Well, this paints an unpleasant picture, eh? (Hana: rent, live in)

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by whtviper1

I find it hard to believe the roughly 1,200 people who make the Hana area home didn't know what they were getting themselves into.

That doesn’t hardly address the problem being considered.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Futuremauian

If they would pave the last stretch and improve the road quality, a lot of the congestion could be eliminated by encouraging the tourists to make a one-way loop around that end of the island.

Opening the "Oprah Road" to the public would take a lot of cars off of the up-country roads.

Good point

[CuttingDiamond]

Anyone have personal experiences with the tourism epidemic? I can't say myself since I haven't been there in ages.

[whtviper1]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

That doesn’t hardly address the problem being considered.

I'm suggesting nothing needs to be addressed. And its hardly a new problem.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by whtviper1

I'm suggesting nothing needs to be addressed. And its hardly a new problem.

Apparently a whole lota folks don’t share your rather cavalier sentiment. Though it’s not a ‘new’ problem … it certainly is a problem, and one steadily growing … and steadily impacting resources and environment.

Whether the people in the Hana area “knew what they were getting into” or not isn’t the only consideration.

And I suspect that there are many Hana area residents whose residence predates the level of recent invasion … many are elders … and others are family who inherit their place.

I first resided as military in Hawai’i in 1967 … again early 70s. Little comparison to today’s tourism numbers and impacts. If I had made the islands my permanent residence back then, should I have anticipated the traffic of today? …. Mmmm … perhaps … but few people are prescient to such a degree.

[whtviper1]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

I first resided as military in Hawai’i in 1967 … again early 70s. Little comparison to today’s tourism numbers and impacts. If I had made the islands my permanent residence back then, should I have anticipated the traffic of today? …. Mmmm … perhaps … but few people are prescient to such a degree.

Of the 1,200 residents of the Hana area - I suspect only a small fraction made the islands home in the early 1970's. It should also be noted - the Hana area had triple the number of residents in the early half of the 1900's so the area has likely benefited from less people.

I started going to Hawaii in the late 80's and the Road to Hana was featured prominently in guidebooks.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by whtviper1

Of the 1,200 residents of the Hana area - I suspect only a small fraction made the islands home in the early 1970's. It should also be noted - the Hana area had triple the number of residents in the early half of the 1900's so the area has likely benefited from less people.

I started going to Hawaii in the late 80's and the Road to Hana was featured prominently in guidebooks.

Not sure I get any point you may be trying to make … how ever many, or few, lived in the Hana area before or since the 70s is irrelevant to the present congestion. And, tourism even in the late 80s was far less than today.

So, are you suggesting this jam-up is fine? Really?

Beyond Hana, when I linked the article it was, in my mind, emblematic of the tourism pressures on all the islands, as well. While I have visited the other islands (even Kahoolawe ), as military I lived on Oahu, of course. And I continue to stay there 10 x more than visit BI, Molokai, et al. The tourism pressures on Oahu are the #1 issue that has kept me from permanent residency.

I’m not against tourism, nor complaining much really. Just musing how over-the-top it’s (understandably) gotten.

[KohalaTransplant]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Apparently a whole lota folks don’t share your rather cavalier sentiment. Though it’s not a ‘new’ problem … it certainly is a problem, and one steadily growing … and steadily impacting resources and environment.

Whether the people in the Hana area “knew what they were getting into” or not isn’t the only consideration.

And I suspect that there are many Hana area residents whose residence predates the level of recent invasion … many are elders … and others are family who inherit their place.

I first resided as military in Hawai’i in 1967 … again early 70s. Little comparison to today’s tourism numbers and impacts. If I had made the islands my permanent residence back then, should I have anticipated the traffic of today? …. Mmmm … perhaps … but few people are prescient to such a degree.

How is that any different than any other tourist area, or really any desirable area at all?
I suspect pretty much every neighborhood in Hawaii could have the same complaint.

Can you name a single desirable area that doesn't have a lot more people, congestion, etc. than it did 50 years ago?

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by KohalaTransplant

How is that any different than any other tourist area, or really any desirable area at all?
I suspect pretty much every neighborhood in Hawaii could have the same complaint.

Can you name a single desirable area that doesn't have a lot more people, congestion, etc. than it did 50 years ago?

Never said it was different. But now that you mention it (other places having tourism congestion), what other places do you think compare in having the pressure impact so fully as with small islands hosting 10x their population?

California has a lot of tourism. A LOT. Yosemite is crammed. So is San Francisco, LA, Disneyland etc etc etc … But outside of that, and other, specific park(s) and venues, the state is not overwhelmed by hosting 10x its population in tourists …. California gets about as many tourists annually as its base population.

[whtviper1]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Never said it was different. But now that you mention it (other places having tourism congestion), what other places do you think compare in having the pressure impact so fully as with small islands hosting 10x their population?

California has a lot of tourism. A LOT. Yosemite is crammed. So is San Francisco, LA, Disneyland etc etc etc … But outside of that, and other, specific park(s) and venues, the state is not overwhelmed by hosting 10x its population in tourists …. California gets about as many tourists annually as its base population.

Tourism in California, while substantial contributes roughly 2.5% of the economy.

Tourism in Hawaii - mostly driven by Oahu and followed by Maui contributes over 20% of the economy. Oahu is at least somewhat diversified - the outer islands, not so much.

Without tourists and the military - Hawaii is just another 3rd World Pacific Island.

It is easy to say - we need to control the tourists. Quite another to actually do so when they are crucial to your existence.