Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - Crag & Route Beta

Crag & Route Beta

Area	Location	Sub Location	Crag	Links
VIC Arapiles	(General)	(General)	(General)	[ Arapiles Guide \| Arapiles Images ]

Author

Tiptoe ridge

jrc

9-Oct-2012
2:35:47 PM

The kid with the memory was my son. 11 in a few weeks. He also climbed a fair bit down there. I think you met him on the belay on Conifer Ck during the Keyboard fiasco.

We did TTR together on Monday 30. Then Mantle with an old friend of ours. He enjoyed the balancy moves.

He has read the selected guide a fair bit. He is a fan of Glen & Simon's prose. definitely better for a 10 yo than reading trip epics or stories in Aussie Photographer. I'm glad he memorised the guide as it disappeared from our campsite on Thursday. It has my name and phone number in it and, not having as good a memory as the next generation, i'd like it back please.

Will_P

9-Oct-2012
3:19:46 PM

I also heard this $15/night rumour from a trusted source who saw it with his own eyes. But I'd also like confirmation. Apparently it's now printed on the box where you (or I, at least) previously deposited the $2/night fee. Can any locals confirm or deny?


Climboholic

9-Oct-2012
3:20:54 PM

Carbon Tax.

TonyH

9-Oct-2012
5:02:21 PM

>Carbon Tax<

I hear the first few moves are tricky but after that it's pretty straightforward. A soft touch at 19.

Wendy

9-Oct-2012
6:43:57 PM

Not having the need to camp at the mount for quite some years now, I couldn't tell you what the fee actually is, but has anyone utilised the basic maths of 5 people times $3?


wombly

9-Oct-2012
8:19:44 PM

They've gone back to the bad old clusterF*&^k of charging 'per site'. $15 p/n for up to 6 people and one car, or an extra $6.20 p/n for each extra car. So, not that much difference if you have a full vehicle.

Full marks the the bureaucrat that thought it was a good idea to do away with the previous scheme was easily workable for most of the punters, and had a strong incentive for self-policing. Good luck for the rangers trying to work out who to chase down in a camping area with no distinguished sites & free parking during the day, particularly during the mayhem of Easter when they actually bother policing the fee policy. Good luck for the average climber trying to figure out how much you're actually supposed to deposit when one car came for 4 nights with 3 people, the 2nd came with 4 but one stayed 2 nights longer and hooked up with a 2nd campsite for 3 of those nights and then hitched out of town, and the 3rd came halfway through with 5 people, then track down the appropriate change from everyone and share out the cost.

So much easier to donate a whole-note amount to the friends of Arapiles letterbox by the pines dunnies then spend a disordinate amount of time whinging about it on an internet forum until the powers that be come to their senses. In the meantime, I'll happily continue making donations to the shiny new, highly over-engineered dunny in the gums that must have cost more than the equivalent of least two or three years' worth of camping fees to build. And yes, I had way to much time to think of this rant on the 11 hour trip back to Canberra.

Will_P

10-Oct-2012
9:55:37 AM

Ah, assumed it was $15 per person, per night. But agree that the logistics of payment with large and varying groups, as well as enforcement, are now much more difficult. Fortunately I'm antisocial and will always be in small, predictable group.


harold

10-Oct-2012
10:06:09 AM

That was gold Wombly. I feel like cut and pasting that and sending to Parks.

I've never understood why have that weird system in the Grampians and elsewhere.


IdratherbeclimbingM9

10-Oct-2012
10:10:33 AM

On 9/10/2012 wombly wrote:
>They've gone back to the bad old clusterF*&^k of charging 'per site'. $15
>p/n for up to 6 people and one car, or an extra $6.20 p/n for each extra
>car. So, not that much difference if you have a full vehicle.
>(snip)

It sounds simple to me. Ranger simply gets around the camp early each day and charges by number of cars, with the onus being on the camper to prove theirs is the 'second' car within a group and get charged the lesser fee.
It isn't the rangers problem of how to divvy up the fee!

