Is Europe Getting Too Crowded

Nobody goes to Europe anymore - it's too crowded.

Sometimes crowds are a necessity of you want to see the really important sights. But you have control of the times you visit, and they all have down times.

Wait a minute, I'm the one who does Yogi Berra quotes.
I'm keeping my mouth shut as it might be judged as being too political.

Back doors -- that's what we need! If only someone would put together a bunch of guidebooks and tours like that -- they could call it Europe Through the Back Door!

But, Frank, by "looking for alternatives" do you mean looking for other continents to visit, or looking for places to go in Europe that aren't crowded? Sometimes it can just be a matter of timing -- winter in Scotland, August in Sicily, what have you.

How about going to places not in the guidebooks? Europe has crowded AND uncrowded parts - take your pick.

Based on the summer observations in the last few trips, ie from May to July, in 2015, 2016, 2017, I'd say yes., especially at the main sights, literally "with masses of people around...." No doubt about that. I would say worse regarding the crowds is at the train stations.

Agnes, that's what I was thinking. Sharing alternative places. The major cities have the big sites but some of the smaller places must have alternatives.

Is Rothenburg really the only "medieval" town in Germany? Is the Cinque Terre the only cliff hugging towns in Italy?

Absolutely - no doubt about it.

I now plan all my trips with crowd avoidance as one of the top priorities. In some ways, it's a pain in the butt. OTOH, it has forced me to become more creative, think outside the obvious, and strike out on my own to places that are not so well known (at least not well known to people from my home country). And that has resulted in some really wonderful experiences.

I know I'm probably in for a good trip when my wife comes home and tells me she was chatting with her friends at work, they asked where she was going on her next trip, and when she told them, they all just blinked, paused, and looked at her as if they had never heard of the place. She usually has to explain where it is, then there's an awkward silence and they ask why she is going there.

When she tells me this, I smile and suggest, "honey, next time, just tell them we're going to Orlando."

Is it time to start looking for alternatives?

Here is an easy alternative. Don't travel in the summer like the mobs of North American tourists do.

I've never traveled in the summer when it's been mobbed. We were in Venice in March several years ago and it was fabulous. February in Ibiza was delightful! October in Vienna was a dream come true. December in London to enjoy the Christmas holidays was magical. April in Santorini, Cappadocia, and Istanbul was fantastic.

Don't abandon locales you truly want to see; just go when the mob tourists groups aren't there.

I too hate crowds and prefer to avoid them if possible. Our upcoming trip is from June 7th to July 15th so we can hike in Switzerland. Most of our destinations are not too mainstream except in the UK. I'm really struggling with if we should spend 3 days in the Cotswolds 3rd week in June. I have it scheduled between 3 days in Bath (not on the weekend) and 4 nights in N. Wales. We will have a car - if anyone has an opinion about a better way to spend that 4 days - to avoid crowds I would be very interested. I was originally considering South Wales and planned on Home basing in Chepstow, but after looking at it in street view in Google maps - I wasn't so sure about that plan.

I think after this trip we will try and travel in the late fall. I'm hoping that will help avoid the crowds. We haven't been to Europe since 2014. I'm wondering how much the crowding factor has increased since then.....

Maybe you can try some of these tours.
http://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/dark-tourism/

Make a map of the places that RS doesn't cover (there are many), and go there. I would add that it is not the North American tourists that are causing the crowding, so maybe check out the guidebooks in Arabic, Mandarin and Hindi as well.

Yes and no.

The top sights at peak time (of day and of year) are too crowded. But you can still see these sights with less crowds by going right at opening, or very early in the AM or late at night (if it's an outdoor thing that's always open, like the Trevi Fountain). There are ways to buy tickets ahead of time or at a sister sight to skip the lines, because often the sight isn't all that crowded but the line to get inside is a disaster. Then of course there is time of year. If you HAVE to be on the most popular beach in Spain in August, yes it is miserable.

Then there is the obvious solution of go elsewhere. Go to Venice to see it, despite the crowds, then head over to...Slovenia where it will be less packed. See the highlights that you really care about then find your own "backdoor".

It's also a matter of taste. The crowds in parts of Rome at peak time are too much for me, but the "crowds" in some of the more popular areas of Sicily like Etna or Siracusa were not bad to me. Other people would find these parts of Sicily too touristed and want to go elsewhere.

