How overtourism killed spontaneous travel - booking tickets for popular sights

This illustrates, to me, the importance of research and creativity in planning trips and vacations. We are aware of the huge influx of visitors who previously did not have sufficient disposable income to travel over long distances. Additionally, the "FOMO" mindset means that sights which were always popular with tourists now have become "must sees" for travelers who have been told that a particular sight is important. After all, who doesn't want to see the bowels of the Colosseum?

In addition to booking early to visit sights that might be of interest, it is vitally important to expand your horizons to capture not only the world famous places, but to allow yourself to enjoy the lesser known but equally important sights. The Flavian Amphitheater in Pozzuoli, near Naples, is breathtaking and is the 3rd largest amphitheater in Italy. On my last trip there, we shared the ruins with perhaps 10 other tourists. The Chiesa Gesu, in Rome, is decorated with some of the finest artwork in Rome but the church is usually empty of tourists, and Michelangelo's "Moses" can be enjoyed without crowds only blocks from the Forum.

If Backdoor travel means anything, it means that each traveler is responsible for seeking out his or her special sights and attractions; if we are captured by the easily available food offerings near famous sights like the Trevi Fountain and the Spanish Steps, we will never realize how wonderful a leisurely lunch can be in a small trattoria only blocks away from the madding crowd.

Totally agree with you Kaeleku! I’ve been fortunate in visiting the “must sees” over the years. But then it was a desire for new and different experiences. My quest was to visit towns and areas not covered in Rick’s guidebooks. So I traveled to areas of Italy, Spain, Germany, Portugal, France and Turkey where tourists were few and experiences were many. I’m not condemning travelers’ desire to see great works of art or magnificent museums or other unique sights but also leave yourself open to explore. It is a worthwhile investment.

I believe there is a bell curve of travel personalities. Some travelers enjoy being "innovators," finding less-traveled sights or destinations, with little or no planning. They may not mind, and in many cases enjoy, the creativity of that travel. Others who do not share that sense of "adventure" are happy to be "late adopters" and either book in advance or line up to see the world famous sight or painting. And yes, sometimes there is a desire to say "I saw it." Even, perhaps, a certain satisfaction in saying "I waited in line 2 hours so that I could see it !"

Each travel style, to other travel mentalities, might not be enjoyable.

There are very, very few things I'm willing to reserve tickets for, far in advance of being there. I've done it a few times, but it puts me in sour mood, and more often than not, when I leave the place I'm feeling like I've been cheated, and the experience with all the crowding and all the managing of the people there (which I grudgingly admit is necessary) it just wasn't worth all the trouble.

I have the same approach to dinner reservations. I live in a city where now, if you want to eat in a well-known restaurant (and even in a lot that aren't well known), you need to book a table, sometimes many days, or even weeks (sometimes month) in advance. What kind of madness has taken over when people are willing to put up with that? Do they think that the food at the restaurant with a 3 month waiting list for a table is really that much better than the meal at a place you can just walk into? I don't.

I'm glad that I have seen a lot of the places that now require booking far in advance (though not all of them - as the list of such places seems to grow every day). I do understand the need to control crowds (sadly, I've seen far too many examples of people behaving badly in popular places). I now try to plan my trips with avoidance of crowds as one of the absolute highest priorities (something that gets increasingly difficult with the worldwide explosion of the travel industry), and that has resulted in some wonderful experiences in not-famous places.

I've found a reliable predictor of the quality of the trip you are about to take: Tell friends, colleagues, aquaintances and random strangers where you're off to. If everyone gushes and goes "ooooooo, I've heard it's beautiful, that sounds wonderful!" then watch out. But if you get a lot of puzzled looks, people ask where exactly that is, or question why in the heck you would ever want to go there....then you are probably in for a real treat. When I told people I was going to (undisclosed location) most laughed or looked at me like I was crazy...but what a wonderful trip that was!

Now, nobody should feel bad or put down for going to, well, very popular places, or anywhere they choose. It's your trip, I wish you happy travels and wonderful experiences. But one can still easily find places that touch your heart and delight your traveler's soul, which do not require advance reservations and have no crowds. Those are just places that most people you know have probably never heard of.

There are definitely places for which you simply must purchase tickets well in advance if you are unwilling to pay for a tour, but a lot of the very popular sights (including the modernista sights in Barcelona, as far as I know) are manageable once you arrive in the city (and have a reasonably reliable weather forecast) if you aren't trying to squeeze 8 sights into two days. If your time is very limited, you will have problems, because some time slots will probably be sold out well in advance--especially the early-AM slots the tour groups seem to prefer. But there are usually tickets available a day or two ahead of time if you don't have to have a specific entry time to keep your entire itinerary from falling apart.

My wife and I are both planners and so far we've avoided long lines anywhere we've been. Having said that, some places are just crazy busy anyway and their is little to be done. For example we took a guided tour of the Vatican and waltzed right in, but even then, once inside it's waves of people. Being 6'2" the crowds don't bother me as much because I can stand at the back and see above them, but my wife is 5'0" and so needs to be closer. Even navigating crowds is more challenging for her than me as she can't see above everyone to get to a destination. To help compensate, research has been our best friend as we do our best to avoid the highest volume times of day by booking guided tours early in the morning or staying in locations for multiple evenings so we can stroll after everyone has gone home.

