Backpackers Are Great Asset For Chiang Mai

[mrclough]

Samsara

True exploration does not mean finding new places. It is much better thought of as exploring the world for one's own experiences, regardless of who's there or how many are there. Exploration is exploring the mind as much as anything else, and going places on a budget means gaining experiences to stimulate the mind.

I don't know how you can feel so certain about everything you say. I have already questioned your 'facts' about why places like pai, ko tao have become 'ruined'. You have seemingly a fixed idea of what a backpacker is in your head, and it perhaps reflects more on your perceptions than any reality.

You also are very against 'drugs', so i do hope you've tried them all so you know what you're talking about from experience.

Backpackers that i'm talking about do indeed travel around with a rucksack for very functional reasons. As for shaving, or not, so what either way?

I see two kinds of young people in thailand traveling around: those with rucksacks and those with suitcases they wheel around. I do my own generalising and call the first travelers and the latter tourists. I have my own problems with the 'tourists' due to most of them having a dstinct lack of respect for the space of other travelers and the locals.

Interesting line. In moving forward with technology etc would it be fair to include the "virtual backpacker" Who gains experience and expands their minds through reading and studying various places from the privacy of their own home on their computers?

[beb]

I don't really trust Lonely Planet but it's not because I'm more advanced than the other backpackers, but because the information strikes me as dated and likely wrong.

I think you're right. Lonely Planet has wrestled with quality issues since Cummings left. It was reliable when he was still running the show. Tough to fill those shoes.

Agree 100%.

I just replaced my 8-year-old copy, with the latest (Feb 2012) version, and was disappointed to find that LP has gone up-market, dropping a lot of the detail on buses & cheaper-accomodation, while showing more up-market 4/5-star places ? Not really for me.

I guess the good news is, the guide is (so far) surviving as a printed-book, in the challenging internet-age.

Wait a minute, I know Joe. I just remembered that he used to work on that.

So according to some here, apparently you're not a true backpacker unless you worked your way across the Pacific on a cargo ship, carried your supplies in an army duffel bag and wrestled tigers in the Golden Triangle. I'll never live up to those standards but when I travel I carry my stuff in a pack that I carry on my back. I and others too ignorant to know better call that backpacking.

BTW they don't make real music like Sinatra anymore either. The world just keeps moving forward.

Edited July 27, 2012 by beb

[hellodolly]

Samsara

True exploration does not mean finding new places. It is much better thought of as exploring the world for one's own experiences, regardless of who's there or how many are there. Exploration is exploring the mind as much as anything else, and going places on a budget means gaining experiences to stimulate the mind.

I don't know how you can feel so certain about everything you say. I have already questioned your 'facts' about why places like pai, ko tao have become 'ruined'. You have seemingly a fixed idea of what a backpacker is in your head, and it perhaps reflects more on your perceptions than any reality.

You also are very against 'drugs', so i do hope you've tried them all so you know what you're talking about from experience.

Backpackers that i'm talking about do indeed travel around with a rucksack for very functional reasons. As for shaving, or not, so what either way?

I see two kinds of young people in thailand traveling around: those with rucksacks and those with suitcases they wheel around. I do my own generalising and call the first travelers and the latter tourists. I have my own problems with the 'tourists' due to most of them having a dstinct lack of respect for the space of other travelers and the locals.

Interesting line. In moving forward with technology etc would it be fair to include the "virtual backpacker" Who gains experience and expands their minds through reading and studying various places from the privacy of their own home on their computers?

I some how feel that this thread is not about the "virtual backpacker" but I believe that is where you will find people like Samsara. No real experience. Just some thing they saw on the internet or from their beach chair sitting around a 5 star resort pool.

[uptheos]

I don't really trust Lonely Planet but it's not because I'm more advanced than the other backpackers, but because the information strikes me as dated and likely wrong.