People are travelling more, it is a fact. There are places in the World that everyone seems to want to see/experience so it makes sense that popular destinations are getting crowded. That being said, we travel in high tourist season ( kids in school so are not as flexible as we will be one day) and we find ways to make it work for us. Start our day early, pre purchase tickets etc.

For sure there are alternatives destinations... I guess it just depends on whether or not they are places that are of interest to you.

Of course - as incomes rise, some people use that extra to travel. And flights are cheap and frequent (compared to years ago).

This is why I like to do a combo of big and small. We spent 5 nights in Amsterdam last year, but then spent 3 nights based in Dordrecht. Our first trip to Italy, yeah, we hit Rome and Venice, but also stayed a night in Genoa and Bologna (not that they are 'small' - but they are generally less touristy). When we went to Germany, we stayed in Augsburg and Munich. In Switzerland, we stayed in Zurich and Bern, but also Spiez.

And tho I do like to be close to the action in big cities (I want to get out early and don't want to spend too much time on a tram or metro or my feet) - I'll still try and stay a little out of the tourist centre. In Amsterdam, we stayed in the De Pijp area - which, while not right on a canal, had more of a residential feel, yet had tons of restaurants nearby and was only a 5 min tram ride to Museum Sq. Had we stayed right in the centre proper, if most likely would have felt more crowded/stressful.

And for me, I do find the nice thing about returning to a big city multiple times - we've already seen the big crowded sights over a couple of visits, so it's easier to go to the smaller museum, or the off the beaten path church or that neat little neighbourhood. I mean, after travelling to London 6 times, we don't need to see Westminster or Buckingham Palace, or ride the London Eye or go to the Tower of London. Let's go to the Grant Museum or the Museum of Brands (!?). But trying to get on the Tube in the mornings or afternoons is still soul sucking. :)

So what works for me is staying in a smaller place in between the big cities just to lessen the annoyance of crowds.

I'm quite new to this forum and as a British resident I've found it very interesting what the recurring places are that are mentioned (Dover still baffles me!) and I've never heard of RS let alone read any of his guides. I too want to avoid crowds wherever possible but with two kids in school I'm now confined to peak season so I avoid the obvious places. This is easier to do if your interests lie in scenery rather than guide book sites, but if you are prepared to discover places that may not be as awe inspiring as the Sistine chapel but still make you want to reach for your camera then there is so much across Europe to discover, even in the summer months.
I have a job that requires quite a lot of travel around the southwest of England and South Wales and I'm discovering quaint gems of a place all the time. Sometimes the difference to getting a beach all to yourself in .July is being prepared to walk 15 or 20 minutes from the nearest car park rather than rock up onto a resort with cafes and parking right on the waterfront.

I get great enjoyment just driving through the Cotswolds but don't feel like you need 3 nights to 'do it'

Jill - there's lots of lovely places to discover around South Wales, I wouldn't suggest Chepstow as a base as it's not really the best location. Post in the Wales forum perhaps. (Just don't listen to the voices that say it's depressing post industrial ex mining towns!)

Yes, many places are overrun. After a brief love affair with the Cinque Terre from (2010 to 2014 we made 4 visits) we got turned off despite hiking the high paths and avoiding the villages during the day.

Last year we took an 8 week Grand Tour. Amsterdam crowds drove us crazy, and the Van Gogh Museum during the (allegedly) quieter hours was impossible. Surprisingly, though, London in late October was delightful. But then we were on our fourth London trip and did not go to the Tower, Westminster Abbey, or other hugely crowded first-visit-type of sites. Venice had its moments as we were there in September and we often go there in winter. Wanted to see the Biennale and it was overrun with art lovers. But we know back doors within Venice and managed to eat at fine places and enjoy our stay by pacing ourselves.

Other places, the off-the-beaten so many people say they want to see but do not, were delightfully unbusy. The Piemonte and Le Marche were pretty much locals-only in October and the weather was great, but I am not convinced many people really want that experience. There’s not so much to do in the classic tourist sense. In these places we simply enjoy our days with long walks, seeing minor sites, drinking wine we cannot find at home, chatting up locals, and riding trains.

Not just Europe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/galleries/Tourist-traps-the-worlds-most-crowded-places/

The article left out many other traps, such as the two I endured recently.

Granada's Alhambra and Bangkok's Grand Palace.

