Dishin’ with the Diva

Leave only footprints…

Concierge.com has an article on the site titled Travel’s Most Endangered Destinations. It’s an interesting article – between climate change, pollution and human traffic, there are a number of sites that simply may not be accessible or even exist for much longer, so if you want to see something, you may need to hurry.

I understand the allure of this type of article – there are places you want to experience, but we tend to have this idea that there’ll be time to get to them. But that’s not always the case; personally, I really want to see the Twelve Apostles along Australia’s Great Ocean Road, but I haven’t been able to make it to Oz, and one of the columns recently lost its battle with the elements and went tumbling into the sea. And I desperately want to visit Venice, but I already know I’m in a race against time there, too, since it’s not-so-slowly sinking.

The trick with some “endangered destinations” is that human traffic is one of the biggest dangers they face, and an increased influx of visitors is the last thing they need. Even if you go with a responsible attitude, you still risk accelerating the destruction of the very thing you came to see.

Personally, I would have liked a bit more information in the article on how these places could be saved, but maybe that’s something the editors felt would be out of place in the context of a travel site. And it’s possible there’s a bit more in the actual magazine article; I believe I read it when it came out last year, but I’d have to go back and check to be certain.

So, when you travel, do you consider the negative impact you may have on your destination? Do you make any sort of effort to minimize or counteract it?