Please sign in to post.
Posted by
1886 posts

It seems like articles about tourists come out every few months.

Sounds like it is more the type of tourist that the Netherlands seems to attract that is the problem. To trample on tulips....what is WRONG with people? The Dutch don't want the "Disneyland" effect; perhaps those who complain should first look in the mirror and make changes from within. Maybe start with Keukenhof. Perhaps make Keukenhof less of a Disney-like attraction with overt commercialism of having employees dress as Disney-like characters and make it more about the beds of FLOWERS themselves. The huge tour buses complained about in the article are very ones that bring mobs & mobs of tourists to the gardens for the 2 months Keukenhof is open.

Tour groups like RS arrive in the massive tour buses complained about in the article. If the groups are only 25 people, why the need for such a large bus that truly offends the people the tour groups are visiting?

While I get annoyed by articles that constantly attack tourists, when I see the damage & total disregard many of these tourists do and practice respectively, I can understand their POV.

Posted by
408 posts

I noticed in the article most of the problem was with the big cruise ships. I'm sorry but for most of the big cruise lines, there are about 3000 people on board. Multiply that by two or three and at the minimum there could be about 6000 descending on one area at a time. Cities can't have that many people in an enclosed area(they all keep to the tourist route) and not have problems.

I understand that people like to cruise but those behemoth ships are environmentally harmful IMHO. Sadly, I see that even Rick is encouraging cruises on them.

Posted by
3365 posts

The article was about the Kinderdijk area. We were just there with, yes, a big bus tour group, last month. It was not crowded and the groups we saw were pretty respectful. It wasn't nearly as uncomfortable as the hordes of party-seeking young folks in downtown Amsterdam. There was only one windmill you could see close up - the designated museum. Do you restrict access to what is really a world treasure? Pull permits from tour companies that don't manage their groups well? As we learned on our tour, the money from tourism helps subsidize the inefficient lifestyle that they seek to preserve. So whats the solution?

Posted by
3869 posts

It is not just the Netherlands, you will see much the same article about Venice, Florence, Barcelona, name any popular destination, you can find a story about over tourism.

Sorry to say, it is not only the badly behaved that are a problem, or the tour buses, or the cruise ships, except for the point that they can contribute to a high density of people into a defined area. In that respect,even the well behaved, low impact travelers on here contribute to the problem just by being there.

What is the solution? I suppose that is the $64 Million Dollar question. Avoiding the most popular areas would be a start, hit the little known areas, but try telling a first time visitor to Italy to skip Venice, Florence, and Rome.

Posted by
905 posts

"Sounds like it is more the type of tourist that the Netherlands seems to attract that is the problem. "

No. It is tourists period. And social media. As Paul said, it is a problem everywhere now, and to amplify what he said, I think the "low impact" / "authentic experience" tourists are the ones doing by far the most damage.

I used to be somewhat indifferent to tourism, then a few years ago I started seeing tourists at a obscure, mundane site in Hawaii from my child hood. I did some digging, and saw an entry on a travel site, and what I found really made me openly hostile to tourists, especially ones that seek "off the beaten path adventures." These reviews (4.5 stars) were for a telephone pole that was lodged into some rocks decades ago in a protected cove on a (formerly) deserted, rocky area on the coastline, about 1 mile from the nearest road. It was a place as kids we used to go jump around in the water, as teenagers to drink beer and do the same. If I had to rank it, in terms of obscure sites, it would literally be #272 on the list of "marginally fun places I occasionally hung out as a kid."

But of course now it is a "tourist destination" so a place that might get 3-4 local kids on a weekend now routinely has 20-30 tourists looking for an authentic experience, milling around, taking instagram selfies etc. It is absolutely obscene. I kind of understand when the top 10 or 20 or 50 sites - all the best waterfalls, parks, bars, restaurants, hikes, beaches etc are infested with tourists. But when these types of mundane, obscure sites are becoming "things" and there is literally no place you can go that doesn't have pasty white rich people looking to appropriate someone else's reality for their "lifestyle brand" ... it's enough.

Posted by
13126 posts

Sounds like North Korea has found the solution.

Posted by
44 posts

It seems like the mayor's desire is not to shun or reduce tourism, but rather manage it so that the lives of residents are not negatively impacted. She stated, “What’s of great importance to the city is that Amsterdam is a place where people live. This is not a frozen tourist spot where life becomes difficult. We need to think about what kind of tourists we want to attract, as we shouldn’t have any illusion that the number of tourists in the city will go down. It will keep on rising.”

https://www.bloombergquint.com/politics/amsterdam-brothels-to-get-a-review-by-city-s-first-female-mayor#gs.5I9Gick