I'm glad I visited a lot of the high-traffic cities in Europe many years ago, starting in the late 1970's. Also, we never go in the Summer. Now our trips are almost exclusively to France, and usually some of the more obscure places. Last year we rented a place in the Ain, in the Bugey region, and the gite owner told us that even the French hardly know the area. This year we'll be spending time in the equally obscure Isere.

The last time we visited Paris, a few years ago, it was a real eye opener for us. We hadn't been there in about a decade, and we were used to doing things like arriving, heading right to the Musee d'Orsay, and going right in. When we tried that, there was an enormous line, so we went elsewhere.

Is the world getting too crowded??? It is getting to be very interconnected and more people with more money.

Maybe I'm just oblivious (focused?), but except for school groups in Segovia last June and the British Museum on a rainy day in late December 2014, crowds haven't made much of an impression on me. We do usually travel in late May early June (although we did go to Ireland, Paris, and Amsterdam in late June early July 2015) , haven't been to Italy in 10 years (although I do feel a trip coming on-maybe in early May sometime now that I'm retiring from teaching), and have never been to Cinque Terra. We went to Alhambra in afternoon and I've heard that the crowds may be less at that time of day.

I think social approval is partly to blame why people go to the same places in Europe as everyone else. They want to tell their friends/ family they're going there. They don't want to tell their friends/ family they're going to Romania or Moldova or Bulgaria (ooohhhs and aaaahhhhhs are better than "what? why?" or blank stares). Plus those guidebooks for Romania or Moldova aren't as thick. People care way too much about what others think (of their travel plans, and everything else). If you want uncrowded, think outside of Europe and outside of cities in general. Go to Argentina, or elsewhere in South America. Wonderful, beautiful landscapes and no one in sight in any direction in many areas in the high Andes. Just wide open space, but you need a car and need to get off the grid. I'm totally ok to never see Venice or Cinque Terre - there's a whole world full of other interesting places.

No more crowded than downtown Nashville....even on a cold, wet night.

I admit that this is something I never seem to think of when I'm doing my planning, but it has sometimes been pretty clear in retrospect:

Popular places within easy commuting distance of a major metropolitan area can see serious upticks in local tourists on weekends. If there happens to be a festival going on--even one not major enough to show up in most tourist literature, the impact on hotel rates can be profound, and there can be notably more people on the street--some of them day-trippers--though probably not so many will be English speakers.

I use booking.com most of the time. It shows the average cost per night of each hotel for the specific period of your stay, but not the night-by-night breakdown (at least not that I've ever seen). You can fiddle with your arrival and departure dates to figure out the cost of individual nights, but I never think to do that in advance; I just wince when the cost turns out to be 50% (or more) higher than I expected. I often just pay the freight, probably in a less centrally located hotel than I would like. Then, when I received the detailed invoice at checkout time, I see that Thursday night cost me something like 54 euros, whereas Friday and Saturday were more like 105 euros (just making those numbers up).

I observed that phenomenon in Toledo (where there was a festival I wasn't anticipating) and Salamanca (where nothing special seemed to be happening). The extra weekend crowding around the ticket machines in the Nice Ville railway station was also pronounced. All those observations occurred in May or June.

Of course, one has to be somewhere on the weekend. I'm thinking weekends may be a comparatively good time to be in Barcelona or Madrid, as opposed to Girona / Sitges / Toledo / Segovia / Salmanca / Cuenca. I suppose that doesn't apply to the well-known weekend party destinations like Prague, which I'm guessing are inundated by folks flying in on cheap budget flights for weekends, long or otherwise.

Nashville...that's a nice, interesting historical city as well as a state capital to see. I was there only once, in August, at the Greyhound station to transfer buses to go to Memphis. It's on the US bucket list.

Over the last few years, I've found that Europe is definitely getting more crowded, however whether it's too crowded depends on the city, time-of-year, time-of-day and viewpoint.

In addition to affluent North Americans and Australians, there now seems to be an increasing number of travellers from the Orient, India, Russia and even the Middle East. Many of the travellers from other parts of the world use guidebooks (LP or others, based on what I've seen travellers using) to plan their touring, which brings them to the same popular sites that many North Americans want to see. Add to that a lot of people taking cruises and increasingly also river cruises.

To minimize crowding, travelling in April or October will probably help somewhat. Staying in a smaller town outside the main tourist centres is another possibility. I usually travel in September and just adjust to whatever conditions I find.

In addition to affluent North Americans and Australians, there now seems to be an increasing number of travellers from the Orient, India, Russia and even the Middle East.

