej said:

but I can't imagine going to Paris and not seeing the Eiffel Tower, Louvre and Champs d’Elysee, skipping the Colosseum in Rome, never seeing Florence, etc.

 

Neither can I!  Why travel to those cities?  Why travel to those countries and not visit iconic and historic sites?  Visiting Rome and not visiting the Vatican Museum, stepping aside to let the tour groups go through and taking your time to experience as much as one can, what a loss that would be for a tourist just because it is such a popular tourist destination.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, to be honest, I've been to Rome 3x, Pisa, Florence, the Louvre (took a pass on Mona Lisa), walked under the Eiffel tower.  My point in flogging my miss-the-top-3 thang was to say that while Venice is a wonderful and mysterious place, I'd venture a guess that a large percentage of folks that cruise in or out of there did NOT visit Asolo, Ravenna, Bologna, Parma, Verona, Padua, Vicenza, etc..  Venice gets a lot of bucket-listers, who want to check the box and tell their friends they've been there, and maybe buy a mask.  Instead of fighting the crowds past the endless shops selling cheap tchotzke's, they could have a great experience with less crowds in a "second tier" town.  

 

A dear friend who is a European travel guide (licensed in France), told me last time we were going to Venice, that we should have dinner at a quaint little place that no one knew about.  Glad to have the recommendation, my wife and I got ready for a night out in the cooling summer air, walked from our hotel and boarded a vaporetto.  Once seated thereon, I looked up, and there was an ad for said "quaint, unknown" restaurant.  So much for quaintness.  I suspect in earlier times it was a real find, but it was close to the Rialto Bridge, and appeared to have been overwhelmed by tourists looking for a red sauce fix.

 

One of the best things you can do in Italy, beyond all the art and architecture, history & culture, is to plop down in a quiet (or noisy) square or piazza of your choosing, with an espresso or a negroni, and do nothing but watch the world go by, and soak up the wonderful Italian zest for living in the now.  We have in the past been doing that and got swept up by crowds watching a soccer game on TV in Firenza, or invited to join a post-wedding party in Trieste.  Not a lot of language in common, but we had pictures of our kids and dogs on our phones, and that was enough!  

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Will Work for Tiramisu said:

 Venice gets a lot of bucket-listers, who want to check the box and tell their friends they've been there, and maybe buy a mask.  Instead of fighting the crowds past the endless shops selling cheap tchotzke's, they could have a great experience with less crowds in a "second tier" town.  

 

And then there are those of us who have been to Venice a few times, the last time we stayed for 5 days and next time we will stay for at least a week. We stay on Guidecca Island in an apartment in the Molino Stuckey building. We get a vaporetto pass and visit many of the islands. I want to catch the train from Venice to Padua but keep running out of time as so much to do. Maybe next time 😁. I do like Ravenna as well.

 

Sigh, so much to see with so little time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Will Work for Tiramisu said:

My point in flogging my miss-the-top-3 thang was to say that while Venice is a wonderful and mysterious place, I'd venture a guess that a large percentage of folks that cruise in or out of there did NOT visit Asolo, Ravenna, Bologna, Parma, Verona, Padua, Vicenza, etc..  

 

Yes, but if you were going to visit this portion of northern Italy, you would certainly want to include Venice. I've been to some of those other cities, and not others, but Venice is head-and-shoulders the shining star among them, one of the most interesting and unique cities in the world. Why would you skip Venice to go to Bologna? Now, if you could do both, by all means -- but your advice was to skip Venice, and that's where I disagreed. 😉

 

And I'm with @frantic36 about there being so much to see and do just in Venice. If you're on a cruise that makes a one-day stop in Venice, you're likely going to only see a few of the top tourist attractions. But many cruises begin and end in Venice -- well, they did up until now; we'll see what the future holds -- with the opportunity to spend additional days and explore more. I've been to several of the surrounding islands in the lagoon, but there are more I have yet to see and explore. I could easily spend more time in Venice… and hopefully I will in the future. I will not need to visit the Doge's Palace or the Campanile each time, just as I wouldn't feel any need to go up the Eiffel Tower on repeat visits to Paris.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By my reckoning, only four ships in the Silversea fleet are now small enough to enter the Venetian lagoon and the Guidecca canal - the Explorer, the Cloud, the Wind and, oh, the Origin.  All the rest are bigger than the 25,000 ton limit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...