Cooler, Farther and Less Crowded: The Rise of ‘Undertourism’

Brad, it would be interesting to see actual numbers. But my guess is that while a strong dollar enables more Americans to travel, they're not the cause of overcrowding in Europe. Most tourists in Europe are - other Europeans. Even on cruise ships. Ireland might be the exception.

While I agree with traveling in off- and shoulder-seasons, its mostly for economical reasons and weather. But I am not in tune with the frequent guidance to substitute less-visited places for the popular destinations. That's probably good advice for experienced travelers who have already seen the important sights and cities. If you've been to France multiple times, you're probably ready to skip the main attractions. But if you've never been to Venice, or seen the Mona Lisa, or the Sistine Chapel, how can you just skip such major touchstones of western civilization? I've not been to Cinque Terre yet, but I want to see it, because there is a reason people go there (and not just because Rick says so).

I wish I had an easy solution to over tourism. Demographics ultimately overwhelm any protections one might suggest.

Yes, I can totally get the Mona Lisa and Venice. I'd suggest making part of your itinerary the big must sees but including other places to enjoy relaxing moments as well.

When we went to Cinque Terra it was in late October. It must not have been a weekend because it wasn't overly crowded. The area, while nice, is far from a must see like Venice or the Mona Lisa. It's a group of relaxing small towns. I could see how it would completely lose its charm when crowded. When we went, we had good weather and good hikes but the towns rolled up the sidewalks before 9, even for dinner.

Good article.

I think overtourism is the result of cheaper travel costs, more Boomer's reaching retirement age, more tourists from other countries and wonderful technology that make travel easier to arrange.

I feel we were privileged to be able to see many of the iconic European sights before the recent gush of activity. We no longer feel compelled to visit the biggies. Also our work and current lifestyle situation allows us to travel off season. This sure helps in avoiding the crush and still having a great time traveling.

We haven't seen Stonehenge. However, we have stood in the middle of a ring of standing stones buried deep in the woods on the Isle of Mull. We had the experience all to ourselves.

Renaissance "art" is quite literally terrible, including the Sistine Chapel

Wow, that is the first time I ever heard the Sistine Chapel as being described as "terrible art", may I ask if you have ever been? And what of these "better examples"?

Is there any way to read this article without subscribing?

A few points.

I am not an art critic or even a big fan of art and I don’t do many art museums (been to Paris twice and never been to the Louvre). But I think calling all old art junk is ridiculous.
If you don’t like it that is absolutely fine. But you can enjoy it without being an art history major.

As for avoiding popular tourist location. That sounds like a great idea to avoid people but it also avoids the most famous locations. And these locations are famous and popular for a reason. No matter where you go in Europe you are not seeing anything like the Eiffel Tower other then in Paris. You may see other nice structures but they are not the Eiffel Tower. The same way that the David is not the Statue of Liberty. And while I would like to see both statues for different reasons they are not interchangeable.

The same holds true for other locations thus most of the famous (and popular) tourist destinations are not interchangeable..

As for the crowd I don’t really think it is Americans that are the crowd. Europeans live as well as Americans (in many European countries) and thus can afford to travel. Are closer to these locations and have more time so they are visiting a lot of their own tourist destination, As for non Europeans I think the Asians are the largest increase in numbers. I saw a lot more folks from Asia (mostly China) then I did Americans.

Just some thoughts

Renaissance "art" is quite literally terrible, including the Sistine
Chapel and the Mona Lisa.

I don't think I'd go over the top like the author of this quote and say it's terrible, but I'll admit that the Vatican wasn't a must-see on my list when I went to Rome.
For, me, a lot of the renaissance paintings start to look the same and all are far too busy to focus on what I'm looking at (anyone remember Doodle Art from the 1970's)? But after visiting with an Art Historian for a guide and learning the stories behind the art, I can appreciate it so much more. She brought the art to life in a way I could appreciate by pointing out that these artists were just businessmen competing with each other to win a job. And how the guy paying to have the painting done wanted himself painted into the picture standing beside Jesus-like a renaissance version of a selfie with a celebrity. We all have our reasons to appreciate, or not appreciate art from any era. For me, yeah, renaissance art is kind if dull if I'm just staring at it. But once i was looking beyond the art to the stories behind it, it comes to life.

