[shane]

From this mornings Dom-post.

Let?s hope that some intelligence is used with the technology….

-s

DOC study backs e-bookings
=====================

MONDAY , 26 JANUARY 2004

The Department of Conservation says it could let people book and pay for hut passes over the internet by July, despite concerns voiced by some staff and trampers.

DOC has released a business case which favours replacing its offline and paper-based processes for administering hut passes with a single, national online booking system.

DOC envisages the system would first be used to let Kiwi and international visitors book huts on New Zealand’s “great walks” over the Net.

It says it could eventually handle bookings “for any or all” of its 3900 recreation sites ? which also include campsites and Kapiti Island visitor facilities. Trampers would still be able to book huts offline, through staff at DOC offices who would have access to the system.

The ideal time to launch a new system is before July, when bookings open for the new season, DOC says.

Alan Edmonds, general manager of science, technology and information services, says DOC is now investigating what a system might cost to implement. The department is proceeding with caution but can’t say whether it would hold formal public consultations before making a final decision on whether to go ahead with the project, he says.

Papers released under the Official Information Act say that comments have been received from both within and outside the department suggesting that a booking system would have an adverse impact on the “traditional tramper”.

“These people would supposedly reach a hut only to find it booked out by international tourists, either because they did not have access to a PC to book online or they did not know where their trip would take them so did not know where to book.”

DOC counters that the number of New Zealanders ? particularly family groups ? walking the Routeburn Track has increased since a booking system was introduced on that track.

“It is often family groups and those without local knowledge that prefer to have some surety of accommodation.”

Mr Edmonds says it would be technically feasible to block bookings from overseas or to impose a quota on Net bookings.

“Whether that is what we feel we should do is another matter.”

The department says increasing pressure on “inadequate systems” and a growing demand for online information and services led it to consider an online booking system.

With the exception of an electronic booking system for the Milford, Kepler and Routeburn tracks, DOC’s booking systems run on standalone PCs which are accessible only to DOC staff or are paper-based.

An abacus is used to note the number of trampers intending to stay in one alpine hut.

An overloaded booking system for the Abel Tasman Coastal Track which runs on a standalone PC is causing particular concern, with DOC struggling to ensure the number of campers doesn’t exceed statutory limits.

The situation in Abel Tasman is becoming “political” as the department seeks to introduce limits on commercial activity and there will be “adverse impacts if it is not seen to be controlling its visitors”, DOC warns.

DOC says a national online booking system would require fewer staff to operate and that not all employees are in favour of the project.

“In general, management dealing with bookings for those great walks where systems are already in place and under pressure, are in favour of introducing a national system, as are those involved in the development of visitor information strategies.

“However, those responsible for the operation of other local booking systems or who perceive a threat to their positions, are not in favour.”

DOC says preliminary financial analysis indicates the system would be cost-effective “in its narrowest sense”, but it will have to invest in a content management system for its website and a helpdesk for online bookings.

“If the additional costs of implementing visitor information content management and contact management ? which may service more than just bookings ? is included, then cost savings alone will not justify a system.

DOC says finding information on its existing website can be “a confusing and frustrating experience” and that the site may be more likely to deter than attract hut and campground bookings.

A redesigned website featuring an online booking facility could let DOC build a “marketing image” for New Zealand’s great walks, it says.

DOC believes its facilities receive about 40 million visits a year.

[Lee-Ann – Promotions officer]

A bit of a worry that the department ” can’t say whether it would hold formal public consultations before making a final decision on whether to go ahead with the project” on it as it has implications for tramping groups!

The annual hut pass process would be great if online (as opposed to individual hut passes).

Suppose we all share concern about overloarding and high visitor numbers and facilities in some areas but believe our concern would be over the implementation and possibility of it being transferred and applied to other sites outside the great walk network (which we dont do much of and if we do we dont do at high visitor times i.e. Waikaremoana)

Lets watch this space!

[Geoff Keey]

This project should be carefully watched.

I have no problem with on-line booking of those Great Walks where there is a booking system. However, the possibility of mailing bookings for huts generally is a bad idea and should be resisted.

I think that one of the best ways of limiting numbers is to restrict Annual Hut Passes to NZ residents – making it a citizenship right.

Maybe the club should write to Conservation Minister Chris Carter or invite him to a meeting of Wellington tramping clubs to discuss the new system.

Cheers

Geoff

[Allan Mac]

Geoff Keey wrote:
>
>
> I think that one of the best ways of limiting numbers is to
> restrict Annual Hut Passes to NZ residents – making it a
> citizenship right.
>

I don’t quite see where the restricting hut passes to residents comes from, sounds a bit xenophobic to me. Surely if foreigners are getting annual hut passes they are not intending to tramp the popular Great Walk tramps, which are the only back-country type huts that currently have a booking system. Also I don’t see how limiting annual hut passes to NZ residents limits numbers – surely if non-residents are going to go to the back-country huts all they would then be required to do, if they don’t have an annual pass, is go and get enough hut tickets. And would we be expected to front up to DoC with our passports if we wanted an annual hut pass? Or how about adding in english speaking test if you don’t have a current passport?

