
Too Many People Are Going to New Zealand - JumpCrisscross
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-16/americans-sleep-in-maori-hall-as-tourists-overwhelm-new-zealand?cmpid=BBD031717_BIZ&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_term=170317&utm_campaign=bloombergdaily
======
jordansmithnz
New Zealander here. Out of all the problems a country could have, 'too many
tourists' seems like an awfully good one.

I'm sure it's more complicated than this, but from a naive perspective,
putting a higher tax on tourism activities for non citizens seems like a solid
solution with no obvious pitfall.

~~~
vinay427
First of all, I assume you meant to say non-residents, rather than non-
citizens.

Second, the obvious pitfall here is that tourists don't like feeling like they
are visiting a tourist trap, and openly charging them different prices makes
it seem like one. I've visited plenty of sites that charge significantly more
for non-citizens (in India, in this case) and it feels more exploitative than
paying a fee in a country that does not do this. Some museums in Spain, for
instance, reach a middle ground by providing free admission to EU citizens
during a low-traffic time of the week.

~~~
Taniwha
I'm sure he did mean to include, here in NZ there's little difference, for
example everyone gets to vote (no taxation without representation after all).

Charging for public goods is very un-kiwi, even for visitors ... it also means
having to pay for people to collect the money (in the US that person in the
little hut collecting fees when you enter a public park) .... probably
something more indirect like a hotel tax would be culturally more acceptable

~~~
rangibaby
I am against non-citizens being able to vote. I prefer Japan's approach; if
you don't like it, naturalize or leave.

~~~
kalleboo
I like Sweden's compromise. Only citizens can vote in the national elections,
but non-citizen residents can vote in local elections (after they've lived in
sweden for 3 years)

~~~
kwhitefoot
Same here in Norway.

------
wallace_f
I travelled through New Zealand for many months, and there were parts that I
loved about the country. There were also parts that I really didn't like that
seemed to be all about a culture which exists there which sees travellers as
easy to take advantage of.

As a hiker, I was lumped into a category of travellers called "backpackers,"
which created frequent distress. The street crime is very real. I was victim
of an attempted robbery (luckily I got out on the better end of it, somehow),
being charged different prices from locals, being given an enormous fine for
sleeping in my car when I was sick and tired with a broken phone, and felt it
was unsafe to drive any further. I also found erroneous over-charges on my
credit card from two NZ businesses that I spent countless hours disputing
until they were removed, and spent many nights in shabby, unprofessional
hostels with undesirable staff.

The whole thing was a lot different than my experience backpacking around
Europe when I was younger.

However, the nature is really incredible, and relatively unspoiled. There is
so much to see in such short distances, and it's one of the best places in the
world for hiking. The international culture is wonderful. I made friends from
all around the world. Some NZ'ers are incredibly friendly: I was invited into
people's homes, given meals and I hitch hiked around the South Island without
any incident or problem (I somewhere read (cannot verify) a conspiracy theory
that hitch hiking in the US was always relatively safe, but the CIA/FBI
created a campaign against it).

That said, many of the most famous and attractive places to visit in NZ were
overwhelmingly packed with tourists. Milford Sound in February felt like I was
in Beijing. Tongariro was swarmed with too many tourists doing the crossing,
all lining up in file one-behind-the-other. Wanaka and Queenstown were a
disaster, just too many people.

The worst problems were not even in the Bloomberg article. All of them seemed
to have stemmed from working class New Zealanders who had hard-working lives
that saw backpackers as an easy target.

~~~
toomanybeersies
I've lived in New Zealand for 22 years and haven't been robbed once, so I
don't think a sample size of 1 makes for valid statistics.

~~~
philliphaydon
Born and raised Kiwi. Robbed in every home I lived in, in Auckland. Devonport,
Takapuna, Glenfield.

~~~
developer2
Are you being straight up honest? You've been robbed or burglarized at least
four times in 22 years, living in four different residences, while living in
four separate cities? The odds of that having happened are infinitesimally
unlikely. Do you walk around your neighborhood, flaunting the fact you are a
millionaire, while living in the poorest districts? Your situation cannot be
representative of the norm; you sound like someone who is embellishing, flat
out lying, or unnecessarily putting yourself in a position to become a victim.
There's just no way your luck is "randomly" that bad.

