Are big ships ruining ports around the world?

There was a short news segment on CBS Saturday morning about how popular destinations around the world (Rome, Dubrovnik, Santorini...) are getting overrun with tourists. Part of the reason, they speculated, was not only more and more people traveling, and the popularity of cruising, but also the size of the new cruise ships. I know that when 5000 passengers arrive at a port at once it's just too much. And when two or three of those monsters are in a port at once it's overwhelming. Even Holland America seems compelled to build bigger and bigger ships We just got back from a cruise to Norway on the Koningsdam. That was the biggest ship I've been on and it just loomed over some of those Norwegian villages we visited. When we arrived in Amsterdam to board the ship, the driver from the airport to our hotel told us that the new city government was beginning a "push-back" against cruise ships. As someone who makes his living from tourism he lamented that they were going to "kill the goose that lays the golden egg". It's really a conundrum.

Passenger demand for big ships is both creating and ruining many places around the world. Perhaps that is one virtue of the mega-ships making people to stay on board and not even bother getting off. They need to do more "cruises to no where" and never land the entire time.

A second layer of cruise planning now includes searching who else might be in port on the same day and avoid as much as possible sharing ports with any of those larger ships.

Hmm.. Did that taxi driver notice the cruise line under whose flag that ship sails is HOLLAND America Line? Maybe the driver is not Dutch but newly imigrated with no allegiance yet?

Cruise ships don't sail down the Tiber in Rome so why d they 'blame' ships for their heavy load of tourists? Civi is miles out of Rome..

Blame Michaelangelo, the days of Caesar, and a huge multi national reilgion... oh yah, tthe great food and incredible architecture...... and all the fabulous fea tures of Rome that attract so many of us to return again and again ;)

For profit cruise lines claim that they need a minimum number of pax per vessel to make a profit. Last time I saw the numbers it was in the neighborhood of 3000 passengers.

OTOH, ruining a tourist destination is largely a function of local policies and regulations. Local authorities are well within their right to limit port visits or other methods to keep tourism within reason.

So, my answer to the question is No...it's not the big ships it is the local tourism policies that are impacting the sites.

If local authorities restrict or prohibit port visits by large ships, the cruise companies will modify their products....by using smaller ships or finding other ports to visit.

Hmm.. Did that taxi driver notice the cruise line under whose flag that ship sails is HOLLAND America Line? Maybe the driver is not Dutch but newly imigrated with no allegiance yet?

...that the new city government was beginning a "push-back" against cruise ships. As someone who makes his living from tourism he lamented that they were going to "kill the goose that lays the golden egg".

For profit cruise lines claim that they need a minimum number of pax per vessel to make a profit. Last time I saw the numbers it was in the neighborhood of 3000 passengers.

 

OTOH, ruining a tourist destination is largely a function of local policies and regulations. Local authorities are well within their right to limit port visits or other methods to keep tourism within reason.

 

So, my answer to the question is No...it's not the big ships it is the local tourism policies that are impacting the sites.

 

If local authorities restrict or prohibit port visits by large ships, the cruise companies will modify their products....by using smaller ships or finding other ports to visit.

As is happening in Venice.

And is why HAL will not have the weekly Bermuda cruises in 2019.

Passenger demand for big ships is both creating and ruining many places around the world. Perhaps that is one virtue of the mega-ships making people to stay on board and not even bother getting off. They need to do more "cruises to no where" and never land the entire time.

 

A second layer of cruise planning now includes searching who else might be in port on the same day and avoid as much as possible sharing ports with any of those larger ships.

'virtue of the mega-ships making people to stay on board and not even bother getting off.'

That's right they don't need a port at all, they should stay in one port, so we can enjoy all the other ones..

What about PVSA in terms of u.S. sailings?

What about PVSA in terms of u.S. sailings?

Getting back to the OP's issue, Yes, large ships are indeed ruining some tourist attractions near ports. We have posted about this issue for several years, but since we are all cruise lovers the issue tends to fall on death ears. But we can actually give some examples of how cruising is causing major problems with some tourist areas.

Lets start with the Port of Venice (Italy) where the overpressure in the lagoon, from large vessels, has been eroding the delicate foundations of many buildings that front the Giudecca Channel. Venice has now approved a plan to ban large ships from the Port of Venice and they will soon have to dock on the mainland a few miles from Venice.

And then we have the Cinque Terre part of Italy which is being overrun with tourists partially because of the use of nearby La Spezia as a cruise port. The Italian government has now installed gates on the access road to Riomaggiore (and Cinque Terre) that they can close if there are too many people in the area.

And we think the best example of how cruise ships can harm an island is found on St Thomas, Forty years ago this was a popular tourist island with a very charming Charlotte Amalie full of cute boutiques, linen stores, etc. Now it has become something not so nice with awful traffic jams, too much crime, large chain stores (like Diamonds International), etc. On several of our last few cruise visits we did not even bother to get off the ship.

Hank

Cruise ships don't sail down the Tiber in Rome so why d they 'blame' ships for their heavy load of tourists? Civi is miles out of Rome..

 

 

 

 

Blame Michaelangelo, the days of Caesar, and a huge multi national reilgion... oh yah, tthe great food and incredible architecture...... and all the fabulous fea tures of Rome that attract so many of us to return again and again ;)

The original CBS spot didn't blame only cruise ships for overwhelming numbers of tourists.

The piece talked about several reasons for more and more people wanting to see the world. Part of the cause is due to travel becoming more affordable. Contributing to that is competition between cruise lines and the fact that the huge ships can hold per-passenger cost down. Of course, we all want to see all those iconic ports if we can. I'm so glad we've been able to see so many beautiful and historic places around the world, and cruising has enabled that. And, yes, we've taken that hour-long trip from the cruise port to Rome.

