Intelligent Travel

Save a Bird, Kill an Island?

IT friend Roger Hamilton just returned from a trip to North Carolina's Outer Banks, where a battle between birds and beachgoers is brewing...

Driving down Highway 12 on North Carolina’s Outer Banks, I sense that something is wrong. “Save a bird, kill an island,” someone had scrawled across an SUV rear window. “Piping plover tastes like chix,” advertises a restaurant on its menu marquee. 

Pretty strong stuff. Better find out what’s up.

My first stop was the legendary Red Drum Tackle Shop, in the village of Buxton. “They” have closed down miles of beaches to off-road vehicles and everything else, says Bob, the owner. All for the sake of three little birds: the piping plover (pictured, above), the least tern, and the American oystercatcher. “They” are conservation groups, a U.S. district judge, and the National Park Service. The conservationists contend that people and vehicles on the beaches prevent the birds from nesting.   

Extreme Staycations

Many have bemoaned the rise of the so-called staycation—if not in concept, than certainly in lexicon. (Disclaimer: Whether the fledgling economy deletes your vacation or not, I fully support treating your hometown as a destination.) Even so, my eyebrows are sufficiently cocked at what the Wall Street Journal recently proposed as an extreme iteration of the trend, a term I’d like to unofficially coin as the “fake-ation.”

The WSJ reports:

While more hard-pressed Americans are spending their vacation time at home lately, not everyone is happy about it. Barbecues and reruns don't match the thrill of travel. So some are going to great lengths to foster the illusion of a wayfaring vacation. They'll sample foreign tourism, wilderness camping, hotel living, and beach-going without ever leaving their living rooms.

Where are the D.C. Smartbikes?

NG Books Editorial Assistant Hunter Braithwaite likes bikes, and tells us a bit about his hopes for the D.C. SmartBike program.

On the first of July, aboard a very crowded Metro, I read this article in the Washington Post’s Express.  Seems that we’re going to have to wait a little longer for the SmartBike program to take off. You know, those cute little (empty) bike racks that are popping up around northwest D.C. I for one am very excited to think that Washington is attempting a bike sharing program, which is healthy, progressive, and sustainable. Who cares if it’s being done in typical D.C. fashion, that is, slowly and illogically? 

IT has done several stories on Paris’s Vélib program, the astonishingly popular initiative set up last summer by the City of Lights. Since then, there have been beaucoup de praise and a few criticisms; namely, that it’s giving access to bikes to people who shouldn’t have access to bikes (tourists, the uncoordinated). And to be fair, this isn’t far from the truth. Paris is a bicycle-friendly city, but it’s still a city. A big one. And most tourists are just that, touring. They don’t have a firm grasp on the nuances of Parisian geography, traffic patterns, or the relentless tide of teenagers on scooters. In short, they’re bad cyclists. But a few broken scraped knees and dented Peugeots shouldn’t be held against them, should it?

But with the three recent deaths of cyclists using the Vélib system since May, some frustrated Parisians are now talking of putting an end to the vélo-fun. Bertrand Delanoë, the city’s mayor, answers with a resounding “Non,” and points out that the accident rate has increased only 7 percent in the city, while the use of bikes has jumped up 24 percent. The city has had over 27 million rentals on the Velib system so far and the program continues growing with every passing week. The city started out with more than 10,000 bikes, and that number has doubled in the past year. And this isn’t just a Paris thing—other cities have their own versions: Barcelona, Lyon, Seville, Helsinki, Copenhagen, Munich.

Albania and the Environment: Mindset over Matter

Freelance writer Laura Powell recently traveled to Albania and couldn't help noticing the amount of litter that lined the roadways. Upon further investigation, she found that the trash was indicative of a troubled history and of a challenging future facing the nation.

One thing that strikes you as you drive through the Albanian countryside (other than the horrendous state of the roads) is the litter that dots the landscape. Piles of trash highlighted by blue plastic bags show up everywhere. Ask foreign aid workers why this is so, and they might tell you it's a combination of a lack of waste management facilities and a lack of education regarding recycling. But ask Albanians and they will tell you they are plenty educated when it comes to recycling. In fact, they were forced to recycle well before the practice was in vogue. According to Auron Tare, head of the Albanian National Trust and a noted historian, during the Enver Hoxha dictatorship (1940s-1985), people were required to turn in glass bottles and paper, and there were school programs designed to teach children about the importance of recycling. Furthermore, given the dearth of consumer goods during Hoxha's reign, there wasn't all that much in the way of nonrecyclables to throw out. As a result, there was little need for landfills and other waste management facilities.

After speaking with many Albanians, my assessment is that the current trend of tossing trash without regard to recycling is not merely careless disregard for the environment. For these people, who had to endure forced recycling during the Communist era, the import of plastics and other disposable consumer goods represented both freedom and wealth. The idea of being forced to recycle and reuse, must seem somewhat anathema to these newfound ideals. Additionally, the rapid growth in the 1990s of consumer goods, and thus waste, caught the country off-guard. 