I think you're right. Lonely Planet has wrestled with quality issues since Cummings left. It was reliable when he was still running the show. Tough to fill those shoes.

Joe Cummings really did a lot for Lonely Planet regarding Chiang Mai, but he didn't find everywhere, he too got information from backpackers, that he wouldn't have found by himself.

[Ulysses G.]

Yes. To me, Joe Cummigns is the Thailand Edition, back when it was respectfully referenced and capitalized as "The Book". Without him it's just a another book; as empty as a bible without Jesus. Ironically they share the same initials.

He IS still around though. To Real Travellers, he'll always be.

I'm pretty sure that he reads Thai Visa pretty regulatly as he is working as an editor for "The Magazine" in Bangkok - among other things.

[uptheos]

So according to some here, apparently you're not a true backpacker unless you worked your way across the Pacific on a cargo ship, carried your supplies in an army duffel bag and wrestled tigers in the Golden Triangle.

Luxury!

[samsara]

Samsara

True exploration does not mean finding new places. It is much better thought of as exploring the world for one's own experiences, regardless of who's there or how many are there. Exploration is exploring the mind as much as anything else, and going places on a budget means gaining experiences to stimulate the mind.

I don't know how you can feel so certain about everything you say. I have already questioned your 'facts' about why places like pai, ko tao have become 'ruined'. You have seemingly a fixed idea of what a backpacker is in your head, and it perhaps reflects more on your perceptions than any reality.

You also are very against 'drugs', so i do hope you've tried them all so you know what you're talking about from experience.

Backpackers that i'm talking about do indeed travel around with a rucksack for very functional reasons. As for shaving, or not, so what either way?

I see two kinds of young people in thailand traveling around: those with rucksacks and those with suitcases they wheel around. I do my own generalising and call the first travelers and the latter tourists. I have my own problems with the 'tourists' due to most of them having a dstinct lack of respect for the space of other travelers and the locals.

Interesting line. In moving forward with technology etc would it be fair to include the "virtual backpacker" Who gains experience and expands their minds through reading and studying various places from the privacy of their own home on their computers?

I some how feel that this thread is not about the "virtual backpacker" but I believe that is where you will find people like Samsara. No real experience. Just some thing they saw on the internet or from their beach chair sitting around a 5 star resort pool.

you could not be more wrong.

just got back from laos. biked 600 km: one trip to vang vieng, one to nam ngum. had an incredible time. didnt see a single backpacker during either trip (except for in vang vieng)

Edited July 27, 2012 by samsara

[tolstoy]

If backpackers are so great, then why don't you let them stay with you. There is some web group called couch surfing. They travel around and crash at strangers houses.

Personally, I think that it can be fun traveling around owning nothing but what you can carry, but it grows old quick. It is fun meeting some of these people but as stated before a lot of them are just following the same beaten path as everyone else. I like going off the beaten path. I hate going to the same flop house as a million other backpackers went.

And as far as the debate about them being good for the economy. Well they don't hurt it, but I don't see that they really contribute much except for creating a stereotype of foreigners being stingy and smelly.

There is a saying in Thai about having to sleep next to the buffalo. It is used quite often when foreigners are on the same trains and busses with Thais.

[mrclough]

Well, I've read this topic all the way through.

I'm still trying to work out which category (if any) I fall into.

I travel around as and when I feel the urge and have time. I'm based here in Chiang Mai and live a few KM out of town.

When I travel sometimes I take a train, sometimes a bus but usually opt to fly where possible as it's quicker and more comfortable, not to mention safer.

Do I use a back pack? On occasions as I may only be taking a small amount of stuff with me, say for one or two nights for example.

Usually I will use a larger holdall bag or a case if I'm going on longer journeys. This is simply due to the size and the fact I find easier to pack neatly.

When I get somewhere I can't wait to go exploring and don't often take a map or guidebook for reference, just see how it works out.

Sometimes I do like to do touristy stuff and will occasionally book on a tour.