Any place can be ruined by over-use. St. Thomas, Santorini, Venice, the Cinq Terre, Valletta, - the lord st goes on. Perhaps the sad fact is that many of those people doing the damage do not gain anything themselves. One of many thousands of cruise ship passengers clogging Santorini really cannot get any feel for the place.

A few places (like St. Barth’s) have taken steps to save themselves by severely restricting cruise ship access.

Even Rome is not “visible” during cruise ship “visiting hours”. When you can’t see the Spanish Steps because of all the tourist butts sitting on them, you start to understand the rationale of those who prefer to travel on land and off season.

Getting back to the OP's issue, Yes, large ships are indeed ruining some tourist attractions near ports. We have posted about this issue for several years, but since we are all cruise lovers the issue tends to fall on death ears. But we can actually give some examples of how cruising is causing major problems with some tourist areas.

 

Its not just the size of the ships, its the numbers too. I've been reading some very critical reviews of Alaska Ports were the town is just swamped with tourists. Its not just 1 or 2 mega ships, its when 3, 4 or even 5 midsize or larger cruise ships show up on a single and day and dump 10K passengers onto the local infrastructure.

I’ve read that Dubrovnik is capping daily tourists in the Old City to 4000.

Its not just the size of the ships, its the numbers too. I've been reading some very critical reviews of Alaska Ports were the town is just swamped with tourists. Its not just 1 or 2 mega ships, its when 3, 4 or even 5 midsize or larger cruise ships show up on a single and day and dump 10K passengers onto the local infrastructure.

When we were in Killybegs earlier this year, our guide for our "over the edge tour" (fabulous by the way) said that they were so happy it was the Prinsendam because of the small size of the ship and number of passengers.

They had been visited by a large ship earlier that week (I think it was the Queen Mary but my memory is short) and she said it was like tsunami hit their town. They don't have the infrastructure to handle that many passengers.

They are grateful for the cruise ship visits but, at the same time, large ships pose a huge problem for them.

I've been a passenger on a ship sailing down the Giudecca canal in Venice and enjoying arguably the best sail-out in the Mediterranean. But I've also been on the other side and have been standing in the Piazzetta in Venice when huge behemoth cruise ships glide by, dwarfing the beautiful buildings and completely out of scale and alien to the gorgeous canvas of the city.

(To be transparent, the ship I was on was only 350 passengers; we look like a fugitive lifeboat from "Gigantica of the Seas" type ships...)

I somewhat agree that it is up to local authorities to take a stand on this -- problem is that it will be hugely unpopular with both tourists and with those who make money from tourism (witness the first post in this thread). A hard sell.

When this topic is discussed, I've seen nasty responses even on these CC boards from folks screaming, "Well if you [insert nationality here] don't want our travel dollars, we'll just go elsewhere." It's a shame people are so short-sighted. I feel it's much more likely that NOT putting some kinds of restrictions on travel to these places is much more likely to kill the goose that laid the golden egg than finding some ways to impose appropriate limits.

Definitely these mega ships are ruining many ports with all the tourists they bring.

I can see why governments want to start limiting size of ships and how many passengers they want per day.

Definitely these mega ships are ruining many ports with all the tourists they bring.

I can see why governments want to start limiting size of ships and how many passengers they want per day.

It’s not just the governments: thoughtful travelers hope that places they love will take steps to protect that which makes them special. Staying late at the Vatican gives you a great oppurtunity to wande, almost alone, through St. Peter’s; and Piazza Navona is itself only late - when the mobs are gone.

So, yes to the original question: the “success” of cruising is doing much to destroy the reason to cruise.

A footnote: there was a news story the other day about a Lindblad staff member killing a polar bear which seemed to threaten another staff member. In short: too much of going to see something special destroys that something special.

A footnote: there was a news story the other day about a Lindblad staff member killing a polar bear which seemed to threaten another staff member. In short: too much of going to see something special destroys that something special.

Sorry - Hapag-Loyd, not Lindblad, on a Spitsbergen call.

It’s not just the governments: thoughtful travelers hope that places they love will take steps to protect that which makes them special. Staying late at the Vatican gives you a great oppurtunity to wande, almost alone, through St. Peter’s; and Piazza Navona is itself only late - when the mobs are gone.

 

.

So, yes to the original question: the “success” of cruising is doing much to destroy the reason to cruise.

Yes you are so right. Sigh,,,,,,,,,,,,, PIAZZA Navona SOO outstandingly beau iful..

We have just returned from a Baltic cruise. We did one previously five years ago. There was a noticeable increase in St Petersburg of tourists. On our last visit there was just our ship docked, which had around 800 passengers. This time there were four large ships in port.

Every major European city is now overrun with tourists of which many are Asians constantly moving in large groups and taking selfies. I realise not all this is due to Cruising, but the recent popularity of cruising does play a part and is taking its toll.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

A footnote: there was a news story the other day about a Lindblad staff member killing a polar bear which seemed to threaten another staff member. In short: too much of going to see something special destroys that something special.

It didn’t seem to attack another crew members. The man received severe head injuries.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

It didn’t seem to attack another crew members. The man received severe head injuries.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Yes, the bear did attack an other crew member who was there to guide /protect cruise passengers visiting. Still, it was a clear example of cruising having a negative impact on the places cruise ships visit. If that sort of interaction happens too much, Spitzbergen will no longer have all of what people think makes Spitzbergen worth visiting.