So did the boom in development. During the Hoxha years, no one was allowed to own property. Additionally, according to Tare, "Because of military reasons, many areas in Albania were heavily protected. For example, there was a major tree planting program by the Communist government along the beaches. This was done with the purpose of stopping sea landings by foreign enemies."  As a result, for many years, Albania's coastlines shared unspoiled space with forest land.

Richard Branson Says Pay for Your Dirty Business

There have been more rumblings in the aviation world lately about having airlines account for their carbon emissions. Last week, the EU announced their plans to begin instituting a carbon trading program for all flights coming into and out of EU airspace. If the plan is approved, Grist reports, "airlines will have to cut emissions 3 percent in 2012 and 5 percent per year from 2013 on."

Meanwhile Sir Richard Branson of Virgin Group put forth an interesting idea at the Global Humanitarian Forum last week: Make dirty businesses pay a carbon-emissions tax on their pollution. The AP has the details...

"If you run a dirty business — an airline business, a shipping business, ... coal business, you should pay for the privilege because you are doing damage," Branson said.

Former UN Secretary Kofi Annan concurred, seeking "climate justice" for the poor, who often bear the brunt of the ecological damage (see: the rice crisis facing many impoverished nations).

I think these are smart ideas. With all the confusion about carbon emissions and the best way to offset them, it stands to reason that the onus of paying for them should not lie only on the traveler (in the form of higher ticket prices, and extra fees). If the airlines were taxed and regulated based on their carbon output, there would be a lot more incentives for them to find cleaner ways to fly. That, and the carbon offsets would apply to all passengers, versus the two, or ten, or twenty who choose to voluntarily offset using a calculator of some kind.

But that's my opinion, I'd be interested to hear what you think. Let us know in the comments below.

Photo: Virgin America

Subscribe to this blog's feed

 

"America's Front Yard" in Disrepair

The Washington Post has been running a series of interesting articles about the deterioration of "America's front yard," Washington D.C.'s National Mall. The grounds surrounding the monuments and tidal basin are National Park Service property, and the service says they're owed more than $350 million in maintenance fees. Which means that if you wander the Mall you'll find rusty toilet fixtures, cracked pavement, dusty lawns, algae-filled reflecting pools, and a host of other signs of wear and tear. (I know, I've seen most of these things myself.) More than 25 million visitors come to the Mall each year–that's more than the Grand Canyon, Yellowstone, and Yosemite parks combined–but there are only 100 toilets, 54 rangers, and three places to buy water. Though the monuments still inspire, their surrounding environs are less than impressive.

A few groups have sprung up to help address these concerns. The Trust for the National Mall is working to raise funds and refurbish the space, using a model similar to that of the Central Park Conservancy, which revitalized New York City's grand backyard after years of disuse. They launched last month and are working to raise over $500 million in donations (right now there's a volunteer section on the Trust's website, but no information on how to donate your time quite yet). And the Mall Conservancy is seeking to expand the boundaries of the Mall for future exhibitions and museums, and help in the long-term planning efforts to revitalize the space. A bunch of task forces have been formed to create a National Mall Day, improve the quality of visitor and welcome centers, and promote performance and art activities. Their site has a great section about the Mall's history, and a variety of proposals for taking Pierre L'Enfant's plan into it's third century.

All I can say is: Amen. I got to enjoy the efforts of the Central Park Conservancy during my time in New York, but it will be a long time before I pack a blanket and head down to the Mall. Besides being overrun with people, there are too few amenities to make it an enjoyable excursion. You go there with a mission in mind: See the cherry blossoms, visit the Smithsonian, or if you're one of the many D.C. leagues, to play in a softball game. But hopefully with these efforts, I can start feeling like it's my own little front yard.

What are your impressions of the National Mall? What do you think can be done to make it better?

Photo: courtesy of the National Coalition to Save our Mall

Hotel Confidential: Does "Green" Matter to You?

Last week, I attended a conference focusing on "Sustainability in the Hospitality Industry" and was impressed with the panelists assembled for the discussion. They ranged from the VPs of sustainability for major international hotel chains to the co-founder of the Lapa Rios Ecolodge, a 16-bungalow property that uses the methane created by pig waste to power their kitchen stoves. So it was obvious that they were going to have a variety of opinions on how best to direct the industry as it goes green. And while many of the hotels talked up their green initiatives, (from creating online models of "innovation hotels," to removing table linens from function rooms and measuring and cutting back their energy and water use) they admitted that these efforts were the "low-hanging fruit" for the industry and that much wider changes need to be made in order to really make a difference. (To that point: One panelist noted that there are more than 4.7 million hotel rooms in the country, and each of those rooms has its rugs torn up and replaced every seven years or so. That's a lot of landfills covered in carpet.)