Edit: I've read your history. You clearly indulge with every comment. You have
_not_ been robbed 4 times in 22 years in New Zealand. Pathological liar, you
should be ashamed. This is HackerNews, not Reddit - people are not going to
give you 1,000 sympathetic upvotes for your invented sob story.

~~~
philliphaydon
It's like you think crime doesn't exist in New Zealand. Living in Devonport I
used to see the local kids climb on the roof of the school and un-screw the
light domes off the roof of the hallways and climb in. Or see them get their
little brother to climb into the clothing donation bins and pull empty out all
the clothes.

Living in Glenfield we used to have washing stolen off the line all the time
so we would dry clothes in-doors.

Come home to the back door open with the glass smashed and items taken.

People keep trying to paint NZ as this pretty picture when it's not.

Believe what you want, but Auckland is full of crime. It's full of corruption.

Edit: and in all those area's, my family wasn't the only victims.

> Do you walk around your neighborhood, flaunting the fact you are a
> millionaire, while living in the poorest districts?

Considering my parents moved out of Auckland because they could no longer
afford to live there, there wasn't anything to flaunt. Nor were those 'poor'
suburbs.

\----

Also. Those are not cities, they are suburbs in a single city. Auckland.

~~~
developer2
>> It's like you think crime doesn't exist in New Zealand.

No, I just find it extremely unlikely for a single family to have been
targeted in four separate cities. I firmly believe that any burglar deserves
life in jail for their _first_ crime, and tend to try not to blame victims for
being targeted, but... 4 times across 4 cities, averaging once every 5-6
years? That doesn't sound legit whatsoever, unless the family is doing
something to paint a target on their backs.

>> we used to have washing stolen off the line all the time so we would dry
clothes in-doors

I mean no disrespect - frankly it's better for the environment and I would
normally applaud - but in this modern age using an outdoor clothesline is a
sign of poverty, meaning you at least lived in a poor neighborhood where
outdoor drying was common. I would bet that you displayed some indication to
your poor neighbors that you were not as poor as them. Maybe you're hanging
$30-per-pair of designer underwear on your line while they are hanging $1
budget underwear from Walmart on theirs. You probably own a middle-class brand
new car, > $30k off the dealership's lot, compared to their < $500 third-hand
vehicle that barely gets them from point A to point B. The moment a poor
neighbor living off welfare knows you are even slightly beyond their means,
you _WILL_ become their target. You might have been hanging clothes outside
(ie: "possibly poor"), but you've shown otherwise that you have more money
than someone who _must_ hang their laundry outdoors to make ends meet. There
is a perceivable difference between hanging clothes outdoors as an optional
luxury, vs. being forced into doing so by being at a financial disadvantage.

Source: only been burglarized once and it was while I was earning an above-
average income, while living in a poor neighborhood. I know it was my neighbor
who couldn't even afford to have electricity hooked up, and they saw me
leaving to work every morning with my laptop case. It's unfortunate and
disgusting, but yes - if you live in a poor area with more money and
possessions than your neighbors, they will notice and make a victim out of
you.

