Combining bike and bus travel is a part of everyday life in cities around the world, but a few weeks ago, this option was suddenly eliminated in Aotearoa. What are cyclists doing in the meantime, and when will there be a solution?

A bike rack on a bus is a simple solution to any number of problems. Maybe your bike has a flat tyre and you forgot to bring a repair kit. Or maybe it’s started pouring and the thought of riding to uni in the rain is unappealing, but the weather will be better in the afternoon. Maybe you’re still getting used to biking uphill, and the prospect of a ride in a bus on the way home is good encouragement to cycle down to the city. Maybe you want to drop your kid off at school on the bus; maybe you live on the other side of a tunnel or bridge that bikes can’t go on; maybe you want to get out of the city and want to bus to somewhere more quiet for a peaceful bike ride.

Whatever the reason that putting your bike on a bus is appealing, it’s currently not an option anywhere in the country. On November 8, a complete restriction on front-mounted bike racks on buses began, everywhere in the country. This followed an initial night-time ban that came in on November 2. 

Most transport operators around the country have front bike racks on at least some of their bus services. These models, which can take two bikes and unfold and lock around the wheels, now have warning tape on them, preventing their use. The issue is a legal one: NZTA issued an alert in October, noting that on some bus models, having bikes on board blocked the headlights, meaning the vehicles didn’t comply with safety law. 

Bike racks on buses have been operating in New Zealand for years and haven’t been implicated in any accidents. “We were surprised the [NZTA] notice had been issued without discussing implications for the industry, but we respect that NZTA wouldn’t issue an alert unless there was a safety risk,” said Delaney Myers, the chief executive of the Bus and Coach Association, in a statement. 

As a precaution, the Bus and Coach Association (which all bus operators belong to) has banned all use of bike racks for the time being. “By law, buses must always be up to Certificate of Fitness (CoF) standard on the road, and lights can’t be obstructed at any time.  When buses go for their CoF, the racks are empty. Testing by bus operators after the NZTA Industry Alert indicates most of the fleet won’t meet requirements with bikes on, and in most cases there is no quick fix,” said Myers. NZTA has established a working group with the Bus and Coach Association and councils to figure out a solution that will make buses compliant. 

Transport minister Simeon Brown has asked NZTA to “find a fix as soon as possible”. The full ban has now been in place for more than three weeks, and there’s no timeline for when a solution might become available. 

“I felt pretty gutted and defeated when [the ban] was announced,” said Elliot Weir, an Otago regional councillor. But they say there’s commitment to finding a solution. “Everyone wants it to get fixed.” 

Peter Galbraith is a member of Greater Ōtautahi, a group of Christchurch residents focused on improving housing and public transport access. He’s been using the bike racks on buses to visit family in Rangiora. The bike means it’s much faster to get to the bus stop, and then get to his dad’s house at the other end. “Not having to bike all the way there saves me time, and not driving saves me money,” he says. Losing the bike rack means he has to take several buses for his journey. “It does inconvenience me – I’m not sure why they have to ban the racks during the daytime, when the headlights aren’t in use,” he said. 

There has also been a flurry of frustration from thwarted bus-and-bike users in Wellington. “Having bike racks made it much easier to use active transport because I could avoid big hills, occasional bad weather and [it] helped out when my bike got a flat tyre,” said one commenter on Metlink’s post announcing the change in the capital.

“Because of this ban, I have to rethink my whole life,” said another commenter in a Cycling Action Network Facebook group. “All of a sudden I have lost flexibility and everything costs more and takes longer.” 

Patrick Morgan, a spokesperson for Cycling Action Network (CAN), has found the bike racks useful, too. “Bikes and buses complement each other – if you can access the bus stop by bike it expands the catchment of the bus route,” he said. He has a friend who regularly uses the bus and train to bring a bike from Te Horo into Wellington so they can ride together. 

“It’s weird NZTA didn’t foresee [this issue] – now they have to clean up the mess and in the meantime passengers are being impacted.”

