Remove ads on the forum by becoming a donating member. More here. |
---|
Possibly because the people who issue the certificate do not share the same concerns about overcrowding.So why not just eliminate getting a certificate for the last 100 km.
I walked two Caminos completing both Portuguese routes without credentials. They were number 2 and 3 Caminos for me. I did them back to back with a 4 day break in Porto. The Compostela was not the point.I'm not a fan of the idea either. But I can imagine some system where the issue of credencials is far more tightly controlled and limited in numbers. Which could in turn restrict numbers using traditional albergues or claiming a Compostela at the end of their journey. But who would decide the allocation of credencials? Quotas by nationality? One central issuing organisation? A lottery for places? It would be a very different experience from the Caminos as we have known them for decades.
Personally, I think the credencia with all the unique and sometimes very decorative stamps is a much more impressive document than the Compostela which really only states that I walked 100km. On my next Camino, I think I would completely skip that last 100 km.As I am not a Catholic, I confess (pun intended) I’m not quite sure what the Compostela does for most people other than acknowledge that they have walked at least 100KM to a very important religious place since indulgences are now only given on certain days and in a holy year and require additional steps, such as confession, which few do.
So it does seem to me that many people may feel satisfied with their accomplishments if they received some form of recognition/acknowledgement other places on the Camino with historical or religious significance. Walking 100km to Padron for a Padronia, for example, or maybe getting a document of some sort at the magnificent Cathedral in Leon. That might, over time, move the needle on reducing some of the congestion into SdC.
One of the reasons why I no longer ask for a Compostela. It states a lot more than that but as the pilgrim office no longer have any interest in a pilgrim's motives and do not ask about them in practice the Compostela no longer means what it says.Personally, I think the credencia with all the unique and sometimes very decorative stamps is a much more impressive document than the Compostela which really only states that I walked 100km.
You are correct in that these particular issues will be sorted by the various commercial interests, as has happened for the last 30 years.With problems comes opportunities. Opportunities for new Spanish restaurant, bar, and especially albergue/hotel entrepreneurs.
This may help a little but penalizes those who genuinely walk for religious reasons. As does limiting their stays in municipal Albergues.Limit a person's compostela to every 5 years.
…
This may help a little but penalizes those who genuinely walk for religious reasons. As does limiting their stays in municipal Albergues.
What a wonderful example of the rhetorical fallacy formally known as an ad hominum, or perhaps better known in this case as 'shooting the messenger'. If properly implemented, it could become an instance of that management policy 'the sackings will continue until morale improves' as we eliminate anyone who has previously walked from even starting a camino.Maybe you should only walk once ?
Many that argue it’s too busy have walked many times!
Something like this would spoil the whole Camino experience, besides I think you would find it hard to fine someone for walking on public lands, roads etcThe PCT in America utilizes a lottery system. Factors like nationality etc are completely disregarded.
It would be relatively easy to transport a few Guardia Civil members, or even dedicated 'Camino wardens' to a slightly more isolated place to check the permits, with offenders being promptly removed from the trail to the nearest town and issued spot fines (€150 first offence, €500 second offence etc) for non-compliance. I'm sure those of you who have walked the Frances more than once could think of multiple places where this could be achieved relatively easily. (I can think of several places on both the Primitivo and the Inglès where it could be done, and I've only walked them once).
Roving patrols of course.
The wardens could double as first aid officers for law abiding pilgrims, transport in a water refill station etc.
You might get away with walking for several days without seeing one, but sooner or later they'd catch up with you. Simply knowing they're there would discourage many cheats.
I did say I would prefer not to see the system implemented however logistics aren't that hard to manage if you put your mind to it.
And I would rather see a permit system than the Camino destroyed by its own popularity.
Perhaps the fee could be applied to Compostela for those who are only walking the last 100km in order to receive it?They could charge a fee for the Compostela.
I hesitate to wade in but for what it is worth ...You are correct in that these particular issues will be sorted by the various commercial interests, as has happened for the last 30 years.
