reintroducing kakadu visitor fees

Spot on Steve.

Cheers,

Jim.

I thought the $23 or whatever it was for 7 days when i was last there was one of the better value things going around

when you consider th john Forrest national park on perths doorstep is $10 per day day use only

oh and to get the standard of the free campsites that are available in kakadu
you need to pay an additional $6 or$7 in WA nat parks

so basically to visit one day and camp is $16 makes $25 for 7 days look not too bad

Last time Kakadu had an entry fee it was only $16 per adult, the reason it was taken away was for political votes, by the way if you are a NT resident you don't have to pay this time.

I amazes me that people will spend $45 per carton of beer or $50 for a bottle of spirits, X amount on wine etc, but a few lousy $$$$ to enter a World Heritage National Park is considered by some an injustice, it simply make me laugh.

Cheers Steve.

see it was so inqonsaquentilal (spelling) i forgot how much it was

Steve Ican agree with you to a point, but certain things just don't add up. Why should N.T. residents not have to pay? Are they contributing more than the tourist--Idoubt it. Your price of a carton of beer and spirits is way of the mark as I am a drinker and buy my grog in Darwin and never pay that kind of money.Also why pay this $25 entry fee per person and then get slugged for camping spots -(Jabaru $31.50, Mardugal $20, Gumlon $20 etc).I can agree with paying for camp site where facilities are provided but I will never agree to entrance fees to a national park as that is what you pay taxes for.It is only my opinion and regardless of which state Ithink entrance fees into a national park is a rip off.

Rambler I have been buying alcohol in Darwin since 1982, the carton of Mid strength I bought last Tuesday was $45.50 and the Bottle of JD was $49.50.

The reason NT residents don't have to pay is a political one, Gunlom and Mardugal are only $10 per person, why should taxes cover entry fees when 80% of visitors are from overseas???

Cheers steve.

maybe things have changed but when iwas there there were sevral free campsites

i also camped at gunlum with its more maintained area and dunny block with showers a bargain at $5 pn

So Steve , are You and your familly going to pay the fee every day ? If not ,Why ? You live in a NATIONAL park as a private citizen and if other private citizens of Australia wish to visit a NATIONAL park why should they pay a fee and YOU dont,!!!!!!!

Hello Alloy,
one question mark instead of seven exclamation marks would have sufficed, may I say.

Anja here, Steve's wife who lives with her family in Jabiru township that's actually not part of the park lease but on a separate lease, on Aboriginal land and under very complex leasing arrangements, not only as private citizens but as proprietors of a tourism business.

Not only do we pay annual fees on licensing, accreditation and -- of course -- the Kakadu National Park permit that allows us to conduct commercial tours, we also put a good amount of money (and we're talking six digits here) as well as in-kind support back into the community.

We communicate well with park management and Traditional Owners and I'm not shy to say that our contribution to sustain the park outweighs by far the monetary amount you're querying.

Cheers
Anja

So Anja ,so you recon that next time some friends or relatives come to visit you and Steve its quite allrite that they have to pay a fee to enter the NATIONAL park that the township is surrounded by ? Last time I looked a NATIONAL park is owned by the public of Australia for the use of ALL Australians , not only for those with a $ in their pocket.

Residents of the NT do not have to pay, this is something I have written above. Seeing that most of my family and friends live in the NT, your comment pertaining to them is not applicable. This is not my doing, the Federal Government has come up with it.

Would we be opposed to NT residents, including friends and relatives, paying to visit? No! however if they are just visiting us in Jabiru they don't need to.

Secondly, Kakadu is not public land, it is Aboriginal land. It is leased by the Federal Government to be run as a national park. Therefore, the Government needs to pay the lease to the Traditional Owners of Kakadu and also spend millions on maintenance and infrastructure of the park, monitoring and research, etc.

Since the fee has been removed the maintenance of the park has suffered due to lack of funds, this has been told to me by park staff.

Jabiru township is a completely different lease, this is something that Anja made very clear.

Google 'national+park+fees' and see how many parks in Australia charge a fee, to be honest it would be easier to find how many don't.

To be honest I don't wish to argue about the issue. There is a minority that won't visit because of the introduction of the fees, but in the grand scale this will not effect the overall numbers of visitors, that is a fact.

Cheers Steve

"Rorts" ???