If I'm travelling by motorcycle then I tend to plan things a little more as you have to stop for gas etc.

I never wander around without a shirt on unless I'm swimming, I couldn't subject people to that lol.

I tend not to get drunk in public very often as I'm concious of the fact I have to return home.

So, am I a back packer or one of the seemingly more hated suit case brigade?

The reason I ask is that I tend to try and not dislike someone just on what I judge their appearance is. don't judge a book by it's cover I think the saying goes. sometimes, rarely, I get a bad feeling about someone within minutes of meeting them and I'll make my excuses and leave.

I can see the point many are making about the stereotypical grungy unkempt appearance some of the younger back packing crowd have, all growing dreadlocks to express their collective individuality lol and I can understand the concern that the "bad apples" may leave the wrong lasting impression on the local Thai community of us foreigners. I think many are worrying a little too much about this though, if you are resident here you will have Thai friends and they know what sort of person you are. Good or bad.

[TommoPhysicist]

if you are resident here you will have Thai friends and they know what sort of person you are.

Don't even go down the 'I have Thai friends' route. Even Thais don't have Thai friends.

Edited July 27, 2012 by TommoPhysicist

[edwinclapham]

if you are resident here you will have Thai friends and they know what sort of person you are.

Don't even go down the 'I have Thai friends' route. Even Thais don't have Thai friends.

Tommo, the great force of Thai reason! thankfully we are all different eh!

[uptheos]

If backpackers are so great, then why don't you let them stay with you. There is some web group called couch surfing. They travel around and crash at strangers houses.

I've heard a lot about this organisation, but my couch is taken I'm afraid.

There are a couple of people in Chiang Mai who belong to couch surfers and they are the most unlikely couch surfers you'd imagine. However, some of the places they have been put up at sound really interesting and they seem to enjoy it, so what's the harm?

[mrclough]

if you are resident here you will have Thai friends and they know what sort of person you are.

Don't even go down the 'I have Thai friends' route. Even Thais don't have Thai friends.

Ha ha, I know exactly where you're coming from with that.

Fair comment lol

[femi fan]

i think youre very much romanticizing backpacker culture from 2000 on. adventurous by just getting on a plane? o, come on lol. in this age there is nothing unexpected for the traveler. all the info is already available, so if youre going to the mainstay places only, its basically a matter of stamping your ticket, taking the same photo as everyone else, buying the tshirt, and going to the next place. i dont see the adventure in that at all.

take chiang mai, for example. you can watch videos online detailing almost every tourist destination that these "intrepid" souls will go to. you can read detailed blogs about every facet of the journey. in this day and age there are no surprises, there is no adventure unless you create it and get off the beaten path, which as ulysses explains, just doesnt happen with these people. theyd rather spend a few hours at starbucks in the morning than rent a bike and go explore off the tourist map.

im like you; ive been to about 75% of thailand. only lived in chiang mai 3 months but ive already been to more places than almost everyone ive talked to simply because i go out and explore. but youre very right, i would enjoy it far less if i saw dozens of suitcase travelers when i went to mae taeng, luang nuea or did the somoeng loop.

It's about what we understand by words!

Backpackers, to me, are people who leave their country to go travelling to one or more countries with a rucksack, and do so for a number of months or longer. This is in contrast to those who take a two week holiday from their job and jet off to a place with their suitcase. The former are more adventurous than the latter. Usually, there are always exceptions.

And that is my main point, what is adventurous to one person is not to another. It's only fair to define how adventurous somebody is in relation to their own perceptions and previous experiences in life, and not in comparison to robinson crusoe or the 'hippies' overlanding it to nepal and india back in the 60s. In addition, does the person following the advice of the guide books not have an adventurous time compared to the person who has no book to help them? It's all relative.