And these locations are famous and popular for a reason.

And that's true anywhere in the world.

I live in the Northeast and have been to NY City many, many times, but last year we took a different route home through New Jersey than usual and drove past an incredible view of the Statue of Liberty. I've seen it before, of course, but it brought on tears because I wasn't expecting to see it and recent events made it mean so much to me.

I don't know if there's any place in Europe that would bring on such a reaction from me, but you have to remember that it's not only the place itself, in many instances, but what the place MEANS. For example, when seeing the ruins of the Berlin Wall or a concentration camp, it's not the physical place itself that you're experiencing so much as the place plus what happened there.

I'm not one of those who can stare endlessly at Renaissance art. And 'must sees' is not a phrase I like to bandy around, must sees are about as subjective as it gets. I was in and out of the Uffizi and Villa Borghese as fast as possible without appearing like a uncultured slob. On the other hand, I spent the better part of a day in the Air and Space Museum in Washington, half full when I went, and the better part of days in Vienna and London museums. If I were allowed, I could spend the whole day in the Garden of Ninfa.

Boy do I understand that.
I was in the USAF Museum in Dayton with my parents and my Uncle (P38 ground crew during WW2) and Aunt. Talking about the different aircraft and I looked up and half a dozen folks were walking with us. They thought I was a tour guide...

But I have never been to the Louvre. And in London I went in saw the Rosetta Stone and the Marbles and a bit more and was out in about 2 hours.. I have spent that much time in the Motown Museum.

That being said I have spent all day in the Detroit Institute of Art. Why the difference? Because of time. Living outside of Detroit I have time to spend in the DIA or going down to the Air Force Museum. Where as in London I have spent about a total of 2.5 weeks in my whole life.
We all have to choose what we do with the limited time we have in Europe (for those that don’t live there). And I would rather spend time walking the streets of Paris or at the Eiffel Tower then in the Louvre. But perhaps if I ever get back I will have time for the things I missed like the Louvre and going to the top of the Arc de Triumph.

But for my while I enjoy artwork I like the old buildings and the ruins and the landscape ore then looking at a painting. On the tours of the Chateaus and Buckingham Palace and such I spend most my time looking at the building and not the works of art. As was said before they start to all look the same except for a few (very few) of the true masterpieces.

Still I think calling them junk is a bit harsh. I am not fond of (most) opera but I would not call it garbage.

That being said I can understand trying to minimize the crowd and such but in my humble opinion if you are going to Europe and not seeing any of the (rightfully) most famous locations and artwork and such then why go?
If you are in France and avoid Paris and other popular cities and the famous other locations like the chateaux and the Roman ruins and the old battle fields then why did you go to France? If I want to see pretty farmers fields or generic countryside or rolling hills I can see that and not leave Michigan much less North America.
Now I am not saying that is all you must see. But there are reasons these places are so famous. And to be honest you are not going to discover someplace amazing that no one else has ever visited. So you will encounter some sort of crowd most places, the bigger the crowd the more “amazing” (for lack of another word) a place probably is.
But truly if the crowd bothers you that much that you are skipping places like the Tower of London or London Bridge or Paris or whatever Famous locations you would see if the crowd was not there then do yourself a favor. Save your money and stay home because you are going for the wrong reasons.

I enjoy getting away from it all and avoiding people as much as the next guy. Heck I own a travel trailer that I usually spend at least 3 weeks a year in often time up in the mountains far away from the crowds but if that is you ideal trip then don’t bother going to Europe.

An America friend of mine visited this summer and unfortunately to due to illnesses I was unable show him the sights. So after two weeks he returned home without having visited any of the tourist sights, but as he said himself having had one of the best holidays of his life.

He bought a local bus pass and each day he took a bus out of the village to it’s terminus and then walked back to our house over the local walking trails. He had several adventures along the way, including helping a farmer with the birth of a calf, joining the neighbors saving hay, being invited in a farm house to have lunch with the farmer and his family, none of whom spoke English!

Ed is very much a people person, so really he got a kick out of all the local social contact. And in a small village he was soon well known, so much so that people would greet him by name which was the cherry on the cake for him.

Next year he plans to try the same approach in Italy.

