Show menu

Michelin Green Guide Ends Animal Rides, Leather Sales

Michelin Green Guide animal rides ban prompts travelers in Spain to choose ethical tours over camel and elephant rides
by
5 min read

Michelin Green Guide animal rides ban is widening as the century old travel series enters its 100th year, with PETA saying Michelin Éditions confirmed it will stop recommending "tourist activities using animals," such as elephant and camel rides, and will no longer sell leather goods. In Spain, the newest Green Guide Spain edition also adds an explicit warning that bullfighting is a "cruel and declining tradition," a framing shift that can change how travelers plan activities in Madrid, Andalusia, and other bullfighting corridors. The practical takeaway for travelers is simple: expect fewer legacy animal use attractions surfaced as endorsed "must do" activities, and plan your itinerary around non animal alternatives before you book tours.

The change matters because travel guides do not just describe destinations, they shape what visitors treat as normal. When a guide removes an activity from its recommendation set, or adds a welfare warning, that pressure travels downstream into tour supply, hotel concierges, and packaged itineraries, especially for first time visitors who rely on a guide as a trust filter.

Michelin Green Guide Animal Rides Ban: What Changed

PETA says Michelin Éditions confirmed three moves tied to responsible tourism and animal welfare: it will no longer sell leather goods, it will remove "tourist activities using animals" from the Green Guide recommendations, and it will warn readers about bullfighting in the Green Guide Spain edition as a "cruel and declining tradition." Michelin has not, as of publication, posted a standalone public policy memo with the full scope and enforcement language, so the most important operational detail is the direction of travel, not a fine print rule list. For travelers, the high confidence signal is that elephant rides, camel rides, and similar attractions are moving out of the guide's endorsed activity set.

The Spain change is especially notable because it is not only removal, it is explicit labeling. A warning printed in a country guide tends to persist across editions and translations, which can shift how mainstream travelers perceive a long debated activity, even if they were not seeking advocacy content.

Who This Matters Most For When Planning Spain and Beyond

This affects travelers who plan from guidebooks, or who book day trips in bulk, because those funnels are where "recommended" becomes "default." If you are building a Spain itinerary around cultural evenings, you will likely see more emphasis on food, architecture, museums, and festivals that do not involve animal harm, and less passive steering toward bullfighting as a marquee "experience."

It also matters for travelers heading to high volume animal ride sites, including places where search ads and intermediaries aggressively market rides as essential. The practical risk is not only ethics, it is trip satisfaction, because animal ride operations can be chaotic, poorly regulated, and refund unfriendly when conditions change. Michelin stepping back reduces one layer of reputational cover those operators have historically benefited from.

For readers who want to align trip planning with lower impact choices, Michelin's move fits a broader shift toward responsible tourism framing. Adept has already advised travelers to skip exploitative wildlife interactions, including elephant rides, as part of basic sustainable trip planning. See Tips to Help You Travel in a Sustainable Way.

What Travelers Should Do Before Booking Activities

Treat this as a planning filter change, not a guarantee that a destination has stopped offering the activity. If you were considering animal rides, the decision point is before you prepay, because many operators rely on strict cancellation terms, and on last minute pressure at the site. Choose alternatives that do not require animal handling or coercion, and verify that any "sanctuary" claims are backed by observable welfare practices, not marketing language.

If your Spain trip includes traditional culture planning, be explicit about your preferences when booking, especially if you are using a travel advisor, a hotel concierge, or a package operator. The easiest way to avoid unwanted add ons is to specify what you will not do, then ask for replacements that still deliver the same trip goal, such as night life, local craft, regional food, or historic venues. If you are traveling with family, decide this in advance so you are not negotiating at the curb in a high pressure tourist zone.

For travelers trying to reduce trip friction, use credible planning sources that explain the "why," not only the "what." Overtourism and sustainability policies increasingly change how destinations present activities, and those shifts can affect pricing, availability, and crowding patterns in peak months. Related context is in France sustainable tourism strategy is working.

Why This Shift Changes the Tourism Flywheel

Guidebooks and curated recommendation engines work like distribution. When a high trust brand removes an activity from its endorsed set, it reduces demand at the margin, and it raises reputational risk for intermediaries who keep selling it. First order, fewer travelers encounter the activity as a default "must do." Second order, tour desks, hotel partners, and online sellers recalibrate their offers because the conversion funnel weakens, and because customer complaints become harder to deflect.

The leather decision sits in the same mechanism. When an institution stops selling a product category, it is signaling that the brand's definition of "travel lifestyle" is changing, not only its destination content. That matters because travel retail is often bundled into what visitors see as official or prestige endorsed shopping. In practice, Michelin is using its centennial moment to reposition the Green Guide closer to "responsible tourism" norms, and away from activities and retail lines that critics say rely on animal harm.

Sources

Topics