SA DEWNR parks and camping

[Walking_addict]

As a bushwalker and 4WDr, I was dismayed to be shown a link just now to the DEWNR site about changes recently introduced to 2 locations here in SA.
Website page up 18/7, effective 1/8, no media about this that I saw.

It seems out SA Parks under DEWNR is moving to a system where you will have to pre book camping in our Conservation and National Parks.
Sneakily they have done this for 2 locations, but no doubt it will expand once in place.
After reading about Cape York fiasco with QLD Parks system, it would be great if any of you with concerns can email DEWNR and voice your concerns.

http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/parks/ ... e-bookings

Note the last para . . .
"As we launch the system we would love to hear from you so that we can continue to improve our service. Send your feedback to DEWNR.OnlineBookings@sa.gov.au "

I have emailed them voicing my concerns.
Please do the same so DEWNR doesn't think we all agree with the idea.
If you aren't sure of what the concerns should be, have a Google and read of some of the threads on various 4WD forums re the QLD Cape York pre booking system, or ask here in a reply.

[whitefang]

The system isn't fully operational just yet. Or at least it wasn't last week. I had to call them to book into some of the backpacking sites at Mount Remarkable. The main problem with this is they said they would e-mail a receipt, but they still haven't one week later. Could be a bit of a problem if they don't reply to the e-mail I sent them before I leave to head up there on Wednesday morning.

[wander]

It is to avoid overcrowding, practical and required.

It will enable you to have a better time if you do go as you will have the space you expect.

Please get behind the system and support it.

Yes there will be teething problems.

[whitefang]

It is to avoid overcrowding, practical and required.

I'm not against the booking system if it does work properly. Which it should when it is fully implemented. I was very impressed to be told that at this stage I would be the only one at the camp sites I booked for.

[Walking_addict]

Sorry, as much as I can see how it might SEEM like a good idea to some desk bound dept head, I am against this.
You only have to read about the fiasco in QLD with Cape York travel to see how bad it could be, especially if introduced to further sites.
What ever happened to freedom ?
Arrive somewhere, you like it, so stick around a few days . . . or not, move on.
This is what travelling is about, not trying to regiment a trip to be somewhere on day 12, another a week later.
Sorry, not sure I can accept this sort of bureaucracy.

[photohiker]

Cape York is a different and busy place. I've had the opposite problem in SA - I've stayed at places where there is no local parks presence and I have not been able to pay for my camp sites. I think I'm about a couple of weeks behind so far. I've even rung to pay but they wouldn't take it over the phone.

A sensible online booking and payment system would be an improvement IMO.

Also, it looks like they are trying to provide the ad-hoc usage you are looking for:

The Visitor Information Centre at Innes National Park will have a self-service station with computers for credit card payments.

Perhaps these terminals will eventually be available at many park locations. If a park is busy, the per booking will become essential.

[wander]

not sure I can accept this sort of bureaucracy.

Real world. These places are popular. Plan ahead and book ahead.

[Walking_addict]

We'll see what people have to say when things are expanded, and it impacts on their travel plans.
Combine this with the sort of changes to a Vic camping fees type of development, and be prepared to be up for a pre planned tour of the bush, at prices you pay at a Big 4.

[Walking_addict]

Popular places should be dealt with by expanding sites and services, catering for those demands, not keep people out.

[whitefang]

Popular places should be dealt with by expanding sites and services, catering for those demands, not keep people out.

Expansion is not necessarily a good thing in all cases. Expansion could jeopardise the natural resources that bring people to certain locations. Expansion would also cost money. Money which I am not entirely sure DEWNR has to spend.

[Eljimberino]

Havent owned a car in 14 yrs. In my opinion camp spots are ruined by 4wds.

[wander]

Popular places should be dealt with by expanding sites and services, catering for those demands, not keep people out

Yep, that is what we need bigger camp areas, 10 acres a go should do it. Wall to wall tents as far as the eye can see. Dunny blocks the size of aircraft hangers.

[Walking_addict]

Popular places should be dealt with by expanding sites and services, catering for those demands, not keep people out

Yep, that is what we need bigger camp areas, 10 acres a go should do it. Wall to wall tents as far as the eye can see. Dunny blocks the size of aircraft hangers.

Lol, well who's going to miss out, are you happy for it to be you ?
It doesn't have to go that big, just clever camp construction and facilities.

Frankly, I don't go to such places in general, maybe once or twice a year enroute to other more isolated places.
What concerns me is them bringing it is to all or most locations over time.
If you think they are going spend money and time to develop this for 2 places, that'd be incredible short sighted.

Anyway, I received a reply from Sarah, the Online Bookings Project Officer . . .

Thanks for your email.

I have received a number of comments regarding the QLD parks system. The system we are using is similar to Parks Victoria’s.