[Wayne]

Yep i agree – limiting annual hut passes to NZers is not a good idea

As Allan points out Annual Hut passes are not for the Great Walks and as such if foreigners buy them then they are intending to go into the back country more remote huts – which i think is good thing. Having tourists less concerntrated on the Great Walks is good – it is less damaging to the environment and also helps spread the tourist dollars around more parts of NZ.

Tourism can be a good thing for the coservation estate (provided it is kept managable and doesnt impact on the environment). Getting a balance is important. But having tourism money coming in, due to the conservation estate being such a good tourist attraction, does help i think to provide greater protections to the conservation estate (some times) ie its crazy to cut down native trees for bugger all $ when at the same time tourism in NZ has such huge potential

So getting back to annual hut passes – i dont think we should do anything to discriminate between access rights or priveleges to NZers or tourists.

thats my 2 cents worth!

Wayne

[Harry]

I don’t think there’s anything xenophobic about the idea of charging overseas tourists more for using facilities than New Zealanders, and I actually think it wouldn’t be a bad idea – if it was practical. The charges for our huts are basically peanuts for many rich American and German tourists, and on the Great Walks in particular they have basically crowded and priced New Zealanders out. I think a number of foreign countries charge tourists more than they charge their own citizens, and I wouldn’t have a problem in theory if New Zealand did the same.

However, I just don’t see how it could be done in practice. As Alan says, I wouldn’t like to see the situation where you had to front up with your passport to buy a hut ticket. Another suggestion I’ve seen somewhere (in the FMC Bulletin, I think) is charging all tourists some sort of Conservation Estate Levy as they enter the country – a bit similar to an airport tax.

But back to the on-line booking system. Maybe this would be ok for the Great Walks but we should certainly be wary of it being extended more generally. It would be ludicrous if you had to book on-line to go and stay at, say, Maungahuka. (Though it does remind me of a story I heard a few years ago of some people who were staying in the Beans Burn rock bivvy (at least I think that’s where it was) when a party of Germans showed up without any tents or anything and said “excuze me, ve haf theze rock bivvi bookt” and asked the people already there to leave! The party of Germans were apparently rapidly told what they could do with themselves….)

[AllanMac]

I don’t like the idea of charging overseas tourists more to use our huts, or the idea of levying a Conservation charge at airports and other points of entry. It would be a mess to administer:
* should we charge people coming here on business?
* would residents holding passports other than a NZ passport be levied?
* would we also levy people coming here on temporary work visas?

I’ve always hated paying a foreigners tax or surcharge when I’ve been travelling. I’d hate to see us do that as well – it’s embarrassing.

also, bear in mind that overseas tourists contribute to NZs tax base in that they pay GST on just about everything they buy in NZ. I heard today that the tourism industry is worth $6 billion to New Zealand. Even if that is a GST inclusive figure that’s a fairly large contribution to our coffers.

[Grant Newton]

I think the idea of on-line bookings for the great walks and any DoC facilities that currently require booking (eg Holdsworth Lodge) is a suitable idea as can making the booking process easier and cheaper. These facilities need to be managed to avoid overcrowding and currently are managed by a more costly, more manual process.

Such a booking system though is a waste of time for the rest of the back country hut network, where a first-in-first-served basis is still the most suitable. I understand the key reason for the high hut fees on the Great Walk Huts (eg Routeburn @ $35pp per night) is due to the cost of administering bookings …… would hate for this overhead to be extended to the rest of the hut network. Lets keep it simple and cheap for the backcountry huts.

As for the tourist/local rates ….. again lets keep it simple and charge the same for everybody. I believe the track/hut network is a great investment for the NZ tourist industry as well as providing very cheap facilities for NZ residents. Charging tourist rates vs local rates generally leaves a bitter taste with tourists and is not good for the tourism industry. A small national park levy added to an arrival tax might be easy to administer, but certainly its worth avoiding bogging down DoC staff with administration responsibilities.

[Andrew]

So Harry does this mean you now support paying something for the huts system?

Theres no doubt that tourism has its benefits for NZ economy, but how much of that $6B goes back into the conservation estate. In 2003 DoC had $19M in non Crown revenue (which includes concessions, recreational charges and donations). Backpackers/tourists are possbily more likely to contribute thru using concession holders than NZers. But tramper tourists off the great walk circuit may be more likely to do their own thing so their hut pass may be the only direct contribution to the conservation estate. The question is if we keep promoting NZ conservation estate as a playground at what point will the fanning out of tourists into other areas start to erode the qualities of those areas (eg. overcrowding, more concessions, increased demand for better facilities).

I think the annual hut pass is ludricously cheap (probably for NZers as well) – for a 3-4 month tramping holiday it is laughable even with a high NZ dollar. Maybe the trick is to up the annual fee but keep the FMC discount as it is (which would then disadvantage non club NZ trampers!). Any other approach is difficult to manage, but I don’t in principle have a problem charging visitors more for using the hut network.

No problem with booking system for great walks etc, but totally unnecessary for the rest of the hut system. The one exception to this would be the alpine huts around Mt Cook/Mt Aspiring – they should have a formal booking system there for flying in users. A certain percentage of beds should be reserved for walk in users who don’t need to book – but if flying in you have to book. Easy to regulate as only concession holders can fly you in.

[Author]

Posts