Six of the world’s most threatened wonders
By Darren Cronian on Tuesday, January 13th, 2009

I have ranted about how we need to improve the number of tourists up here in the North of England so a press release received from travel magazine, Wanderlust, caught my attention. It highlights six of the world’s most threatened wonders.

Six of the world's most threatened wonders

It’s not a topic I would usually write about but I thought it was an important subject to discuss here on Travel Rants so I appreciate your comments. Apparently these six destinations are struggling from years of uncontrolled tourism development.

• Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt
• Zanzibar, Tanzania
• Venice, Italy
• Kashgar, China
• Ranthambore NP, India
• Omo Valley, Ethiopia

Boycott threatened wonders

Interestingly, Wanderlust asks that we boycott these destinations for a minimum of three days, to ensuring the sustainability credentials of tour operators are checked thoroughly, and urges travellers to think carefully when making travel decisions in 2009.

I’m not convinced that’ll make any difference, but what do you think?

Threatened status

Each destination has a different reason for its threatened status. Zanzibar now receives 200,000 tourists compared with 50,000 in the mid 90’s; this is causing problems with the local water supply. Venice which has seen visitor numbers shoot through the roof with up to a quarter of a million tourists visiting over a weekend.

Adventureous travellers

Travellers have become much more adventurous and travel to destinations that you would not have imagined five years ago. Last year we discussed the opening of fast food restaurants in Cusco, Peru but let’s not forget though that the local areas need the revenue from tourists to survive.

That aside, as travellers what can we do to improve the situation in these destinations. What I will do is post the suggestions Wanderlust provided for tourists visiting these destinations to see if we come up with the same ideas.


Related posts

Please enter your email address to receive my free newsletter

 



13 responses to “Six of the world’s most threatened wonders”

Caitlin | 13 January, 2009 at 8:50 pm

What does boycott it for a minimum of three days mean? That I’m free to go to Venice for 362 days of the year?

Report this comment

Darren Cronian | 13 January, 2009 at 9:23 pm

@ Caitlin

From the press release “From boycotting Sharm-el-Sheikh in Egypt, visiting Venice for a minimum of three days, to ensuring the sustainability credentials of tour operators are checked thoroughly, Wanderlust is urging travellers to think carefully when making travel decisions in 2009.”

Maybe I miss-quoted them? Ooops.

Report this comment

Damo | 14 January, 2009 at 6:37 am

Keep supporting local businesses, using restaurants locals use, and ask where souvenirs are made

Report this comment

Simone | 14 January, 2009 at 8:08 am

Supporting local shops and restaurants is important instead of going to westernised places. I think this is really important.

Report this comment

Darren Cronian | 14 January, 2009 at 8:10 am

Not sure boycotting is the right way to go about this but I think asking where travel gifts are made or using local markets and shops. As for Venice I suppose a lot of people just want to visit before it’s under water!

Report this comment

Sally | 14 January, 2009 at 8:11 am

Good post Darren

I think Wanderlust makes a good point about thinking before you travel. Travelling is too often about seeing what others have boasted about seeing/doing (e.g. Machu Picchu) rather than something personal and experiential.

We need a culture shift to getting off the beaten track, where travellers feel confident planning their own unique adventures, not going through the tour operators.

Boycotting can be irresponsible if it impacts the local economy more than the tour giants. They are so huge, the best way is always to go local

Overall, thoughtful travel has to be the way ahead, no? Great debate.

Report this comment

heatheronhertravels | 14 January, 2009 at 8:23 am

I’m hoping to get to Ethiopia this year and I know it’s a very poor country with under-developed tourism. I hate to think that people would avoid visiting when they really need tourist income.

I think the answer is to visit with a locally based company that works with the local communities to ensure that they benefit from all the visits and photo opportunities.

Report this comment

Sally | 14 January, 2009 at 9:00 am

Tourism income can lead to protection of endangered areas/species if well-managed. See the success in Rwanda for e.g.

For Ethiopia, you may look at Ethiopian Community Tourism: http://www.community-tourism-ethiopia.com. Have a great trip!

Report this comment

Joanne | 14 January, 2009 at 1:43 pm

I think the original piece from Wanderlust which insists we boycott Sharm El Sheikh is both naiive and silly! This is a purpose built tourist resort. Boycotting this holiday destination would mean devestation for thousands of workers in the hotels/bars/restaurants etc.

Although tourism has not been handled in these places in the best way, rash moves are not the best way to righten them.

The local tourist board needs to think of ways to improve the offering and education is important. Would we leave a tap running or a light on all day at home?

No, so why do so many people do it when on holiday. So many Egyptian peoples lives depends on us visiting their country. I am just picking this as an example.

Report this comment

Darren Cronian | 14 January, 2009 at 3:55 pm

@ Joanne

Great points and great discussion everyone. Keep those thoughts and opinions coming in.

Report this comment

Dan Linstead | 16 January, 2009 at 9:15 am

I’d like to respond on behalf of Wanderlust magazine.

Just to clarify, we are recommending different courses of action for different destinations threatened by over-tourism or poor development. The Venice 3-day suggestion, for example, is to minimise the hordes of day trippers and cruise visitors who wear down the fabric of the city while contribute little or nothing to the local economy (hence need for huge advertising hoardings on St Mark’s Sq, as discussed on this site previously).

Sharm is a different story. This is indeed a purpose-built resort – nothing existed here before tourism, and everything is shipped in from outside. Hotels are largely owned by Cairo (or foreign) businessmen, and only an estimated 3% of tourism revenue stays in the local area. Because there is no ‘real’ infrastructure in Sharm, it is also massively wasteful, producing up to 10x the rubbish of other Sinai towns.

So we are saying – boycott Sharm, and go to another Sinai destination (for example, nearby Dahab), where the local Bedouin are more actively involved in the tourism economy and you’re not just lining the pockets of big businessmen and filling the Red Sea with litter. This kind of direct action is the way to put pressure on the local authorities to improve their act.

Report this comment

Darren Cronian | 16 January, 2009 at 9:18 am

@ Dan

Thank you for dropping by and commenting. Apologises too for the small misquote. The problem with say boycotting Sharm and instead going to a nearby destination is do the tour operators have package holidays there?

I have never been to that area of the world so I am unsure.

Report this comment

Dan Linstead | 16 January, 2009 at 4:49 pm

There are numerous package holidays to other resorts – Dahab has grown massively in the last decade (when I was last there in the early 90s it was still largely backpackers; now you can go with Thomas Cook) but is still a more sustainable option than Sharm. If you want more than beach/ dive, Bedouin Paths (www.bedouinpaths.com) are a highly recommended UK-based outfit. Or if you’ve got a bit more time, fly into Cairo and travel down independently – stay in a homestay or eco-lodge, use a local tour operator, get under the skin of the place… (Dan Linstead, editor, Wanderlust)

Report this comment

Please post a comment

     Comments will be moderated. Please read the comment policy before posting.