Todayville Travel: Spring in Italy – Riccione and the Tuscan Hills

Lindsey Lubkey

Published

6 years ago

12 minute read

Second in the two-part series ‘Spring in Italy’.

“My head was down, focused on my churning bicycle pedals and the relentless climb up a twisting cobblestone road. What was I doing here? I’m not even fond of biking.”

The Most Serene Republic of San Marino is located smack dab in the middle of Italy. At 62 sq. km. it is one of the smallest nations in the world. Although only a few dozen kilometres from Italy’s Adriatic Coast, San Marino’s summit is almost 800 meters above sea level. And crowning this mountainous micro-state is the medieval Fortress of Guaita. My destination.

But I wasn’t looking up. My head was down, focused on my churning bicycle pedals and the relentless climb up a twisting cobblestone road. What was I doing here? I’m not even fond of biking.

I needed the exercise. We had been in Italy for almost two weeks and had yet to actually earn any of the fabulous meals we had devoured.

It was a tough three-hour slog to San Marino’s pinnacle – but an easy glide back down to the coastal town of Riccione, and the Belvedere Hotel where we were ensconced for four nights. The Belvedere is a “biker’s” hotel. Marina Pasquini, the proprietress, is a dynamic effervescent woman. Marina exudes the qualities of both caring mother and astute businesswoman. Her staff love her – and feed off her magnetism. This osmotic energy carries through to the guests – who are treated like family.

Marina is a wonderful cook. So after a gruelling 70-kilometre ride, I felt justified in accepting a second helping of her traditional Friday night paella. Marina is also an observant woman (I wouldn’t try stealing any silverware from the Belvedere). When we checked in she noted I was toting a ukulele:

“Would you like to play at lunch this afternoon? You’ll be biking up to a farmhouse and winery in the hills.”

“I can’t carry the ukulele on my bicycle,” I replied.

“Don’t worry, we can bring it up for you,” she said happily. “It will be wonderful.”

How could I say no?

Marina and her Friday night paella

On the ride up my wife Florence had bike problems. Her chain kept falling off. Our guide Dani-boy was nonchalant and pleasantly attended to each messy repair. When we arrived at the farmhouse his hands were black with grease.

Thanks Dani!

During lunch I scoured my brain for an appropriate tune to entertain a group of bicycle aficionados in the Rimini hills of Italy. After a four-course meal, a sweet dolce and plenty of vino di casa, the group was rambunctious. I tentatively plinked the ukulele.

An exhausted Gerry enjoys the view from the summit of San Marino

My truncated version of Dean Martin’s “That’s Amore” went over well.

Then I recounted Florence’s bike chain maladies by singing (with apologies to the Beatles):

“Chain, my baby’s got a tangled-up chain,

And it ain’t the kind, that you can cl-e-e-e-an,

But Dani-boy, fixed her chain for me. Yeah.”

The crowd went wild. Bike enthusiasts can be real nerds.

Dani-boy had a genuine tear in his eye. Despite their hot-blooded temperament, Italians can be surprisingly sentimental.

On our last Belvedere morning, as we checked out, the skies opened up. Disheartened cyclists, decked out in jerseys from around the world, sat and scanned the dreary sky. The ride was off for the day. Rain, steep narrow roads, zany Italian drivers and over-enthusiastic bicyclists do not mix well.

Marina was in the foyer to bid us arrivederci, offering a genuine hug – and a request that we soon return.

We were off to Tuscany, the final leg of our month-long stay in Italia. The GPS indicated that our AirBnb in Lucca was three hours away. But as per our usual modus operandi we took the road less travelled and turned what should have been a short jaunt into a seven-hour odyssey through the twisting narrow country roads and unsurpassable beauty of Tuscany.

The road less traveled

I enjoyed driving in Italy. Despite their crazy reputation, I found Italian drivers really get it (unlike some folks piloting cars on Alberta’s highways). I survived a month driving in Italy without incident: no fender-benders on narrow cobblestone streets, no roundabout collisions – and not one Italian offered a gesticulation as to where I might go and procreate.

However… it will be a miracle if the post office doesn’t eventually deliver a slew of photo-radar tickets and one-way street infractions. It is not an understatement to suggest that compliance with Italian driving laws is impossible. And Italian roads require super-human navigating skills. Florence (and our GPS) performed admirably – we were lost fewer than a dozen times.

When we arrived in Lucca our hostess met us outside the town walls, helped us park and escorted us to her lovely apartment in the heart of the Old City. (Our AirBnb experience throughout Italy was amazing. Our hosts were uniformly friendly, helpful – and available. Many even stocked the fridge with Italian delights for our arrival.)

Lucca

One fine afternoon we signed up for a wine-tasting tour in the famous Brunello region of Montalcino, near Sienna. En route we passed vineyard after vineyard, interrupted only by ancient olive groves. And it seemed every Tuscan hill was topped by an alluring fairytale-like village – with stone spires guarding the verdant fields of Italian spring.