But where they diverged was on how best to do it. The idea of creating federally regulated hotel sustainability certifications, or standards, was dismissed by some panelists as "regressing everyone to the mean." How can you have competitive distinction, they wondered, if you even the playing field and make everyone adopt the same sustainable practices? And more importantly to their bottom lines, why should they do it if it's not always what the customer wants? One panelist noted that while Whole Foods has a reputation as a sustainable company, very few people know (or care) whether their supermarket buildings are LEED certified (most aren't). And except for some rare examples, most hotel chains use their marketing budgets to highlight the comfort, amenities, and convenience of their properties, not whether they're overtly "green."  Ultimately, they said, the customer is concerned with whether the reservation is late or the room is dirty and until we customers actively seek out sustainable standards, the costs and benefits don't add up.

I was a bit miffed by overtly corporate subtext to the sustainable conversation (mind you, not all of the panelists held this perspective, and several were quick to respond in support of certifications and standards) but the idea I left with was, well, do people really want their hotels to be green? If you knew that a certification existed, would you seek out hotel chains that adopted earth-friendly practices? I'm interested in hearing your opinions, please share them in the comments below.

Image: The Innovation Hotel website from the InterContinental Hotels Group.

Subscribe to this blog's feed

Re-entering Reality After Vacation

Memorial Day weekend has come and passed—ushering in the ritual advent of white pants, swimsuit angst, and, more exciting for all involved, the summer vacation season. (Excuse our brief pause to cue a collective “yippee!”) Exhilarating for those with upcoming adventures to anticipate; utterly depressing for the rest of us. And second worse to not having travel plans? The inevitable return to the daily grind after vacation.

Not that I'm asking for pity: I’m still reveling in my sun-kissed glow from a six-day jaunt to the Mexican Riviera, and scarcely expect sympathy for my current inability to face reality. (But come on, it’s hard to maintain a tan under the emphatically less pleasing glow of our office’s fluorescent lights. And where’s my afternoon cerveza and nap? …you get the idea.)

Lucky for me, I work at a travel magazine and am allowed to entertain these notions, all in the name of “work.” My mind wanders to the beach mid-morning, so I pen a blog entry about the Mexican bungalow where I relaxed last week. My stomach pangs for a tasty sope (a bean-and-crudités-topped puffy tortilla), my new favorite Mexican antojito, rather than the humdrum salad I mechanically packed for lunch this morning. So I Google "traditional Mexican recipes," telling myself I’m doing invaluable research for IT readers.

Zut Alors! Paris' Car-Sharing Program

Earlier this month, Paris’ beloved leftist mayor Bertrand Delanoë announced plans to begin a city-wide car-share program, which will be modeled after Paris’ current (and wholly successful) bike-share program, Vélib. All I can say is, “yikes.”

I just returned from a month–long séjour in France, and tested out a similar version of the Paris pedaling program in Lyon, which is actually where the idea of a cheap, advertising-subsidized plan was created. The concept, in my opinion, is pure genius. The program clears up traffic congestion, reduces carbon emissions, and allows tourists to get a more authentic look into the city’s culture. It’s amazing how much more of the city you can see when traveling above ground. Plus, I managed to avoid paying anything by returning my bike every 30 minutes and exchanging it for another one. (The first 30 minutes are free.) That, my friends, is also pure genius.

That said, the idea of using the same system with cars is daft. It turns a smart, eco-friendly idea into a messy, untested nightmare. Monsieur Delanoë should let this concept sink shamefully back to the drawing board.

Travels with the Mouse

Would you travel with Disney? More and more people are doing just that. Disney's tour-outfitter arm, Adventures by Disney, which began a mere three years ago with six tours, focused mostly in the American West, has expanded to 17 separate itineraries, including China and Australia. Senior editor Norie Quintos, the magazine's resident tour expert, recently returned from an Adventures by Disney trip to Italy with these thoughts.

"Authentic, immersive, and experiential," are how Ed Baklor, senior vice president of the Burbank-based company, describes the trips. These are all buzzwords I (and our magazine) love. And in truth, everyone on my tour—young and old—enjoyed themselves (including me and my kids, by the way). But it did get me thinking, can a Disney trip truly be authentic? And what is authenticity anyway?

Is it hitting the expected high spots (Colosseum, Sistine Chapel, Michelangelo's David, and a gondola ride) with minimum waits in line because Disney had pre-booked admission? Is it the appearance of no, not Mickey, but another costumed character playing Venetian Marco Polo edu-taining the kids with tales of his voyages? Is it the hands-on pasta making lesson at a Renaissance castle in Tuscany? Or the appointment to create your own Carnevale mask in Venice? What about the opportunities to stop and shop at The Disney Stores in Florence, Rome, and Venice? Or the liberal gifting of Disney-logo pins and baseball caps and canvas tote bags to the guests?