reintroducing kakadu visitor fees

Submitted: Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 21:07
ThreadID: 75683 Views:3571 Replies:9 FollowUps:28
This Thread has been Archived
just seen on kakadu parks web site that they are reintroducing the parks visitor fee in april of this year it will be 25 dollars per person i think this sucks
they need to encouarge more vistor to the area not scare people away
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Top End Explorer - Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 21:30

Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 21:30
I think it's a great idea, in fact I was apposed to them dropping it in the first place.

$25 per adult over 16 is a very fair price, I have paid a lot more to use or see a lot less.

Since it has been dropped, your tax money has paid for the running of the park, as I have said before 80% of visitors are from overseas, so your tax has been supporting the park, therefore 80% of the visitors have been getting a free ride from your tax dollar.

Anja, Philip and I visited the only national park in Holland 3 weeks ago, we were charged $75 dollars for the day, it was well worth it, I have also paid more to visit other national parks in Australia, I am only to happy to pay to visit these places and I don't see the problem you have.

Cheers Steve.
AnswerID: 402167

Follow Up By: Best Off Road - Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 21:56

Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 21:56
Spot on Steve.

Cheers,

Jim.

0
FollowupID: 671617

Follow Up By: get outmore - Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 22:36

Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 22:36
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
0
FollowupID: 671627

Follow Up By: get outmore - Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 22:38

Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 22:38
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
0
FollowupID: 671629

Follow Up By: Top End Explorer - Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 22:49

Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 22:49
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.


0
FollowupID: 671631

Follow Up By: get outmore - Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 22:51

Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 22:51
see it was so inqonsaquentilal (spelling) i forgot how much it was
0
FollowupID: 671632

Follow Up By: The Rambler( W.A.) - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 00:08

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 00:08
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.
Bush camp

Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 671642

Follow Up By: Top End Explorer - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 00:40

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 00:40
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.
0
FollowupID: 671645

Follow Up By: get outmore - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 00:41

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 00:41
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
0
FollowupID: 671646

Follow Up By: Alloy c/t - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 10:22

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 10:22
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,!!!!!!!
0
FollowupID: 671686

Follow Up By: Top End Explorer - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 10:50

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 10:50
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
0
FollowupID: 671691

Follow Up By: Alloy c/t - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 14:15

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 14:15
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.
0
FollowupID: 671730

Follow Up By: Top End Explorer - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 15:00

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 15:00
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


0
FollowupID: 671748

Reply By: Member - Richard H - West NSW - Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 21:42

Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 21:42
Fee introduced again eh. Usually these rorts cost more to enforce than what they collect.

Kakadu - yeah sure Kakadon't.


AnswerID: 402168

Follow Up By: Best Off Road - Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 21:59

Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 21:59
"Rorts" ???

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

Jim.

0
FollowupID: 671618

Follow Up By: Member - Michael John T (VIC) - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 00:02

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 00:02
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.
We retired to travell
It's time to go again...

Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 671640

Follow Up By: get outmore - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 01:05

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 01:05
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
0
FollowupID: 671652

Reply By: Member - lyndon NT - Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 22:33

Monday, Feb 01, 2010 at 22:33
When the fee was still being charged some years ago we visited via the “back road”. I can’t remember just how far we drove in before getting to the “check point”, but it was quite some way. Only then did we find out almost the whole park was still closed but the fee still applied. I guess it depends on your point of view, I grew up going camping with my folks, it was all they could afford, we would camp in a paddock near a beach and that was our holiday. Had they had to pay we probably would have stayed at home. I think it is sad the way things are going for low income earners. How long before you have to pay to take your kid to the local park to kick the footy? I guess there is always the video games instead? LOL
Having said all that, I don’t mind paying if facilities are clean and the fee’s aren’t over the top.
Cheers Lyndon
Now is the only time you own
Decide now what you will,
Place faith not in tomorrow
For the clock may then be still

Member
My Profile  Send Message

AnswerID: 402180

Reply By: Member - Alan H (QLD) - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:13

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:13
I am opposed to fees to enter any national park.

I can happily pay a fee to use a facility eg showers etc but to just enter an area which is natural is just a rip off. It is the principle of charging not the amount of the fee. Parks should be available to all not just the rich. this user pay brain washing is conditioning society into have and have nots based on free spending cash available.

On top of the paying these fees we are then regulated to hell by power crazed politicians who try to justify them by talking about provision of facilities. As I said I'll happily pay to use a facility but that should be my choice as whether or not I want to use the facility.

Entrance fees are purely taxes. I don't want facilities provided all over parks. leave them in their natural state.

Unfortunately, those that cry that a small fee is negligible and is acceptable just plays into the hands of the commercial operation of parks which should be seen as owned by all Australians.

The overseas tourist/visitor should pay either. They contribute to wealth of the country by the extra they spend on food and services similar to all of us when we travel through our country spreading our dollars across towns. we don't have to pay to enter areas that we own.

