Petra holds a special place in my “travel memory” as, back in 1964, I visited it on my first major “expedition” whilst hitch-hiking from UK to Jerusalem (then in Jordan) and back. Since then I have revisited it 1999 and in 2012. Enormous changes have taken place to the “visit experience” over those years. Many of them are irreversible but that doesn’t mean that they are welcome – the concern now is what the coming years will bring and whether Petra itself can survive and provide a worthwhile visit?

In 1964 there was no entrance fee, I just signed in at the police check-point and slept overnight in one of the caves. There were almost no other visitors (though it was low season August) and, on my departure evening, I slept on the floor outside Wadi Musa police station as there wasn’t suitable lodging in what was then a tiny village – happy days! Of course there were no “Lonely Planet” guide books or similar and, although an on-site Archaeologist was helpful, I really saw the site “blind” and, inevitably, missed much of its significance. Visitor information boards had not yet reached the site!

By 1999 the place was transformed, with a busy (and rather untidy) town having grown up just beyond the entrance – and a 5* hotel. Entry fees had reached JD20. Our latest visit in 2012 identified even more people and more changes. Entry fees had risen beyond inflation – Jordan now gets JD50 per person and 90 for day-trippers from Israel and Egypt. It could probably get even more – tourists might grumble but, having traveled so far, few are going to miss the site for a few extra dinars

The daily maximum number of tourists in the UNESCO-approved management plan of 1994 was 1500. However, in 2009 the average daily number in April (the peak month) was 3195 and the max 4583. In 2010 these figures were 4015 and 5145. Annually, 93k visited in 1985 and this had reached 975k in 2010 (twice as many as when we had visited in 1999!) and plans are to increase this to 1.5 million as Jordan continues to market Petra as a tourism destination via activities such as “New Seven Wonders”

So what changes has this massive, and apparently inexorable, increase in visitors brought about?

a. Some locations, such as the Treasury and the theatre, have been permanently cordoned off because of erosion problems. Apparently most of the historic “makers marks” on the latter’s masonry disappeared within 10 years.

b. The site has lost its feeling of isolation with the village of Um Sayoun now clearly visible on the hillside as one enters from the Treasury. In 1964 Bedouin still lived in and ran their flocks in Petra (I remember a fine camel train but now the only camels are for tourist rides) – they were however removed in the 1980s and they have concentrated in villages close to the site.

c. The dreaded “Health and Safety” has made an appearance too! In 1999 we were still able to climb the cliffs behind the Treasury to obtain the fine views they provided. In 2012 there were notices prohibiting this. The entrance to the Monastery climb now has a notice warning that a guide should be taken. One can imagine that it could become obligatory in some locations or that some of the side routes will be closed altogether. But one can perhaps understand the reasons – the terrain is rough and wild. Apparently the search and rescue facilities are not adequate for the number of tourists (many of whom are even older and less mobile than we are!) and the accidents which occur.

d. Several striking new “toilet blocks” have appeared - the use of informal latrines by all those tourists can’t have been very pleasant! There was even a “toilet in a cave” (photo!!) where one could sit (or stand!) and look at the carving and the colours of the rocks! I wondered if it might have been this very cave where I had slept all those years ago. The design has been criticized as being “monumental” and apparently the WHC has written twice to Dept of Antiquities asking for their removal.

e. Formal restaurants have reached the site. Our day trip from Aqaba included a lunch at one of them. Stylish tented awnings softened the lines of solid buildings and I had high hopes when I noted that it was run by Crowne Plaza, but, in our opinion, the food was less good than one would have hoped for from that brand and we didn’t eat anything! Better to take a picnic and eat wherever you want!

f. In 1999 we had entered at 7 am and did find some relative peace and quiet – I would aim to go in at 6am now! Later, everywhere was crowded and “pinch points” like the Treasury were a bun fight. The track up to the Monastery was also a constant stream of people. The “hassle factor” was quite high, albeit in a reasonably friendly manner, but every ruin and every corner on the trail revealed yet another souvenir seller or drinks stall. I know they are only trying to make a living but the site would be more pleasant if the numbers were limited and the locations centralized.

Some aspects of the site have improved. The Siq path has been restored (by WMF) to what is thought to have been its original level after centuries of rubble accumulation. It was fully paved in Roman times and this has been left where it was found and, where not, a modern consolidated material has been laid to reduce dust etc. The Byzantine Church, which was only discovered in 1990, has been excavated to uncover its fine mosaics and these have been protected by a shelter.

And what further changes can be expected? A problem is that most visitors arrive in the same few hours – apparently a staggered/time stamped ticketing system is under development. Other plans include the introduction of “zones” and a trail system within the site and also the introduction of another exit (the current “need” for everyone to enter and exit through the Siq inevitably reduces the maximum capacity) – and this would need a shuttle service as well. On can imagine a very different visitor experience if these types of changes were introduced.

So, improved management might reduce some of today’s negatives – but I wouldn’t bank on it and it would seem likely that a visit in another 5 years would find it even more crowded, touristy and expensive. Still worth it but such a shame!