“Mario loves making vino, his passion for sixty years. He has a certain – pardon my French – joie de vivre.”

Mario Ciacci is the octogenarian who founded and still oversees Abbadia Ardenga winery – although these days Mario’s role seems limited to entertaining customers, dancing with the lady guests – and sipping a little of his own beautifully-aged Brunello. He proudly walked us through the vintner’s process – and his priceless cellar – before serving us a simple lunch coupled with a multitude of his Abbadia vintages.

Mario Ciacci woos the ladies – when not making wine

Mario loves making vino, his passion for sixty years. He has a certain – pardon my French – joie de vivre. Mario is also a seasoned salesman; in addition to my traffic tickets, any day now we’re expecting an overseas shipment of Brunello wine.

After three nights in Lucca and four in Sienna we moved on to Orvieto for our final few Italian nights. In each of these towns the itinerary was simple: explore the narrow, confusing streets of the city core for a day, then hop in the car and tour the surrounding countryside for a couple of days.

Ponte Della Madallena near Lucca

“The gold-gilded façade of the Duomo is spectacular at sunset.”

All of these walled cities have their unique character but Orvieto is perhaps the most charming – and interesting. Built atop a flat butte of volcanic tuff, the town has remained impregnable for millennia. Its high walls provide a natural defense that could not be breached. The city was also immune to enemy siege. Water was drawn from the ingeniously designed well of San Patrizio and food literally flew in through the windows: the people farmed pigeons. Thus both food and water were readily available without leaving the protection of the fortress.

Orvieto is home to one of Italy’s most striking Gothic cathedrals. The gold-gilded façade of the Duomo is spectacular at sunset. And beneath the streets an ancient labyrinth of tunnels was carved into the tuff, designed for quick escape. (Perhaps flight from this siege-proof city would have been necessary had Orvieto been infiltrated by stool pigeons?)

Duomo in Orvieto

We’ve been home for some time now and the traffic tickets have yet to arrive – but I take solace in the fact that when they do there will be a hearty glass of Brunello at hand to ease the pain.

If you go: The Belvedere Hotel specializes in hosting bike enthusiasts from around the world.

Gerry Feehan QC practised law in Red Deer for 27 years before starting his second life as a freelance travel writer and photographer. He says that, while being a lawyer is more remunerative than travel writing, it isn’t nearly as much fun. When not on the road, Gerry and his wife Florence live in Red Deer and Kimberley, BC. Todayville is proud to work with Gerry to re-publish some of his most compelling stories from his vast catalogue developed over more than a decade of travel.

Gerry Feehan

Read about Gerry’s adventures in Hawaii

Enjoy an excellent adventure in Texas. Click below.

Up Next

Todayville Travel: A ‘soft egg’ in the Nahanni Pt. 1

Don't Miss

Todayville Travel: The Long Road to Texas

Lindsey Lubkey

Follow Author

More Important Now Than Ever: Remembrance and a few thoughts on this World Suicide Prevention Day

Arts / 6 years ago

Enjoy wine and support local art at ‘Art! Live at the Hive!’

Entertainment / 6 years ago

An amazing lineup of headliners awaits at this year’s CFR Cabaret!

Business

Looming Air Canada strike highlights need for more competition in the air

Published on August 16, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Alex Whalen and Jake Fuss

Air travelers in Canada are facing a major disruption as Air Canada’s flight attendants threaten strike action. Air Canada says the strike could affect 130,000 passengers per day from coast to coast.

Currently, two airlines control between roughly half and three quarters of all air travel at Canada’s major airports. When either Air Canada or WestJet face a disruption, a large share of Canada’s overall air traffic is affected. In recent polls, a majority of Canadians have said they feel like Canada’s system of air travel is “broken”. Passengers experiencing hardship should cheer for more competition in Canada’s airline industry.

Increased competition has multiple benefits. When one airline inevitably faces a disruption, passengers would have more options to book with other carriers. Competition also tends to lead to lower prices and better service across the board for the customer, as power shifts away from the supplier and toward the consumer.

Unfortunately, Canada’s skies are largely sealed off from competition.

Due to restrictive federal rules known as “cabotage”, foreign airlines may fly to Canadian airports, but they cannot operate routes exclusively within Canada. For example, a foreign airline such as Delta can fly from New York to Toronto, but cannot then fly from Toronto to Montreal. This policy limits choice and competition within Canada.

In contrast, the European Union removed cabotage restrictions for member-states in the 1990s. The result? More competition (including from new low-cost carriers such as Ryanair), a 34 per cent decline in ticket prices (adjusted for inflation), more cross-border routes, and greater flight frequencies. The entry of new low-cost carriers alone helped lower airfares by 20 per cent.