Making the bike-rack-fitted buses fit legal requirements might take a while; suggestions include moving headlights or adding lights to the racks themselves. In the meantime, other ways of uniting buses and bikes are under consideration. 

Metro, Christchurch’s public transport operator, has set up a small vehicle with a bike rack that follows the Lyttelton bus through the tunnel, so people can get to town without having to bike over a big hill. “It’s a tiny bus that follows the big bus, it looks quite funny,” Galbraith said. While the bike-bus and the normal bus don’t have perfectly aligned schedules, it’s better than nothing. 

The “no more bikes on buses” edict might have flown under many Aucklanders’ radar; New Zealand’s biggest city doesn’t allow (non-folding) bikes on buses, although limited numbers of bikes can be taken on ferries and trains. That might be changing; at the same time that the rest of the country has had the option to take bikes on buses eliminated, Auckland Transport has been running a trial of allowing bikes inside the Northern Express buses, which take passengers from the Hibiscus Coast and Albany into downtown Auckland. Preselected volunteers took part in the trial, which could pave the way for a wider rollout of bikes inside buses in the future. AT infrastructure and fleet specification manager Edward Wright said the trial of two different bike rack designs had gone well and next steps “could be further trials at a potentially larger scale”.

While travellers might be frustrated that buses currently can’t take their bikes, a final note from Myers is a reminder to frustrated travellers. “We know this is hugely disruptive for the people who rely on [bike racks]. In the meantime, we ask people don’t take out their frustration on the drivers – this wasn’t their decision.”

Local experts are warning against a TikTok tanning trend that will put young people at greater risk of skin cancer. Alex Casey reports. 

It begins like any other bit of TikTok beauty advice, delivered from a grey bedroom with a framed Gucci logo on the wall, somewhere in the depths of the United States. “Hey guys,” a young woman named Sydney says, ponytail slick and fine gold jewellery gleaming. “It’s that time of year again: it’s tanning season.” She clasps her hands together, revealing a squared-off French tip manicure, ready to deliver her sermon on how to tan “better, faster, and easier!!!”

“If you are new to tanning, you need to check the UV index,” she begins. “I don’t really know what UV is, like, scientifically, but that’s what makes you tan, so you just need to check it.” Her recommended UV rating for tanning? “Like eight to 12.” 

With nearly one million views, Sydney’s video is just one of thousands on TikTok encouraging young women to sunbathe in what local experts are calling “really dangerous” levels of ultraviolet radiation. “The UV is an 11 right now so you know I just had to come outside,” says one bikini-clad woman (1.1 million views). “I don’t even take the time to go outside if the UV is five or lower,” says another sweatsuit-wearing teen in her “tanning q&a” (2.5 million views).

The UV index measures the strength of the sun’s ultraviolet radiation and indicates the risk of harm from unprotected sun exposure. In other words, it tells you when to stay inside. In Aotearoa, any UV rating over six is considered a “high-risk” exposure. “It is concerning to hear that young people might be using a UV index (UVI) of six or above as a guide to tan,” said Emma Shields, evidence and insights lead the Cancer Society. “The higher the UV index number, the less time it takes for your skin to become damaged.”

While the vast majority of these videos come from the United States, the UV index tanning trend has now made it to Aotearoa ahead of another hot, dry summer. One Auckland parent told The Spinoff her 13-year-old and 16-year-old daughters had both become “obsessed” with the UV rating in recent months. They both frequently check the MetService app and organise their schedules to visit Auckland beaches to tan with their friends on the strongest UV days. 

“They’ll be saying, ‘Oh, I’m going to the beach on Friday because the UV is a 10 – it’s like they plan all their activities for the week around when the UV is high,” she said. 

Several other parents have encountered the same behaviour. Another parent of a 16-year-old told The Spinoff her daughter needed to leave the house by 2pm last weekend to tan because that was when the UV was at its highest. “It’s definitely escalated recently where I’ve noticed more girls organising their entire day around the UV rating,” they said. “They think the higher it is, the browner they’ll get, so the more of an ideal time it is to get out there.” 