~> As an aside; if they charge $15 for a single motorcyclist, then we are being disadvantaged again by comparison!

pecheur

10-Oct-2012
11:00:31 AM

On 10/10/2012 Will_P wrote:
>Ah, assumed it was $15 per person, per night. But agree that the logistics
>of payment with large and varying groups, as well as enforcement, are now
>much more difficult. Fortunately I'm antisocial and will always be in small,
>predictable group.

Lies you showed up at least once to a VCC trip. Admittedly the antisocial bit is probably true since in three days I heard you say less than you do in one review of Rock ...

uwhp510

10-Oct-2012
12:34:59 PM

On 10/10/2012 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:
>It isn't the rangers problem of how to divvy up the fee!

Yes it is.

Ranger: "Okey dokey, there's 10 cars in the car park (this morning, some of which probably belong to people who have arrived nice and early this morning) so I'm going to sit down here until I've got at least $150 in my pocket. Who wants to pay?"

{tumbleweed....}

martym

10-Oct-2012
12:41:14 PM

On 9/10/2012 Wendy wrote:
>Not having the need to camp at the mount for quite some years now, I couldn't
>tell you what the fee actually is, but has anyone utilised the basic maths
>of 5 people times $3?

So it's increased to $3 then? Still bloody cheap.
I thought the OP was implying it's gone up to $15.
This other complicated system sounds ridiculous...
Surely in the end, per person per night is going to be the most lucrative way to charge people - since generally you're just going to chuck a $20 into an envelope for 6 people ($18)

Let's hope they don't adapt Mt Stayplton's system & the gnarly shower.


harold

10-Oct-2012
12:56:15 PM

On 10/10/2012 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:

>~> As an aside; if they charge $15 for a single motorcyclist, then we
>are being disadvantaged again by comparison!

Yes, a guy on a bike pays the same as 6 guys in a van?? Sorry Rod, but that could only ever make sense to a government worker.


IdratherbeclimbingM9

10-Oct-2012
1:06:25 PM

On 10/10/2012 uwhp510 wrote:
>On 10/10/2012 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:
>>It isn't the rangers problem of how to divvy up the fee!
>
>Yes it is.
>
>Ranger: "Okey dokey, there's 10 cars in the car park (this morning, some
>of which probably belong to people who have arrived nice and early this
>morning) so I'm going to sit down here until I've got at least $150 in
>my pocket. Who wants to pay?"
>
>{tumbleweed....}

I see your point, but if the early-arrivers parked in the day use area, the delineation would still be faily*_{(*appropriate typo? Heh^x3)}easy?

~> What Araps needs is a caravan park and motel complex, along with CCT cameras to catch fee avoiding dirt-bag climbers, then the rangers would have it easy!
{2nd tumbleweed, ... sound of wind in pines,....}
;-)


IdratherbeclimbingM9

10-Oct-2012
1:16:21 PM

On 10/10/2012 harold wrote:
>On 10/10/2012 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:
>
>>~> As an aside; if they charge $15 for a single motorcyclist, then we
>>are being disadvantaged again by comparison!
>
>Yes, a guy on a bike pays the same as 6 guys in a van?? Sorry Rod, but
>that could only ever make sense to a government worker.

No shortage of them about!
;-)

I am not saying it is fair, but assuming wombly is correct when he wrote:
>They've gone back to the bad old clusterF*&^k of charging 'per site'. $15
>p/n for up to 6 people and one car, or an extra $6.20 p/n for each extra
>car. So, not that much difference if you have a full vehicle.
~> then I read that as being a site consists of the first car regardless of passenger numbers below 6.
Hmm, thinking about it further, a single occupant car gets ripped off the same way, so I suppose it does have a degree of consistency, ... unless you catch a bus or hitch-hike out to there!


Climboholic

10-Oct-2012
1:28:32 PM

So I was right: They're trying to reduce carbon emissions.

Will_P

10-Oct-2012
4:20:07 PM

On 10/10/2012 pecheur wrote:
'Lies you showed up at least once to a VCC trip. Admittedly the antisocial bit is probably true since in three days I heard you say less than you do in one review of Rock ...'

Ha! Yeah, it's true, but I was just trying to find a regular climbing partner who makes up for my mercurial and solitary nature with jovial goodwill to all. (Hi Jon! You ready for Skink this weekend?)

There are 57 messages in this topic.