Alan
AnswerID: 402220

Follow Up By: Member - Kevin B1 (WA) - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 11:46

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 11:46
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.
0
FollowupID: 671700

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 12:33

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 12:33
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.
0
FollowupID: 671710

Follow Up By: Member - Timbo - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 12:43

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 12:43
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...
0
FollowupID: 671712

Follow Up By: Top End Explorer - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 12:47

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 12:47
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.
0
FollowupID: 671713

Follow Up By: OzTroopy - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 13:16

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 13:16
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.
0
FollowupID: 671719

Reply By: Alloy c/t - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 10:15

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 10:15
Here we go again , pay a fee for what we ,that is the Australian public , allready own , pay a fee to see your OWN national park , and while at it lets throw in some vagaries of WHO has to pay ,
AnswerID: 402233

Reply By: jackablue - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 13:47

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 13:47
I was up there in July and it was free. I was actually dreading having to pay the fee again as I remembered from last time I thought it was a bit steep and most of the park was flooded. I said to my wife, "I'm sure we paid to get in here last time? Oh well thats good". So now it's back hey, well I won't be going in there for another 15 years anyway. Rather go to Litchfield.

AnswerID: 402269

Follow Up By: Member - Matt & Caz H (QLD) - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 16:07

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 16:07
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
0
FollowupID: 671761

Follow Up By: Top End Explorer - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 16:26

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 16:26
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.
0
FollowupID: 671764

Follow Up By: Member - Matt & Caz H (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 04, 2010 at 16:12

Thursday, Feb 04, 2010 at 16:12
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
0
FollowupID: 672125

Reply By: olcoolone - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 17:16

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 17:16
Here we go again.....according to some everything should be free, the gov turns around and says " we are going to increase taxes to provide better" services, the council says "we are going to increase rates to maintain or increase the standard of living."

I'm all for a use pays system.

I'm use to paying fees to get through or into areas for my enjoyment and relaxation.

At least by putting a fee on National Parks you tend to keep the idiots out.

And to the people who think it's wrong to pay....don'r go.
AnswerID: 402313

Reply By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 19:52

Tuesday, Feb 02, 2010 at 19:52
I would like to say I was up there in the winter and really enjoyed it.

Went and saw Steve and his lovely family and stayed in Jabiru and thoroughly enjoyed it.

$25 each is what you also pay to see Ularu and get a lot less for it and I dont see anyone moaning about that.

We went to Ubirr, Yellow waters and Nourlangie and the Uranium mine which was $17 for 2 hours.
Took a flight for an hour which cost us about $450 .

The facilities were excellent and the Park Rangers were helpfull.

The Lakeview van park was excellent value at $30 for an Ensuite site

Just go without a case of beer. It wont hurt you and see the country.

Our trip has cost about $1,000 a week for a year so $50 is nothing.

Cost me $140 for fuel today.

We work on the theory if we want to see something we do

If we dont think its value, like $12.50 ea to walk up a lighthouse we dont go.

To many expect loos, showers and all the frills for free.

Someone has to pay somewhere, either as a user or a Taxpayer.

So would you sooner pay for what you use or subsidise others.

If you dont want to pay. Fine, dont go.

Your loss.



AnswerID: 402341

Follow Up By: Alloy c/t - Wednesday, Feb 03, 2010 at 09:29

Wednesday, Feb 03, 2010 at 09:29
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.
0
FollowupID: 671894

Reply By: offaroundOz - Wednesday, Feb 03, 2010 at 09:52

Wednesday, Feb 03, 2010 at 09:52
I new to travelling, heading off in april to explore this beautiful country of ours with my family of 5 and I wasnt aware that you had to pay to see Ularu and Kakadu ?? I thought this was all in our backyard for everyone to experience ....obviously not . I dont mind paying but fairs fair, if you live here, you shouldnt have to pay to see it.
I was going to buy an annual national parks pass ....does this not cover all national parks ??
AnswerID: 402431

Follow Up By: Alloy c/t - Wednesday, Feb 03, 2010 at 10:04

Wednesday, Feb 03, 2010 at 10:04
"does this not cover all national parks? " NO it does not.
0
FollowupID: 671900

Follow Up By: Top End Explorer - Wednesday, Feb 03, 2010 at 10:29

Wednesday, Feb 03, 2010 at 10:29
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.
0
FollowupID: 671906

Follow Up By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Wednesday, Feb 03, 2010 at 13:44

Wednesday, Feb 03, 2010 at 13:44
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


0
FollowupID: 671932

Follow Up By: offaroundOz - Wednesday, Feb 03, 2010 at 17:46

Wednesday, Feb 03, 2010 at 17:46
Thanks guys, will do more research and take more money....LOL

0
FollowupID: 671962

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (14)