menachem

They try to do that by making the through road private, but they forget that this is an important area where local people go for nearby Alblasserdam. And it's not that they "chose" to live there. Those miller families have been working the mills for generations. And "many other jobs": no: it's river cruises, often not from NL or tour buses from cruise ships that dock in Rotterdam, also not from NL , nor are the tour buses "local". There are plans for a huge new visitor center that will really ruin the area. There simply isn't more room, because of the way the Waard area was constructed as a pumping array for the mills. Also, Kinderdijk and Alblasserdam are entirely not reliant on tourism. It's SWEK that's making the money (and losing it inexplicably) and the municipality because of permits and taxes. Nothing flows to inhabitants, I assure you.

menachem

[QUOTE=Cowboy1968;16823368] You have to remember that it is not the mills as buildings that constitute the "sight", but the entire layout of mills and the canals making up the pumping array. So any plans that involve the Middelwaard through that entire area is a no go. And only the bit between the dyke and the modern pumping station can be developed. And even that would affect the way the entire area looks.

PalenQ

Well I guess the only solution is to ban tour boats and bus tours and let anyone who goes on their own in? Menachem is a local Rotterdammer (?) and knows a lot about this situation so I have to respect what he says as he does not get his news from a newspaper but by living nearby and probably biking there, etc.

So menachem what would you exactly do?

marvelousmouse

It seems like a no win situation. Would their way of life be preserved if it wasn’t a world heritage site? I understand why the millers are upset, but preservation and tourism goes hand in hand. It doesn’t mean they should have to put up with drones or cruise ships at all hours, but they’re addressing the wrong people in their protests. Tourists visiting are unlikely to return. This is a local regulation issue.

My grandparents visited there on a tour in the 90s, I think. They weren’t off the beaten path sorts—I don’t think you can blame Instagram for this. And we all benefit from cheap flights

the popular places are popular for a reason. Chinese, American, Indian—what does it matter. You can tell people they should go to second tier cities or sites all you like, but time and money are valuable.

PalenQ

The only solutions are - buy the keepers out and put 'museum' staff in charge or limit tourist numbers - just like museums and the Anne Frank House.

HappyTrvlr

We saw one Viking river cruise boat and no tour buses at all. Public buses went by but mostly people on bikes or foot enjoying this beautiful place. It was a Sunday in August and it was not terrible crowded.

menachem

It's the classic overtourism conundrum: a few people do make money off the flow of visitors, and they simply offload the loss of privacy, damage to the public space etc to the local inhabitants and to a powerless municipality (that also has a revenue stream from tourism and so has no incentive to regulate) Same is happening in Amsterdam, Barcelona, Venice. Once a spot is in the itineraries and a narrative has formed around it (like on this forum), it's done. I would say the only measure SWEK can take is to have Kinderdijk removed from tour schedules. But especially river cruises include it. I guess pricing it so it becomes unattractive would be a way, but SWEK has no incentive whatsoever, because Kinderdijk tourism is their revenue stream.

menachem

I cycle there every week, and the place is usually mobbed now. Less in the winter months. You were lucky to find it relatively quiet.

menachem

Can't do the "musuem" bit, as the pumping array still has a role. The mills have to be in working order, them's the Waterschap rules. If they aren't and the new pumping station fails, Kinderdijk, Alblasserdam and Nieuw Lekkerland will get wet feet. Paying staff for the maintenance would be prohibitively expensive. Also, the entire area is Waterschap property, and the millers are on the Waterschap's payroll.

ribeirasacra

Observation on the posts:
Oh my the experts have come out onto this forum and given there suggestions on how to solve this situation. They know nothing about the locals, nothing about the workings of the country, nothing about the "mentality" of the country.
One poster remains calm in an adverse situation and explains things.

How the Dickens does this happen?

Cowboy1968

If you are not interested in a discussion you should not post on a public forum.
I find the impact of global tourism an interesting topic. And at least I am interested in other opinions.
In fact, I do not see much disagreement in principle - just the question if the interest of those 60 people outweighs the interests of the visitors and those working in the related travel businesses.

I assume you can think of a multitude of regulations and restrictions that would limit the flow of visitors.
But before you do that, I think you owe the other side a holistic assessment which also takes into account the people who make their living from it. Not only directly by operating tour boats or offering day trips by bus, but also in the hospitality sector in the Rotterdam area.

menachem

In the 1980s and the 1990s, Kinderdijk was kind of hard to reach, hemmed in between two big rivers and on the tip of a peninsula. And by public transport it still is a bit of an expedition. However, with the rivercruise ships and the buses from cruise ships in Rotterdam, a second jetty, the waterbus schedule amended so there's a direct ferry to Kinderdijk, all that has changed. The dynamic is there.

Mills are sensitive machines: if they're not worked, they become ruins quickly, because they're dynamic structures, not static monuments. A miller who knows about a particular mill should live in it and keep it in working order. The dilemma for SWEK is that if they remove the millers, they will need much more money for upkeep than they do now, because the Millers' labour is more or less unpaid. By the way, the vast majority of these families have ties to the mills that go back more than 200 years, to the period when the mills were first built. And why should that happen? To convenience one time visitors who snap a few selfies, order a coffee in the cafe and are on their way again? Of course not. It is a very fragile site, and SWEK have really misjudged what their promotion efforts would cause. So yeah, bite the bullet and restrict visitor numbers. Alblasserdam is up in arms about making the Middelwaard into a private road so locals have to pay an entrance fee to walk there. And they're quite right to protest.

PS, the hospitality sector in the Rotterdam region will be doing fine without Kinderdijk. All money flows to SWEK and the municipality of Kinderdijk/Alblasserdam. But they would have to look at a different financing model for the maintenance of the site and there the Waterschap plays a big role. My entirely personal opinion is that the transfer of the mills (not the entire site, just the mills) to the municipality was a big mistake and that ownership should revert back to the Waterschap for measures to work. This is because a Waterschap is a completely depoliticized entity that has its own, independent revenue stream from Waterschap taxes. SWEK would have to be dismantled for this to work, but there are now people with too many financial interests in the SWEK board of governors for this to be feasible. And so the present muddling continues, with the site deteriorating and the rights of millers being disregarded. (Already two additional mills will become "museums" and the families that live there ousted)

MyriamC

We visited there in winter, years ago. It was like being part of an Anton Pieck painting.

ribeirasacra

Oh my that boat broke down! Took to walking on frozen water.
Joking, apart a (n)ice photo.

PalenQ

Observation on the posts:
Oh my the experts have come out onto this forum and given there suggestions on how to solve this situation. They know nothing about the locals, nothing about the workings of the country, nothing about the "mentality" of the country.>

So since you obviously do what would you do? I see no suggestion from you about what can be done. Others have given suggestions of a general nature - restricting number of visitors, etc. But no solutions from you, an expert on this - what would you do?

menachem

The only solution is: take it out of the itineraries. Same as in Amsterdam: stop putting together itineraries with the so called "off the beaten path" tips.

marvelousmouse

What, off tour itineraries? Or off tourist website/pamphlet “recommended” itineraries? I could see the first one through limiting access to the site, but the second doesn’t seem achievable.

It seems odd to discourage the production of the “off the beaten path” tip lists on a forum that routinely agonizes over people NOT going off the beaten path.

ribeirasacra

I shut up, I never make suggestions on how to cure the over tourism phenomena.

PalenQ

Then why criticize others who do? If you post something and want no comments except from one person...well

ribeirasacra

I never ever criticized anyone on this thread. Well apart from you who reads things that are not there! Example number 2 above.