Some people deride young folk off on their gap year on their parents' money, deride young people who don't shave and take drugs while on their travels, deride backpackers who follow the lonely planet, deride today's backpackers as not being adventurous enough (not so easy these days when everywhere's already discovered), and so it goes on. Well, to me they've got off their arse from their own comfort and security of their home society and made an effort to embrace the world. They've often given up jobs and taken risks simply by getting on the plane in the first place. We live, in the west, in a seriously risk-averse condition these days. It's one of several reasons why i could not possibly live back in england any more. But that's the fact of the times. So what seems unadventurous to one person is not to the other.

As for me, my attempts at being objective and fair go up in smoke when i have to comment on the suitcaser equivalent of backpackers. I see them all in my old traveler haunts, acting with no respect to locals or local custom, getting completely pissed all the time, corrupting everybody with the ways of excess money, pushing prices up, creating demand for four and five star nonsense, and more bars and shops, and more concrete, and more noise and so it goes on.

But there's one advantage: it pushes me into exploring and looking for other places where i don't find them. For me there's nothing finer than finding new places - new to me that is - and it's even finer when the only westerners i might see are fellow explorers. For i know a good conversation and swapping of tales is the reward over a beer or two.

I have strong memories of some favourite places, including samui, phangan, and tao where i just kept on returning to back in the 90s, and bit by bit the suitcasers are desecrating these places. It's very sad to see, not the least because the locals and the local way of life has been bought out, and replaced by big business, money is god, greed-is-the-creed ways. I wish they'd never found thailand!

I used to be thankful that the places i visited were pretty unknown to my fellow westerners, now they've all found them and half destroyed them. And 'they' are the suitcasers, not the backpackers.

So, i don't romanticize about backpacking, i compare them to the suitcase mob, and you will therefore understand better my liking for, and respect for backpackers as a grouping.

[edwinclapham]

^^^^ great post

[femi fan]

One view of how to go about making the most of one's life is the gathering of experiences. That is more easily done, and more prolifically done, by leaving one's home society and getting out and about for a long period of time.

Backpackers do this far more than any other grouping of people i can think of. The suitcasers and their four/five star nonsense i doubt even know what country they're in half the time, so similar is everywhere that they stay.

If we're talking about being adventurous, then backpackers take the gold medal. As for individuals within this grouping, then yes, some are more adventurous than others, and some appear to take the road most traveled. But kudos to ALL OF THEM for having the balls to leave jobs behind, or for leaving their comfort zone (the ones with rich parents), and to go off somewhere for a long period of time. They will learn and experience things that they never would have done if they'd stayed at home or been the typical suitcaser. Whether they used the LP or not!!

And, a final point while i'm thinking about it, for all the 'un'adventurous travelers we see or hear about, it's the nature of the travel game that there are loads we never see or hear from, because they're out in the middle of nowhere where they can't be seen by the expats, suitcasers, and anybody else. So we really don't have any idea how many backpackers are out there because the riskier ones are just out there doing it!

[insertmembernamehere]

1. You got to take length of stay into account.. Backpackers often stay for months in country. A 5 star traveler is typically gone in a week.

For instance, Banyon Tree Samui charges, for it's "cheapie" room PER NIGHT about 25,000 baht. Most backpackers I know do not stay for months, but maybe a couple weeks then move on to the next country. But assuming your scenario works sometimes, even then, a week at the Banyon Tree at 175,000 baht is, I think, going to be much more than what a backpacker wants to spend for a month or two. And that's just on accommodation.

A backpacker spending 500 baht a night on rooms and eating from food stalls does not rack up the tourist dollars compared to the 5 star spender.

Backpackers, to me, are people who leave their country to go travelling to one or more countries with a rucksack, and do so for a number of months or longer.

Then by your definition, there are few true backpackers about. I think if you look at total tourist numbers, and not just poll Khao San Road, you'll find that few people are traveling for a number of months or longer. There are some, but not that many.

