During and following this summer’s class in Cultural & Heritage Tourism Development I learned a lot about tourism at World Heritage sites and did my final paper on  endangered world heritage. It’s a sad issue that, in my opinion, doesn’t get near the coverage that it should.

Although I’ve never been to Galápagos, it’s always interested me stemming from research I did as an undergrad about the economic situation in Ecuador (archive of an old tripod page that defies all laws of good design-sense). I think tourism is just one of the many ways that Ecuador can develop and recover, but at what expense?

Ecotourism  is a huge boon to some regions, but when a site is placed on the danger list, what’s the responsibility of tour operators and tourists?

It’s a good question that I’m not sure I know the answer to.

Many of the reader-generated reviews of hotels, restaurants, destinations and other travel services on the Web may have started their lives as independent blogs by travel buffs. But they have consolidated into major online businesses, taking an ever-growing piece of the market from print guides.

While there’s no doubt that the resources, financial and otherwise, that come from the big corporations can help a site I can’t help but wonder if it causes the same problems that face the print guides in the end. For example, when Lonely Planet was a smaller entity they were better able to research and update their titles but now, their books have a tendency to go stale. When TripAdvisor and the others have to worry about meeting the needs of a parent entity, will the same thing happen? It’s no secret that I have an interest in social media as it relates to tourism, but I think the trend toward mega businesses is taking it too far.

I think that IgoUgo is headed down the better bath in that they require users to register and comments are often linked with user profiles. In addition to helping to reduce/eliminate the possibility of review stacking, it allows someone who reads the reviews to see if their interest is in line with the reviewer. If a 20 something person is looking at hotel reviews, it’s more likely that they’d want to read a review posted by someone in their own generation rather than someone in their grandparent’s generation.

It’s going to be interesting to watch the big two evolve, as well as: I 8 There, Hotel Shark and the other related sites. See where they all are in a year.

While I realize the issue(s) facing those interviewed:

Like many other frequent business travelers, he finds that there is only one airline whose flight schedule fits his needs.

“I’m not loyal,” he adds. “I’m just a hostage.”

it bothers me.

Maybe I’m spoiled in the NY area where I have, at minimum, four viable airports (HPN, EWR, LGA and JFK) and innumerable airline choices but I find it very hard to imagine an airport where there is a monopoly. Or if not a monopoly, a time monopoly. If the traveler’s schedule is so strict that only one makes it, how does s/he tolerate the unavoidable delays?

In an article on SmarterTravel.com titled “Frequent Flyer Resolutions for 2008,” he wrote, “My first resolution is to continue my gradual disengagement from mileage programs.”

In a way, that’s what I’ve been doing. I don’t want to feel tied to one program. Granted, there are times I wish I didn’t do this in order to more easily attain elite status, but I don’t mind being non-elite for the sake of my sanity. A good example is Virgin America, eleVAte hasn’t launched officially and even when it launches it isn’t likely to be aligned with any of the Big Three, but the flight times and prices are good. To me, it’s about more than mileage.

…interesting FlyerTalk discussion on the article as well…

Pico Iyer’s recent post, The Friendliest Country, and the Unfriendliest Skies is a great read. I’ve read a few of Iyer’s books and some of his contributions to anthologies, but I hadn’t read his work in blog format prior to his contributions to JetLagged.

When comparing foreign-flag carriers to those operating under the US flag, he noted that they provide good service:

instead of the large, angry and tired militants on U.S. flights to Japan, who act as if every question is an insult, and every passenger an injury.

While I agree in general, and no currently-operating airline will ever top Singapore, I found the service between the US and Japan to be significantly better than US->elsewhere. I attribute that, in part, to the Japanese staff on board NWA flights (I’ve never flown JAL) and the Korean staff on KE. Asian culture demands higher-quality service (think elevator ladies in Takashimaya) than US culture. Sure there are some people, many even, who take respect and politeness as their badge of honor, but in general it cannot compare.

I don’t fly *Alliance often. I actually need to find a way to pick up my soon to expire SQ miles. I’ve found CO’s service to be above par for the US airlines, and the Eagle flights out of HPN are great. I think there are bad apples everywhere, but Iyer’s post raises some interesting questions.

But instead of citing culture, history, natural wonders, political interest, or interaction with people, as the primary reason for its 53 geographical choices, it clearly implied that the arrival of upscale deluxe hotels was the main reason for visiting most of its nominees.

Now it’s fair enough that different people have different travel drivers, but I’m with Frommer on this one. Is a hotel really a reason to spend the time and money visiting a destination? The only real reason I can think of is if you’re trying to complete a “quest” of staying in all properties of a particular name — at one time I was trying to visit the Hard Rock Cafe in each city I was in. But I don’t know if that’s it. Other than visiting friends and family, I can’t imagine choosing to go somewhere for a reason other than it interested me.

I don’t agree with Frommer when he said:

If you, like many, are not interested in ultra-costly hotels, is there anything for you to read in the travel section of The New York Times? Precious little.