Very true, Ken, and folks from other countries tend to come in what we might call the off-season, or at least in shoulder season.

I would guess the majority of tourists at any given European hotspot, at any given time, are other Europeans. Its just the Americans that we notice (and feel guilty about it).

Some of the things I read online make me think maybe some places, at certain times, are oppressively crowded. For example, I am not especially eager to go back to Cinque Terre based upon what I have read on this board. Our last visit to Versailles in 2010 was a disaster (made the mistake of going on a Sunday). London in May 2013 was tolerable in terms of crowds, the rest of England that we visited including Bath, no problems at all. Ireland May 2016 only part of Ireland that was crowded was Dublin's Temple Bar. Prague May 2011 was a zoo, but elsewhere in Czech Republic (Olomouc, Pesky Krumlov, Telc) were not crowded at all--nor was Budapest or Sopron on the same trip.

There are many dynamics driving the crowds as far as I can tell. Infrequent and new travelers tends to gravitate to the most recognizable, high profile cities. And there are a lot of new travelers these days. Also the availability of cheap flights within Europe means if you are inclined to do London and Prague, you can do that more easily (for me that would be a less than satisfactory visit to each country, as there is more to each than these cities). You probably meet ten Americans people who have been to Italy for every one that has been to Poland. Only one of those ten will have been to Lucca. Ten people who have been to Paris for every one that has been to the Dordogne. Everyone loves the most high-profile cities--they are well-loved in part because they are so awesome. But on another level it's an extension of the cult of celebrity, the obsession with seeing something iconic. The reason why everyone crowds around the Mona Lisa at the Louvre. Focusing on only the most famous places to visit is not my style of travel at this stage, but it is for many people. (Although, I will say that four of my sixteen Europe trips have included Rome; four of my sixteen have included Paris. Not as much in recent years). Our next itinerary will probably be Krakow to Berlin in late April.

To avoid the crowds, get outside of the most high-profile cities and visit smaller ones, even get out in the country. Go to less traveled countries. Go shoulder season or off-season. Actually everything is getting more crowded when you think about it. Many of the national parks in the U.S. experience way more visitors than they can handle with decent quality of experience in high season.

I agree. And even in the high-profile cities people tend to congregate at the most famous spots. There's a cliche that if you wander 5 minutes from San Marco, Venice is a whole different (uncrowded) city. This is true so many places - and even within sights. The Mona Lisa is wall-to-wall people but there are whole near-empty galleries at the Louvre. So if you are in a big, crowded city I would suggest seeing the highlights you care about, then heading out to the less-known sights or just wander around a neighborhood. New or once-in-a-lifetime travelers are often on a 2 day in Rome, 2 day in Paris, 2 day in London type trip so just see the highlights. A better experience for those who have already seen the highlights or don't care about highlights is to seek out smaller sights.
This doesn't work in smaller towns - I think the Cinque Terre is small enough that there are few to no uncrowded back streets in most of the villages. But that's the great thing about big cities - they are big enough that there is always something interesting that isn't mobbed.

Another option is to stay overnight at "day-trip" locations. Toledo, for example, is PACKED during the day but it's less than an hour from Madrid so everyone goes back there in late afternoon/early evening. Night is very, very uncrowded. To the point where I wasn't sure I liked it, but most people I've talked to find it peaceful. This applies to small towns within a hour or two of major tourist cities all over Europe.

"...at what point is it just too frustrating." That in the end is an individual assessment, if one works on that assumption. I don't accept that assumption, I'll see those impacted "sights" regardless of the crowds or no crowds, and since I go in the summer, (starting in May), I'll just have to put up with the tedious and taxing crowds.

Yes, and that’s why we travel during shoulder and off seasons and the trend is clear. In this little mountain town, we’re experiencing record crowds and a greater variety of visitors. It’s odd to be hiking and run into Indians (not the first ones, the ones 1/2 round the world) having a fabulous time and no doubt thinking it’s very uncrowded.

I had a friend go to the Cinque Terre a few years ago - she was there around the 3rd week of April - the weather when they were there looked glorious (they were in shirt sleeves) and she said there weren't many people around at all (and judging from the photos - hardly a soul around). I mean - if you are going for relaxing/scenery and hiking, that seems like a good time to go.

If I ever do decide to return to CT, I'll def go around that time of year.

