YR1

Ok. My husband and I are celebrating our 40th birthday and decided to take a trip without the kids. We travel every year and always take them with us. We like hikes, biking and art.
Although we were convinced we would go the Netherlands, my husband brought up Peru as we have always wanted to go to Machu Picchu. If we go to Peru we would do the 2 day Inca trail rather than the 4 day.
I guess we have to make a decision on our own but if anyone has visited both places and has suggestions that would be great. Among other things I am trying to decide for something that my kids ( ages 9 and 5) would not enjoy for a while.

Thank you

atravelynn

Happy BD to your husband.

Netherlands vs. Peru. Looks like a soccer match.

I've visited both but never thought about a head to head comparison.

What time of year? How much time do you have? Check flight costs to see if that makes a difference.

"We like hikes, biking, and art."

Hikes--as you mention, The Inca Trail is one of the most famous hikes, whether 4 day, 2 day, or a short 1 day. I never hiked in the Netherlands, just strolled around. So Peru wins for hikes in my book.

Biking--touring Amsterdam and the countryside by bike is a great way to go. Never considered biking in Peru. The terrain and streets did not seem conducive to biking. Netherlands wins for biking.

Art--Hard to top Rembrandt and other Dutch Masters at the Rijksmuseum. Or the Van Gogh Museum. So from a traditional sense, the Netherlands wins. But the Incan construction techniques that precisely fit together massive rocks in interlocking patterns is an artform in and of itself that is unique in the world.

The renowned Cuzco School of Painting is on display in the many fine murals and other works in the Cathedral in Cuzco's Plaza.

The textiles created in Peru from alpaca and llama wool are works of art.

So for art, it is a tossup.

Go to Peru.

mlgb

There is mountainbiking around the Sacrd Valley near MP including
http://kbperu.com/tours/mountain-bik...e/abra-malaga/

I think with lids Amsterdam is easier (except on the wallet). In Peru you'd be worried about zltitude, possible tummy upsets, and steep dropoffs on the pathways around the archaeological sites.

atravelynn

Biking to MP.

http://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic...co_Region.html

colduphere

Hiked and biked in both. The two are so totally different places. You will most likely be on mountain bikes in Peru.

Our youngest was 12 in Peru. He would have loved Peru from about age nine on I would guess. The other two would be equally happy in Peru or the Netherlands starting at the same age.

If you have always wanted to see Machu Picchu I would go to Peru. Now if my wife were here she would say for no good reason that if she was leaving her kids behind she would prefer the Netherlands as she would think it was safer (planes, earthquakes, driving, immediate health care). But she isn't here.

BellaClaire

I also have spent time in the Netherlands (The Hague, Amsterdam, and Otterlo)...I LOVE the Netherlands. The only reason I would say go to MP is because there are rumors that they will eventually not let people go to the site....that in itself would be reason enough for me.....

trekperu

As far as I know you will always be able to Machu Picchu. Most of the ruins have been rebuilt and the number of people per day are limited to 2500.

mlgb

Of course they will always let people visit Machu Picchu...the economy of Cusco and the SV depend on it! However they are increasing restrictions, such as the limit on daily visitors (a good thing) and roping off from close access some of the most significant structures.

BellaClaire

I have heard that from professional travel industry professionals...but...yes...just a rumor, nothing official...but I've heard it more than once...even our guide on our September visit mentioned it. I have nothing to substantiate it....and have no clue if it's true...so perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned it...sorry! Not sure what I should have or have not said....

colduphere

I would try and get to the Netherlands before it is under water.

lcuy

I would go to Machu Picchu without kids. It is expensive and you might have health issues. Enjoy it with just your husband, and go to Amsterdam next year with your children.

crellston

I have been to both places, although in the case of The Netherlands, that was a very long time ago. For me Peru wins hands down and I intend to return their next year. Travelling with children to any developing country lacking the infrastructure is always going to be higher risk in addition the risks that mlgb's mentions are especially important where kids are involved. My kids are grown up but had I taken them to Peru, i would have been constantly worrying about them falling of a mountain or getting sick..There is so much to see and do and see in Peru I doubt you will regret it, where as The Netherlands IMHO is flat and somewhat lacking in spectacular sights although the opportunities to view some of the most famous art in the world are obvious.
It is very much a personal decision and I guess my own view is perhaps biased by my living in Europe where the differences in culture, landscape etc. are less marked than between Europe and South America.

atravelynn

YR1, please share your final decision.

YR1

So sorry I had forgotten to reply to all of you. Your thoughts are very much appreciated and have helped me make a decision. We have decided to go to Machu Picchu. I will say that colduphere got me thinking with all the concerns regarding things that may happen to us which will leave our kids orphans. I worry so much about this, that I have bought my husband's plane ticket but not mine as I am one of those travelers who will not fly on the same plane as my husband if my kids are not coming. We have not traveled international without our children, however and my husband is begging that we go together given the concerns with flights delays etc,...which if were to happen will mess up our trip..
We are very excited. Thank you for your replies and so sorry for the delay in my response