I have fun scanning the online Travel section for the places they cover and the stories they run – such as the recent discussion of flying coach. I just ignore their where to stay recommendations in favor of my own preferences.

Christopher Elliott, whose blog I read quite regularly, had an interesting post on Frommer’s article. I think he it on the head when he talked about travel media possibly losing its audience, but I think that’s the difference between the commentaries found in travel blogs (including those who also write for mainstream media), travel writing books (the Brysons, Travelers’ Tales Guides and many others) and the media. They’re read for different reasons. I don’t go to them all for the same kind of information because each is better in different areas. It’s the reason why you should think about what you’re looking for before going for an answer.

I said it then and I’ll say it again… I don’t think coach is the end of the world. I’d much rather spend the $ on another aspect of my trip, but that’s just me. A me who has survived the following in coach:

• EWR-DTW-KIX in August 01 (much saner flying time)
• KIX-SIN-BNE and return (although SQ coach is a dream!)
• KIX-DTW-LGA
• LAX-NAD
• MEL-SIN-KIX
• KIX-YVR-JFK (and return)
• KIX-ICN-LAX
• HPN-ORD-LAX-AKL-MEL (OK, I’ll admit to being worn out at the end of that one. 33 hours travel time, ~21 flying)

I agree that there are issues with the US airlines that need to be addressed — namely horrendous customer service and delays, but I don’t think coach is the end of the world.

On another note, I’m currently reading Nuts! and thoroughly enjoying it, even though I’ve never had the chance to fly Southwest. I seem to be on a business strategy/airline kick lately.

My thoughts on those I’ve been to, or am likely to go to…

1. Laos – don’t have a huge interest in SE Asia but the history of Laos and the French influence interests me.
2. Lisbon
3. Tunisia
4. Mauritius
5. Mid-Beach, Miami/6. South Beach, Miami - maybe it’s just me and my general lack of interest in all things Florida, but these two seem out of place among their list neighbours.
7. Maldives – heard wonderful things about these islands.
8. Death Valley
9. Courchevel
10. Libya
11. Hvar
12. Puerto Vallarta
13. Sylt
14. Prague - it sounds bad to say been there, done thatbut I think it’s safe to say I won’t be back in 2008.
15. Quito - had an interest in Ecuador since I did my undergrad research on the economic issues; and I’d love to visit Galapagos.
16. Liverpool – I went there in December 2000 and I’d agree there’s more to it than the Beatles. Very pretty at Christmas time.
17. Munich – I’ve been to the train station and the Starbucks therein – does that count?
18. Iran - yep, love to do that for the region’s history although I don’t think 2008 is realistic for me.
19. Tuscany
20. Anguilla
21. Bogota
22. Playa Blanca, Panama
23. Alexandria – I don’t have a huge interest in Egypt but I’m curious about the region’s history.
24. Mazatlan
25. St. Lucia
26. Oslo
27. Buenos Aires - love to go one day, heard such wonderful tales.
28. Rimini, Italy – I love Italy but “raging club scene”… sounds like a miss as I’m sure there are quieter stretches of the Adriatic Coast.
29. Malawi
30. Roatan
31. Mozambique
32. Kuwait City
33. Verbier
34. Lombok - raging popularity among backpackers and I have 0, no negative interest in going.
35. Northwest Passage
36. Easter Island - am saving my miles for this one! One day, but it’s not at the top of my list.
37. Virgin Gorda
38. Namibia
39. San Francisco – nice city, but I’m in no rush to go back
40. Detroit – been through the airport many times but I can’t say I have an interest in the city.
41. Itacare, Brazil
42. Kilimanjaro - was wondering when this would come up! Even before I went to Tanzania Night at NYU and met the Tanzanian delegation, I had an interest in the country and especially Kilimanjaro. Not sure I want to climb it, but I’d love to see it. Kilimanjaro and Zanzibar.
43. Algeria
44. San Diego
45. Malaga
46. Puerto Plata
47. London - love the city, it was great to go back in May.
48. Vietnam - yep, similar interest to Laos.
49. Essaouira
50. Las Vegas - had a wonderful time, fun city.
51. Barossa Valley- a lot of fun to visit the homes of some of the wines I enjoy, but I enjoyed McLaren Vale since it was less touristy.
52. Tokaj, Hungary
53. New York - nahh, I’d never go there

I’ve been to eight. Not outstanding, but to be honest I wouldn’t use this list as an aspiration. They’re not my kind of destinations. My own goals for 2008:

• stop going “back” – I love Australia, Spain will always be a favorite and CapeCod is my ‘home’ but if I want to visit new places, I need to get out of the reruns.
• New continent — Antarctica is not realistic for 2008 but I’d like to do either South America or Africa. Tanzania is probably not going to happen in 2008 but Egypt or Morocco might — my two other interests. Rio is also a real possibility.
• Plan for the next “big trip” — not long, but interesting. Where? When?

