All Farangs To Pay Full Price At National Parks

[rogerchiangmai]

CHARGES TO NATIONAL PARKS - CHANGE FROM 15th NOVEMBER

ALL FOREIGNERS TO PAY FULL PRICE 400THB

The question here is can anyone confirm a change in the policy in Thailand of allowing long stay foreigners to enter national parks etc. at the local Thai prices. Up until now this has been straightforward by using Thai driving licence or similar BUT THIS MAY HAVE CHANGED.

We visited Doi Suthep national park yesterday (Sunday) and the officials demanded 400THB per person entry from all 10 of us. We protested that we are all Thai residents and had the necessary documents only to be told that there had been a recent meeting??? and that ALL foreigners are now required to pay. We protested about this and pointed out that there had been no signs or notice to this effect (we suspected that it had been made up) In the end the officials backed down, charged us 20THB each and said that we would have to pay 400THB next time! we pointed out that there would not be a next time if this was the policy - we will be voting with our feet.

This seems to be a new policy - the meeting was said to have taken place on 15th November - has any one else heard about this or is it just a few locals making policy up on the hoof????

Roger, Chiang Mai

Edited November 21, 2007 by camerata
Fixed formatting

[cmsally]

This has been on the cards for a while and in the intervening time they have been allowing residents in on cheaper prices (although seemed to be a bit haphazard) and also tour companies to pay the old rate of 200Bt if they buy tickets in bulk.

Obviously now they have decided that they want to enforce the 400Bt. Which will mean that everybody, whether resident , tour group or unaccompanied visitor.

I for one won't be going near a national park.

I think this means entry to Mae sa Waterfall is now 400Bt

[jackr]

This has been on the cards for a while and in the intervening time they have been allowing residents in on cheaper prices (although seemed to be a bit haphazard) and also tour companies to pay the old rate of 200Bt if they buy tickets in bulk.

Obviously now they have decided that they want to enforce the 400Bt. Which will mean that everybody, whether resident , tour group or unaccompanied visitor.

I for one won't be going near a national park.

I think this means entry to Mae sa Waterfall is now 400Bt

Nor me

[uptheos]

400 Baht is about 8 pounds (for foreigners). As a native of UK I have to pay 25 pounds Woburn Wildlife Park, 17-95 pounds Tower of London and 20 pounds Madame Tussauds.....that's as a native! I agree that foeigners should pay the same and they do. However, if the UK brought in a law saying I can go to places that involve my heritage for say five pounds a time, but all foreigners have to pay full price I wouldn't complain. I reckon a one off 8 quid to a decent national park isn't so bad.....just be selective where you go.

[percy2]

CHARGES TO NATIONAL PARKS - CHANGE FROM 15th NOVEMBER

ALL FOREIGNERS TO PAY FULL PRICE 400THB

[/b]

The question here is can anyone confirm a change in the policy in Thailand of allowing long stay foreigners to enter national parks etc. at the local Thai prices. Up until now this has been straightforward by using Thai driving licence or similar BUT THIS MAY HAVE CHANGED.

We visited Doi Suthep national park yesterday (Sunday) and the officials demanded 400THB per person entry from all 10 of us. We protested that we are all Thai residents and had the necessary documents only to be told that there had been a recent meeting??? and that ALL foreigners are now required to pay. We protested about this and pointed out that there had been no signs or notice to this effect (we suspected that it had been made up) In the end the officials backed down, charged us 20THB each and said that we would have to pay 400THB next time! we pointed out that there would not be a next time if this was the policy - we will be voting with our feet.

This seems to be a new policy - the meeting was said to have taken place on 15th November - has any one else heard about this or is it just a few locals making policy up on the hoof????

Roger, Chiang Mai

At Nam Ngao last week they wanted to charge me B200 until they saw my license , while at it I showed them stubs from some other parks I've been to recently to show I normally pay the local price. They were horrified to see that Thai's are charged B40 to enter Khao Yai.

I enjoy the NP's of Thailand and go to them regularly but B400 may put me off.

