BootsnAll Travel Community

And you thought it just felt crowded...

Link to an article about why the United Nations is considering listing Machu Picchu as one of the world's most endangered monuments.

Watch Your Step

This is so sad. My friend was telling me that when she was visiting, McDonald's was shooting a commercial there or something. Ugh.

What happens if it goes on the World Heritage list? Less tourists, higher ticket prices?

This is a prime example of how a destination, that has such a unique and beautiful tourism product, is not putting in the proper sustainable development processes in place. In my destination planning class this past semester, we covered similar tourism sites where carrying capacity (ammount of people the site can without before damage to the site takes place), and site preservation/conservation has been overlooked due to the all mighty dollar. Manchu Picchu is one of the definates on my to-see list. But i would rather have the site closed, and a plan developed to protect it, then re-open it to the public in a few years. I want to see the site, but not at the expense of it being destroyed. And no more commercials need to be filmed there. I can't believe that one of the main features of Manchu Picchu was destroyed over a beer commercial, that's sad. I'd rather wait, probably pay more for my ticket, as long as it means it will be conserved for the future generations that deserve to see this beautiful piece of Incan history.
Until next time,
Diana

I believe that they will limit the amount of people who go there every year, which is a good thing. Probably will charge for up keep which is good.

I have heard that the same thing is in store for Venice. WHich is also good.

D

They actually already limit the number of people who can go on the trail at a time. There's also trail maintenance and clean up every Feb. Admissions is pretty steep (considering the country), and I'd hope that it helps pay for the upkeep.

If you walk around MP, you will notice gaps in some of the Incan stonework. This shows that the land is shifting as well.

Another newspaper article today on the same topic:

(L.A. Times....don't think you have to register)

Watch Your Step, Part 2

Sadly, the best way to preserve it is not to go, right?

I still plan on going.

quote:

Originally posted by Marisa:
Admissions is pretty steep (considering the country), and I'd hope that it helps pay for the upkeep.

It's pretty much the same as Angkor (and Cambodia is even poorer than Peru.) Angkor admission is $20 for one day, $40 for three. The depressing part of that is it makes pretty much no difference to the number of people who visit. When a plane ticket costs several hundred, another 40 or so to visit a once-in-a-lifetime location is not a big deal. The only way admission fees could make a significant difference to the number of visitors is if they were raised to the $100-200 range, and while that would work it would be really unfortunate to limit access to such places based solely on the wealth of the visitor.

My preferred solution would be to put strict limits on the number of visitors, and perhaps double admission fees (not as a means of restricting numbers, but to raise more funds for maintainance.)

Don't not go. MP is fine. I promise. The amount of money the coutnry would lose by not maintaining the ruins is incredible. The INC is well funded solely for that purpose. This sounds more like a PR trick to me.

Will