For years many of the hot destinations around the globe have struggled to balance economic growth thanks to tourism, aging infrastructure, environmental impacts and ensuring the areas are accessible for locals. What has been discovered is there is not just one right answer. Still many are trying to solve the issue.

In Angkor Wat, the Cambodian Government decided in 2016 to nearly double the ticket prices in an effort to reduce the flow of tourists. A visitor cap was also placed on one part of the site, but not the gates.

Amsterdam had a different approach. The city has limited Airbnb rentals and started to market out of area tourist destinations to get people out of the centre of the city through the use of various tourism apps.

In Bhutan, they limit visitors to 140,000 a year, and in Beijing at the Forbidden City tourists are restricted to about 80,000 a day, but making it easier for visitors to come in winter with half-price tickets compared to the popular summer months.

Closer to home and Byron Bay has been working over the past couple of years to manage the two million tourists per year as well as the expectations of locals.

The last conversation involved a visitor tax, which is a concept used in some places around the world.

So, what does this all mean for Freycinet?

There isn't a solution that can be fixed overnight. This is because of competing interests.

We don't want to lock up our state, but as Tasmanians, we want to enjoy the area ourselves and the serenity a lot of these amazing areas offer. There are also many businesses, run by mums and dads, that rely on tourists for an income.

On top of this is the environmental impact. If the areas in high demand are not treated respectfully and with care then in years to come the place will no longer be a destination for travellers.

The public meeting has shown a need for deeper conversations on this issue to try and formulate our own plans that will benefit both the tourism sector and locals.