Venice -- Interesting (and Sobering) Fact

[Neuhoftraveler]

Much has been written about the sheer volume of tourists now regularly overwhelming Venice. But I've never seen this quantified. So I looked up the list of cruise ships that will be in port on the day we arrive there for our Adriatic cruise a few days later.

 

Keep in mind that the total population of Venice these days is said to be only about 55,000. The number of passengers cruising into Venice that day, plus the number cruising out that day (and not double-counting those on a one-day port call), is -- a staggering 13,009. And keep in mind that this doesn't include cruise passengers already in town whose ships depart a day or two later, or those still in town whose ships arrived a day or two earlier, not to mention non-cruising tourists who arrived by air, by rail, by car, or on a bus tour (day-trippers or otherwise).

 

No wonder the Venetians are said to prefer pigeons to tourists.

[3ssn]

Sorry to hear that, but a beautiful city...

Edited May 19, 2014 by 3ssn

[cruisemom42]

They apparently don't hate our money...

 

Of course they don't hate the money. :rolleyes: But perhaps one needs to think a little more deeply about the situation.

 

Imagine if you and your family lived in a house that, for whatever reason, was a tourist attraction. You might like the extra money that you could charge for people to visit your house. At the same time, you might hate the constant wear and tear on your house that hordes of tourists cause -- the candy wrappers on the floor that you have to pick up, the scuffs and scratches on your walls, the gum on the floor, the lamp that gets broken, the noise (and probably complaints) your family has to endure all day every day...

 

In Venice, locals also have to endure the higher prices charged by all merchants who are catering to presumably fatter tourist wallets, the fact that everyone in their city now expects a hefty tip in a non-tipping culture thanks to tourists who refuse to leave their habits at home, etc.

 

(On the other hand, Venetians don't think much of pigeons either... ;) Tourists may still be marginally ahead.)

[3ssn]

Changed my initial reply after some reflection... Next august we'll be in Venice again but we stay in Mestre. I will pack my pigeon-suit... just in case

[rebeccalouiseagain]

Venice is one of my favorite places in the world. I have visited there in summer and fall (7 times now) and it is a wonderful place to explore. Even during festivals I didn't mind the crowds. The bottom line is that at night Venice is not swarming with people. In the early morning it is really great as well. Most people who don't like Venice haven't stayed there overnight. During the day I think it is best to hang out in the Castello area- which is very tranquil or visit Burano. At night Venice is so romantic. Love it there.

[p_mori7]

OP: If you never been to Venice before, I respectfully suggest that you wait until after your visit before you start dissing on too many tourists invade the city.

 

It is simply not true.

 

St-Marks is always busy, which is normal. Once you start walking and exploring the back streets, you will find that Venice has plenty of room to accomodate everybody.

 

Then there are the outlying islands of Murano, Burano & Torcello...there will be people...but still plenty of room.

 

Venice was a center of trade way back when...and has always been used to acomodating lots of people.

 

Enjoy your visit !

 

:)

[euro cruiser]

For those interested in a deeper understanding of the issues Venice is dealing with, here are two Unesco reports you might enjoy reading.

 

This one specifically addresses the port: http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/FIELD/Venice/pdf/news/rapporto4_single%20pages.pdf

 

This one discusses tourism: http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/FIELD/Venice/pdf/news/PROGRAMME%20Venice%20Workshop%2020-21%20June%202011.pdf

[cruisemom42]

For those interested in a deeper understanding of the issues Venice is dealing with, here are two Unesco reports you might enjoy reading.

 

This one specifically addresses the port: http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/FIELD/Venice/pdf/news/rapporto4_single%20pages.pdf

 

This one discusses tourism: http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/FIELD/Venice/pdf/news/PROGRAMME%20Venice%20Workshop%2020-21%20June%202011.pdf

 

There has been a lot of discussion on the port, but I found the second report on tourism very interesting. For those who don't want to take the time to go through it all, a few highlights:

 

• Venice has approximately 22 million visitors per year.
  
• Less than one-fourth of them (5 million) stay overnight -- so Venice is not getting hotel revenues (and given this, they are likely not getting much revenue from food).
  
• Less than one-tenth (2 million) visit any of the cultural attractions in Venice -- so Venice is not getting revenues from the vast majority of these folks either.
  

The report further suggests that "The impact of massive, low quality tourism is indeed devastating. Not only are pollution and congestion generated by the excessive pressure of tourism on the delicate urban texture, it also fuels a process of the crowding out of residential and non-touristic economic activities."

 

The constant influx of tourists has also contributed to the decrease in actual residents: from 180,000 in 1951 to fewer than 60,000 in 2011.

[Neuhoftraveler]

OP: If you never been to Venice before, I respectfully suggest that you wait until after your visit before you start dissing on too many tourists invade the city.:)

 

To p mori7: For your information, I have been visiting Venice since 1964, which probably is before you were born. Nor can I even imagine what in my post could responsibly be called "dissing" anyone or anything. If there's any "dissing" going on here, it's not by me.

