National Park Fees Reduced For Foreigners

[markokang]

At least those of us working here paying taxes should be able to show our work visa and/or tax ID and pay Thai prices.

My Thai girlfriend earns more than me but pays 400% less at parks etc.!?

Too many discrepencies.. It should be government controlled ie: Race relations dept.

And as for never been to a national park, they are beautiful! I love going there! peaceful and alot of widlife to see:)

[SWW]

Non-Thai citizens do not have the same rights and privileges as Thai citizens, just like every other country in the world. Don't expect the 30 baht health scheme and 40 baht admission to National Parks to apply to you. You can cry racism because you are from Zimbabwe or some other country with a race that is different from the predominant race of Thailand; but its just a citizenship issue. Complaining will get you no where. A big smile and decent Thai language skills and a bit of humility and respect will get you into the national park for a pittance 90% of the time.

Too true, my Thai driving license gets me in for Thai price every time without a quibble. My spoken Thai's pretty poor too, just bluff it and finish the conversation as quickly as possible!

I just went to Khao Yai yesterday, and did not even get a chance to show my Thai driving licence. As soon as I opened the window, the guy asked (in Thai, of course) "you work in Thailand, yes?" to which I replied (also in Thai) "yes", and he asked for the Thai price. I suspect that that was the test right there. If I had responded (in English) "excuse me?" or similar, I would have needed to to a lot or arguing to get the Thai price.

He was very friendly, unlike the tossers who kept us awake all night playing their CD player on volume setting 11. At 5AM, we got out of our tent and drove somewhere peaceful, where we slept for 3 hours in the car.

But I agree with the other poster - there are some wonderful sights in the national parks. I don't always get away with paying the Thai price, and as a taxpayer in Thailand I usually object very strongly when I have to pay the 'tourist' price ... but I do understand the reasoning behind charging 'tourists' more than 'locals'. Just a shame that it always comes across as being racist. Can anyone think of a better way of checking?

[jumnien]

This idea that non-citizens living or working in a country should enjoy 100% of the privileges of citizens has to be smashed!

[ratcatcher]

I live and work in Thailand and pay taxes and yesterday we drove into Khao Yai National Park. I was asked for, and paid, the B400 entrance fee along with the fee for my Thai wife.

It wasn't the B400 fee that bothered me but the fact that whilst we traversed the park en route to Prachinburi, we did not see one item of wildlife, not even a bird.

The only reminders that this was indeed a park were the occasional elephant droppings. Otherwise it was rather boring.

However it was on a holiday weekend and maybe the fees are now reduced.

[petedk]

This idea that non-citizens living or working in a country should enjoy 100% of the privileges of citizens has to be smashed!

I teach English in many companies and I am often asked by Thai girls whether they could receive full medical insurance, unemployment benefits and so on if they marry an English man. Also would they receive a widows pension if he died. This is all some of them think about.

So it works both ways!!

Yes, nearly all (if not all) of my Thai friends earn much more than I do and when we go to national parks they are embarrassed when I am asked to pay more then them. Usually I get away with a lower price by speaking Thai and showing my ID card from work.

[WillArzonia]

Nine times out of ten, if you show your Thai health card/social security card, they let you in for the Thai rate. I've only had to argue a couple of times.

[KhaoNiaw]

Not a national park, but I took some visitors to the Bang Sai Art and Crafts Centre yesterday.

At the gate, the girl asked if the foreigners in our group work in Thailand and I said I was the only one. She still charged the Thai price for the others, one child ticket and one 7-year old free. I noticed that she'd only given me 3 adult tickets and pointed out again that we were 4 adults - she just smiled and said that's OK without charging any more. A grand total of 170 baht, when I'd been expecting 400+. Great value and a very pleasant afternoon.

[Larsbo]

These parks fees has been irritating fore years,

I am sailing with guest on my sail yacht and we are paying ex. 7 x 400 a night for me and 6 guest on board.

My Thai wife is normally fore free as our cook; other Thai national has to pay 30 baths some times fore free.