But new entrants into the industry, including low-cost carriers, face significant barriers to entry in Canada, with foreign ownership restrictions compounding Canada’s competition problem. Currently, the Canada Transportation Act caps foreign ownership of Canadian airlines at 49 percent, and no individual foreign investor can own more than 25 percent of the voting shares.

Starting a new airline is obviously a big undertaking, in part because of the large amounts of capital required to acquire a fleet of airplanes. These rules limit the ability of new entrants to raise the necessary investment capital to compete in the Canadian market.

Loosening these restrictions was recently recommended by Canada’s Competition Bureau, which had been tasked with studying the dismal state of competition in Canada’s airline sector. Earlier this year, we authored a study published by the Fraser Institute which reviewed international best practices in airline policy. Based on this review, we recommended Canada remove foreign ownership restrictions, among numerous other recommendations where Canada is offside with peer countries, including the need for lower taxes and fees, changes to Canada’s airport ownership structure, and a more competitive regulatory burden.

The looming Air Canada strike is just the latest in a long list of regular disruptions faced by Canadian air travelers. While such disruptions may never be fully eliminated, government policy is making the situation worse than it needs to be. Cabotage and foreign ownership restrictions should be removed to provide consumers greater choice when it comes to air travel.

Business

Competition Bureau recommends bureaucratic power grab over airline industry

Published on July 22, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Matthew Lau

According to the Competition Bureau’s recent market study of Canada’s airline sector, “Competition delivers major benefits to Canadian travellers. Beyond lower prices, competition drives quality improvements and innovation.” This statement about economic competition is correct. Unfortunately, however, some of the Bureau’s other ideas about economic competition are fundamentally wrong and its poor proposals, which would damage the airline industry, are mixed in with beneficial proposals.

Let’s begin with what the Competition Bureau, a law enforcement agency that reports to the federal government, gets right. Three of the 10 recommendations in the Bureau’s market study relate to opening Canada’s airline sector to international competition. Allowing more international competition is an commonly proposed idea (including in a Fraser Institute study earlier this year) and a good one.

Specifically, the Bureau recommends raising the single-investor foreign ownership limit for Canadian airlines to 49 per cent, allowing 100 per cent foreign ownership for domestic-only Canadian airlines, and working with other countries to remove foreign competition restrictions. The Bureau also recommends reducing regulatory costs for northern operators to support northern and remote market access, and opening government contracts to as many bidders as possible to get better value for taxpayer dollars.

Alas, despite these good ideas for protecting or improving competition, the recommendation at the top of the Competition Bureau’s list is negative, founded on a poor understanding of economic competition, and places far too much faith in the power of government intervention to preserve or improve competition.

“We recommend adopting a system of parallel reviews,” reads the study. “Under this system, both the Commissioner of Competition and the Minister of Transport would conduct independent reviews. Either process could block a transaction, and deals could only proceed if they cleared both reviews.”

In other words, the Competition Bureau proposes the Commission of Competition (the head of the Bureau) have veto power over airline mergers and acquisitions. The stated intention is to disallow anti-competitive mergers or collaborations, but this appears to be a bureaucratic power grab that would block transactions that benefit airline passengers and likely reduce investment in the airline sector.

Speaking to a parliamentary committee last year, a deputy commissioner with the Bureau pointed out that it had opposed three airline mergers in recent years—all of which the federal government finally approved despite the Bureau’s opposition, although with onerous political conditions.

The Competition Bureau laments industry concentration (the degree to which a few large players serve a high proportion of the market), but as a Montreal Economic Institute analysis on airline competition noted, “both economic theory and empirical evidence suggest that it is barriers to entry rather than the size and number of firms in a market that matter.”

Indeed, this was a key economic insight explained by Joseph Schumpeter more than eight decades ago. Industry concentration is not inherently negative and may well result from suppliers and consumers freely making decisions with their own money. Government barriers to entry, which tend to cause industry concentration, is the real problem.

If economies of scale allow large airlines to operate more efficiently than small ones, airline passengers may well be better off when two airlines merge. Or, if an airline is financially distressed, its acquisition by another airline may allow it to continue operations and maintain services. And if airline investors realize they may not be able to eventually exit their investments by selling to other airlines, the long-run effect will be to reduce airline-sector competition and investment.

The Competition Bureau seems to grasp that barriers to entry, not concentration, are the problem by saying its goal “is not always to promote multiple carriers on every route” but rather to promote a competitive environment “where the best airline serves each route but knows it can be replaced.” Yet the Bureau’s hostility towards past airline mergers, as well as value-creating mergers in other industries, suggests it does not apply this thinking consistently and seeks to block even transactions that generate significant economic benefits.

The Bureau’s new report gets some things right, but more bureaucratic power over the airline industry will not help Canadians. The Competition Bureau simply should not have veto power over airline mergers and acquisitions.