First of all I must say that I like and admire Rick and what he has done for American tourism and his attempts to get Americans to behave and see things from another perspective.

However... Rick Steves is to European Tourism what Joe Cummings (from Lonely Planet) was to Thailand tourism in the 1980's. They both have touted "hidden" gems like the Cinque Terre and Koh Samui which have since turned in to very crowded and in the case of Koh Samui over developed Must See sights..

This kind of thing is unavoidable.

Add to this that in the 1980's the number of Chinese middle class From the PRC could fill a small town in Nebraska. Now the number of Middle class Chinese with the money to travel overseas equals the entire population of the US or more. The same is true for other parts of the world including India. I travel to America's National Parks often and see the incredible rise in the number of foreign visitors from these countries there. This in fact makes me proud of our country and it's natural heritage. At the same time our parks are very crowded at times.

Much of the advice here is about finding the "out of the way" and the "unknown" however for the first time visitor seeing the iconic sights is important. And those that write that the high season seems to be stretched beyond all normal definitions are correct.

But much of what one goes to Europe for, the Art, the Architecture, the History are important to experience and if one is going to have that experience you are going to encounter crowds (in some places almost anytime of year) But do go, don't let the crowds stop you.

And this thread makes me wonder how many of you have actually read Ricks books. He spends literally chapters explaining how to avoid or reduce encountering crowds and lines at almost every important stop. If you follow his simple tips you will probably feel much better about the experience

Everyone loves the most high-profile cities--they are well-loved in part because they are so awesome. But on another level it's an extension of the cult of celebrity, the obsession with seeing something iconic.
That's true, but it is also true people go to the sights they've heard of, and apparently don't have the interest or initiative to go to places which don't show in some list of so-called must-sees. Czechia is more than Prague and Cesky Krumlov. Germany has much more - and much better - to offer than the traditional Munich-Neuschwanstein-Rothenburg trip. Belgium is not limited to Brussels and Brugges.

I travel to America's National Parks often and see the incredible rise in the number of foreign visitors from these countries there. This in fact makes me proud of our country and it's natural heritage. At the same time our parks are very crowded at times.

I'm hip deep in planning a Moab & Zion trip right now, and am remembering how crowded Zion was in 2012 with both Americans and foreigners alike- the whole 'go five minutes from the bus stop' saying didn't really apply then when popular trails like Emerald Pools or Riverwalk, which had all the human density of Central Park or Trafalgar Square the whole trail, and it's apparently only gotten worse since then.

But some places live up to their reputation and are worth the crowds, and for us the key is to split time between the old standards we want to see along with seeming half the planet as well as carefully trying to get further off the beaten path.

There's nothing wrong with being a tourist instead of a traveller or wanting to go to London instead of Sofia. We all have different travel styles, different interests, and different comfort zones, and because someone likes to travel differently than we do doesn't mean They're Doing It Wrong. The important thing is that they're getting out and exploring instead of staying home and never seeing what else is out there.

There's a cliche that if you wander 5 minutes from San Marco, Venice is a whole different (uncrowded) city.

I've found that to be true in so many places. On a visit to Cassis, we spent 2 nights. The first night we had dinner at a restaurant right in the port, and it was crowded with tourists and pretty mediocre. The next night we walked away from the port down a small side street, and had dinner at a lovely restaurant filled with locals.
As to another comment about staying in touristy towns -- we spent a week in Riquewihr, which was beautiful but quite touristy, and our apartment overlooked a parking lot where tour buses gathered during the day. But we were usually gone most of the day, and when we returned in late afternoon, the tourists were almost all gone, except for the few that were spending the night.

Although it is the location of RyanAir's "Brussels" airport, Charleroi, Belgium is probably not that crowded.
As for Yogi Berra, I think the Economist went there first.

"but it is also true people go to the sights they've heard of, and apparently don't have the interest or initiative (emphasis mine) to go to places which don't show in some list of so-called must-see".

Spoken like a true European (or expat living in Europe) with most of Europe at their doorstep, just a short and inexpensive flight or train ride away, making short visits to out of the way off the beaten path places very convenient - not to mention the annual vacation time to do it. I'm not saying this is wrong, lord knows I wish it were me.

It's easy for many of us on this forum, as frequent travelers to Europe, to complain about the crowds at the popular spots and to advise others to seek out less crowded but equally interesting and exciting and scenic places. But we have to admit the fact that we are not the 'average' tourists.

