Called to seriously rethink the approach to tourism in New Zealand



[ad_1]

Aoraki / Mt Cook National Park registered over one million visitors for the year ending January 2019. (File photo)

SUPPLIED

Aoraki / Mt Cook National Park registered over one million visitors for the year ending January 2019. (File photo)

As the country grapples with the effects of Covid-19 on tourism after the shutdown, there are calls for a serious rethink of how the industry operates, including a limit on the numbers.

Dr. Robert Wynn-Williams, a member of the Canterbury Aoraki Conservation Board, has proposed a limit on the number of future visitors: his proposal will be discussed at the next board meeting on Wednesday due to teleconference due to restrictions on movement in the current closing environment.

Wynn-Williams, a former interim chairman of the board, said the time was right to discuss the future of tourism in New Zealand since the closure meant “tourism is currently at zero.”

“There will be a lot of pain in the tourism industry, even after the closure is lifted, we just don’t know what tourism will be like in the future,” he said.

Conservation Boards are independent bodies that give voice to local concerns to gain ground in the work of the Department of Conservation, and nationally when necessary.

Wynn-Williams said he was unsure how limitation mechanisms might work, although he believed there were lessons to be learned from countries like Bhutan taking a “high value, low impact” approach to tourism that could potentially put less pressure on environment. If adopted here.

“I think in the current climate, this is a really good time to discuss this,” he said.

In the 12-month period ending January 31, 2019, Aoraki / Mt Cook National Park recorded over one million visitors.

Figures for the 12-month period ending January 31, 2020 have not yet been released.

Wynn-Williams said she would like to see the pressure off places like Aoraki / Mt Cook National removed in the future.

“We have to see how much they can really hold,” he said.

Canterbury Aoraki Conservation Board member Robert Wynn-Williams suggests that some form of limit on visitor numbers could be considered. (File photo)

GEORGE HEARD / STUFF

Canterbury Aoraki Conservation Board member Robert Wynn-Williams suggests that some form of limit on visitor numbers could be considered. (File photo)

Federated Mountain Clubs President Jan Finlayson agreed that there was a need to rethink how the tourism industry would work after Covid-19.

The organization, which has more than 22,000 members, had already reached out to Tourism Minister Kelvin Davis about his concerns, including how future tourism infrastructure would develop.

“We fully support the concept of intensified infrastructure and recreational work on public conservation land and other similar lands as part of the post-Covid recovery,” said Finlayson.

“Well done, it will benefit health and the nation, as well as the economy.”

The government announced earlier this month that it had put Tourism New Zealand in charge of leading the effort to reinvent the way tourism operates in the post-Covid-19 world.

The tips back to Davis are expected to arrive before the end of the month.

The popular Church of the Good Shepherd on Lake Tekapo was one of the many attractions that tourists flocked to before Covid-19. (File photo)

JOHN BISSET / FAIRFAXNZ

The popular Church of the Good Shepherd on Lake Tekapo was one of the many attractions that tourists flocked to before Covid-19. (File photo)

Finlayson said there was a possibility that the tourism industry would consider a “quieter, slower and less disposable approach.”

“It is also an opportunity for New Zealand to re-establish international tourism as an industry with a slight environmental and social touch,” he said.

However, he also cautioned that limiting the numbers could lead to “all sorts of unintended consequences,” such as excluding New Zealanders from their own backyard.

“National parks in particular belong to all New Zealanders,” said Finlayson.

“We don’t want to make it a ‘have and not have’ situation. There needs to be a more nuanced approach.”

[ad_2]