Visiting Europe isn't just about the major sights and claiming that you may as well stay in Anytown, USA if you're just going to enjoy the countryside is missing the point spectacularly. Touring the French countryside for example is completely different to exploring the countryside of Michigan or wherever. Nowhere in Michigan are you going to experience stopping in rural French villages and have lunch at a small bistro, it's not about the flora and fauna it's about experiencing a different culture. France isn't all about Paris, in fact all my favourite French experiences have been elsewhere in France.

This topic is exactly why the Rick Steves forums have the reputation they have.

A full topic with posters suggesting that people spend 1/4 of a years income to go see some random countryside or other place that if you took a photo of 99.9% of the people in the world would have no idea where it was taken. While avoiding the attractions that are generally considered the top attractions in Europe and have been considered this for about as long as tourism has existed. You know why these places are popular? Because to the vast majority of people visiting Europe they are the most interesting places. Let’s stop pretending that they are only popular because they are popular. These attractions are not the Kardashians.

I am almost willing to bet that everyone that is in support of this has already BEEN to this tourist locations. And has been to Europe enough that they can now spend time in frankly the middle of nowhere.

This is also a bit of an issue with RS TV shows. He occasionally gets on a tangent of spend a week helping a Swiss farmer bring in his crops kind of thing. Something that probably is interesting to someone that has been to Switzerland a couple dozen times and has spend by his own account something like 10+ years of his live in Europe. But something that the average person going to Europe (and watching his shows, or buying his books, or taking his trips or reading these forums) has no interest in or time for.
You will note the RS does not have a trip that includes a day walking in a field iron the side of some random hill in the middle of farm country in France. You know why? Because if the average person wants to do that they don’t need to spend thousands of dollars to go to Europe to do it. A farmers field on a hill pretty much anyplace else will look much the same.

douglasjmeyer, good analysis. Most of the people I know will only make a once-in-a-lifetime visit to Europe. Telling them to skip Venice or Versailles (for examples) because its too crowded is not going to work.

Because if the average person wants to do that they don’t need to spend thousands of dollars to go to Europe to do it. A farmers field on a hill pretty much anyplace else will look much the same.

Ah, but those forum participants that you disdain here are not average people. It's the average person who thinks countrysides are the same everywhere and who only wants to visit places that will make folks back home envious in their pictures.

I for one don't take any photos when I travel. I don't blog or post on Instagram or Facebook. I'm not trying to make anyone anywhere envious or tick places off a list. I travel only for myself, and for what I care about experiencing, and that's just as legitimate as what your "average" traveler wants to experience.

Simply being in a foreign country broadens your outlook on life - at least it does so when you're not hell-bent on seeing every last one of the famous sights. Yes, the sights are mostly worthwhile, but that's only part of what seasoned travelers go abroad to experience.

Though I'm nowhere near Rick's class, I've spent a great deal of time in Europe. I've ended up in a few non-urban locations that underwhelmed me, places that I didn't consider worth the time it took to reach them from my perspective as an American (resident of a huge country with a great variety of natural beauty but not able to spend unlimited time in Europe). My "meh" reaction to those places may in some cases have been related to not having access to a car, but I agree that some below-top-tier European beauty spots are less than spectacular. Not counting hiking among my hobbies, I do prefer countryside that offers lovely views.

On the other end of the spectrum, there seem to be few folks on this board with less interest than I have in many big-name attractions; Stonehenge, the top of the Eiffel Tower, inside the Colosseum, most castle/palace/stately home interiors--no thanks. Those may be historically important places, but I just don't care.

There is a huge range of experiences to be had and things to see in Europe falling between heavily-visited (and often costly) "attractions" and generic rolling hills or forests. I have special interests that I indulge during my trips, but I love just being in a place that feels foreign due to architecture, signage, food (taste and smell) and language. Even if the main sight in a city is more crowded than I would like, many hours of pleasure await me as I wander aimlessly through the historic part of town, where many streets are usually devoid of tourists. Needless to say, I'm thrilled that most visitors don't share my interest in back-street tourism.

I don't adhere to the view that a beautiful town or city, looking different from anything I've seen back home, is not a worthy destination just because nothing of great historical importance happened there.