By the way, Lonely Planet guide books were the worst thing to ever happen to independent travel. They created false "good" trails where people would bottleneck. And the books, by allowing even morons to travel to remote places without having to think, encouraged a "paint by numbers" kind of tourist.

Edited July 28, 2012 by insertmembernamehere

[femi fan]

^^^^ great post

Thank you edwin, but it's a very good thread, and backpackers, like 'hippies' always seem to get a hard time in life from others who for whatever reason have taken a distaste to them. As the OP expressed so clearly, they're actually a great group of people on the whole, who embrace the world and celebrate the differences between different peoples while discovering similarities that mark the human race wherever they come from. If we had more ex-backpackers in political positions we might have a more peaceful world...

[femi fan]

Backpackers, to me, are people who leave their country to go travelling to one or more countries with a rucksack, and do so for a number of months or longer.

Then by your definition, there are few true backpackers about. I think if you look at total tourist numbers, and not just poll Khao San Road, you'll find that few people are traveling for a number of months or longer. There are some, but not that many.

By the way, Lonely Planet guide books were the worst thing to ever happen to independent travel. They created false "good" trails where people would bottleneck. And the books, by allowing even morons to travel to remote places without having to think, encouraged a "paint by numbers" kind of tourist.

When i first came to thailand with my own backpack there were about 4 million 'tourists' per year coming here. Now i believe it's more like 20 million. From just looking around when i travel around thailand i'd say there are much the same number of backpackers now as there were 20 years ago, perhaps even more. I've just come from a place last month where i met several farangs who are here for three, six or 12 months.

As for your comments about LP it's easy to agree. But on the other hand these books gave many people an opportunity to go out and discover the world beyond their own backyard that they otherwise might not have taken. And there's no point in having a world if one can't go out and take a look at it!

And we could say that by creating the 'false good' trails they diverted the masses away from the trails that 'real' adventurous travelers were discovering!

I can't really blame the old-style guide books, i prefer to squarely lay the blame for the destruction of places onto the suitcasers and their demands, and the big business that then catered to, and often created, those demands by indulging in building buildings frenzies all over the place.

[FolkGuitar]

In 1990, Koh Tao had no phones, electricity was on from 8am-4pm, there was a small village two blocks long that started right at the dock where the night boat from Chumporn tied up and the day boat from Koh Phangan stopped. There were two small 'buildings' on the island that were made of cement. (One was one room, the other two) The rest were either bamboo or shanty wood structures in the village. Along the western sided of the island there were several bungalow colonies, and a small collection of huts on the eastern side that could only be accessed by foot. The only 'road' was unimproved dirt that went just beyond Sairee beach. The only people who came to Koh Tao were backpack travelers. Had to be... there was no way to climb up the old wooden pier with a suitcase. I could get a private bungalow on the water for 50 baht a night. A-frames could be had just past Sairee Beach for 20 baht. There was nothing to do at night on Koh Tao except sit around talking with other travelers, maybe play some quiet guitar, have a small fire on the beach, listen to the sounds of the ocean... It was quiet... It was all backpack travelers. You could hire a water taxi to take you to the small island of Koh Nangyuan just off of Koh Tao if you REALLY wanted to get away. That place was empty! There was one policeman, and almost no crime. Because there was nothing to do there at night, once a month the folks who were working there, or those of us backpack travelers who were staying on the island for long periods, would go over to Koh Phangan for a party. The party was held on the night of the full moon, because without easy communication, using lunar dating made scheduling the party easier for everyone.

Today Koh Tao has a car rental agency, several hotels with swimming pools, air/con in almost every bungalow colony, three villages, loud bars open every night blaring out so much music you can hear it 1000 meters away. There are several miles of paved roads. Speed boats arrive every hour. Koh Nangyuan has upscale hotels covering it, it's waters polluted by the speed boats bringing tourists down from Bangkok for day trips... The 15-man police force is having trouble keeping up with the troubles.