Unfortunately this doesn't nothing to address the massive overcrowding on parts of the actual route - ie. the Camino itself. Especially the last 3 days on the Frances. For those who know no better it's very possibly not a major issue, but for somebody that has walked hundreds of kilometres the sheer numbers surrounding us are somewhat problematic shall we say.
As has been addressed by others above this pressure may be potentially be relieved by changing the criteria to get a Compostela. Whilst for a significant number this has genuine religious meaning, for all too many it is simply a pretty certificate, which can only be obtained by completing the last 100 km.
As also suggested above, identification and marking of alternative routes into Santiago would potentially benefit both the commercial interests and pilgrims.
This may help a little but penalizes those who genuinely walk for religious reasons. As does limiting their stays in municipal Albergues.
Plus it does absolutely nothing to address the tour groups who do not use municipals, who's tour organiser collects their sellos along the way, and who simply collect a Compostela as a pretty certificate at the end. (I appreciate that this is not the case for all tour groups, some groups are of course on camino for religious reasons).
Nor I would add does it do anything to stop people like myself who walk because we feel the need to do so, do not need to stay in municipals, and never collect the Compostela at the end.
No, in origin and spirit, it's all about the religious pilgrimage to the Tomb of the Apostle, and the Compostela is a part of that religiosity rather than the centre of it.The Camino in origin and spirit is still also about the Compostella.
That sounds illegal ; but even so, then people would just start walking 150K instead.Perhaps the fee could be applied to Compostela for those who are only walking the last 100km in order to receive it?
There have been recent protests in different parts of Spain to seek a better balance between the goals of the tourism industry and the local people. So some of this suggestion for tighter controls might be influenced by the the wider objective of trying to modify the "mass tourism" model, which represents a significant economic benefit for Spain.I've just read this article from La Voz de Galicia. A Camino guide and frequent pilgrim with over 30 years of Camino experience calling for some greater regulation of numbers - at least on the final stages. Prompted by the sight of pilgrims coming to blows near Portomarin.
Un guía lanza la voz de alarma: «Asistí a una pelea entre peregrinos y hasta ahora me parecía imposible mezclar puñetazos y Camino»
El madrileño Raúl Vincenzo Giglio, tras recorrer la ruta a Santiago 44 veces y guiar a infinitos grupos, comparte su lamento: «Estamos en un momento crítico en el que o cambiamos algo todos nosotros nuestra forma de peregrinar y se regula el último tramo, o el Camino puede morir de éxito»www.lavozdegalicia.es
All the more reason to encourage them. I dont think anything should be regulated. Plus it would not work.Many of those in the rolling luggage group are Spaniards enjoying their own culture in their own country.
I had been told by several Spaniards I know that walking the camino is good for their CV That’s why places like Sarria, Ferrol, Tui etc are so populair among them.Many of those in the rolling luggage group are Spaniards enjoying their own culture in their own country.
Actually it didn't start with us here on the forum, it started with an article in a Spanish newspaper - kindly provided by @Bradypus (post#1).This forum is just the beginning. Soon they’ll be articles in travel magazines and websites about how crowded the Camino has become.
Indeed they are. A group of 40 were on the Camino Inglès last year at the same time as myself, booking out entire albergues along the way. (A Spanish church group I believe, walking during Semana Santa).Many of those in the rolling luggage group are Spaniards enjoying their own culture in their own country.
Furthermore, on the topic of comparing the Camino Francés to the PCT in the context of regulation: there is the important difference of land ownership. Much of the land to the right and left of the Camino Frances is privately owned. There is no government body that owns large areas in this context. I think that this is one of several major differences between the Camino Francés and the long-distance wilderness trails in the USA.Also in terms of comparing regulating the PCT to the Camino.
I assume the PCT was regulated for environmental reasons, not for the comfort of the hikers.
And probably because the National regulating bodies like the Park service have a mandate to protect the land and flora and fauna, there was a legal basis for use regulation.
Note: It would require the expropriation of land.In answer to your mail, we inform you that the Environmental Department annually makes the maintenance and the signposting of the Way to Santiago in Navarra.
We know the section referenced, it is very rocky with slope and can damage the knees, causing some accidents.
Your proposal to condition a zigzag path it is ideal solution, but very expensive and also it involves the expropriation of land to undertake the works.