The majority of American travelers visiting Europe will make a total of 1 or 2 trips to Europe in their lifetime for 2-3 weeks each. Two of the days from each trip will be used up in transport to and from, and the cost will cut deeply into their overall budget. Of course most of these people, especially first time travelers who have saved up for 10 years or more for this trip (which may be their only trip to Europe), will want to see what they have been hearing about, reading about, and seeing photos of, all of their lives. They literally don't have the time to go to the out of the way places that are crowd-free.

I mourn the days when major sights were less crowded (when many of us started travelling to Europe) and when off season or off peak times of day were the methods used to avoid any crowds there were. Unfortunately those days are gone and not likely to return. If you go now and you want to see those 'must see' popular sights you have no choice but to steel yourself for having to deal with crowds. It is the new reality.

Dont go when the weather is good
Avoid the Icons of History and Culture
Wait? That's silly.

Do go when the weather is good. That's generally April, May, June, September and October.
Do see the Icons of history and culture like Rome and Paris; but end the trip examining a unique culture like Romania or Ukraine or Albania or Bulgaria ....... and save a lot of money doing it.

There have been a few times visiting Versailles when I found it relatively tolerable in terms of tourists, (still pretty crowded, but depends on your tolerance level), then the contrary when it swamped, I mean swamped, with tourists. With that and the heat on that day, I didn't stick around too long. If that were the case at Fontainebleau, I'd still stay. Crowds aren't going to drive me out of Fontainebleau.

If one has been absent from travel in Europe, say five to ten years ago was the last trip, the very first difference you'll notice now in the summer is the HUGE numbers of international tourists, Indians, the Mandarin Chinese, the Spanish speakers, be they from Spain or Argentina, etc, or you spot out the different languages spoken.

In Bill Bryson's book "Neither Here Nor There," written in the early 90's, he remarks about how much more crowded places such as Florence were then than when he first went to Europe in the early 70's. Ha ha, it's all about your frame of reference isn't it. Maybe forty years from now we'll consider this year as a relative golden age of uncrowded travel.

I still have to listen to my sister's stories about going to the Uffizi in the 70's and the admission was like 50 cents. A pension in Venice was $4/night. Hey, gas was was 28.9 cents a gallon.

As for Yogi Berra, I think the Economist went there first.

I think the Econmist plagiarized Yogi.

I heard that the Cinque Terre villages (in Liguria in ITALY) and the trails between those villages are too crowded with people (too many people there), every month : April, May, June, July, August, September, October. When I was at the Cinque Terre, I was there in the month March. On March 13 that year, the weather was very pleasant. The temperature of the air was 72 degrees F. in the afternoon. Beautiful blue sky, bright but gentle sunlight, beautiful blue color on the surface of the Mediterranean Sea. But too many people in the restaurants in Vernazza. Only one person working as a server (waiter) in the restaurant. If I will go to the Cinque Terre again, I will try to reserve a table in the best restaurant in Monteroso.

Will mentioned Bill Bryson's book. Bil Bryson said he did not like
crowded and tense cities. But Bill Bryson said he liked being at Rome.
He wished to stay there longer. Well, Bill Bryson is a humorist, not a
writer of travel guide books.

Actually, Rome is not crowded at all, at least when I usually visit it (October). Crowded are a few hotspots, like the Vatican, the Colloseum and the Trevi Fountain, but with a good travel guide you can avoid these tourist hordes. I usually recommend to simply ignore the Vatican and see Santa Maria Maggiore and the Capitoline Museums instead, since the crowds completely ruin the experience, especially in the Vatican Museums. I would actually say that Rome is far less touristy than Prague or Florence for example, since the old town and the number of sights is huge, and most tourists only know the three or four top sites.

I'm reminded of meeting several couples from Seattle in a German restaurant on the Rhine. I'd been doing an exchange with the German Air Force but offered to help when I overheard them ask each other how to say beer in German. We had a nice visit. They told me of their travel plans and I said, sounds like you're following a Rick Steve's itinerary. They were dumbfounded at my mind-reading power. In reality, there are just a bunch of people in Europe with blue travel books that are all seeing the same sights on the same schedule.

Rick's choices are good choices but they aren't backdoors (at least not after he started publishing them). I feel bad for anyone who thinks they will miss the crowds by following Rick's advice.

