Goto Chockstone Home

  Guide
  Gallery
  Tech Tips
  Articles
  Reviews
  Dictionary
  Links
  Forum
  Search
  About

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

  Shop
FREIGHT FREE
in Australia

Black Diamond "STOPPER" Set. (Sizes 4 to 13) - 10 pieces. Comes with a "free" karabiner for racking.   $109.00
16% Off

Chockstone Photography Australian Landscape Photography by Michael Boniwell
Australian Landscape Prints





Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

 Page 8 of 10. Messages 1 to 20 | 21 to 40 | 41 to 60 | 61 to 80 | 81 to 100 | 101 to 120 | 121 to 140 | 141 to 160 | 161 to 180 | 181 to 191
Author
Vic Parks Camping Fee Proposal

Sabu
6/02/2014
4:05:52 PM
Just got a reply from my local member who supplied the following information from Minister Smith's Office:

"Campgrounds and roofed accommodation in parks allow visitors to access and enjoy Victoria’s wonderful natural environment and enhance the social and economic benefits provided by parks. It is important to provide longer-term financial sustainability for camping and roofed accommodation services.

The former Brumby Labor Government left Victorians with a $178 million black hole in funding for our national parks. The figure was confirmed in a Treasury review which was actually ordered by the previous Government, so it was clearly aware of the cost pressures facing Parks Victoria. The former Government was advised multiple times that if action were not taken camping and accommodation facilities were at risk of falling into disrepair. The Victorian Coalition Government is taking action to ensure that this does not happen and that Victorians can enjoy these facilities into the future.

The proposed fee structure for camping and roofed accommodation will make sure that the costs of providing and maintaining safe, visitor friendly facilities and services are sustainable and affordable for campers. The proposed fees will reflect the costs of managing campsites, as even the most basic camp site requires periodic maintenance to ensure it is safe, accessible and to minimise impacts on the nearby environment.

All revenue generated by the proposed fees will be fully reinvested back into providing camping and accommodation services in Victoria's national parks.

As part of the Regulatory Impact Statement process, it was important that the public had the opportunity to have their say many submissions were received. The Minister will consider submissions before reaching a determination. "
Wendy
6/02/2014
4:13:38 PM
That's a "we don't want to really hear what you say" response if I ever heard one. I'd like to see them recoup $178 million from camping fees.
patto
6/02/2014
5:01:26 PM
I'm confused how the alpine grasslands can fall into a state of disrepair.

Increased costs for facilities I can understand. Charging per night for backcountry camping is another thing entirely.

JamesMc
6/02/2014
9:57:16 PM
At least if there is a financial incentive, they may may stop leaving parts of The Grampians closed for years after bush fires.
earwig
24/02/2014
11:03:53 AM
Fees from July 1. Details here

http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/forestry-and-land-use/visiting-parks-and-forests/national-parks-camping-and-accommodation-fees

Will_P
24/02/2014
11:25:34 AM
My reading of this is that what they were originally proposing is going to be implemented - or am I misunderstanding? Also, Arapiles is in there for the new fee structure from July 1. Naive perhaps, but that surprised me, given the recent changes to the fees there.

nmonteith
24/02/2014
11:26:14 AM
$48+ a night for the Grampians. OMG.
patto
24/02/2014
11:27:24 AM
Looks there will be many more law breakers now that back country camping will be charged.

Set up a tent deep in the high plains far from anywhere and you are still suppose to pay overnight fees and a booking fee. Total cost for 1 person 1 night. $20.
patto
24/02/2014
12:30:31 PM
On 24/02/2014 Will_P wrote:
>My reading of this is that what they were originally proposing is going
>to be implemented - or am I misunderstanding? Also, Arapiles is in there
>for the new fee structure from July 1. Naive perhaps, but that surprised
>me, given the recent changes to the fees there.

Yes.

PARKS VIC: We have taken into consideration the input from park users and decided to ignore it all.
mattyj
24/02/2014
12:35:22 PM
The fine is $160 per offence. Does anyone know if this is distributed over the 'site' or is per person?
gfdonc
24/02/2014
12:40:46 PM
1. These fees are unreasonable.
A powered site with showers at Natimuk Lake is $20 for two people.
At Arapiles, an unpowered site with no showers is $37.80.
Ref: http://www.aaatourism.com.au/accommodation/info/natimuk-lake-caravan-park/