On my recent Camino Frances, I spent many a night in sold out albergues where I had to exit past a mountain of rolling luggage waiting for transportation.Actually it didn't start with us here on the forum, it started with an article in a Spanish newspaper - kindly provided by @Bradypus (post#1).
And those articles ? There is a plethora of articles on how crowded the camino is, and have been for quite some time. "Is the camino too crowded", "Avoiding crowds on the Camino" etc headlines exist across multiple websites and on YouTube. And yet the numbers still continued to grow. Proving the old adage 'any advertising is good advertising'.
Indeed they are. A group of 40 were on the Camino Inglès last year at the same time as myself, booking out entire albergues along the way. (A Spanish church group I believe, walking during Semana Santa).
Equally there are many who are not. A good friend of my sister was part of an Australian tour group not long afterwards doing the Sarria section, walking when they felt like it, taking the support vehicle when they'd had enough.... .
I think governments have lots of mechanisms to regulate private land if they want to. But they have to justify it to their citizens.Furthermore, on the topic of comparing the Camino Francés to the PCT in the context of regulation: there is the important difference of land ownership. Much of the land to the right and left of the Camino Frances is privately owned. There is no government body that owns large areas in this context. I think that this is one of several major differences between the Camino Francés and the long-distance wilderness trails in the USA.
Many years ago I wrote to several authorities and Camino associations in Navarra to ask whether they would consider turning the path down from the Alto del Perdon into a zigzag path to prevent injuries and make it easer to walk down for inexperienced walkers. A few did not bother to respond but I got one informative reply:
Note: It would require the expropriation of land.
Apart from the fact that the most official credencial, namely the credencial issued by the Cathedral of Santiago, does not refer to refugios but to albergues, it also states that it allows el acceso a los albergues que ofrece la hospitalidad cristiana del Camino, or in English as translated by them, permit access to the hostels offered by the Christian hospitality of the Way. Albergues belonging to this classification are a small minority I would assume.Re refugios - the credential is already a permit for staying in refugios.
In order to receive a Compostela at the end of your journey you must now present your collection of sellos on an authorised credencial. Some posts have suggested that many people would not walk a Camino if there was no Compostela at the end or if the conditions for receiving one were made more demanding. I am not in favour of some central control of numbers but I can imagine a system where the issue of credencials is more tightly controlled and limited in number and therefore fewer people could claim a Compostela in any given year. That would not affect me personally as I no longer ask for one. I think that many people would continue to walk without troubling the pilgrim office for a piece of paper when we reached Santiago. But it might be a deterrent for some of those for whom receiving a Compostela is a major goal.Credencials as currently used are not a means to regulate the number of Camino pilgrims.
So, was that a joke about there being no restrictions for the pilgrimage to Mecca or not, I wonder.Or, just stop moaning about it? The Hajj to Mecca has between 2 and 3 million pilgrims each year ... they don't restrict, they just set up the right infrastructure.
(before the usual responses - all of the above is in jest). ... well, nearly all
So, was that a joke about there being no restrictions for the pilgrimage to Mecca or not, I wonder.
Quite apart from the fact that the pilgrimage to Mecca is not exactly as “open to all” as the Camino to Santiago, there is also this bit of very current news:
According to Saudi laws, during the Hajj season, it is strictly prohibited for any Saudi citizen, resident, or non-resident to enter Mecca and the holy sites without entry permits.
The Saudi authorities aim to enforce the entry permit system to regulate the influx of visitors and safeguard the sacred sites.
I don't see much room for belief there. You may or may not refer to visas for resident workers in Saudi Arabia. Such visas don't qualify for entering Mecca.I believe that that is for Saudi resident workers, not pilgrims.
And? Please focus on the exact content of the posts you react to. Thank you.All must be pilgrims, Muslims, to attend the Hajj. They have Saudi resident immigrant workers who are not Muslims and they are allowed to enter for work purposes on a permit system.