tldr; While you were living in a below-average income neighborhood, most
likely working for a living while your neighbors lived on free welfare, you
found them stealing from you? Forget your sense of basic entitlement and
privacy for a moment; quite simply, am I right or wrong? Again, I'm not
insulting you for your likely "above average" situation at the time. I'm
merely trying to gauge against my own experience, which is that you will
become a victim if you live amongst those who are poorer than you.

~~~
philliphaydon
> 4 times across 4 cities

Can we be clear that these 4 homes were probably within 15km of each other.
They are Suburbs in Auckland City. On the North Shore, which is probably
considered the richer part of Auckland.

> but in this modern age using an outdoor clothesline is a sign of poverty

I don't know about the rest of the world, but even in 2017 it's still very
common in NZ to hang laundry outside. Most people own houses with a back yard.

My parents no longer live in Auckland, the house they live in has a huge front
yard and back yard, even tho they own a washer and a drier, mum prefers to
hang washing outside, because it prevents the clothes from shrinking from the
heat of the drier, and I quote (cos I rang her today to clarify why she dries
her clothes outside) "it prevents burning the smell of soap into the clothes
so they don't smell like soap"

> While you were living in a below-average income neighborhood, most likely
> working for a living while your neighbors lived on free welfare, you found
> them stealing from you?

Those Suburbs are on the North Shore, the 'poor' / 'low income' suburbs are in
South / West Auckland. I doubt you would find many people at all on the north
shore who are on the dole.

\------

Look, New Zealand is a beautiful country, with amazing people, it's my home.
But our government sucks, and is pretty corrupt despite what the corruption
index tells you. Every 3 years we change government, and its full of promises,
and they never deliver. There is so much the government could do to make it
worth while for Kiwi's to stay in the country, let alone convince people to
move there to start businesses or work. But they continue to hinder the
country. I left 11 years ago, and every time I go back it's more and more
depressing in Auckland.

------
emilyfm
I've been travelling on a road trip in NZ for the last month or so (with a few
more weeks to go). Even now, tail end of the summer season, the country is
packed.

I like to drive around with just a rough route, see a place I like and stop
for a while, but that just hasn't been possible if I want somewhere
comfortable to sleep. Motels are mostly very small (6-12 rooms) so there's not
a lot of availability. I've had to book in advance (and have a super-flexible
route, skipping some full towns and even regions) to be able to get anything
at all.

There's chronic under-investment in hotels and motels. It doesn't look like
much (outside the cities) has been built since the 60's and 70's. It's like if
the US never built Holiday Inn Expresses, Hampton Inns and so on and was just
relying on mom-and-pop downtown motels to house everybody, or if there were no
Premier Inns in the UK and it was still just seaside B&B's.

That does give what little accommodation there is more character with a more
personal service, but it's still mostly poor quality and a tiny number of
rooms. With some motels (luckily a minority) it's been clear that the near
100% occupancy all the time means they just don't care, somebody will rent the
room however bad it is.

I don't think it would be much different with a motorhome or camping, official
campsites look full and unofficial campsites are everywhere (and many of those
campers do trash the place, giving campers and tourists a bad name and
building some real dislike of them in the country).

There are also a few high-profile cases of tourists driving on the wrong side
of the road (or just badly) and causing accidents and deaths.

The growing (and very understandable) anti-tourist feeling in NZ should
correct the problem in the long run, as tourists feel less welcome and tell
their friends that.

It would have been better if the government funding for attracting people to
NZ (too fast) had instead been spent on infrastructure (including help with
building brand-new motels).

~~~
nickthemagicman
Unless I'm missing your point I think that unspoiled natural feeling is the
appeal.

It's still a little wild but not dangerous.

Why bother going there if it's just another strip of Hard Rock cafes, Holiday
Inns, Tourist shops selling wallaby trinkets?

You could just save the plane ticket and go to Hawaii instead.. if motels and
Hard Rock Cafes are what you want.

And that's what American developers will turn it into....evidenced by...every
culturally exploited tourist city in America.

Because capitalism is most profitable catering to the lowest common
denominator spring break middle American hordes who prefer the safety and
comfort of an Applebees and Holiday Inn over the possible discomfort of
something unpredictable.

Seriously, Hawaii and Cozumel have everything you're looking for.

~~~
te_chris
+1 if the Americans are unhappy because it's not a wasteland like America can
be then I'm sure there's other places to go.

~~~
pm90
I think you are being rather unfair to the poster. I don't think (s)he is
advocating an American style system exist in NZ; only that traveling is made
much harder by the lack of it (and exactly how that is made difficult).

In fact, I think the "mom and pop" shops could do a win-win by investing in
expanding capacity and providing better service to tourists.

Of course, that is slightly difficult if they don't want tourists. But in that
case, it should be made clear to visitors...don't dupe them into coming to
your country and then provide terrible service just because you can get away
with it.