Koh Tao grew. Its growth was good for the local residents who made their living from the visitors. But it ceased being a backpacker mecca when the prices began to rival Koh Samui's. The 'full moon party' morphed into a "Full Moon Party" complete with T-shirts to say so, then evolved into a "Half-Moon Party" because so many tourists wanted to come and play. Tourists... no backpack travelers.

In the past few years we are witnessing this same transition in Chiang Mai. 10 years ago there were backpack travelers everywhere you looked. The guest houses were doing a land-office business, as were all the tourist venues. While the backpacker might opt for a cheap room, they spend plenty of money in the various activities around the area, be it cooking classes, jewelery making classes, massage classes, trekking, taking day tours of the sights, etc. With the changing of the laws regarding visa renewal, it made it more difficult for the backpack traveler to stay around. More and more mid-level tourism opportunities began to be seen, with bus tours coming in for three days, etc. These bus tour folks have their entire days fully planned out for them, which had a significant impact on Chiang Mai business. For those able to deal with bus tours, it meant increase. For those that relied upon the backpack traveler, it often meant closure. Chiang Mai tourism changed its face from backpacker to middle-class package tourist. Some people like this change. Others don't. But we can't deny the fact that it was the backpack tourist who opened the area, be it Chiang Mai, Pai, or even Mae Hong Son.

One point to consider... Tourists go where there is something to see and do. Many people choose not to visit 'tourist sites,' then wonder why they didn't enjoy their time. Would you prefer to spend all day walking around San Sai or Doi Suthep?

Edited July 28, 2012 by FolkGuitar

[Ricardo]

I think the point about good guidebooks, is that they help give ordinary people the background-knowledge & confidence to 'take the plunge', and get started. The L-P Guides to Thailand & S.E.Asia certainly helped millions of people do that, to their great credit !

Some people used to say the same negative things about organised package-holidays in the 70s & 80s, but now many of those holiday-makers are planning their own trips, booking flights or other transport independently, and finding food/accomodation as they go. Many more actually live in the countries which they first discovered when hostelling or backpacking or on a package-holiday.

The aristocratic/rich used to say unkind things about the middle-classes on early Thomas-Cook tours of Europe, seeing end of their elitist monopoly on the Grand Tour, but as an ordinary bloke I can only be grateful for the travel-opportunities I've had, and it would be wrong to try now to deny others the same experiences.

It's interesting seeing the Chinese or Indians starting to travel, and also the Thais themselves seeing more of their own country, Chiang Mai still has a lot to offer them, so long as it takes care to preserve what originally made it somewhere special. Such as wooden-houses instead of concrete shophouses, or the green nature nearby, elephants and all !

[dave2]

re .. There is some web group called couch surfing. They travel around and crash at strangers houses.

hes right ! ... ahhhh backpackers : )

dave2 ... who went to england for a month , pattaya and reyong for two weeks

last year with a backpack : )

[femi fan]

There was nothing to do at night on Koh Tao except sit around talking with other travelers, maybe play some quiet guitar, have a small fire on the beach, listen to the sounds of the ocean... It was quiet... It was all backpack travelers. You could hire a water taxi to take you to the small island of Koh Nangyuan just off of Koh Tao if you REALLY wanted to get away. That place was empty! There was one policeman, and almost no crime. Because there was nothing to do there at night, once a month the folks who were working there, or those of us backpack travelers who were staying on the island for long periods, would go over to Koh Phangan for a party. The party was held on the night of the full moon, because without easy communication, using lunar dating made scheduling the party easier for everyone.

Today Koh Tao has a car rental agency, several hotels with swimming pools, air/con in almost every bungalow colony, three villages, loud bars open every night blaring out so much music you can hear it 1000 meters away. There are several miles of paved roads. Speed boats arrive every hour. Koh Nangyuan has upscale hotels covering it, it's waters polluted by the speed boats bringing tourists down from Bangkok for day trips... The 15-man police force is having trouble keeping up with the troubles.