Not according to the numerous reports of spaniards protesting against mass tourism over recent months. Including in Santiago. A Fodor's guide headline from 10/23 "Flooded by tourists, Santiago de Compostela has had enough of its tourists." Santiago's Mayor is quoted as saying "I want Santiago de Compostela to stop being just a tourist destination and a theme park,” .Mainly because I suspect most Spainards want the opposite.
Of course! It is illegal for a non-Muslim to attend the Hajj - it isn't a tourist thing .. are you suggesting hat we should do the same? Only allow Catholics to enter the Santiago cathedral precincts?
The correct expression is "ad hominem".What a wonderful example of the rhetorical fallacy formally known as an ad hominum, or perhaps better known in this case as 'shooting the messenger'. If properly implemented, it could become an instance of that management policy 'the sackings will continue until morale improves' as we eliminate anyone who has previously walked from even starting a camino.
There was talk in the news about the introduction of a tourist fee for Santiago. I don't recall which of the political parties floated the idea and whether they control the town administration at the moment. However, do tourist fees combat overtourism and reduce numbers of visitors? Or are their purpose more to generate income that can be used to improve conditions (protection of the environment, affordable housing etc) for the inhabitants of a popular tourist destination?Apparently, Santiago de Compostela intends to impose a tourist fee in order to combat overtourism. It closed its northern port terminal to cruise ships.
One thing that is being done, and I've witnessed these incremental changes over the years, is that the route of the Francès in particular is changing over time to avoid some pueblos where the locals were annoyed (also in some cases for better pilgrim safety), but detouring into some those pueblos where the extra business is wanted instead.There have been recent protests in different parts of Spain to seek a better balance between the goals of the tourism industry and the local people. So some of this suggestion for tighter controls might be influenced by the the wider objective of trying to modify the "mass tourism" model, which represents a significant economic benefit for Spain.
The party is BNG ( Bloque Nacionalista Galego). The current mayor is from BNG.There was talk in the news about the introduction of a tourist fee for Santiago. I don't recall which of the political parties floated the idea and whether they control the town administration at the moment.
Yes, it is referring to A Coruña. My mother was on a cruise that stopped in A Coruña years ago, and told me that it was a city worth spending time in. So I did exactly that in 2017 and loved it.As to Santiago's "northern port terminal" and cruise ships - what does this refer to? It cannot be the port of Coruña, can it? This was published in April 2024:
Apologies, it appears I may have inadvertently posted info from an article on the 'other' Santiago! I did specify Santiago de Compostela in my search for articles (there's so many of them that I just very briefly skimmed) but Google and I have a love hate relationship....s to Santiago's "northern port terminal" and cruise ships - what does this refer to? It cannot be the port of Coruña, can it? This was published in April 2024:
I also don't want to see those restrictions, but some change is probably necessary. Maybe with the terribly crowded Caminos the people walking for fun or for exercise might just get tired of it and try other ways of spending a nice vacation. There are plenty other hiking routes in the world.Thanks for the article @Bradypus . Interesting timing considering that we only just talked about this elsewhere on the forum in the last few of weeks.
(Perhaps not surprising because forum members are simply reporting on the same phenomenon.)
The guide is quoted as saying that he thinks people should be encouraged to walk the last hundred k's on other routes. Whilst that is certainly one idea (which we have also discussed) he actually mentions the Primitivo - which of course joins with the Frances - so hardly a solution.
The Inglès is already saturated at certain points at certain times of the year - Pontedeume, Bruma being the classic examples. (But increase in accommodation availability would fix the majority of those issues, because with the exception of the first hour or two of the day, the trail itself is not horrendously busy.) That said a permit system would then spread the pilgrims more evenly, which is actually better for the infrastructure - I'm sure the hospitality providers would not complain. (Better than turning people away one week, and half empty the next).
Accommodation on the Portuguese is also stretched at certain times of the year. Again, some kind of permit system would greatly assist in alleviating that.
As luck would have it the last one hundred kilometers is all within Galacia on all routes, is it not? So potentially only one authority involved.
Anyone walking from further afield (you could even have specific start points) would be automatically entitled to a permit. The data from Pilgrim House could be used to extrapolate approximately how many pilgrims are actually on any route on a month by month basis. (Last year they estimated that approximately 600,000 people walked a camino, with 450,000 people registered, meaning 75% of the pilgrims applied for a Compostela).