 

Another thing: "Way back," there weren't as many people in all of Europe as now visit Venice every year.

 

So tell us, p mori7: Have you ever been to Venice? If you have, did you spend all of your time on Murano, Burano, and Torcello? Let us know.

[rebeccalouiseagain]

I think any place that becomes a tourist mecca takes away from the lifestyle of the locals. In recent years, cruise ships have become more popular and cruisers may not plunk down a lot on land but they do bring income to the city. The port charges money for ships to come and provides jobs for locals. The airports are busy with tourists- which provides jobs for locals. The mass transit has to hire more people because of tourists. The hotels aren't cheap- so they are getting their fair share of tourists. The restaurants tend to overcharge and under-deliver- so no sympathy there. Still- this is income for the locals. The shops do take in lots of money from the millions of people who come there each year.

 

The locals I'm sure "hate" the tourists but if it weren't for the tourism... would Venice be in the condition it is now? The income certainly helps the city.

[cruisemom42]

The locals I'm sure "hate" the tourists but if it weren't for the tourism... would Venice be in the condition it is now? The income certainly helps the city.

 

Did you actually read the report linked above (or other, similar news stories)?

 

Many sources have confirmed that the balance is too one-sided. It is not sustainable. Tourists ARE in fact causing more damage to Venice than the money they bring in is "helping" the city. Much of the money brought in by tourists is used to ameliorate the damage they cause -- not least of which is the impact of huge cruise ships sailing through the heart of the city.

 

So to answer your question -- no, Venice wouldn't be in the condition it is in now if there were fewer tourists; it would probably be in better shape.

 

If the flight of locals to the mainland continues, as well as the ever-increasing hordes of tourists and out-of-scale cruise ships, there will be no "real" Venice left to visit. It is slowly becoming a Disney World version of itself.

 

I hadn't been to Venice in many years, and I noticed a huge difference last year to when I first visited Venice (in 1978). I was not fond of the tarted-up hotels that look to pander to a tourist version of "La Serenissima" or the endless tawdry souvenirs that are not even made in Venice (or Italy, for that matter...)

 

If nothing else, those who love Venice should try to understand her problems and consider what can be done to offset those problems -- or there will BE no real Venice for our children and children's children to visit and fall in love with.

[rebeccalouiseagain]

I read the articles. I am not sure how you stop the "daytrippers"- which seems to be the main complaint. I suppose you could pull out the cruises entirely- that might cut down on some tourists but it's a free country and people will still come from the mainland to get a look at Venice. Not sure what the solution is.

 

As for the vendors- that might be something that the local municipality should deal with- things like crap sold on the bridges and "fake" designer bags along the sidewalk.

 

Venice, like many cities in Europe has the added problems associated with the economic depression that has impacted the globe. Fewer people are buying the big ticket items like Murano Glass chandeliers and expensive lace. These things are a bit outdated and not really in vogue anymore.

[euro cruiser]

I suppose they could acknowledge what they have become, put up gates, and charge admission to the city.

[wassup4565]

I visited Venice for the first time two years ago, so have no longer-range experience to compare with. I DID think it was a kind of Disneyland, no getting around that. But at the same time, boats are still plying the canals loaded with lumber for construction or carboys of wine, and that is real. And the little streets and squares don't need any set decoration - they are still real.

 

If you want to see something truly scarey, have a look at Dubrovnick. As a fellow cruiser said, "You want to destroy your city, just have it declared a UN historic site." A very small ancient walled city, during daylight hours it is now crammed with tourists shuffling shoulder to shoulder on every side. The only commerce I saw was people selling stuff to tourists. If people actually still live there, they must only come out of their houses in the dark of night.

 

Venice is not like that yet. Ha ha, just reminded me of a parallel thing. We used to do a lot of wilderness canoeing and one of our canoeing buddies always insisted we cover up any evidence of where we camped or beached our canoes. So nobody else would know to stop in those places.

[rebeccalouiseagain]

I really don't like this "Disneyland" analogy. First of all- if the only place you went in NYC was Times Square and Central Park- then you haven't seen the "real" NYC. If in Paris you only went to the Eiffel Tower or the Champs Elysee- then you haven't seen the "real" Paris. These are tourist attractions and they flog all kind of crap in those areas- that take away from the ambiance and local charm.

 

If you only go to Venice for a day and visit the Rialto and St. Mark's- these are the tourist attractions and that's where the cheesy vendors congregate by day- and are gone by dusk usually. The rest of Venice is not full of this stuff.

 

Besides some small villages in Italy, Venice is one of the only places in the world that has no cars. This is really unusual and the buildings are works of art in themselves. I have yet to see a "tacky" building in Venice. It is a historic site and the buildings are much the way they were hundreds of years ago. The whole city is art.