All this talk of seeing the "Blockbuster" sites reminds me of this humorous little article that pops up on this forum from time to time, called The truth about how Americans travel, an excerpt:

"Is it famous? Americans are there. You won’t find many of them toottling around Puglia or Slovakia. They quest for not for the hidden gem, but for the best. Head to the Amalfi Coast or St Tropez, Paris or Rome, and they’re there, front and centre - you can hear them from a mile off. They may be coming in search of their family roots - in which case, you’ll hear plenty about that, too.

Americans are list-tickers; with less holiday time than Europeans, they’re a people on a mission, and they don’t want to waste time. In Beijing, they’ll “do” the Forbidden City, the Temple of Heaven and the Summer Palace - and all in one morning. In the afternoon, it’s the Great Wall."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/north-america/united-states/articles/what-american-tourists-are-really-like/

Wow! Live and let live! Travel the way you want!

This topic is exactly why the Rick Steves forums have the reputation they have.

A full topic with posters suggesting that people spend 1/4 of a years
income to go see some random countryside or other place that if you
took a photo of 99.9% of the people in the world would have no idea
where it was taken.

Think about it: Why would a forum devoted to European travel be filled with the "average" people who want to go see only the most famous places? Of course it's going to be filled with people who are more passionate about European travel, and travel in general, than those who are spending 1/4 of a year's income for their once-in-a-lifetime trip to Europe.

If I'd only been to Europe once and then was done with it for the rest of my life, I wouldn't be participating here. And I believe the same goes for most of the other regular participants.

So I don't know what kind of reputation you're fighting against, but it's probably the same all over the Internet. BMW forums are full of people who adore BMWs and don't simply own one. Cat forums are filled with people who don't merely like cats, but love them to pieces. And so on.

How about going to places of your own choosing and preferences, not those dictated by tour groups, RS, and others? What RS suggests and recommends makes no difference to me, if the interest overlap, fine, otherwise, his recommendations don't contribute to where ny final intinerary for that particular trip will be. I started traveling solo to Europe prior to his splash in Europe.

My travel style is different, at variance from his....just a matter of choice and convenience. His doesn't appeal.

I'll continue to go over in the summer...primarily

Wow! Live and let live! Travel the way you want!

Yes! I love topics like this but I've always wondered why people care how someone else travels to the point of being snobs or defensive. I'm a relative newbie to European travel as I had other priorities while my kids were growing up, but now that they're university age, my wife and I are on a mission with 4 European trips in the past 5 years and Scotland on the radar next year. Yes, I've seen some major sites in Rome, Venice, Paris and London. And yes I've seen some lesser sites that in my mind are A listers such as Lascaux Caves and Oradour Sur Glane in France. My bucket list stll includes
Blockbuster sites such as Versailles and Buckingham Palace, but it also includes Vimy Ridge in France and Calgary on the Isle of Mull. Yes, my wife and I sometimes take selfies and post on Facebook-because some of our friends and family enjoy our adventures, but I''ll also get up at 5am for that perfect photo of Carcassonne at sunrise or to have Venice all to myself. There are no travel rules, we're all allowed to set our own and see the world as we see fit.

It’s not the Americans creating the overcrowding. It’s the Asian and Middle Eastern tourists who are creating the overcrowding as they are newbie travelers with large tour groups/families and lists of places they must photograph. Americans and Europeans, the more experienced with Euro travel, are now searching for places not overcrowded. Go to Africa, folks.

I never said it was the Chinese.

True that certain places in Europe are a lot more, far more crowded than in the past , say in the 1970s and '80s, still, is that fact or perception of overcrowding serve as a deterent to repeated visits to Europe.

No way, I'll still go back to Paris, Vienna, Berlin and London too regardless of the crowds in the summer...unthinkable not to return to, say, Paris due to the tedious crowds.

Interesting article. There are undiscovered areas everywhere in Europe as far as I've been able to see. Having an on the ground view in an area largely ignored by North American tourists, in a city with 3 royal palaces within 2 blocks of each other, and what is quite possibly the world's greatest automotive museum, Germany's best cuisine (I mean, Baden-Wuerttemberg is the breadbasket of Germany and we have the highest number of Michelin stars of any state in Germany), and yet we're still mostly passed by wrt to international tourism aside from some overrated places in the Black Forest, and it's hard to say if that's a curse or a blessing.