The double pricing is a bit silly as they could easily get the visitors to voluntarily spend more than that at these places.

Cheers

[garro]

Our village is part of a national park and I usually get in for free.

If a big boss arrives from afar I pay the Thai prices.

I would not agree to pay to full price, and if asked to do so I would simply not go.

I think if the parks brought out a special price for foreigners who are frequent users I would probably pay this.

I have taught for free in the village school for the last four years so feel worthy of the discount.

Edited November 19, 2007 by garro

[sriracha john]

Perhaps this is a new phenomenon for Chiang Mai, but on a national scale, this policy has been in place for over a year....

A new quarterly thread...

I apologize for having overlooked this fiscal year's quarterly thread on double-pricing and arriving in such a tardy manner.

I post my standard response in the hopes that one day the Thai solution proposed to this Thai/Foreigner issue becomes reality:

Ahhhh... another thread to which the following is appropriate:

Sorry to have not noticed this month's version of this monthly thread earlier:

I have never heard of a tax id and work permit in tandem NOT get someone in at local prices.

Just off the top of my head and to be quite specific from personal experiences, the following parks would accept ONLY Thai National ID cards for admission at Thai prices:

Pang Sida National Park

Huay Huat National Park

Khao Sam Roi Yot National Marine Park

It is a highly inconsistent policy extended across the country which lends itself to abuse and charges of racism/favoritism, and creates a great deal of resentment. Certainly not worth the ill will it generates.

It's a shame when those in power to effect change ignore the recommendations of those with brains. The solution is right in front of their noses:

Dr. Adis Israngkura, an economist at Chiang Mai University and a consultant to Thailand's first and foremost "think tank" (Thailand Development Research Institute) conducted a research project for TDRI on this very topic and wrote the best paper, "Determining entrance fees to national parks: the case of Thailand" that I have ever encountered on the subject.

The paper, published in 2001, made the following recommendations:

1. Higher fees, for all, to the more popular parks with many facilities, which can subsidize the smaller parks with very few facilities.

2. Higher fees, for all, on long week-ends/holidays when parks tend to be heavily visited to help ease congestion and lessen environmental degradation, which will result in increased visitor satisfaction.

3. Annual memberships and lifetime memberships should be offered and available to all.

4. Both Thai and foreigners should pay the same entrance fee, but special services should be made available to the foreign visitor for additional higher fees, such as English-speaking tour/travel guides or English-language information booklets/maps. "The current policy unnecessarily jeopardizes the the image of the overall tourism industry."

5. Entrances fees should be exempted for the elderly, the handicapped, and children visiting on school trips.

I think when experts, and Thai himself, recognizes it as a problem, it's VERY telling....

[chiang mai]

400 Baht is about 8 pounds (for foreigners). As a native of UK I have to pay 25 pounds Woburn Wildlife Park, 17-95 pounds Tower of London and 20 pounds Madame Tussauds.....that's as a native! I agree that foeigners should pay the same and they do. However, if the UK brought in a law saying I can go to places that involve my heritage for say five pounds a time, but all foreigners have to pay full price I wouldn't complain. I reckon a one off 8 quid to a decent national park isn't so bad.....just be selective where you go.

400 baht is more like £5.80 but the fact remains that it is still 400 baht and an inappropriate amount for residents of Thailand who happen to be farangs.

[CountryBoy]

I got into a queue to get 6 tickets to enter the hot springs outside of Pai. Now that's part of the Huay Nam Dung Nat'l Park. Spoke perfect English and pointed to the Thb 20 stack of tickets. 18 yr old kid in military uniform looks cautiously around, smiles and takes Thb 120. I thank him and proceed.

I believe some of the park staff are at odds with the double pricing too. Raising a hoo hah amongst foreigners, by foreigners might just get this common response. Walking ATM's can afford it. A long term and hopefully permanent ideal would be to raise awareness and even rejection of 2 tier pricing BY Thais (park loving ones at least) themselves. Thb 50 - 100 seems fair enough or dare I say it, Thb 1000 season ticket pass good for 12 months? with more concessions for senior citizens etc etc.