Exactly how you would enforce it I do not know, but I'm sure it could be done.
Even at the risk of annoying some of the locals in their daily walks. Mind you let's face it not many of them wear day packs, let alone rucksacks!
Do I want to see this happen? Heck no!
Might it become necessary? Sadly, yes.
I agree...similar has certainly happened to me before.I did specify Santiago de Compostela in my search for articles (there's so many of them that I just very briefly skimmed) but Google and I have a love hate relationship....
Don't many major European cities already have limits on the number of cars allowed in the central core (ie, downtown) during certain hours of certain days? I think I recall some permit/ fine mechanisms involved.That would be a very serious infringement on the whole idea of freedom of movement.
Camino is not a performance, nor a football game, nor an exhibition.Don't football matches sell tickets? Imagine the chaos if every football match was General Admission (no assigned seats) and free. Don't many museums have timed entry tickets, free or fee?
You are not being trolled. You are being contradicted. The point being made is that the Saudi Arabian govt very strictly controls numbers travelling to Mecca. You stated that millions are allowed to travel to Mecca whereas millions are refused permission to travel to Mecca.Oh dear - I knew I would be trolled, and I knew who would be doing it - look, it doesn't matter what the people who run Mecca do - my point is that they 'allow' MILLIONS of pilgrim to attend Hajj each year. Can we stop this unpleasant pedantry now?
Yes, see post #12.Don't many major European cities already have limits on the number of cars allowed in the central core (ie, downtown) during certain hours of certain days? I think I recall some permit/ fine mechanisms involved.
Don't football matches sell tickets? Imagine the chaos if every football match was General Admission (no assigned seats) and free. Don't many museums have timed entry tickets, free or fee?
(before the usual responses - all of the above is in jest). ... well, nearly all
David, how do you expect members to react when you introduce vague "jest" into the discussion? Who is the troll here?Oh dear - I knew I would be trolled, and I knew who would be doing it
Actually not. The Compostela in it's current form was only introduced in the 1990's along with the 100 km requirement (conveniently in Galicia).I hesitate to wade in but for what it is worth ...
The Camino in origin and spirit is still also about the Compostella. (field of stars!) Please don't take that away! There are many motivations for the stamps and the Certificate but it has such a long history.
I don't doubt that it is important to the Spanish but once again, the Compostela is a modern day invention.To think the solution is to get rid of the compostella which not only has such a rich, long history but culturally is so very important to the Spanish whose host country this is) This might be like throwing the baby out with the bathwater so to speak ...
The 1963 model :Actually not. The Compostela in it's current form was only introduced in the 1990's
Only the mass printed one.the Compostela is a modern day invention.
But not like the Frances, the Portugues or the Ingles, there isn’t.There are plenty other hiking routes in the world.
Agreed and that’s the key for me. What sets the Camino apart. Available to all ages, all level of experience, offering different ‘qualities of experience - luxury to sparse’, and for the most part budget friendly!But not like the Frances, the Portugues or the Ingles, there isn’t.
A hike that is well-marked and well-maintained, not too technically difficult, where there are villages and cities with accommodations of varying comfort levels (or at all) and restaurants at most 25 kms or so apart, with cafes and food trucks and rest stops in between. If there’s something like that that’s not the Camino, I’d love to hear about it.
I completely agree. While I'm on the Camino people from other countries often ask me "why the Camino? Aren't there lots of long distance trails in the US?". I always tell them yes, but not with albergues every 20 km or so. The only thing that long distance trails in the US have in common with the Camino is that you use your feet for transportation. I'm not interested in extended wilderness hiking, camping, carrying a tent, all my food and water, etc. I like walking from village to village and experiencing the Spanish (and Portuguese) culture. I like spending time in the larger cities on the way.But not like the Frances, the Portugues or the Ingles, there isn’t.
A hike that is well-marked and well-maintained, not too technically difficult, where there are villages and cities with accommodations of varying comfort levels (or at all) and restaurants at most 25 kms or so apart, with cafes and food trucks and rest stops in between. If there’s something like that that’s not the Camino, I’d love to hear about it.
