I'm planning to go to Croatia for a couple of weeks at the beginning of September. There are so many places that look fabulous to visit but we don't really want to move from place to place as we'd like this to be a relaxing beach holiday. Can you recommend a place that we could perhaps use as a base from which to explore the surrounding area?
Jo Hunter
The obvious place would be Dubrovnik, but as this will be busy even in September, you may wish to look elsewhere. I asked Balkan Holidays (balkanholidays.co.uk) for some suggestions, and they immediately plumped for Makarska. This good-looking town is an hour and a quarter down the coast from Split which is served by several low-cost carriers from the UK. Makarska's beaches will suit your needs. Or you could also try the town of Brela, nine miles up the coast, which has one of the mainland's best stretches of pebbles.
If you're feeling very active, Mount Biokovo and the surrounding peaks, which form a backdrop to Makarska, offer excellent hiking, rafting and mountain biking. Some trips may be subject to minimum numbers but while the start of September is quieter than August you should find most acitivities operating.
Makarska also works as a jumping-off point for the islands, too. It's easy from here to arrange day visits to Zlatni Rat (Golden Horn) beach on Brac or to neighbouring island of Hvar. Split and Trogir are within easy reach for a dash of history. If you're not too fussed about a pool, then Hotel Biokovo (hotelbiokovo.hr; doubles from £92) is on the town's promenade with a breezy terrace cafe. For a pool, you need to go slightly out of town – try Hotel Park (parkhotel.hr; doubles from £112) on the next cove up from the town itself. There's also the option of finding a private room which can be a way to bag a bargain out of high season. Ask at an agency when you arrive to minimise time spent searching around town.
Next year I'm planning a six-month trip around the US on a tourist visa, followed by a year in Ecuador teaching in a language institute. I'm aware that flights to South America can be very expensive so to keep costs down I would prefer to fly straight from the US to Ecuador and not travel back to the UK in between. However this raises a question about visas. Am I able to apply for a work visa for Ecuador from within the US or do I need to apply from within my home country? The job contract with the language institute has been set up in advance so I can prove I have employment in Ecuador. I've tried the Ecuadorian embassy website but it's full of broken links.
Lucy Clark, by email
Phone, provided you can get through, is the best way to get up-to-date accurate visa information in these circumstances. I spoke to the Ecuadorian Consulate in London and got separate confirmation from the equivalent office in Washington DC (+1 202 234 7200; ecuador.org) that applicants have to apply in their home country. The only exception is if there is no Ecuadorian diplomatic presence in your home country. But there is an embassy in London. There's nothing to stop you trying when in the US, provided you have the correct documentation, but the official line is that you need to apply in the UK.
As an (ex-) student of medieval literature, I'm toying with the idea of walking from London to Canterbury, maybe next Easter. It seems that the old pilgrimage routes aren't really useable anymore and I'm struggling to find any practical information, ie how difficult it is, how much time to allow, where to break up the journey. I'm not much of a camper (okay, so maybe that means it's not the best holiday for me!), so if I were to do it I would preferably like to walk for about five-six hours a day and then find a pub and a bed for the night. Is that feasible?
Jo Greenland, Tours, France
The route that Chaucer's pilgrims walked to Canterbury is now occupied by the A2 so you need to deviate from the original path. This doesn't mean that you can't have a great walk. Most of the journey will be on the latter stages of the North Downs Way, which runs from Farnham in Surrey to Dover with a spur taking you to Canterbury. Once you're on the North Downs Way section planning and route-finding is a doddle – simply seek out nationaltrail.co.uk/Northdowns, which can help with everything from accommodation to places of interest along the way. As this route follows the highest point of the downs wherever possible the views of surrounding countryside are excellent. This also means the occasional steep incline but mostly gently undulating terrain.
Before you get to the North Downs Way, you have a couple of days of threading through south London and then suburban towns and villages ahead of you. These days will be very different from the stages on the North Downs Way and you should be prepared for walking on a mix of suburban streets, pavements of quiet(er) roads and footpaths in later stages. You'll need the relevant Ordnance Survey sheet map for route planning. Roughly, the first day will take you from Talbot Yard in Southwark, where the Tabard once stood – look for the blue plaque - heading south-east to a suitable stopping point such as Petts Wood or Orpington. You can find some B&Bs and hotels around Orpington such as the Mary Rose Inn (maryroseinn.com) in St Mary Cray. The next day, weave along through Pratts Bottom, Knockholt Pound, Chevening and Otford to the village of Kemsing, where you pick up the North Downs Way. If these two days don't sound like much fun you could recreate the pilgrim's route from Winchester to Canterbury, following St Swithun's Way as far as Farnham in Surrey and then the North Downs Way from there. Taking the train out of London is another option. The whole walk should take five to six days, covering 10 to 15 miles a day. The map of the North Downs Way at the site listed above doesn't include London – for a version overlaying the walk on the usual Google Map see http://bit.ly/dlg0iA. There are also several dedicated maps and guides to the North Downs Way section of the walk – Stanfords stocks the range.
Do you think it's worth spending big money on travel gear? I'm going to India for a month and have always survived with cheap but mildly uncomfortable backpacks before. I'm not going to be doing any trekking although I will be moving around a lot. Is it worth spending upwards of £100 more for a major name brand as opposed to the value ranges from the high street travel shops or even supermarkets?
Helen Power, by email
There are savings to be made when buying your kit but this isn't one of them. If an item is critical to the success of your trip, like a bag, then you should make sure you get a good one. Get something that both fits you and is fit for purpose.
There are several reasons for saying this. The first is comfort – when backpacking in somewhere like India you'll spend a fair amount of time walking with your luggage, and poorly fitting straps and unevenly distributed weight can spell trouble for your back and shoulders. The second is that a bag that fits you and is well-made should last for many years, spreading out the cost over several trips. If you buy a cheap bag which breathes its last on the luggage carousel at Heathrow – or before – you'll need to buy another, possibly poor-quality one, when overseas which is a chore and a cost you can do without. Third, a better-quality sack will give you better features such as pockets and zips in helpful places. Given all of these points, I think going at least into the mid-range category is a good idea. You don't have to walk out with the most expensive item in the shop, just something that is well-made, fits you and will last.
On the other hand, when buying items that won't derail your trip if they fall apart – like, for example, one of your pairs of walking socks or some shirts, then taking a chance on something cheap may be worth it. Light, long-sleeve cotton tops, available for a few pounds in many high streets stores, are excellent base layers when walking, cycling or moving around in the heat. I should add that I haven't tried the value ranges of travel gear in supermarkets. If any readers have, I'd be grateful for their comments.
You don't necessarily need a voluminous bag, especially if you're not taking camping gear. As important to what bag you take is what you put in it. Packing evangelist Doug Dyment has some superb tips on travelling light at onebag.com. There's also a huge archive of backpack-related tips on the Activities and Gear forum of Lonely Planet's Thorn Tree.