[rogerchiangmai]

Thanks for those additions, clearly an irregular policy across Thailand and of course a running sore for many of us.

Just for the record the National Park Office in question is the Mont Tha Thon waterfall on the right almost half way up the winding road to Doi Suthep. This waterfall has virtually no facilities, no food or shop, you basically travel down a simple road to the modest waterfall and enjoy the view, maybe picnic, maybe take a picture or two, a 30 minute attraction.

Higher up the same road past Suthep Temple and Bhumping Palce at the Hmong Village Doi Pui - if you walk on through the village high street lined with retailers you can find gardens laid out beautifully with flower beds and trees, some have objects from past times village life etc. and provide lovely mountain views, one even has a small waterfall. They too have an entry fee.......... just 10THB.

[PeaceBlondie]

I've gone this year with my boyfriend's family to Queen Sirikit Botanical Garden, and also to Doi Inthanon. They let us all in for free at the garden, and I paid full price at Doi Inthanon, despite my protests and Thai driving license. Hit and miss. But the wound I got at Doi Inthanon in 2003 is acting up lately, and it reminds me that the staff there gave me about 4000 baht worth of free first aid, so I'm not complaining.

[chanchao]

I go to Montrathan Falls a lot. Great and clean place to take the kid. I'll check the ticket situation next time I'm there. (Maybe this coming weekend)

[uptheos]

400 Baht is about 8 pounds (for foreigners). As a native of UK I have to pay 25 pounds Woburn Wildlife Park, 17-95 pounds Tower of London and 20 pounds Madame Tussauds.....that's as a native! I agree that foeigners should pay the same and they do. However, if the UK brought in a law saying I can go to places that involve my heritage for say five pounds a time, but all foreigners have to pay full price I wouldn't complain. I reckon a one off 8 quid to a decent national park isn't so bad.....just be selective where you go.

400 baht is more like £5.80 but the fact remains that it is still 400 baht and an inappropriate amount for residents of Thailand who happen to be farangs.

Sorry, got my calculations wrong....its an even better deal! I guess its what a person's values are. Since it has been widely advertised on this blogsite a certain establishment does a BBQ for 999 Baht all you can eat drink. Now some people might like this and find it good value - good luck to them its their choice. Personally I'd prefer to visit 2 or more National Parks of my choice for less money as I feel my gratification lasts longer than a few hours. The overpricing for farangs has been around for ages and its not going away. Either get over it or boycott the places - you have your choice - use it. I think it might be best if you did anyway, because you can't appreciate a thing of beauty whilst seething about your loss of 400 Baht. High BP and stroke just aint worth 400 Baht!

[VocalNeal]

400 Baht is about 8 pounds (for foreigners). As a native of UK I have to pay 25 pounds Woburn Wildlife Park, 17-95 pounds Tower of London and 20 pounds Madame Tussauds.....that's as a native! I agree that foeigners should pay the same and they do. However, if the UK brought in a law saying I can go to places that involve my heritage for say five pounds a time, but all foreigners have to pay full price I wouldn't complain. I reckon a one off 8 quid to a decent national park isn't so bad.....just be selective where you go.

What a load of drivel. I suspect this was written just to bait me which it did. This type of comment is niave and counter productive. Next you'll be telling us that we should pay 65 baht a litre for petrol and 476 baht for a bus ticket from Bangkok to Pattaya because it costs 14 pounds on the Oxford Tube to London. Hey why not make the Skytrain far 102 Baht. Don't compare anything in a country you visit to anything you spend "at home". Pick another indicator like the minimum daily wage or the price of daily necessities and then do some math, you'll get closer to the real price. Accordingly my calculation says entrance to The Tower of London is 17.95 (the other two you quoted are businesses and not government owned) so 17.95/5.52 is 3.25 hours at minimum wage. So take 3.25 hours at 22.85 baht which is Bangkok's minimum and we get a sample entrance fee of 75 baht to a Natl. Park. Incidentally I couldn't find the admission charge for UK Natl' Parks. maybe they are FREE!