There are a few reasons for us to transition to an online system:

• For many of our visitors it is more convenient – they can book and plan ahead and don’t have to carry the correct amount of cash. Many interstate and overseas visitors tend to expect an option to book online.
• We have had problems over time with our ‘iron rangers’ being vandalised. This is an issue across the state and we are losing money to theft and having to replace and repair iron rangers.
• It will also make the system of picking a camping site fairer – as we have had issues with people trying to stake claims on camping sites before long weekends/competing for camping spots. Online booking is fairer as only one person can legitimately book each camping spot
For visitors who have not been to the park before we have tried to provide the information they require to make an informed decision about what site they book. For each campsite the system will display:
• An image of the individual site
• What vehicles are suitable for the site i.e. caravan, campervan, tent etc.
• Where the site is located in proximity to the amenities
• Any other information i.e. shady site, near creek, fire pit etc
I hope you will visit Mount Remarkable or Innes National Park, not just because they are beautiful parks, but so you can provide feedback on the booking system. As we implement online bookings we are using visitor feedback to further develop the system to make it more user friendly. For this reason your feedback is sincerely appreciated.

If you have any further questions or comments please let me know.

While a lot of this makes sense, you'd be crazy to think they will be putting in the online system for these 2 parks and leaving it at that . . . no, it's a money stream, and they will no doubt roll it out, along with possible consequences to travellers, especially in more remote locations.

I'm also also a bit cynical about them one day doing a Park Vic sort of 'user pays' pricing system too, to pay for all the booking costs / upgrades.
We already 'user pays' through our taxes, will they go down ?
Apparently Vics still pay a levy for parks on some bill they get (?).

Anyway, I replied . . .

Thanks for the reply Sarah.

There were quite a few comments about your replies to other inquiries on various forums, all positive to your addressing of the concerns.

I truly hope this works, and will not go widespread, as travel is often impromptu for free independent travellers, who like to stay and go as they please when they arrive at places in our parks, and find they like somewhere another day or two, or would rather move on.

My only other concern is people pre booking a site for multiple days, to cater for unplanned issues that may arise, detours, breakdowns, and the likes.
Often campsites are found to be booked out in QLD, only to have many spots empty when a travellers passes through . . . Or, you arrive to your booked site and there are a bunch of undesirables already there and no ranger to assist moving them on.
One case I read, a ranger did arrive, and even he couldn’t get the intruders to move on, telling the bookee they should find another spot nearby.

Yes, have camped and walked / fished at Mt R and Innes, they are nice spots.

Again thanks for your reply, and I guess time will tell if this works, is expanded over time, and how it may or may not inconvenience travellers.

So, let's see where it goes.

[sim1oz]

Hi Walking_addict, I'm interested in what Sarah's reply is to the potential issues you have pointed out. We are having similar discussions in the Vic forum about what is happening here.

I'm a bit at fault myself. One year I booked to do 5 nights on the Great Ocean Walk but did not manage to go. Since I wasn't going to get any money back by cancelling and hoped that we could still do the second part of the walk, I never advised ParksVic at all. From the way things are set up here, Parks Vic are happy if they get their money but there is no incentive to cancel (close to the camp dates) and provide availability to other walkers. If they had an option to get part of your money back when you cancel and a full (or large) refund if someone else then takes your booking dates that would be a lot fairer to all. I'm not holding my breath! To me the focus seems to be on raising revenue, not ensuring people will get to enjoy the parks. If it was the latter, then the booking system would be more sophisticated.

[walk2wineries]

Thanks for posting this Walking Addict, I wasn't aware of the changes. Its a pain; the east coast has parks where one must pay online or by phone, and of course they are out of phone (and internet!) range. Very annoying when its empty. Mt Remarkable, if they mean the Mambray Creek area, has resident rangers doesn't it? If the place is that busy they tend to check daily - why not empty the "iron ranger" then? Sarah referred to an "option" to prepay - by all means, but why not just an option, not a mandate?
Is it that difficult to have both? A sequestered area for pre-booked (they can have the pretty spots!) maybe, or just confine the pre-booking requirement to busy periods such as schoolholidays and long weekends.
I don't go camping if the weather suddenly hits 40 or its raining+++ - generally I camp so I'm close to a walk in the morning. If it is really raining then maybe its healthier for the park for me not to take my 4x4 along the track - wh I might do if I'm prepaid and in the area.

[walk2wineries]

I sent feedback as well, Walking Addict. Same boilerplate response. They think that doing this only for peak periods and not when the parks are empty would confuse the users too much. They also believe that the Mount Remarkable national park has mobile phone coverage; I was there with several of us with different phones and providers - she's wrong!

[whitefang]

Not sure which provider you are with, walk2wineries, or when you were last there, but I had coverage there with optus two weeks ago.

[walk2wineries]

I had vodaphone which admittedly isn't good; someone else had telstra. Admittedly I think we checked about 3km West of Alligator, not at Mambray where we started - a couple were driving along the firetrail looking for a misplaced kid so we wanted to spread out a bit & it would have been good to have had contact!