A bit earlier perhaps. The format of the Compostela was adapted numerous times but there was a change in the content that is important, and it happened in the 1970s or 1980s. As one can easily see in older models, for example in the one from 1785 posted in this thread, these Compostelas confirmed that the holder had confessed, obtained absolution and received the Holy Eucharist. It was therefore, very obviously, a document that only Catholics could obtain. One can see that Confession and Eucharist are still mentioned in the 1963 model.Actually not. The Compostela in it's current form was only introduced in the 1990's along with the 100 km requirement (conveniently in Galicia).
You speak exactly for me, and I hail from the USA, as well.I completely agree. While I'm on the Camino people from other countries often ask me "why the Camino? Aren't there lots of long distance trails in the US?". I always tell them yes, but not with albergues every 20 km or so. The only thing that long distance trails in the US have in common with the Camino is that you use your feet for transportation. I'm not interested in extended wilderness hiking, camping, carrying a tent, all my food and water, etc. I like walking from village to village and experiencing the Spanish (and Portuguese) culture. I like spending time in the larger cities on the way.
For me, the Camino is traveling across a country by foot, not a hiking trip.
Sometime between the 1967 Compostela above and my first Camino in 1990. The version I received was superficially similar to that 1967 one posted by @JabbaPapa but without the mention of the sacraments. I believe the current version with the text about the minimum distances dates from 2014 or thereabouts.We will not find these words in a contemporary Compostela. They were dropped. It is a major and fundamental cut with pilgrimage and Compostela tradition
WAIT WAIT! Up above in this thread I was taken to task when I suggested that the Compostela was tied to receiving an indulgence. While I know that an indulgence and absolution are not exactly the same, certainly they are similar, no?A bit earlier perhaps. The format of the Compostela was adapted numerous times but there was a change in the content that is important and it happened in the 1970s or 1980s. As one can easily see in older samples, for example in the one from 1785 posted in this thread, these Compostelas confirmed that the holder had confessed, obtained absolution and received the Holy Eucharist. It was therefore, very obviously, a document that only Catholics could obtain. Confession and Eucharist are still mentioned in the 1963 sample.
Confession and absolution have not been required to receive a Compostela for at least 34 years to my personal knowledge. And it has certainly not conferred an indulgence either.WAIT WAIT! Up above in this thread I was taken to task when I suggested that the Compostela was tied to receiving an indulgence. While I know that an indulgence and absolution are not exactly the same, certainly they are similar, no?
Yes, but above in this thread I was speaking not to the modern Compostela but to its history. At least that was my intent.Confession and absolution have not been required to receive a Compostela for at least 34 years to my personal knowledge. And it has certainly not conferred an indulgence either.
First of all, so that nobody misunderstands it: this is not "discussing religion". It is trying to understand the concepts of faiths other than one's own brand.While I know that an indulgence and absolution are not exactly the same, certainly they are similar, no?
Just so it is clear, I never meant to imply that the modern Compostela grants an indulgence.First of all, so that nobody misunderstands it: this is not "discussing religion". It is trying to understand the concepts of faiths other than one's own brand.
Absolution and indulgence are complementary. They are part of the Catholic teaching about the concept of sin. What is being joked about among Camino pilgrims, including on this forum, about these concepts (concepts that are not easy to understand if you'd ask me) is plain nonsense such as the popular idea that the Compostela (today's Compostela) is an entry ticket to paradise.
I hope we can leave it at that.
And also to be clear, the earlier Compostelas were not documents that confirmed the granting of an indulgence either. The technical term for such a document is "Letter of Indulgence" and the earlier Compostelas were not letters of indulgence.Just so it is clear, I never meant to imply that the modern Compostela grants an indulgence.
And it was possible to obtain a plenary indulgence if you arrived by bus, walked through the usual main portal on Praterias square, did not get a Compostela, and did all the other requirements needed. (Go to Confession, receive the Eucharist, and pray).During the last Holy Year (2021 and I assume 2022), it was possible to obtain a plenary indulgence if you walked the last 100km into SdC, obtained Compostela, and did all the other requirements needed. ( Go to Confession, receive the Eucharist, and pray).