I believe in Aus. this person would have been called a "WHENWE"

Edited November 19, 2007 by VocalNeal

[uptheos]

400 Baht is about 8 pounds (for foreigners). As a native of UK I have to pay 25 pounds Woburn Wildlife Park, 17-95 pounds Tower of London and 20 pounds Madame Tussauds.....that's as a native! I agree that foeigners should pay the same and they do. However, if the UK brought in a law saying I can go to places that involve my heritage for say five pounds a time, but all foreigners have to pay full price I wouldn't complain. I reckon a one off 8 quid to a decent national park isn't so bad.....just be selective where you go.

What a load of drivel. I suspect this was written just to bait me which it did. This type of comment is niave and counter productive. Next you'll be telling us that we should pay 65 baht a litre for petrol and 476 baht for a bus ticket from Bangkok to Pattaya because it costs 14 pounds on the Oxford Tube to London. Hey why not make the Skytrain far 102 Baht. Don't compare anything in a country you visit to anything you spend "at home". Pick another indicator like the minimum daily wage or the price of daily necessities and then do some math, you'll get closer to the real price. Accordingly my calculation says entrance to The Tower of London is 17.95 (the other two you quoted are businesses and not government owned) so 17.95/5.52 is 3.25 hours at minimum wage. So take 3.25 hours at 22.85 baht which is Bangkok's minimum and we get a sample entrance fee of 75 baht to a Natl. Park. Incidentally I couldn't find the admission charge for UK Natl' Parks. maybe they are FREE!

I believe in Aus. this person would have been called a "WHENWE"

I don't see any need for personal insults, but I expect the moderators will edit it - all I have done is pass my opinion.

It was certainly not written to bait you.....who are you anyway someone important? Why is the comment naive and counter productive? Naive and counter productive for whom....you? If I say I see nothing wrong with paying 400 Baht for a visit to a national park its up to me, I can pass an opinion (can't I)? I didn't realise this was a blogsite where everyone had to agree with each other. Incidentally I'm not visiting here - I've lived here on a retirement visa for 11 years (Nienke knows me) and to be honest I find very little to complain about - I think we are lucky tolive here. I think your rantings about petrol and bus tickets are just that...rantings.....do try to come back with something a little more constructive. You are free to use your money exactly as you choose and if you can't afford a trip to a National Park then don't go.....its as simple as that!

[ZEAK]

400 Baht is about 8 pounds (for foreigners). As a native of UK I have to pay 25 pounds Woburn Wildlife Park, 17-95 pounds Tower of London and 20 pounds Madame Tussauds.....that's as a native! I agree that foeigners should pay the same and they do. However, if the UK brought in a law saying I can go to places that involve my heritage for say five pounds a time, but all foreigners have to pay full price I wouldn't complain. I reckon a one off 8 quid to a decent national park isn't so bad.....just be selective where you go.

What a load of drivel. I suspect this was written just to bait me which it did. This type of comment is niave and counter productive. Next you'll be telling us that we should pay 65 baht a litre for petrol and 476 baht for a bus ticket from Bangkok to Pattaya because it costs 14 pounds on the Oxford Tube to London. Hey why not make the Skytrain far 102 Baht. Don't compare anything in a country you visit to anything you spend "at home". Pick another indicator like the minimum daily wage or the price of daily necessities and then do some math, you'll get closer to the real price. Accordingly my calculation says entrance to The Tower of London is 17.95 (the other two you quoted are businesses and not government owned) so 17.95/5.52 is 3.25 hours at minimum wage. So take 3.25 hours at 22.85 baht which is Bangkok's minimum and we get a sample entrance fee of 75 baht to a Natl. Park. Incidentally I couldn't find the admission charge for UK Natl' Parks. maybe they are FREE!