I travel shoulder season to avoid both big crowds and very hot weather. I don't mind seeing the big attractions but I'll definitely skip a sight that's likely to be too crowded, or at least visit at the least crowded time of day.

I'm going to start a thread titled, "Best luck you've had avoiding major crowds at major sights". Maybe we can share some ideas that have worked for us?

I travel to America's National Parks often and see the incredible rise
in the number of foreign visitors from these countries there. This in
fact makes me proud of our country and it's natural heritage. At the
same time our parks are very crowded at times.

I'm hip deep in planning a Moab & Zion trip right now, and am
remembering how crowded Zion was in 2012 with both Americans and
foreigners alike- the whole 'go five minutes from the bus stop' saying
didn't really apply then when popular trails like Emerald Pools or
Riverwalk, which had all the human density of Central Park or
Trafalgar Square the whole trail, and it's apparently only gotten
worse since then.

I think about this when I read all the complaints about the overrun hot spots in Europe. Visitation numbers to some of our parks have reached a critical point and the NPS is considering all sorts of methods to try and restore some sanity. We've been lucky at some of the worst as we get up and onto the trails early in the morning, and have been physically willing and able to tackle more difficult or remote treks that the majority pass by. But the mandatory shuttle system within Zion Canyon isn't enough anymore; it doesn't eliminate the traffic jams just to get NEAR the park during high season and holiday weekends. I've all but given up on wanting to mess with the reported zoo at Yosemite.

selkie, you might take a look at Kolob Canyon at Zion? That was on our agenda last return trip to escape the (fall) masses but a round of really nasty storms and flooding killed that plan, as well as most of our others. Anyway, that one is supposed to be a breath of fresh air when a lot of Zion Canyon trails are overrun.

In Moab (which we love) take a look at hiking Fisher Towers: no pass needed and not inside a NP boundary. It's my favorite hike in that area, and we've done it with almost no one out there. Go early in the morning if your trip is during the warmer months. At Arches, we've done both Tower Arch and Primitive Trail at Devils Garden without a lot of company at all but again, go early in the morning. We haven't found the Island in the Sky unit at Canyonlands to be all that trampled but it's got a lot more room than Arches. If willing to make the drive, leave very early some morning and drive down to the Needles Unit and do the Chesler Park hike; FABULOUS. There's a nice loop you can do by tacking on the Joint but it's an 11-miler RT so just do Chelser as an out-and-back (6-miler RT) is that's too long for ya.

One trick at Zion is to take bikes on the shuttle early in the morning to the end of the canyon then ride the bikes back down stopping where ever you want on the way back. Each shuttle can take 3 or 4 bikes.

We went to Yosemite annually for years. We went last May hoping to avoid most of the crowds and it was INSANE! Luckily we had our bikes. People were waiting for over an hour to get on a shuttle. The bathroom at Yosemite falls had been so overrun it was absolutely horrible, and I mean really horrible. So bad that I wrote the NPS about it. Made me gag! The NPS has got to figure out how to get a handle on the situation. I think the problem is really that a lot of tour companies are running day tours into the parks, bringing in massive amounts of day visitors on big bus tours (usually foreign visitors).

Kathy, I appreciate the information about places in southern Utah, from you. I saw southern Utah from an airplane, high in the sky. I wish to be there, on the ground, some day, some year.

Jill, don't blame the NPS. They can't keep up with the increasing crowds at the same time that the government keeps cutting their budget. Something has to give.

selkie, you might take a look at Kolob Canyon at Zion?

Part of the reason we booked in the Hurricane/La Verkin area instead of Springdale is that it puts you 20 minutes from Zion main and 20 minutes the other way from Kolob Canyon, and we figured we'd go heavy on Kolob if the Springdale side was too much of a zoo.

(Takes notes of Moab area hike options)

Utah has done a really good job of marketing their national parks and other natural beauty areas in recent years- great for the state economy, but with some of them, the easy to reach areas are somewhat small and getting quite crowded.

Visitors to many of the national parks are loving them to death. For example, demand is far exceeding the proper capacity of Glacier National Park, which is spectacular.

Bruce, I agree Glacier NP is amazing. We were there last in summer of 2016 and I didn't feel it was any where near as crowded as Yellowstone or Yosemite. We did stay on the east side of the park though. I was really hoping it would be spared as it's more out of the way than the others:(

I love reading guidebooks and planning the route and itinerary. Train travel and staying near the main downtown sights is convenient and has its place.