What is "over" tourism?

Over tourism is where the place (town, museum, whatever) gets so crowded you can't find "it" whatever the "it" is you are there to see or experience. Many places are beginning to feel that way.

What is "over" tourism?

See for yourself: How tourism is killing Barcelona – a photo essay | The Guardian

That was from last year... I can tell you it's only gotten worse since :(

I have lived in the Middle East for five years and Germany for four during 1981-1991. Far fewer people traveled in those days and there was no need to book any tickets in advance. This was before the internet and before many retired Boomers wanting to spend their retirement savings on travel. Also, before many tourists from the former Soviet Union, Warsaw Pack and China were traveling.

Also, with huge cruise ships these days many places are filled with cruise passengers. Places like Venice, Dubrovnik, Athens, the Greek Island and Barcelona are loaded with travelers.

When we lived in Germany, frequently, we just hopped in the car and planned our activities on the cuff. That largely worked. I would not dream of doing that these days. Also, I want to take advantage of the great research that I can do on the internet to maximize our time and best hotels, etc.

Life is good, we still love to travel and can handle the crowds.

We just have to accept that with the crowds, some of our ability to visit top sights on a whim is going to be impacted by measures taken to deal with the crowds. That and don’t just focus on the blockbuster sights, or time your visit to make it manageable. I don’t mind giving up some flexibility for a better experience (like at the Borghese), but it is a hassle to pre-book multiple sights on a single trip. I guess my spontaneity is bounded anyway when I visit major tourist cities, usually because my itineraries tend to be tight (have to work on that). But I usually make it a point to build in time at places not so overcrowded. Also I budget ample time for just walking around. A bigger proportion of travelers now are less experienced, just because a lot of them have only recently reached the level of prosperity to let them travel. Newer travelers zero in on the marquee sights. It’s not because they are shallow, it’s a natural tendency for those new to travel.

This is all very true. I am sorry for those who have to stand in lines to see sights I was able to waltz into years ago, oftentimes for free, too. Personally, I avoid lines using every trick I can, but I also think we are being travel snobs for looking down on people who are just trying to see and do what we did so easily a few decades ago. Maybe they’re having a great time getting to know others from around the world as they wait in line. I/we were luck to see what we did when we did and then move on to lesser traveled places.

We have concentrated our travel in the former communist countries, Romania, Croatia, Hungary, Serbia, Slovenia. We have been to Austria, Germany, France, but spend more time in those Balkan/MittelEuropa countries. This summer, in Timosuara and Oradea in Romania, we saw a few tourists, but not too many. There is plenty of interesting things there. We enjoy these countries because they are not as used to tourists (parts of Croatia are busy true), and they are inexpensive. We have yet to go much to Bulgaria, Albania, N Greece, N Macedonia, Modovia, Belorus, Poland. Also Portugal. We have no interest in GB nor in most of the scandinavian countries nor in Russia, due to costs. So, we will continue to travel, but not in the "travel hot spots".

I'm a fairly anxious fellow. A lot of planning decreases anxiety and makes travel much more pleasurable for me.

Also... I find it a bit of a bizarre concept that entry-level travelers going to popular destinations should be classified as "them"s who are inferior to the "us"es.

Newer travelers zero in on the marquee sights. It’s not because they
are shallow, it’s a natural tendency for those new to travel.

Thank you for saying that. While not new to travel, my wife and I are reasonably new to Europe and we're making up for lost time with 4 trips to Europe in the past 5 years. At times I've felt that our method of travel has been under attack as we have been two of the millions that visited the Blockbuster cities with the blockbuster sites via cruise, group tours, but also on our own. But as we return we do tend to branch out and try different experiences and different travel methods. It's really no different than at home, I live about an hour's drive from Banff, Alberta which also has an overtourism problem, but can you blame people for wanting to go there, it's spectacular. But if you become a repeat visitor you slowly learn what else Banff and Jasper National Parks offer and you start moving toward the less populated areas. It's a natural transformation.

This is why I love returning to cities I've been to before (and enjoyed enough to want to return again - and I am VERY lucky to have the ability to do so) - Paris, Venice, London - multiple visits means we can now get off the beaten track. In Venice last month (5th visit) we were able to wander the back canals and visit some of the less touristy sights. Our 8th visit to London meant we could take our time and go to the John Soane's museum (which - yes, we did have to book timed tix for) or skip Westminster Abbey and pop in St Margaret's Church instead.

