Freedom Lost

Freedom camping is one of many issues facing the Tasman region and impacts many communities nationwide. In 2011, central government introduced the Freedom Camping Act as a way to regulate growing issues around freedom camping. National figures according to Motueka newspaper The Guardian (2018) suggest that over the past ten years the number of freedom campers have increased from around 30,000 to 115,000 annually.

Freedom campers at Decks Reserve. Source: The Guardian (2018).

In August 2017, Tasman District Council (TDC) sought public submissions on their proposed Freedom Camping Bylaw and enacted this in December 2017. This was an opportunity for residents of the region to offer their input to find workable solutions to a local problem. As a result of this process TDC identified areas where freedom camping would be permissible. The purpose of the local bylaw according to the TDC (2018) was to: ensure access to local areas were maintained and protected; maintain public safety and health; manage used areas; provide for those wanting to freedom camp; and encourage a positive experience for campers and local residents.

Freedom campers in the Tasman Region. Source: Stuff, (2017).

The Guardian’s article points out a variety of issues at Decks Reserve in Motueka which is one of the designated freedom camping sites throughout the Tasman district. These issues range from campers undressing in public, leaving rubbish, alcohol consumption, inappropriate use of public and private facilities, human waste, restricting other car park user’s access and taking up valuable parking space at usual business operating hours. Local rate payers also believed there were more costs than benefits and that there was no reasonable return on investment from their rates for allowing the activity in the designated area.

Freedom campers cloths dry on a historical icon near Motueka. Source: The Guardian (2018).

Freedom campers that tend to break the rules are commonly younger travellers wanting to prolong their holiday. They want to save money where possible, hence, park up where ever they can. They often stay in the country for longer (from three months to one year), find seasonal or casual work, wwoofing (working weekends on organic farms), visit iconic locations as well as spending time in remote areas away from usual tourist hotspots to acquire unique experiences in ‘unspoilt’ non-commercial locations. These younger long-term visitors usually purchase vehicles which they use as makeshift campers to then sell their vehicle onto new arrivals when they’re finished their trip. These visitors typically use social media, internet or public noticeboards to find and sell their vehicle. The Backpackerboard is an online platform which facilitates this exact function. It’s a well established tradition and almost a rite of passage for many travellers.

Travellers to NZ buy and sell camper vehicles online. Source: Backpackerboard (2018).

Causalities of this issue stem from central government via the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s strategies to increase tourism, however, the combination of increased visitor numbers with insufficient planning on a local and national level to deal with obvious impacts creates a stinky situation. It’s no wonder when images such as is this below, shown on Tourism New Zealand’s web pages actively promote a free and easy experience in this country.

Tourism New Zealand, (2014).

The Tourism New Zealand Annual Report (2015-2016) list some of their strategic priorities as: grow markets that drive opportunities and future market possibilities, promote New Zealand as a positive and inspiring destination, focus marketing on higher value visitors to extract greater revenue potential, focus on market research to enhance commercial partnerships to drive greater interests, optimise capability of internal capability through staff and systems to deliver high quality experiences for visitors, (p 18). These are grandiose aspirations which look impressive in a glossy report; however, there seems to be a vast gap between central government department ideology and actual events taking place at grass roots level.

These issues are now left for local people and local councils to tackle. Currently each council in New Zealand finds different ways to handle the problems of freedom camping resulting in an ad-hock, reactionary management approach. For international and national travellers alike, understanding local bylaws can be confusing and therefore lead to miscommunication and misunderstanding. Central government is fixated by the idea of continual economic growth and Minister for Tourism, Calvin Davis “doesn't want to kill the golden goose as local authorities struggle to deal with the rapid rise in the numbers of freedom campers visiting our shores” says Stuff 2018.

Minister for Tourism Calvin Davis faces media on tourism impacts. Source: Stuff (2018).

To solve some of these tourism issues, central government must confront causal mechanisms which stem from economic growth ideology mixed with insufficient regulation. Central government needs to restrict the sale of vehicles to overseas visitors so that only ‘registered self contained campers’ are available for visitors to hire when wanting this type of experience. Visitors to this country should not be able to buy a vehicle and do whatever they want. Central government also needs to reform their ideation about continual economic growth, as this is flawed logic. It’s flawed because continual growth in not possible within the bounds of our planetary limits and having more does not necessarily mean that the public are more content.

Unfortunately the issues from freedom camping have undesirable effects for many areas nationwide. Local governments have introduced Freedom Camping Bylaws as a means to manage an activity which is promoted by central government departments. Central Government’s blind focus on economic growth coupled with a lack of regulation are causal factors of the freedom camping debacle. Tourism does generate revenue for businesses. It also creates a multitude of issues for local councils to manage and control on behalf of its constituents.