I believe in Aus. this person would have been called a "WHENWE"

I agree. That comment does not help long stayers at all. The fact of the matter is this is our home, some with families and land, so why are we treated like outsiders? Fine, have a price for "tourists", but not for others who live here. It is safe to say that if this was tried in some western countries there would be lawsuits every other day. Its just plain wrong. If I show my license and they still insist on my paying a price that is inflated 400%, then I just dont go. Its not the amount of money, its the issue behind it, the whole idea. So dont get hung up on "its only bla bla in pounds". Thats not the point.

[percy2]

I agree. That comment does not help long stayers at all. The fact of the matter is this is our home, some with families and land, so why are we treated like outsiders? Fine, have a price for "tourists", but not for others who live here. It is safe to say that if this was tried in some western countries there would be lawsuits every other day. Its just plain wrong. If I show my license and they still insist on my paying a price that is inflated 400%, then I just dont go. Its not the amount of money, its the issue behind it, the whole idea. So dont get hung up on "its only bla bla in pounds". Thats not the point.

If it was only 400% it wouldn't be too bad

Cheers

[uptheos]

400 Baht is about 8 pounds (for foreigners). As a native of UK I have to pay 25 pounds Woburn Wildlife Park, 17-95 pounds Tower of London and 20 pounds Madame Tussauds.....that's as a native! I agree that foeigners should pay the same and they do. However, if the UK brought in a law saying I can go to places that involve my heritage for say five pounds a time, but all foreigners have to pay full price I wouldn't complain. I reckon a one off 8 quid to a decent national park isn't so bad.....just be selective where you go.

What a load of drivel. I suspect this was written just to bait me which it did. This type of comment is niave and counter productive. Next you'll be telling us that we should pay 65 baht a litre for petrol and 476 baht for a bus ticket from Bangkok to Pattaya because it costs 14 pounds on the Oxford Tube to London. Hey why not make the Skytrain far 102 Baht. Don't compare anything in a country you visit to anything you spend "at home". Pick another indicator like the minimum daily wage or the price of daily necessities and then do some math, you'll get closer to the real price. Accordingly my calculation says entrance to The Tower of London is 17.95 (the other two you quoted are businesses and not government owned) so 17.95/5.52 is 3.25 hours at minimum wage. So take 3.25 hours at 22.85 baht which is Bangkok's minimum and we get a sample entrance fee of 75 baht to a Natl. Park. Incidentally I couldn't find the admission charge for UK Natl' Parks. maybe they are FREE!

I believe in Aus. this person would have been called a "WHENWE"

I agree. That comment does not help long stayers at all. The fact of the matter is this is our home, some with families and land, so why are we treated like outsiders? Fine, have a price for "tourists", but not for others who live here. It is safe to say that if this was tried in some western countries there would be lawsuits every other day. Its just plain wrong. If I show my license and they still insist on my paying a price that is inflated 400%, then I just dont go. Its not the amount of money, its the issue behind it, the whole idea. So dont get hung up on "its only bla bla in pounds". Thats not the point.

Sorry to give you such grief, but I believe we are on a blogsite not a direct link to the government. I'm not on a crusade to help long stayers, I'm a long stayer and in all honestly I feel things equal themselves out in the end. I agree that people who live here permanently should get a reduced price, but it just won't happen. Yes, morally its wrong and showing a licence or your name on a land deed makes no difference. So all I'm saying is you deal with things in the way that suits your lifestyle and I'll deal with them in the way that suits me. At the moment we're focusing on National Parks - well try flashing your license at other establishments and see if they care either!

[Crow Boy]

Guys - let's all remember the rules of the forum and be polite to eachother.

For what it is worth, as a long term resident it irritates me that I have to pay a second tier price to go and see national parks or visit some of the larger and more famous temples. My partner walks through either free or for 20baht and I have to trek around to the other side of the place and pay 200baht. The rationale has always been that "Thais pay taxes and therefore support the cost" well I pay considerably more tax than the average Thai and my partner has NEVER paid tax so that argument is not valid.

CB

[uptheos]

Guys - let's all remember the rules of the forum and be polite to eachother.