The contrast is well illustrated in your post!

That 'nothing to do' really is the way to be in the beach/island life. It's what had me addicted to the three islands throughout the 90s. My first trip to ko tao brought me there on new year's eve in 1992. By then i'd spent quite a lot of time in samui and phangan the preceding two years. We arrived at mae had, and then immediately were put in a long tail boat to go northwards along the beach to each bungalow resort.

The boat started inwards towards the first resort, and as we got nearer it seemed like the heaven to beat all heavens was to be my place of residence for two weeks. But no, full!! Disaster i thought, it had just looked so awesome. However as we left and then presently came back in towards the next resort, heaven reappeared, and it was almost too much for the soul. But full again! And so it went on about five or six times, can't remember, until we came to the last one. Space, two bungalows for us right on the beach. I'd never seen anything like it, even after my times in the two bigger islands. Ko Tao was a gem of a natural wonderland and a feast for the soul.

Later that night after walking along the road/track back towards the main 'town', we went to a concert we'd been told about. The locals told us it was the first gig ever on the island. It's little things like that that make a traveler's ego and soul tick! Awesome stuff at the time, great tales to then tell others.

I went back to the island throughout the 90s, the last time was in 2000. What i've heard about the place has stopped me going back.

It's one reason why i have a problem with the suitcase mentality. I wish they'd stuck to ruining their own continent instead of coming this far. Still, i count myself lucky to have enjoyed the times i did.

Parts of phangan though are virtually the same as 20 years ago...

[Johpa]

In the past few years we are witnessing this same transition in Chiang Mai. 10 years ago there were backpack travelers everywhere you looked. ......

The type of backpackers that you saw in very minimal numbers in Chiang Mai transiting though Chiang Mai 10 years ago, the ones you hung out with on Koh Tao 20 years ago, and the ones I hung out with on Koh Samui 30 years ago are no longer visiting Thailand. That style of adventure traveler with a backpack might still be found in Vietnam, but you are more likely to find such people traveling in Central Asian countries, although if Burma opens up we will see a resurgence of such travel over there for a brief time. The tourist infrastructure here in Thailand is now fully mature in most places and of little interest to such people. Today, adventure travel with a backpack conjures up organized trips for adventure sports like climbing, kayaking, etc. It is no longer about the adventure of travel. In Thailand they might carry a backpack, but they won't be staying in any guesthouse that does not provide free Wi-Fi. It is a different world.

[FolkGuitar]

The type of backpackers that you saw in very minimal numbers in Chiang Mai transiting though Chiang Mai 10 years ago, the ones you hung out with on Koh Tao 20 years ago, and the ones I hung out with on Koh Samui 30 years ago are no longer visiting Thailand.

It's true... They can no longer travel that way through Thailand. They/we would arrive with no fixed plans, stay a week or a month or five months depending upon our mood. There was no problem renewing visas; bring your passport to most any storefront travel agent, pay a few hundred baht, and the next day have another month added to your time... month after month with no trouble at all. Stay around, move, come back, leave, following the wind or the pretty girl from Sweden you met at the guest house... These days a backpack traveler has to have an onward ticket just to get into Thailand at many border crossings! Renew visa once, and then move on. Can't come back for at least six months.

These days, it's easier for that sort of backpack traveler to wander around Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, India, even Malaysia! Vietnam is the new backpacker destination because the infrastructure has made it comfortable for that sort of travel. It's no longer comfortable in LOS for the 'wanderer.' Now you need a plan... an itinerary... and a ticket out.

Today, adventure travel with a backpack conjures up organized trips for adventure sports like climbing, kayaking, etc. It is no longer about the adventure of travel. In Thailand they might carry a backpack, but they won't be staying in any guesthouse that does not provide free Wi-Fi. It is a different world.