BTW America is not a "wasteland" by any means. Sure, there are many parts that
are like that, but there are an equal number of incredibly beautiful natural
sanctuaries. Actually I'm not even sure what you mean by that term.

~~~
bitexploder
Ya know, America is a huge place. We have vast tracts of unspoiled nature
larger than many New Zealands put together. Sorry if this sounds defensive but
it is. I think parent gets it, but for anyone who thinks tourism in America is
only some consumer mass product... that is just wrong. The scope of America's
wilderness is staggering. It always amuses me when "people" think they have to
leave the country to see some unspoiled wilderness.

------
civilian
It still seems like one of those "good problems". Hotels and guides will be
able to charge more. Government should definitely look at park fees based on
usage and investing in infrastructure.

~~~
tmnvix
> Government should definitely look at park fees

Speaking as someone who grew up in New Zealand - and like most kiwis, spent a
great deal of time tramping, camping, and otherwise enjoying the public parks
- any tpye of entrance fee to those places would be a huge shift in culture.

Easy and free access (notwithstanding taxpayer funding) to publicly owned
parks is something I regard as a birthright. User-pays might sound sensible
and fair but I can guarantee you that a large part of NZ's population will
choose not to visit the parks instead of paying a fee (even if it is very
small). Many of them wouldn't be making that choice themselves (e.g. the
children of poor families). For them to miss out on what is an essential part
of growing up and living in NZ would be a very bad thing.

Besides, when this was last suggested a month or two ago t was touted as a
solution to the Department of Conservation's funding shortfall for maintaining
the most popular 'great walks'. That shortfall was said to be around $1.5m -
less than the cost of many tourism campaigns.

The solution doesn't have to be user-pays.

~~~
andrei_says_
Maybe tourist visa fees could cover some of this

~~~
Taniwha
our tourist visas are free at the border for many countries - for a lot of our
visitors (Oz, Canada, US, UK) you pass through a machine, never talk to a
person (well except for the ag inspection)

[https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand-visas/apply-
for-...](https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand-visas/apply-for-a-
visa/tools-and-information/general-information/visa-waiver-countries)

------
Jedd
> “If we don’t fix these things and look to the long term, we’ll be putting a
> cap on our own growth,”

It always saddens me when I see comments that assume unlimited growth is a
good thing - and not an opportunity to consider the pros and cons of managing
growth, especially of things like tourism.

We've all been to places that are 'unspoiled' and can understand the interest
in keeping them that way. We've also all been to places that are almost
exclusively populated by tourists. I'm sure some people enjoy the sensation of
being in those places (vendors perhaps) but anecdotally I find it rare that
people rate those experiences higher than the former, or wish to revisit those
types of places. This suggests we have an understanding of the value of
controlling tourism growth.

One of NZ's most famous walks - the Milford Track - already has some
significant constraints (presumably to maximise the walkers' enjoyment and to
minimise the damage to the environment). During the season, you can only walk
the track in one direction, maximum 40 people are allowed to set off each day,
etc.

------
vorg
The headline above says "Too Many People Are Going to New Zealand", but the
article is actually about "... Tourists overwhelm New Zealand". Perhaps the
title needs flagging, because tourists are only one of three main sources of
people going to New Zealand. International students and immigrants also go to
NZ, and are both also quite large business sectors. Education, like Tourism,
is also one of the top 5 earners for NZ, with many flow-on effects in the
economy such as pushing up the cost of rental accommodation. And Immigration
(including returning former residents), while officially not national revenue
but part of the country's "capital account", is huge, pushing up the prices of
houses to astronomical levels, especially in Auckland. We need a story about
whether there's too many people going to NZ that deals with all human arrivals
in NZ, not just tourists. And I suspect it would reach the same conclusion.

------
cyberferret
I guess we can thank the LoTR franchise for making New Zealand a 'must visit'
place. I've visited (and loved) the North Island a few years back, but never
done the South Island.

Last year, a group of us old high school friends wanted to book the Milford
Sound 1 week trek to celebrate our 50th year on the planet, but found out it
was booked out 2 years in advance! Speaking to people who have done it over
the years, it seems that 10 years ago, you could do the walk and never see
another soul, but nowadays it seems to be a veritable rush hour jam (a bit
like the snake line of climbers on Mt. Everest it would seem).