Why so? Many of the National Parks we camp in charge a fee. Why should Kakadu be different?

Jim.

Hi Richard,

How can a NSW person complain of $25 for an extended stay in such a diverse and truely interesting place as is Kakadu. I've recently experienced at least one NSW NP where the cost was $37 per night including $7 perday car entry. As for Kakadu (Kakadont) I believe any body who expounds this (and many do) really hasn't taken enough time to explore and appreciate the many facets of the park. (My pers onal view).

regards ,
Mike.

Ps Will returning there again this year along with my daughter & two young grand children.

as I understand it the "kakadont" moniker was coined by locals on the formation of the national park. previosly is was a favoured location for stuff like buffalo shooting, pig hunting with bows, Blowing barra out of waterholes with gelly, netting the rivers etc

Alan H,,,Your post is exactly how I feel on this subject, to charge any Australian to view any of there own country to me is offensive. Pay for facilities used no problem. For years I have shunned national parks that charge an entry fee and have missed out on seeing some great country I know but that is just my personal protest and my opinion on this subject will never change.

Exactly right ....

A so called "national park" entry fee is nothing more than a tax on a toll road.

Same as any entry permits that may have a fee attached yet one is travelling on a public road.

Paying for the use of facilities is more than acceptable but I'll be dashed if Im going to pay for looking at trees, water and dirt through my windscreen.

kakadu aint that great .... theres plenty of other locations just as good if not better around the country IMHO ... they too of course are being restricted to the public.

Alan, I hear what you're saying but with people being what people are I'd suggest that approach may result in the Nat Parks being not so enjoyable.

The facilities the Nat Park might typically provide would include facilities such as toilet/shower blocks, rubbish bins, BBQs/fireplaces etc. Allowing free access for all with a charge to use these facilities would most likely result in many visiting but only a few using the facilities - I'm sure you can imagine the outcome...

If you blokes are to stingy to pay a few bucks to visit areas in Australia that charge a small fee, then never go to Europe as you get nothing for nothing over there, If you want to visit anything you need to pay and it's not cheep either.

Cheers Steve a big supporter of the entry fee.

Stingy ... ????

Ive paid to access lots of places with locations/items of interest .... but they were private property.

So I guess in reality Im too stingy to go BACK to public locations that have been turned into theme parks with fees since my original visits.

Europe ???? .... With what is ... or rather was ... available to see in this country ... why bother.

Hi,

I agree Litchfield was much nicer, we camped at Kakadu for 2 nights back in June we paid $20 per night camp fees. Thought it was a bit over rated - did enjoy Jabaru though.Litchfield blew us away - Awesome place.

Cheers
Caz
http://www.travelingoz.webs.com

I understand how people view things differently, but could you please explain where you went and what you saw in both places, and how you saw Litchfield better than Kakadu?

I have visited both placesl hundreds of times, and I have never been attached to Litchfield the same way I am with Kakadu.

Just interested.

Cheers Steve.

Hi Steve,

I LOVE waterfalls, I felt Litchfield had better waterfalls, water way than Kakadu, With all the Hype about Kakadu I guess I expected more. It was a lot more crowed at Kakadu as well. As you say people view things different.

Cheers

No one complains about the fee to see Ayers Rock ? Have a look at the archives or talk to the people at Coward springs , the black market for tickets because of the fees to see the rock is huge.

"does this not cover all national parks? " NO it does not.

Most National Parks are run and funded by the state they are in.

Uluru and Kakadu are funded by the Federal Government, as I have stated above, the entry fee is only payable for persons 16 and over.

In Uluru the fee is valid for 3 days, and Kakadu it will be valid for 7 days.

All monies are to be spent 100% within the parks, the money is spent on the lease, maintenance and research, this is law.

Both are world heritage listed, to maintain this standard it takes an enormous effort which requires large sums of money, A use pays system reduces the amount of tax payers fund that would otherwise be used in other more need areas.

I hope this clears things up.

Cheers Steve.

To offaraoundoz.

Get on the net and look around You have a lot to learn about whats free and whats not.

Like beaches that are in NP's and you need a day ticket to go there.

A yearly parks pass would be a good idea but dont expect that it covers everything.

It will get you into parks but other things that are in the park will still cost you.

Like Caves lighthouses etc etc

Thanks guys, will do more research and take more money....LOL