Walking a fine line on tourism

Our resources are being stretched because of the influx of tourists – in the previous holiday season 1.75 million people from overseas visited a national park.

e careful what you wish for: popularity can come at a cost. We have basked in the praise for our liveable cities and internationally recognised scenery, nodded appreciatively at the latest ranking in the world’s hottest travel listings. And like babes we have thrown open our arms to the world.

But along with the many gifts from adoring foreign visitors have been the poking and prodding of arms and legs, the painful pinching of cheeks. That love and popularity, while appreciated, has become overwhelming. We have learnt, as have many before us, that it comes with a cost.

At the weekend we took new, tentative steps towards a more mature, assertive stance on managing that love and pain. And trying to create a stronger sense of self.

Conservation Minister Eugenie Sage has announced a trial to charge international tourists roughly double what they pay now for access to huts on four of the country’s Great Walks.

From this October to April next year overseas visitors, including children, will be charged $140 per night on the Milford track, $130 per night on the Kepler and Routeburn, and $75 per night on the Abel Tasman Coastal Walk. New Zealanders will not pay the extra charges.

It is hoped the trial will raise an extra $2.9 million towards maintenance of the huts and tracks.

This follows other moves by the Government to support overburdened infrastructure, including a possible levy on tourists entering the country.

The logic makes sense, as long as it is carefully calibrated and does not kill what Tourism Minister Kelvin Davis has dubbed ‘‘the golden goose’’.

Our resources are being stretched because of the influx of tourists – in the previous holiday season 1.75 million people from overseas visited a national park. In some cases infrastructure had to be built to accommodate the rising tide of global interest.

That has pushed up the cost for all, including New Zealanders. It makes sense that those driving such demand should help meet the cost of delivering it.

Anyone who has travelled overseas will have experienced paying more than the locals to visit an attraction. Tourists pay more to visit Thailand’s national parks, and it’s a similar practice in many other countries.

Sage appears confident that foreign tourists will keep coming and pay extra, but she is less so on the vexed issue of access for Kiwis, many of whom struggle against the tourism tide.

She does not believe there will be a significant reduction in bookings, but is hopeful that some of the new pricing will point people to our other Great Walks and better manage the load.

That would be great news to the many Kiwis who feel shut out of their own country and its landmark attractions, despite applying year after year.

But only if it works.

The trial will be only a partial success if it delivers the money but not the access for those frustrated Kiwis. A few million dollars will not matter much if people remain shut out. It will be even less attractive if the increased demand and over-crowding shift to the other prominent tracks.