 

If you go to Rome, Paris or London during the height of tourist season- you might be put off by the crowds and the garbage they leave behind but I think most tourists are extremely respectful of other countries and they aren't rubbing up against homes in Venice as someone said. I have never left my garbage for someone else to pick up or caused "Wear and tear" on the facades in Venice. That isn't happening and if anything the income from tourists helps the property owners to repair the buildings- which aren't in disrepair for the most part- they stand proud and historic.

 

They only rubbish I have seen in Venice was dog poop in some of the alleys and I suspect that was the locals' and not cruise ship passengers or day trippers mess.

Edited May 23, 2014 by rebeccalouiseagain

[cruisemom42]

I really don't like this "Disneyland" analogy. First of all- if the only place you went in NYC was Times Square and Central Park- then you haven't seen the "real" NYC. If in Paris you only went to the Eiffel Tower or the Champs Elysee- then you haven't seen the "real" Paris. These are tourist attractions and they flog all kind of crap in those areas- that take away from the ambiance and local charm.

 

If you only go to Venice for a day and visit the Rialto and St. Mark's- these are the tourist attractions and that's where the cheesy vendors congregate by day- and are gone by dusk usually. The rest of Venice is not full of this stuff.

 

Besides some small villages in Italy, Venice is one of the only places in the world that has no cars. This is really unusual and the buildings are works of art in themselves. I have yet to see a "tacky" building in Venice. It is a historic site and the buildings are much the way they were hundreds of years ago. The whole city is art.

 

If you go to Rome, Paris or London during the height of tourist season- you might be put off by the crowds and the garbage they leave behind but I think most tourists are extremely respectful of other countries and they aren't rubbing up against homes in Venice as someone said. I have never left my garbage for someone else to pick up or caused "Wear and tear" on the facades in Venice. That isn't happening and if anything the income from tourists helps the property owners to repair the buildings- which aren't in disrepair for the most part- they stand proud and historic.

 

They only rubbish I have seen in Venice was dog poop in some of the alleys and I suspect that was the locals' and not cruise ship passengers or day trippers mess.

 

You might be thinking too literally. My analogy was not meant to suggest that people were literally causing damage to Venice by scuffing up the walls.

 

On the other hand, I don't think Venice would agree with your assertion that visitors are not causing damage. For several years now, Venice has had annual campaigns to get tourists to change their behavior:

 

http://www.italymagazine.com/news/venice-launches-respect-city-campaign-aimed-tourists

 

 

One example might be the pigeons in St. Marks. I've heard tourists grumble about the change in rules -- it's no longer allowed to feed them, and it can in fact result in a large fine. But tourists just don't realize the large amount of damage that these pigeons were doing, and some continue to feed them anyway. Their droppings damage statues and decorative elements on buildings, and they peck into crevices and cause damage searching for food.

 

One study found that cleaning up the monuments and repairing the damage caused by pigeons was costing each Venetian taxpayer 275 euro per year.

[rebeccalouiseagain]

They used to sell birdseed in St. Mark's and I did throw it much to the amusement of my two sons- who laughed hysterically as a flock of pigeons came right at me and nearly pecked me to death- ala "The Birds" and I ran screaming from St. Mark's. It's funny now but I think that feeding the pigeons is for the birds! :eek:Pun intended.

Edited May 23, 2014 by rebeccalouiseagain

[p_mori7]

To p mori7: For your information, I have been visiting Venice since 1964, which probably is before you were born. Nor can I even imagine what in my post could responsibly be called "dissing" anyone or anything. If there's any "dissing" going on here, it's not by me.

 

Another thing: "Way back," there weren't as many people in all of Europe as now visit Venice every year.

 

So tell us, p mori7: Have you ever been to Venice? If you have, did you spend all of your time on Murano, Burano, and Torcello? Let us know.

 

Your post read like you agreed that too many people visit Venice. You are obviously one of those that visits alot if you have been going since 1964, so I don't understand why you post a link to that article ? Do you agree with the article ? If I misunderstood you, then my bad.

 

Your assumption on my date of birth is incorrect.

 

When I was there, I explored as much as possible in 48 hours, and not just M,B & T.

[rebeccalouiseagain]

The "sobering fact" that the OP was talking about is how 22 million people visit Venice each year and it is causing more harm than good.

 

I disagree. Like many statistics- they can make an argument sound scientific. I am not an economist but have reason to believe that like many tourist Mecca's- tourism is the #1 source of income and if it was suddenly gone- there would be huge decline in the standard of living of those who still reside in Venice and in the outlying areas that need the tourism income. I think it is a fantasy to think that people would continue to live in Venice when there is little industry in Venice to support the extremely expensive cost of living in a sinking city. That's "Disneyland" thinking.

[euro cruiser]

There's an entire world between alpha and omega. None of the articles, whether or not you agree with their conclusions or their analysis of causes, suggests eliminating tourism. They discuss ways of managing it, and of making it a more balanced economic proposition where everyone wins; Venice as well as her visitors.

Edited May 23, 2014 by euro cruiser