Even the major companies that sold high quality equipment for camping, trekking, mountaineering, etc., are now devoting more and more space to fashion clothing rather than functional gear. REI, EMS. and other outdoor adventure dealers are even selling adventure tours, aimed at the middle-class traveler. Packaged 'adventure,' safe for the whole family. Yes indeed... It IS a different world.

[uptheos]

These days a backpack traveler has to have an onward ticket just to get into Thailand at many border crossings! Renew visa once, and then move on. Can't come back for at least six months.

These days, it's easier for that sort of backpack traveler to wander around Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, India, even Malaysia! Vietnam is the new backpacker destination because the infrastructure has made it comfortable for that sort of travel. It's no longer comfortable in LOS for the 'wanderer.' Now you need a plan... an itinerary... and a ticket out.

Thailand is famous for shooting itself in the foot.

Edited July 29, 2012 by uptheos

[Sharp]

all good and true, but many backpackers are annoying to no end and have no real agenda other than to go to the places everyone else goes to -- where's the adventure in that?

many of them are merely looking for the next "high", whether it's cheap booze or drugs or some adrenaline rush. they have no mental aspirations beyond what their guidebooks tell them. 3rd class travel zombies.

however, youre very right in that they are more likely to support the true local economy. so perhaps putting up with them is worth it if it keeps the "real chiang mai" around just a little longer.

Valid points I agree.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa app

[FolkGuitar]

Someone needs to blaze the trail to new places and ideas. The 3-day package tourist is not going to do that. Once the interesting place has been found, mapped and written about often enough, and 'comfortable and safe' accommodations established for getting there easily, staying there, and leaving 'on time,' then it's time for the rest of the traveling population to follow. I know that my parents would NOT have even walked in the door of some of the places I used as guest houses around Asia. When the 7pm train didn't show up at the station in Kota Bahru, my parents would not have thought to just spread a sarong on the floor of the station and go to sleep until it did arrive... about 4am. They would have been frantic, worrying why the train was late. It wasn't 'late.' It just didn't arrive yet... The backpack traveler enjoys the traveling as much as the destination. The 3-day package tourist is only concerned with arriving on time, being taken by the hand to see the sights, sleeping in a clean room with solid locks on the door, and leaving in time to make the next flight.

The City Fathers really do care about the growth of their towns. Chiang Mai had far more backpacker guest houses than 3-star hotels in the past, which was a good thing while the area was growing. At night, the bar girls on Loi Kraw drew in the men. The City Fathers don't care for that sort of trade, so blatantly visible. We all realize that the Farang sex tourists only account for less than 20% of the Thai sex industry, but it's a very VISIBLE percentage, consisting of a majority of those same backpack tourists. So... what to do about it? Their answer is to cater to the 3-day package tourist instead. The big-money tourist attractions don't suffer because they can cater to the tour buses. But the average ex-pat living in the area doesn't visit those tourist venues. We see only the local Farang bars having fewer and fewer patrons as the backpackers head to easier pickings, and not the expensive tourist sites drawing in big money. So the real question is; is Thailand really shooting itself in the foot? It is losing money from the backpacker trade but gaining from the package tour business. I'd love to see the actual dollar figures to be able to know the bottom line...

[Ulysses G.]

I like the Australian attitude towards backpackers. They value them for contributing to the economy and things in Oz are very backpacker friendly. The Thai government obssestion with "quality tourists" is not realistic for a country that does not have a lot to attract wealthy people in large numbers over a long period of time.

Edited July 29, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

I like the Australian attitude towards backpackers. They value them for contributing to the economy and things in Oz are very backpacker friendly. The Thai government obssestion with "quality tourists" is not realistic for a country that does not have a lot to attract wealthy people in large numbers over a long period of time.

At the same time, they could also have accurately assessed that as Thailand develops and becomes more expensive, the true (Western) backpacker traveler market will become less over time. The logical progression is to move to a higher level of tourism, which of course has to mean an increase in facilities, standards and infrastructure. (Don't laugh, it's a process.)