When having confessed was a prerequisite for a Compostela, if you got your document on a day without an indulgence then there wasn't one.WAIT WAIT! Up above in this thread I was taken to task when I suggested that the Compostela was tied to receiving an indulgence.
The only Santiago with a sea port that I can recall is Santiago de Cuba. It is the only one of the five major Santiago cities located on the coast. There are many more locations named Santiago. I didn't check how many were also ports.Apologies, it appears I may have inadvertently posted info from an article on the 'other' Santiago! I did specify Santiago de Compostela in my search for articles (there's so many of them that I just very briefly skimmed) but Google and I have a love hate relationship....
It seems unlikely, given the article that you have quoted, that A Coruna would be affected. Plus I'm not even sure that Santiago de Compostela could close A Corunas Port to tourist ships if it wanted to?
I actually can't find that reference now, I've been looking at so much stuff over the last hour it's not funny.
I've edited my post accordingly.
There was a discussion... I think last week... on BBC Radio 4 about the introduction of a tourist fee in Venice during peak dates. They were intending to trial it either this year or next year, I can't remember. The proposed fee was only around 5 euros (Italy allows up to 10 euro 'tourist tax') and they wanted to impose it in the first instance only on certain peak dates.There was talk in the news about the introduction of a tourist fee for Santiago. I don't recall which of the political parties floated the idea and whether they control the town administration at the moment. However, do tourist fees combat overtourism and reduce numbers of visitors? Or are their purpose more to generate income that can be used to improve conditions (protection of the environment, affordable housing etc) for the inhabitants of a popular tourist destination?
As to Santiago's "northern port terminal" and cruise ships - what does this refer to? It cannot be the port of Coruña, can it? This was published in April 2024:
El Puerto de A Coruña batirá récord de cruceros en 2024 y también en 2025
La ciudad es la que más barcos recibirá de toda la franja atlántica entre Lisboa y la Bretaña francesa. En los próximos 14 días recibirá la visita de 20www.elespanol.com
And it was possible to obtain a plenary indulgence if you arrived by bus, walked through the usual main portal on Praterias square, did not get a Compostela, and did all the other requirements needed. (Go to Confession, receive the Eucharist, and pray).
They are trialling it this year, with the result that they have more tourists this year during the period in question than last.There was a discussion... I think last week... on BBC Radio 4 about the introduction of a tourist fee in Venice during peak dates. They were intending to trial it either this year or next year, I can't remember. The proposed fee was only around 5 euros (Italy allows up to 10 euro 'tourist tax') and they wanted to impose it in the first instance only on certain peak dates.
It is hardly surprising that numbers have increased despite the charge.They are trialling it this year, with the result that they have more tourists this year during the period in question than last.
The controversial entry charge was introduced last month in the hope of controlling the “unmanageable” volume of day trippers.
Tourists must pay €5 (£4.26) to enter the city’s historic centre on busy days until mid-July as part of the 29-day trial.
Overnight visitors are currently exempt from the entry fee as the tax is included in the accommodation charges of hotels and Airbnb rentals.
In high season, more than 80,000 visitors flock to St Mark’s Square and Venice’s other attractions. By comparison, the city has just 49,000 permanent residents.
But nearly a month on, the plan has been branded a “total failure” after revenue data showed visitor numbers are on the rise compared to the same period in previous years, according to The Independent.
As anyone who ever did a stats module will tell you, correlation does not equal causation.They are trialling it this year, with the result that they have more tourists this year during the period in question than last.
Well right, but it still means that the fee has had zero deterrent effect so far, contrary to some earlier claims thereto from the part of those that instituted it.It’s hugely likely that this is due to the unprecedented growth in tourism per se
I always thought that those claims were simply 'whitewash' to help justify the fee.Well right, but it still means that the fee has had zero deterrent effect so far, contrary to some earlier claims thereto.
Well, that's what I think too, which doesn't bode well for these calls to "regulate" the Camino, which would with similar outcome be nothing more than a straight pilgrim tax.I always thought that those claims were simply 'whitewash' to help justify the fee.
