In many countries tourism is an important part of the economy, but it also causes environmental damage. Some people believe that tourists should pay an additional tax to compensate for this damage. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

touristry, being a weighty part of the economy in a lot of countries, caused a bad environmental impact and destroyed important communities. Historical places and picturesque sites are dying out. A number of believed that it is better that people who travel pay an extra payment to compensate for those environmental effects,

To begin

with, a country with a developing economy and small taxes can reduce tourist interest because of unfounded prices.

Moreover

, trek often puts pressure on natural resources through over-consumption, often in apartments where resources are already scarce. Tourism puts enormous stress on local land use and can lead to soil erosion, increased pollution, and natural habitat loss.

Furthermore

, tourism is not just a victim of global warming – it

also

contributes to the problem. navigation alone is responsible for 8% of the world's carbon emissions. As more and more people transit each year,

this

footprint is only growing. It can

also

lead to cultural erosion, social disruptions, and environmental degradation.

On the other hand

, We hear a lot of news about excursions. We can see new facets of our country.New regions will open. A positive impact can refer to an increase in jobs, a higher quality of life for locals, and an increase in the wealth of an area. touristry

also

has the advantage of rebuilding and restoring historic sites and encouraging the revitalization of cultures.Despite these reasons, there are others who argue that additional tax is necessary to compensate for the damages. In conclusion, the preservation of historical sites is in our hands. Historical venue picturesque berths are dying out. Organising more security guards and spreading awareness is the best way to block

further

harm to the nature of the tourist field.