Eve*, 15 years old, told The Spinoff she didn’t initially know what the UV index was when she started seeing it on social media last year. “For a while, I was a bit confused, because I would see TikToks that were like ‘UV 11 or UV 10 today, I’m so excited to go tanning’. But then you look in the comments and people explain what it is.” This year, she and friends have started checking the weather app every day and head out to tan any time the UV is “eight or above”. 

“Everyone wants tan lines now,” Eve told The Spinoff. “I actually don’t know why, to be honest, it’s just like a weird beauty standard that everyone’s hopped onto.”

The trend is also trickling down to the tweens. One parent of an 11-year-old girl told The Spinoff that they have noticed an “increased resistance to sunscreen”, with their daughter expressing that her friends have “gotten into tanning” more recently. “She has asked for a bikini – not to wear to the beach, but so she can lie out in the sun at home,” they said. “I find the trend really concerning, given how brutal the exposure is in New Zealand and our family history of melanoma.”

Tanning is particularly dangerous in New Zealand, where a combination of our lower pollution levels, positioning in relation to the sun, and the ozone hole has resulted in us having the highest death rate from melanoma in the world. “There’s basically no safe level of unprotected sun exposure here,” said dermatologist Dr David Lim. “In Auckland in winter, it takes about an hour to do damage, even when the UV is around 2.5. But in summer, you are talking minutes.” 

Specialising in skin cancer removal at his Auckland clinic Skintel, Lim told The Spinoff he was in “disbelief” to find the “very concerning” TikTok trend taking hold among young people in Aotearoa. “Many health education agencies and dermatologists have done a lot of work over the last few decades educating the public about the dangers of UV exposure and the risks to health. This work was aimed at reducing rates of skin cancer and saving lives,” he said. 

“I am concerned that this new trend will undo this work and lead to increased rates of skin cancer. It could end up costing people their lives for the sake of a tan.” 

Although Eve admitted that she and her friends don’t always wear sunscreen – “you have to get a good base” – she said she was aware of the health risks. “It’s just that when I go outside, I’m not thinking, ‘Oh in 30 years I might have skin cancer’. I’m just thinking, ‘I’m having such a good time with my friends’,” she said. “We try not to go out for very long periods, we might go out and tan for 15 minutes each side, go back under the shade, or have a swim, then tan for another 15 minutes.”

But Lim warned that even short periods in high UV can have serious implications. “Intermittent high-intensity sun exposure is actually the riskiest exposure pattern for the development of melanoma,” he said, noting an increase in misinformation around tanning in his younger patients. “Their understanding is that as long as they don’t get burnt, they’re OK, but that’s not the case. Tanning is the body’s defence mechanism and it does represent damage,” he said.

“There is also a perception that tanned skin provides protection from burning, when it actually is only the equivalent of about an SPF three or four, compared to using a 50-plus sunscreen.” 

Not only does tanning come with obvious health concerns, Lim said it speeds up the photoaging process in terms of fine lines, wrinkles and pigment spots on the skin. Several parents noted this seemed at odds with the anti-ageing skincare movement also gripping young women through Tiktok. “One minute you’ve got the Glow Recipe, and everyone wanting to put the niacinamides and acids on their face,” said one parent. “Now it’s like they are doing the total opposite.” 

Shields from the Cancer Society reiterated the measures that people should take to protect themselves this summer: covering as much skin as possible, seeking shade in the middle of the day, using an SPF 30 sunscreen every two hours, and wearing a wide-brimmed hat and sunglasses. For parents, she recommended starting a “non-judgemental” conversation about the trend and potential risks. “It may be helpful to explain that there’s no such thing as safe sun tanning, and any tan is a sign of skin damage,” she said.

With this trend arriving in the midst of serious conversations around social media regulation, Lim suggested healthcare messaging needed to better reach young people on the platforms that they use. “Obviously, we need to meet young people where they get their information from, so we probably need to get on to TikTok and start trying to refute these sorts of things,” he said. “For now, I’m just hoping this is short-lived, and they move on soon to something less dangerous.”

*Names have been changed