For what it is worth, as a long term resident it irritates me that I have to pay a second tier price to go and see national parks or visit some of the larger and more famous temples. My partner walks through either free or for 20baht and I have to trek around to the other side of the place and pay 200baht. The rationale has always been that "Thais pay taxes and therefore support the cost" well I pay considerably more tax than the average Thai and my partner has NEVER paid tax so that argument is not valid.

CB

Crow Boy - I fully agree with being polite to each other, however I have noticed that some impolite messages get removed and others not? Back to the topic - yes it irritates me too, but the comment was made that I do no favours for long stayers. Long stayers can fend for themselves as I have and on a personal note I saw all the National Parks and temples I wanted to see years ago - so I haven't got a problem. If others have got a problem and want to send their BP sky high then thats up to them. I think on the whole, living in Thailand I get a bargain - that's all and if I want to go to a national park I'll either go, pay the fee and enjoy it or go, pay the fee and be miserable or not go because the fee is stopping me seeing something beautiful......many choices.

[Ricardo]

I would confirm that, for entry into a National Park in the UK, there is absolutely NO FEE, and there would be widespread hilarity at any attempt to introduce one.

How can you justify charging, for entry into part of your own country, as if you don't have an inherent right, to be there, on publicly-owned land or a common Right-of-Wa ?.

Now as to charging for use of facilities, such as a car-park, or a well-maintained public-washroom, then that would be easier to justify IMHO. Although one can equally argue that this is what we pay taxes for, in a high-tax country like the UK, which Thailand is not one.

[chanchao]

At the moment we're focusing on National Parks - well try flashing your license at other establishments and see if they care either!

Well, they *DO*.

Loads of businesses give discounts to residents and not to tourists, because it makes sense. (Returning customers, etc.) They obviously don't care if the resident is Thai or something else, they care about making it attractive for locals to visit them because they know they're not going to pay top tourist dollar.

Edited November 19, 2007 by chanchao

[uptheos]

Lots of contributions on this overpricing topic, (which has been thrashed out over and over again during previous years), is basically preaching to the converted. No-one on this topic has any power to change things though I agree its a good sounding board. Might I suggest all those seriously afflicted with this overpricing stuff, make placards (written in Thai) and have a demonstration march to city hall. I'm sure many Thai sympathisers will join you on the way!!

[rogerchiangmai]

Again thanks to all the contributions they are appreciated.

Much has focussed on the age old arguements about the fairness of the pricing system, what I really wanted to know is if this really is a change across all of Thailand from 15th November or if this is just a few local folk at one National Park acting on their own initiative. I have never encountered this problem before at many other National Parks I have visited and I have always paid Thai prices wherever I travel, so it was new to me - the answers seem to suggest that the picture across the country however is more patchy. Clearly we all make our own decisions about where we visit and what we are prepared to tolerate, but this forum enables us to share our knowledge and act accordingly.

As for the future, I thought the quote above from Dr. Adis Israngkura was spot on - we love this land and it's people but of course they get it wrong sometimes, and this is one of those times. We therefore hope that common sense prevails in due course and that some or all of Dr. Israngkura's proposals become a reality one day. We all can decide how we choose to help to bring about change, that is our choice, for me the issue is one of principle and fairness so I will act accordingly.

Best wishes to all.

[mcgriffith]

I see the issue as just raw capitalism, with a smattering of xenophobia mixed in.

If the dual pricing policy bothers you, vote with your feet. Don't enter and don't pay.

There will always be tourists on a short stay who will pay the fees, for a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to see a spectacular park, etc.

For those who live here, who have Thai partners/spouses/family who enter for a pittance, and are asked to pay the full foreign tariff, it must be aggravating.

The same kind of dual-price model exists in Hawaii, USA. If you're a haole from the Mainland, you pay full-pop retail.

If you're a local long-time resident, you get the discount price for everything- car rentals, hotels, etc.

In Thailand, they don't want seem to want to differentiate between the tourist who just stepped off a plane, and one who has lived here for years, has a Thai family, etc.