On one hand, it's wonderful to live and work in an area that isn't overrun with mass tourism despite having a very authentic and interesting culture and many world-class sights. On the other hand, how much attention do you want to draw before mass tourism can ruin the things that make this area unique and worthwhile? Maybe Germany has enough of these things in abundance that there's plenty go to around - but it's also frustrating to answer the same questions about Rothenburg OdT, a town that has been nearly loved to death.

But it's the same everywhere - tourists pile into overpriced, increasingly obnoxious Napa while largely ignoring the amazing Anderson Valley because it's just a little bit harder to get to. But I don't want Anderson Valley to change, so do I want to send throngs of tourists there and turn it in to the Cinque Terra of California? Luckily geography will probably prevent that in NorCal, but easily accessible Swabia could turn into the Next Big Thing. My favorite place in Mexico, Tulum, has been ruined within a decade due to overtourism. It's tough when you both want to share the gospel and keep something the way it is.

Unless there is a personal reason like a wedding, we always travel when it is cooler and perhaps less crowded. Traveling with the masses from North America in the heat of the summer is something we avoid particularly because it is typically more expensive to travel during high, peak season.

Late autumn and early spring are ideal.

I think currency value only has a minor impact on tourism. The human population keeps increasing every year. Crowding is getting to be more of a "normal" state unfortunately.
Population growth affects everything! Longer lines, more security, higher prices, pollution, etc..
Airlines pack-in customers like sardines. Luggage rules. Airports are larger with longer corridors.
The whole dynamic of travel changes!
Travel was much different when RS got his start!
Different World now.

"An American tourist takes up just as much space as an "asian" tourist. "

From my unscientific observation of some Americans that often isn't the case! Some Americans (and Brits), seem to be unusually plump and occupy rather more space than other people.

But more generally, tourism is increasing. Barring some catastrophic event, that isn't likely to change. The boundaries between high, mid and low season are blurring, or have disappeared in places. The only real solution is for governments to get a grip and introduce tourism rationing. You've been there before? Sorry, someone else's turn now.

The boundaries between high, mid and low season are blurring

Really? Do you have evidence of that? I do not see that happening when I travel off-season or in the middle season.

There are still an enormous number of travelers who can only travel at certain times - because of their kids' schedules, for example. We see that here on this board pretty often. And others who travel to get away from bad weather or get to nice weather. Those factors are not going to change easily.

I've had good and bad at "big sights" as well as "off the beaten track" sights. I'm most proud/excited when I find a great experience that is still undiscovered by tourists.

It's easier than you think. Most people still travel during "vacation" season. More often than not a person's first international trip(s) covers only big name sights. It's still a relatively rare person who has been on more than a few international trips. Many of those, with many trips, still visit only sights recommended by a guide book, part of a cruise itinerary, included in a guided tour or are easy to reach with public transportation and not much walking.

As a young man in San Diego, I liked backpacking in the Sierras. Anything reachable by car was consistently crowded. If you hiked three miles or more from the nearest trail head, however, it was a completely different world. Not only did the number of people go way down, the people you met were much different from the average park visitor.

That tourism is increasing, that lots of Asians (Chinese, Indians, Koreans, Japanese) and other international foreign tourists inundate, swamp the most famous sights, that crowding is a unavoidable matter to be dealt with or, at least, a factor that cannot be ignored, etc., etc, the bottom line is are these unpleasantries going to affect your desire to continue traveling, if that is what you intend to do.

Bottom line... in light of all these negative factors, (there are a lot of them), what are you going to do about it?

In Germany seeing this influx won't affect my decisions to visit, explore regions, towns and cities pertaining to historical. cultural factors I've earmarked for future trips...Schleswig-Holstein, Greifswald, Schleswig, Leipzig, Jena, Rostock, Cuxhaven, Stade, Hechingen, etc.

There are so many different ways to travel. Each traveler is interested in different things. Must-sees for some may be must-skips for others. I know people who don't like traveling and don't. (Or, just do short car trips near their homes.). It is what it is. To each - his/her own way.

Here is an excellent article on the positive steps some tourist boards and localities are taking to redirect tourism:

https://www.treehugger.com/travel/how-positive-redirection-shaping-tourism.html