But I do hope that the economic flow through is good for them. I recall that
even on my last trip there, we stayed at B&Bs and Farm stays and in talking to
the locals, they were quite negative about the dismal economic conditions. But
equally strangely, there seems to be a lot of good startups and IT related
companies coming out of NZ over the past 10 years (Xero etc.)

I guess the NZ tourism commission will have to make hay while the sun shines.
I live on the edge of Kakadu National Park here, and remember back in the
heyday of 'Crocodile Dundee', we had the same huge influx of visitors from all
over the world keen to see it, but of late, the demand has fallen
significantly, which is probably better for the park, but not for the hotel
and safari operators out there. Luckily they didn't overextend their
infrastructure investments, which could be a lesson for other countries.

------
qrbLPHiKpiux
Want less of something, raise prices.

~~~
rosser
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good)

EDIT: It's not that simple. Raising prices doesn't magically lower demand in
every scenario.

~~~
KaiP
Is travel a Veblen good for the average tourist to New Zealand?

~~~
btdiehr
Of course not. Some people seem to think pasting tangentially related
wikipedia articles contributes to discussion, but it doesn't.

~~~
rosser
It was posted as a counter-point to its parent's unqualified assertion that
raising prices lowers demand.

~~~
halcyondaze
Right but randomly posting in a link to Veblen good on Wikipedia because it's
one example of when raising prices doesn't lower demand doesn't mean it's in
any way relevant to this discussion. Almost no one would argue that this kind
of travel is a Veblen good.

------
afarrell
With the rollout of the Dreamliner and budget long-haul airlines, I would
expect this trend to continue. Even if it is a bubble, would solving this
problem not also improve infra for residents?

I guess there is a danger in building facilities that are only useful to
tourists. Perhaps they should invest in hotel rooms that are either:

1) clustered near universities so that if tourism does collapse, they can be
converted into dorms.

2) Easy to merge two rooms, add some fixtures, and create studio/1bed
apartments.

------
cconcepts
As a Kiwi, what catches my attention about this discussion is that "raising
the standard of living" in pure economic terms is still a primary political
campaigning tool in NZ.

How do you measure the great things we already have and value that aren't so
easily shown on a balance sheet and can't be shown on an emotive graph that
trends up towards the right hand side?

The voter supported political agenda (whichever party it comes from) seems to
often involve economic activities that don't hold to the long term values of
the average Kiwi or the things that the rest of the world love our country for
but we're temporarily blinded by the prospect of a shiny new car so make
concessions in the short term.

I love the fact that so many people want to come and enjoy our home, but
please understand that NZ is this way at least in part because we haven't
focussed on growth at all costs. It may not always be this way.

------
keithnz
A big factor in auckland at the moment ( especially around the time of this
story ) is we have a big housing shortage, it's the start of the university
year with many students looking for places to live, and a lot of hotel/motels
being used while people look

------
bengalister
I visited New Zealand 9 years ago with 2 friends for 3 weeks in late November,
early December. We visited on our own both North and South islands with the
mandatory ferry crossing from Wellington to Nelson. We stayed in backpackers
and drove a few hours a day and did short hikes during the day. I almost liked
every bit of it, especially the South island, you can see beautiful and
diverse sceneries doing only short distances. Tongariro crossing was already
packed. That being said it is a very long journey from Europe, not sure if I'd
go back there again (now that I visited it). For fjords I have been told that
the Norway's ones are more impressive. For lakes, pristine forests and
glaciers, I preferred the Canada's ones (Banff National park). And for Alpine
sceneries, well I know live in South of France and there are comparable
sceneries with large plateaus dominated by snowy mountains, it is just wilder
in NZ.

------
blauditore
The cropping of that graph seems quite lurid to me. On the first sight, it
looks like tourism is twice as big as predicted, which is not even close.

------
wordpressdev
By the title "too many people are going to New Zealand", I assumed it was
about immigration. NZ seems like a great place to migrate to but the catch is
that you need an offer letter from the employer first and there aren't any
employers around (at least I am unable to find one) who are gladly hiring
overseas candidates.

~~~
raverbashing
What do you mean "the catch"? That's how it works pretty much everywhere

There are exceptions, but the rule is that one.

~~~
wordpressdev
Employers want you to be physically present at the place of job to give you a
job offer, country gives work visa only when employer issues an offer letter.
Not sure how that'd work?