But, I'm also a fan of car travel in Europe. You can take an exit, make a turn, and get out wherever you want and just enjoy the local culture wherever you are. Even to sit in a traffic jam on the autobahn can make a memory.

We often stay in less expensive off-path lodging, outside of city center, and eat at local restaurants and markets. You don't even need to know the name of the little town where you're staying to enjoy the culture and have a memorable European experience.

Rent a bike or go for a lengthy walk/hike. Buy your meal ingredients at a local market in the local language. Give it a try! Ask a local about what to see that most tourists miss. Try using the local language, even if just to say "hello," "pardon me," "please", "thank you," and "goodbye."

Rick has it right. The stories that I remember and share years later come from experiences interacting with people around you. But, you don't always find the right circumstances from the guidebook. Head the other way and keep your head up and eyes open.

But, I'm also a fan of car travel in Europe. You can take an exit, make a turn, and get out wherever you want and just enjoy the local culture wherever you are. Even to sit in a traffic jam on the autobahn can make a memory.

I love putting the address of our hotel into the GPS/Sat Nav and then having the freedom to just go down whatever country road looks interesting knowing that it just takes a few pushes of buttons to get home at night. And how many countryside bus drivers will pull over so you can buy strawberries from a roadside stand?

Kathy, I appreciate the information about places in southern Utah,
from you

You're welcome, Ron. And it's nice to find myself amongst some park-lovers here! :O)

The Southwest Parks are breathtaking, even the few which are overrun. We stayed until the sunset crowd had gone and hiked down from Delicate Arch (Arches) in the dark under a full moon a few years back; a religious experience. Utah's "Mighty 5" National Parks are ALL must-do's for hikers, as well as other parks and monuments in Northers Arizona and New Mexico/Southern Colorado and Utah. There are some terrific state and local parks/trails as well; e.g. Goblin Valley, Kodachrome, Little Wild Horse, Dead Horse Point, etc. Just hope my knees hold out a few more years so we can get a few of the more remote under our belt (anyone here hiked Bisti/De-Na-Zin?)

Ron, if you want some more ideas, start a post in "Beyond Europe". A PM is fine as well but a forum post might be useful for others planning a trip to that region.

Is it time to start looking for alternatives?

I'll second Kodachrome Basin and Dead Horse Point State Parks in Utah, both are awesome. State parks are often less crowded than the National parks - not always but often. While the National parks are popular with foreign visitors, they often don't think about exploring the State parks.

I'll also put in a plug for Oregon's State parks. So many people go to Crater Lake and the Columbia River and miss some fabulous places.

Dead Horse Point State Park is amazing - honestly, I had just as good experience there as the Grand Canyon, minus all the cars and people. Kathy is spot on with her recommendations. Although I found Arches to be relatively (much) more busy, Canyonlands (especially the Needles District) was not. It's a HUGE park. Basically, the more strenuous and hard-to-get-to the hike (e.g. requiring off-road driving), the less people will be on it. If you can roll up to an overlook in the car, it's bound to be crazy crowded...but if you are fit and are willing to hike more challenging trails, you can find yourself alone at least a part of the time. It's basically a matter of self-selection and obviously heath, age, and fitness level. There were more people than I thought on the Chesler Trail (Canyonlands) but it was still comparatively empty compared to others. I hiked three Utah parks in early May and they were not too crowded at all, it was such a nice surprise. Capital Reef appeared to be totally understated and there are tons of interesting hikes there. I skipped Zion and Bryce altogether (partly due to lack of time and partly wanting not to be around crowds).

I agree, Utah has marketed the hell out of its parks...they've been loved to death. The number of foreign tourists to Utah is pretty amazing. I saw seemingly just as many of them as domestic tourists.

I agree, Utah has marketed the hell out of it's parks...they've been loved to death. The number of foreign tourists to Utah is pretty amazing. I saw seemingly just as many of them as domestic tourists.

Very true Agnes. And I just saw that Lonely Planet's 2018 best places to visit in the US includes Southwestern Utah and it's parks. Lonely Planet is very popular with foreign travelers so expect more visitors.

I forgot about Antelope Island State Park to the northwest of Salt Lake City. Totally amazing and relatively empty...the only folks I saw camping were Europeans. It's a great place for photographing a bison colony which roams throughout the park.

Re: Antelope Island State Park: bring lots of insect repellent!

Re: Antelope Island State Park: bring lots of insect repellent!