Doesn't seem fair, but that's the way it is....

[Dustoff]

I tend to agree with Crowboy that politeness works wonders, not to mention the forum rules.

If we have problems in Thailand, perhaps we could contact local authorities rather than crab at one another?

I have found that the Tourism Authority of Thailand, Thai Immigration and even the Tourist Police (who seem willing to forward comments to the appropriate governmental departments) are open to meaningful input (as opposed to complaints about their country) and are willing to respond in kind.

If Thais are in our home country and find discrepancies in the administration of fees, laws or treatment of foreigners, should they complain to one another or seek appropriate resolution?

Theos, while I understand (not necessarily agree with) your standpoints, if you find yourself having trouble with fellow ThaiVisa members or the moderators, is it possible that you tend to come off as sometimes rude and opinionated? Not a judgment, just an observation.

Respectfully, da Dustoff

[sceadugenga]

Take a run up to the 'Rai and bring your kids out to the Kun Khon Nam Tok National Park. Great waterfall, good walks and lots of lawn area. Never been charged to go in yet.

Edited November 19, 2007 by sceadugenga

[JimsKnight]

I go to Montrathan Falls a lot. Great and clean place to take the kid. I'll check the ticket situation next time I'm there. (Maybe this coming weekend)

Just been, they wanted 200 baht, they got 40 baht instead (on producing thai drivers licence)

Phu Ping Palace, they wanted 100 baht, they got 20 baht (on producing thai drivers licence).

It's a shame to see that the thais are may wish to bring in hard-core pricing but I doubt it'll come to anything.

Edited November 19, 2007 by JimsKnight

[sriracha john]

I see the issue as just raw capitalism, with a smattering of xenophobia mixed in.

If the dual pricing policy bothers you, vote with your feet. Don't enter and don't pay.

There will always be tourists on a short stay who will pay the fees, for a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to see a spectacular park, etc.

For those who live here, who have Thai partners/spouses/family who enter for a pittance, and are asked to pay the full foreign tariff, it must be aggravating.

The same kind of dual-price model exists in Hawaii, USA. If you're a haole from the Mainland, you pay full-pop retail.

If you're a local long-time resident, you get the discount price for everything- car rentals, hotels, etc.

Keeping the topic relative to that of National Parks, is that the policy in Hawaii? As a federally operated entity, I suspect it's not.

Even if it was, how do they differentiate Hawaiian residents from other Americans or even other nationals?

A Hawaiian equivalent to the Thai situation would be that many South Pacific-looking individuals wouldn't be questioned at the entrance and allowed to enter a National Park at one rate, whether they were Hawaiians or Fijians or even Filipinos....

whereas any Caucasian would automatically be assumed not to be a Hawaiian resident and be expected to pay at another rate, unless they presented a valid ID proving otherwise.

Thailand, with its racist overtones that allow Asians of many different nationalities to enter at a local rate (as long as they remain mute while paying), but always demand a higher rate of any Caucasian wishing to enter, is pretty unique in my experiences around the globe.

The highly arbitrary nature regarding the enforcement of the rules (which are quite precise in that Thai Nationals pay one price and ALL foreigners, irregardless of whether they have DL, work permits, Thai wives, been here 25 years, or are just here for a 3 day holiday visit from the Ukraine pay another) lends itself to many complaints. It lends itself to situations where at any particular park on Tuesdays and Fridays it allows foreigners in at the local rate, but only if Sombat is manning the front gate between the hours of 10:00 and 13:00. Even within the same park between different employees on different days and depending on their various different moods seems to dictate whether or not foreigners get in at a foreigner rate or a local rate. On top of that some parks always do it one way and others always do it another way. Consistently inconsistent is an apt description on a national basis.

Btw, Dr. Israngkura's proposals solve all the problems with this on-going issue that generates so much ill-will.

Edited November 19, 2007 by sriracha john

[chanchao]

Why 40 by the way and not 20? It used to be 20? It did you bring someone?