~~~
ido
Come with 3 months tourist visa after already arranging some job interviews
online, then once there go to as many as you can & once you get an offer apply
for the work visa.

------
bbcbasic
I did the Tongariro Alpine Crossing track in winter, and it is like as
photographed. Apparently in the summer (when you can see the coloured pools)
it is super congested - back to back backpackers.

Going skiing in NZ this year. From Australia it is actually cheaper than
skiing in Australia, even including flying there.

~~~
Taniwha
I think that one of the main problems with the Tongariro Crossing is that
there are not a lot of similar hikes (in NZ we say "tramps" and "tramping" for
"hikes and "hiking") that attract tourists, so if you're not heading to the
South Island it's your only real choice for this sort of trip.

------
veb
We do have AirBnB here don't we? I wonder how they're doing...

EDIT: It's a serious question. With the rise of tourism, and seemingly lack of
accomodation, are they doing any better in NZ than they have in recent years?

~~~
Taniwha
Yes- but don't sublet your rental ...

[http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&o...](http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11812800)

------
muninn_
It's just like anywhere else. There are too many people and naturally they
want to go to the nice places.

~~~
soperj
New Zealand has been nice for ages.

~~~
forgotmysn
but the masses haven't been able to travel internationally for ages

~~~
soperj
they have. First time I went to New Zealand from Canada was in 1983. My Mom
bought a year long ticket that allowed her to stop anywhere in the pacific rim
in the early 70s. She sold it to someone else after 6 months and stayed in
Australia for 6 months to work, then continued on her way through South East
Asia.

~~~
bjelkeman-again
I paid about $900 for a round the world ticket in 1986. Today they are about
the same. So calculating the inflation for $900 in 1986 gives $2000 today.

So, yes the travel was possible before, but it is significantly cheaper now.
Average income is also going up [1].

[1] [https://ourworldindata.org/economic-
growth](https://ourworldindata.org/economic-growth)

------
sulam
Clearly they just need to tax Peter Thiel's income.

~~~
cmurf
Well he bought NZ citizenship so I'm sure the tax laws apply to him as any
other citizen.

~~~
lazyasciiart
Like most of the world, NZ doesn't tax based on citizenship, it taxes based on
residency.

~~~
Taniwha
well exactly, somehow he bought NZ citizenship without meeting the minimum
residency requirement provided for by the law ... that's why it's currently an
ongoing political scandal in NZ

~~~
lazyasciiart
I just assumed the poster was an American who didn't actually know other
countries don't tax based on citizenship.

~~~
sulam
Actually, it was a joke.

------
ImTalking
I was born in NZ but the family moved when I was 2. I recently got NZ
citizenships by descent for my kids because I want to give them the option to
move to there if all hell breaks out in the world. It's probably the last
place on earth that one can still drink pure water right out of a lake. I
choose not to move back there as an adult due to the isolation but if climate
changes or wars happen then this isolation becomes a positive.

~~~
hueving
>It's probably the last place on earth that one can still drink pure water
right out of a lake

Dramatic much? I've done this many times from lakes in the Rocky Mountains in
the US. I'm sure there are countless other places where it can be done as
well.

~~~
ghaff
There are certainly clear, cold lakes in the Rockies. However, I really
wouldn't advise just drinking out of them without filtering or other water
treatment. Yeah, you'll probably be fine but there's definitely Giardia and
Cryptosporidium in a lot of water sources that look perfectly clean.

~~~
hueving
You'll need a citation for that. Otherwise it's just baseless speculation on
par with saying you can drink from New Zealand lakes.

~~~
ghaff
To pick a random set of citations: [http://tahoetowhitney.org/content/sierra-
nevada-backpacker-w...](http://tahoetowhitney.org/content/sierra-nevada-
backpacker-water-quality-information)

There seems to be a fair amount of disagreement.

Look. I have no idea personally. However, conventional wisdom is that it's
prudent to treat water. If I were dehydrated and had no treatment options, I'd
certainly take my chances and drink apparently clear, clean water. (And have
on occasion.) But I wouldn't just set off on the assumption it wasn't
necessary either.

