The increase in tourism has led to the destruction of the environment, thus tourism ought to be banned in certain areas. What is your opinion?

These days the surroundings are facing dismantle due to the expansion of travellers.

Consequently

, few places are necessary to be prohibited for visitors. I totally disagree with the opinion.

This

essay will justify my point of not restricting tourists visiting the places.

To begin

with, some believe

tourism

should be banned in a few places in order to maintain, beauty of the

place

.

Firstly

, history and culture have always been an attraction towards

tourism

.

Hence

, it not only benefits the

place

in economic growth, but

also

in country’s brand value.

For example

, people around the world would love to visit Paris to see the Eiffel Tower, which is known as one of the best masterpieces in the world.

Therefore

,

this

helps in attracting more tourist and profits to the nation.

Secondly

,

tourism

is a major revenue for several countries. Due to high dependency on

tourism

, could lead to the downfall of the region. To cite an instance, Maldives rewarded by the tourists as the most breathtaking and heavenly

place

to visit and if the government bans

tourism

as a result

, it would affect the nation food and shelter who majorly depends upon the tourist money.

However

, there are few lands who have taken preventive measures to save the

place

like people are not allowed to take pictures or touch the art of the

place

. To illustrate, Goa is known for its seashore and party life, but there were times when empty alcohol bottles were flowing into the ocean, due to which government took a preservative measure of restricting alcohol consumption near beaches. These preventive measures will not only prevent nation revenue, but

also

the nature. To conclude, disallowing visitors in certain places would not only affect the revenue, but

also

the country’s brand value.

Therefore

, taking preventive measure would secure the district.