2. Where to from here?

access t CliffCare
24/02/2014
12:48:29 PM
On 24/02/2014 gfdonc wrote:
>1. These fees are unreasonable.
>A powered site with showers at Natimuk Lake is $20 for two people.
>At Arapiles, an unpowered site with no showers is $37.80.
>Ref: http://www.aaatourism.com.au/accommodation/info/natimuk-lake-caravan-park/
>
>2. Where to from here?
>
>
I'm snowed under at the moment so haven't had an opportunity to go through the latest but unless they have changed it, even with the new RIS, Arapiles was classed as a special camping area (this was changed remember when the great fee debacle happened). It wasn't going to fall into the same category of site pricing rather it would be per person per night. At $5 per night.
pecheur
24/02/2014
12:52:37 PM
On 24/02/2014 gfdonc wrote:
>1. These fees are unreasonable.
>A powered site with showers at Natimuk Lake is $20 for two people.
>At Arapiles, an unpowered site with no showers is $37.80.
>Ref: http://www.aaatourism.com.au/accommodation/info/natimuk-lake-caravan-park/
>
>2. Where to from here?

Buried in Table 8 of the exec summary, Araps is still $5 per person per night.

One of the more boring uses of my lunch break...
kieranl
24/02/2014
2:10:33 PM
On 24/02/2014 pecheur wrote:
>On 24/02/2014 gfdonc wrote:
>>1. These fees are unreasonable.
>>A powered site with showers at Natimuk Lake is $20 for two people.
>>At Arapiles, an unpowered site with no showers is $37.80.
>>Ref: http://www.aaatourism.com.au/accommodation/info/natimuk-lake-caravan-park/
>>
>>2. Where to from here?
>
>Buried in Table 8 of the exec summary, Araps is still $5 per person per
>night.
>
And gfdonc is generally correct. Arapiles is the one sensible exception in all of this.
Sadly, The Happy Wanderer, that was used by so many in submissions as a benchmark of cheap private camping, was devastated by the Grampians bushfires and is currently closed, forcing climbers into the hands of price-gouging landlords, ie the Parks Service.

Sabu
24/02/2014
2:16:09 PM
They haven't updated the document at all, its still dated at October 2013 with notes about how it will be implemented in March.

The quote of the page suggest they're still planning changes but only in relation to pension card holders etc and the length of peak periods.

WTF was the point of asking for feedback if they don't change a bloody thing??

ajfclark
24/02/2014
2:29:51 PM
That when people complain they could say "Well we went through a process..."
kieranl
24/02/2014
2:55:02 PM
On 24/02/2014 Sabu wrote:

>WTF was the point of asking for feedback if they don't change a bloody
>thing??

Come now, Sabu, who do you think you are, a mountain cattleman or someone else important?
access t CliffCare
24/02/2014
3:49:41 PM
On 24/02/2014 Sabu wrote:
>They haven't updated the document at all, its still dated at October 2013
>with notes about how it will be implemented in March.
>
>The quote of the page suggest they're still planning changes but only
>in relation to pension card holders etc and the length of peak periods.
>
>
>WTF was the point of asking for feedback if they don't change a bloody
>thing??

There also wasn't a huge amount of people that responded unfortunately. And many of them were identical responses - those seem to be counted as one response. Low fanfare on the RIS coupled with the usual low response from public makes for easy decisions for them. I would imagine it would require a decent response on the richter scale to sway them from what they had in mind.
Wendy
24/02/2014
5:17:02 PM
I heard there were about 6000 submissions. I know that's not much our of 22 million, but it does seem a fair few submissions to have to consider. I never received any acknowledgement or feedback on mine. That tells me just how much they really cared about it.
patto
24/02/2014
5:44:59 PM
6000 submissions is a decently large number. There only 5.7mil not 22mil in Victoria. So that makes 1in1000 of the population.

 Page 8 of 10. Messages 1 to 20 | 21 to 40 | 41 to 60 | 61 to 80 | 81 to 100 | 101 to 120 | 121 to 140 | 141 to 160 | 161 to 180 | 181 to 191
There are 191 messages in this topic.

 

Home | Guide | Gallery | Tech Tips | Articles | Reviews | Dictionary | Forum | Links | About | Search
Chockstone Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography

Please read the full disclaimer before using any information contained on these pages.



Australian Panoramic | Australian Coast | Australian Mountains | Australian Countryside | Australian Waterfalls | Australian Lakes | Australian Cities | Australian Macro | Australian Wildlife
Landscape Photo | Landscape Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Fine Art Photography | Wilderness Photography | Nature Photo | Australian Landscape Photo | Stock Photography Australia | Landscape Photos | Panoramic Photos | Panoramic Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography | Mothers Day Gifts | Gifts for Mothers Day | Mothers Day Gift Ideas | Ideas for Mothers Day | Wedding Gift Ideas | Christmas Gift Ideas | Fathers Day Gifts | Gifts for Fathers Day | Fathers Day Gift Ideas | Ideas for Fathers Day | Landscape Prints | Landscape Poster | Limited Edition Prints | Panoramic Photo | Buy Posters | Poster Prints