And it also helps that my husband can take 3 weeks off work if he likes, so we can spend longer in cities - having 5 nights in Vienna was perfect. Our 5 nights in Rome on our very first trip meant we could go out to Appia Antica and visit the catacombs because we had the time. After our first few trips overseas, I know now to plan some lesser visited places into our itinerary just for a change of pace (last trip - Innsbruck and Bolzano - which was my fav newly visited place on our trip). Actually - thinking back - our very 1st trip we spent a night in both Genoa and Bologna, eschewing places like Florence and Milan (which we did get to eventually). I know we will get back next year short of a debilitating illness or death. It seems like a lot of Americans are lucky to be able to take 2 weeks at a time, so they have to squeeze in what they can.

But as said before on discussions like this - places are popular for a reason. Museums are popular for a reason. Iconic paintings and statues and landmarks. Many people are only going to get to a certain country/city maybe only once in their life, so of course they want to see with their own eyes the Eiffel Tower or San Marco or the Rijksmuseum or David.

I hate standing in lines with a passion (thinking back to our 45 min wait to get into the Doge's Palace on our first visit) so having timed entries - other than having to be in a certain place at a certain time or risk not getting in - is OK by me - I can plan my day around entries.

My travel style is generally spontaneous. I'd rather go places when I want than be a slave to an itinerary. I'm still able to do that in most cases but I do miss sights because I'd rather miss them than have to reserve a month in advance.

The catacombs in Paris are a good example. I've been in the area a couple times, saw the line and walked away. The Eiffel Tower is something I don't even care to brave crowds, and reservations, to see. Many top sights can be visited without reservations but it requires getting up early, visiting late or out of season. Sometimes I see them with remarkable ease, other times I skip them to avoid massive crowds. Not experiencing an over-crowded sight isn't the end of the world.

My last trip to Ireland I made an exception to my rule and booked a boat to Skellig Michael as soon as I could, then built part of my trip around it - knowing weather, more specifically seas, might keep me from visiting. The weather on the day of my planned visit was perfect. Unfortunately, the dock work they were doing on the island wasn't completed so no boats were landing. The best laid plans... This didn't do much to change my general rule about avoiding building an itinerary around reservations.

We have visited the Paris Catacombs twice but was 10 years ago or so. There were no lines and no more than a dozen people going through. Went to Versilles years ago and the crowd was fairly small. We returned to visit gardens and hamlet at Versailles last year and the crowds were unbelievable to tour the palace. Small towns and villages now have more appeal for our travel.

I also enjoy going back to the major tourist hubs like Rome and London. Less pressure to see all the biggies if you go back. I do regret not making it to the Louvre last visit to Paris in 2010. Having visited the Vatican Museums four times I can now actually imagine going to Rome again and skipping it. Likewise, been to Churchill War Rooms twice and could skip it next time. Still must visit Doge's Palace every time in Venice though. You could really do the same trip every time to Italy and not get bored. Venice-Florence-Rome. But I prefer to mix it up. This last May I visited mostly second tier cities like Ravenna, Padova, Bolzano, Verona and they were great too. Also Venice and Varenna (day trip from Milan).

I too am bothered by over tourism. It's just that recognizing that I am one of those tourists, I appreciate pre booking as opposed to either standing in, or looking at the lines. The more crowded places that limit admission to a smaller number of pre-arrangers the better. Be spontaneous somewhere less crowded or don't complain about the crowds.

The biggest problem seems to be the people who posted here that they keep returning to the same place. That doesnt leave room for new people to come. Selfish!!

I would imagine that no one has done anything about "over tourism" because if a location is making money off it, using that money to reinvest in their own country or community; then from their perspective it isnt "over tourism". If and when they think the tourism hassle outweighs the income generated from the tourism, then as most are democratic nations, they will do something about it. What? Triple the tourist taxes at hotels, raise taxes on flight tickets, double the museum ticket costs, etc. It really wouldnt be impossible to regulate the industry in a particular location that way. Is that what everyone wants? Prague hotel rooms for $200 plus a $50 a night tourist tax?

I don't know that too many people are worried about 10-minute lines. I've seen a lot of lines that looked like they would be an hour or longer (including a few that had signs posted to allow you to estimate how much longer you'd be in line), and I think it's totally reasonable not to want to spend your vacation time that way. For one thing, it's a lot harder on my feet than walking around.

And then there's the possibility of sell-outs at some sites. While I was hanging around the tourist office in Krakow last year, person after person approached the window to ask about tickets for Auschwitz, only to be told advance tickets were sold out for the next 8 days. I was very glad that--warned by someone's post on this forum--I had bought a ticket before I got to town, because (slow traveler though I may be) I was not spending 9 days in Krakow. It was possible to go to the camp and try the ticket line, but the line was very long and open to the elements, and there was no guarantee there would be same-day tickets available by the time a visitor got up to the counter.

Travel for most is a matter of enjoyment and convenience. So buying in advance just seems make sense, especially for the things that are important. You fly all the way to X with the desire to see Y, do you want to risk as bust or maybe save $15? Doesnt make a whole lot of sense.

Another article on overtourism, this time about Pompeii:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/25/travel/pompeii-restoration-overtourism.html?xtor=ES-208-[26352_NEWS_NLB_ACT_Wk44_Mon_18_Oct_19]-20191028-[bbcnews_pompeii_newsworld]