National Parks have engaged contractors to manage parks just south of Crescent Head for a period of 3 years. As a free wheeling solo free camper, this is bad news. The contractors (who are good blokes) are now rigidly charging $20 a night. I could handle $10 as a solo traveler considering I can get a powered site in Byron for $17.

Although I'm a tight arse with my camping fees in National Parks, I use to spend all my food, beer and petrol money in Crescent Head.

I guess it's a good crowd control measure in this area. I'm now finished staying at Crescent unless the point is pumping, in which case I'll stay in the suburban streets.

Does this include Plomer?

Plomer is the main area to surf south of Cres...bit of a shame as many will do what Stan is planning, but then again to service the ammenities (sparce) cost $$...current fees are $10/night.

Don't think it will keep the crowds down though. ..Have I said I don't like crowds before...yeah baby.

Where do you stay in Byron for $17 a night?

Thats bloody cheap.

ET.

Yes, I understand it includes all the govt camping sites from Crescent to Plomer and it is $20/night whether it is one person or two.

And yeah I get they have costs to meet such as cleaning and rubbish disposal, but it's all government funded so I'm going to do my best to avoid paying them.

Belongil Fields at Byron is $17/night powered from Mon-Thurs and I think it's $22/night Fri-Sun. Might be more expensive during holidays.

Have returned to a couple of camp sites further south now where I'll be able to dodge the ranger. As a retired travelling surfer, I'm happiest when I'm getting plenty of waves and spending bugger all.

Like your style Stano

Select to expand quote

surfbroker said...
Like your style Stano

100% love ya work stanos

I can see some logic in this new policy, but it does seem a pity that you, Stanos, and even myself on the odd occasion, become, shall we say, collateral damage.

With each passing year I become more and more aware of how many couples there are, usually from the continent, doing the el-cheapo tour of oz in the clapped out old rented, rust bucket mitsubishi express van or the like.

They rarely use the camping grounds because the $20 they would spend there could take them another 140 kliks in their old death traps, so they camp out in the bush in ever increasing numbers and this not only puts a strain on the environment, it can also have a negative effect on our own health and well-being. I'm speaking of course about the practice of open defecation.

There would be many out there that would say that they're very careful about how and where they take their dump and no doubt they would never dream of not digging a suitably deep hole, or ensuring they are suitable distance from a waterway or path. But I would be living in a fools paradise if I thought for one second that teenager from a city in Europe would bother to struggle too far through the Australian bush at 2am, shovel in hand and good intention in their heart, to lay cable in an environmentally sound way.

By making the fee comparable to the camping ground fees, it could encourage more of them to use these facilities.

But as I said, it's a pity that the poor dude who's just out to get his daily dose of stoke, the most cost effective way possible, is caught in the crossfire.

ah there just covering costs to print out new fine books for all the people smoking in the national park. 20 bucks is a bit steep treachery is 15 a night hot showers etc ,,,,so please explain npws.........



P.s. I hold a grudge the ****ers locked people out of a lot of areas down this way,,,sad as we pay the tax and it hardly world heritage after the sandmines

It's just a bloody shame that so many idiots before hand have made free camping a scarce activity for the rest of us because of their inability to leave the place in a nicer place than they found it. When I first moved here in 2000 we used to free camp along lighthouse beach at Seal Rocks before they started stopping that.

I have no issue with paying some cashola for a provided space but there comes a point when the price point drives people back to free camping and away from the intended space. From memory PP has been $20 a site for 2 people for a while now which we have generally been happy to pay. I still believe Treach is great value as well.

I will check what the rates are in the national park around here later today.

The camp site that National Parks run near Seal Rocks is a good one. It rarely gets busy and you don't see the ranger that often. The private operation of this site would not work compared to the sites south of Crescent because there would be no money in it.

The site that is run privately at Treach is also a cracker

PP has been managed privately for a few years now, and this time last year fees were $20/night over the Xmas period to prevent those that set camp up all Xmas, even though they aren't there much of the time. There have been rumblings from locals that they can't have a holiday in their own back yard. I can see both sides, if you don't set up early you miss out, but it would be nice to have a break locally.