And similar reasons apply for the growth rate of the number of Camino pilgrims. We are often keen to emphasise that Camino pilgrims are pilgrims and not tourists. Not surprisingly though, the growth rate of Camino pilgrims has followed the growth rate of tourists to Spain and within Spain over the years.It’s hugely likely that this is due to the unprecedented growth in tourism per se, which is affecting everything from climbing Everest to visiting my local botanical garden.
Indeed. And that discussion is a multifaceted one.Well, that's what I think too, which doesn't bode well for these calls to "regulate" the Camino, which would with similar outcome be nothing more than a straight pilgrim tax.
The tourist tax must be for everyone who sleeps in Santiago no groups excluded .Indeed. And that discussion is a multifaceted one.
On one hand, for some the camino is truly a pilgrimage. And should be supported and protected as such.
There are others for whom it is spiritually significant but not technically a pilgrimage as such.
Another faction exists for whom it is either a bucket list item or something to put on their CV. Or, simply, because they can.
Then there are the Long distance hikers who are simply doing it because it's another trail, albeit one with a massive amount of infrastructure (no tent or cooking Gear required).
You could break it down even more but I'm sure everybody gets the picture.
The first group aside, I see no issue with charging a pilgrim fee, or in another words, tourist tax. The same as any visitor pays (regardless of country of origin) whenever they visit major cities in many countries nowadays. It already exists in Spain - Barcelona for example - but is not yet universal. After all, we put significant strains on the local infrastructure.
But that would be incredibly unfair on less affluent members of that first group.
Not sure how you define it! It’s USD100 for nationals of most countries to get into the Galapagos Islands and is soon to double! The whole island is a designated national park so you are paying. ‘National Park entry fee’.I think the only place that has effectively imposed a tourist tax is Bhutan, which has a daily sustainability fee of $200 (although I just read that post-pandemic it has been temporarily reduced in order to … increase tourism!) Of course, Bhutan is unique - an isolated mountainous country with just one airport and difficult-to-get-to land borders. I don’t imagine it would be overwhelmed by tourism even in the absence of the fee.
I wasn’t thinking, really, about places like national parks. Even in the US, there’s a fee to enter many of them. But the Galapagos is certainly a high amount - and it also has the same qualities as Bhutan in that it is isolated and the “borders” easily controlled.Not sure how you define it! It’s USD100 for nationals of most countries to get into the Galapagos Islands and is soon to double! The whole island is a designated national park so you are paying. ‘National Park entry fee’.
Sure - I guess what I meant and I wasn’t clear was that you pay on on arrival at airport (as whole island is designated a national park!) even if you sit in your room for two weeks and don’t see a seal! It’s a good point you make.I wasn’t thinking, really, about places like national parks. Even in the US, there’s a fee to enter many of them. But the Galapagos is certainly a high amount - and it also has the same qualities as Bhutan in that it is isolated and the “borders” easily controlled.
I paid it last month in Berlin and last year in Menorca.I think the only place that has effectively imposed a tourist tax is Bhutan, which has a daily sustainability fee of $200 (although I just read that post-pandemic it has been temporarily reduced in order to … increase tourism!) Of course, Bhutan is unique - an isolated mountainous country with just one airport and difficult-to-get-to land borders. I don’t imagine it would be overwhelmed by tourism even in the absence of the fee.
Yes, many cities add a “tourist” tax to hotel bookings (including bookings for people who travel for reasons other than tourism, such as business*). But they generally don’t do anything to actually reduce tourism - they are baked into what people perceive as the hotel cost, and generally not high enough to dissuade people from visiting.I paid it last month in Berlin and last year in Menorca.
True, and sometimes we pilgrims fit the bill, too.What riles me though is the tourists complaining about the other tourists ...
I think it could have become another Nepal without the tax, and indeed this was the thinking behind the introduction of that tax (high value, low volume).I don’t imagine it would be overwhelmed by tourism even in the absence of the fee.
And pilgrims complaining about other pilgrims.What riles me though is the tourists complaining about the other tourists
That was exactly my point.And pilgrims complaining about other pilgrims.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?