That article made me smile. I’m not much of a user of Frommer’s guides, but I met him last December when a professor brought him in to speak to our class. I was thrilled when he remembered me two months later at the Javits show “From Dr. Laitamaki’s class, right?” because I couldn’t imagine how many people he must have met in the intervening months. It’s amazing how many industry changes Frommer has seen, and its a testament to the strength of his product that it has lasted through the changes.

His comments in general were interesting, but these were some favorites:

Q: What is one place you will never go, and why?

A: Myanmar (Burma). Its democratically elected president, the Nobel-prize-winning Aung San Suu Kyi, has asked travelers to stay away. I will not support the thuggish military rulers of that nation with my tourist expenditures. In like manner, I refused to visit the Union of South Africa (or even to mention it in my writings) during the time when apartheid reigned and Nelson Mandela was in prison.

Yep, I’d agree. Especially timely given this week’s events. When I read Bad Lands, I didn’t quite understand it still being referred to as Burma, but the book helped me to understand some of it. Using the “new” name apparently is a form of legitimizing the regime. I can honestly say I had no desire to visit Burma anyway – I’m just not that interested in southeast Asia with the exception of Cambodia and Vietnam for historical reasons.

 Q: What is the biggest mistake people make when traveling?

A: They fail to prepare themselves by delving deeply into the history and culture of the destination in advance of arriving. They wander as utter novices, unable to understand the sights and institutions brought to their attention. And all the lectured commentaries of their tour guide simply add to the confusion. Advance reading — a few nights at the library — is the key to a successful trip.

I also agree with this, and the issue of authenticity that followed. I don’t understand the point of spending time and money to visit a destination with no understanding or appreciation of what you’re going to see. While there are some nuances that are hard to understand without seeing a place, a little advance knowledge is good. When I was in Berlin this summer there was a couple on the bus who had no real understanding of the significance of the events: even the main ones like Checkpoint Charlie. It’s surprising to me, but I guess people don’t always worry. I think the fact that I am an insatiable reader helps.

I  never knew Frommer had a blog, but now I look forward to reading it.

I’d like to say I get it, but I don’t.

“Our primary concerns about public access to the Statue of Liberty’s crown are safety and health concerns, not terrorism,” Daniel N. Wenk, the deputy director of the park service, said at a Congressional hearing on the subject, the first in the six years the crown has been closed.

Like others, I think that if that were really the case, it would have come up long before 9/11.

Mr. Wenk said the statue’s creator, Frédéric Auguste Bartholdi, “never intended or designed the Statue of Liberty as something to enter or climb.” Only after it opened in 1886 did the War Department — the predecessor to the Defense Department — begin letting “curiosity seekers” inside the sculpture, Mr. Wenk said. The statue’s torch was closed in 1916.

Again, I think it’s highly unlikely. If it were such a danger, then I think it would have been closed in 1916 along with the torch. It may well not have been its intended purposes, few things are used in that manner, but that doesn’t mean it should be used as an excuse 120+ years later. I have good memories of the Statue’s centennial when I was in elementary school. 

The Daily News’ editorial makes some interesting points, the majority of which I agree with.

And on it mercilessly went, with South Carolina GOPer Henry Brown saying that the climb up is something “our kids’ kids and our kids’ grandkids should get to experience,” as he did with his grandson Sept. 8, 2001.

Gemma and I were just talking over dinner the other night about her last visit to NYC and how glad we were to have done the Statue. To be honest, I’m not sure I’d go up it again. I’ve done it twice and I’m not sure I could get used to a view that did not include the Twin Towers. It seems so wrong. I’m happy with Lady Liberty as a landmark in New York Harbor, but I think it should be open for those who want to enjoy the view from the crown. The base just isn’t the same.

Newest Wonders  of the World Prompt More Than Wonder from today’s New York Times is an interesting article.

“We believe there is a risk that these sites will become tourist attractions like Disneyland,” said Sue Williams, a Unesco spokeswoman, adding, “The campaign seemed quite commercially driven and another way to lure in more tourist dollars.”

While I understand the risk that over-development and over-touristing can damage a destination, it’s not as if any of these wonders are new destinations. That’s not to say precautions shouldn’t be taken to ensure their continued viability, but I think there’s a huge difference between tourists choosing to visit a destination due to this designation and them turning into Disneyland.

Holland America’s cruises will provide increased access but some such as Petra Jordan and Maachu Pichu are still more of a challenge to access.  Significant time and money is required to visit all of the sites, with the possible exception of The Colosseum, and I’m not sure this new designation has/will receive enough attention in order to dramatically increase tourism in the manner in which UNESCO is worried.

Overall, I think this contest has created more controversy than I bet the creators imagined. Seems as if everyone has had something to say about the results, and it isn’t likely to end any time soon. Personally, I’m not that excited about the results – but I’m not as worried either. This summer’s class taught be more about the issues related to culture and heritage tourism, but I still am not convinced that increased visitors is necessarily always a bad thing.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, especially as they move forward with the nominations for the Natural Wonders.  At the very least, I’m getting lots of fodder for my C&HT paper.