I am paying 2800 bath a night, next day we could sail to the next marine park where we again would have to pay a new park fee 2800 bath.

In a 14 days tour we could be charged 16800 bath and in a yearly high season I could be paying for 4 tours like this

a total of app. 67000 bath.

We do not use any of the houses or other facilities there might or not be on the islands since we have what we need on the boat.

I wish that I could buy a one year season ticket to all the marine parks in the Andaman Sea for the boat incl. 4 - 6 crew.

It is a lot of money we pay, and same time has to watch longtails, fishing boats, trawlers and speedboat fishing illegally with net directly on the reef and sometimes even dynamite fishing on the reef and they are not charged at all.

The even sell the illegal fish to islanders and to tourist.

A yearly charge is ok, but this is way too much one of the overcharged things in Thailand which give a very bad reputation for all who experience it.

[Larsbo]

sEnd a full copi of this topic to the Thai national park office, sothey can read this.

These parks fees has been irritating fore years,

I am sailing with guest on my sail yacht and we are paying ex. 7 x 400 a night for me and 6 guest on board.

My Thai wife is normally fore free as our cook; other Thai national has to pay 30 baths some times fore free.

I am paying 2800 bath a night, next day we could sail to the next marine park where we again would have to pay a new park fee 2800 bath.

In a 14 days tour we could be charged 16800 bath and in a yearly high season I could be paying for 4 tours like this

a total of app. 67000 bath.

We do not use any of the houses or other facilities there might or not be on the islands since we have what we need on the boat.

I wish that I could buy a one year season ticket to all the marine parks in the Andaman Sea for the boat incl. 4 - 6 crew.

It is a lot of money we pay, and same time has to watch longtails, fishing boats, trawlers and speedboat fishing illegally with net directly on the reef and sometimes even dynamite fishing on the reef and they are not charged at all.

The even sell the illegal fish to islanders and to tourist.

A yearly charge is ok, but this is way too much one of the overcharged things in Thailand which give a very bad reputation for all who experience it.

[biggles45]

Not sure about the racism angle. I have a five year thai licence and when i show this have always been charged the local price.

[sriracha john]

The convenient thing about this reoccurring topic, is that you don't have to re-type everything all over again.....

It is a slap in the face for all Western tourists, as no doubt those

with Asian faces will still continue to get in at local rates.

The discrimination is not on race but nationality so its nationalist, not racist.

The aspect of this issue described above is what makes it racist.

Simple to eliminate. Check everyone at the gate for a Thai National ID card. If no have, charge foreigner rate.

If you go in the parks with Thai's (family) and have Thai driving license, show it when you go in and 9 times out of ten you will get in at Thai prices, especially if you joke that you are falaang Lao and not falaang tourist.

Also at some parks the driver go's in free. That always upsets the person collecting the fees when the driver is a falaang.

As with many things in Thailand... different experiences in similar situations abound.

I've experienced no greater than perhaps a 20% success rate with what you describe in approximately 30 different National Parks all around the country.

It involves many different factors which can sometimes be as trivial as which employee is manning the gate on any particular day (successful at the same park one day and unsuccessful on another day) or even the mood of the same employee on any given day (successful at the same park one time and unsuccessful on another day with the same employee both times).

Irregardless of whether or not it's successful, it contradicts the official rules on the National Park's own website which dictate simply that there is a rate for Thais and a rate for Foreigners.

There is nothing in the entrance fees that references race in any fashion whatsoever. It does address nationality, however.

It's not in the rules per say, it's in the implementation of the rules at the entrance gate level.

The employees, who are the direct representatives of the government, apply the racist pricing policy on all-too-frequent basis to the point it's discrimination on a government institutional level.

Oh, the terrible plight of the caucasian man being visciously discriminated against in every corner of the world! Woe is us! Let's all hold hands and sing "We shall overcome"!

The constant troll'er has returned...

[mellow1]

This idea that non-citizens living or working in a country should enjoy 100% of the privileges of citizens has to be smashed!

That should be especially applied in all western countries towards the hoards of foreign abusers, and other illegal foreigners.

[Foggy Bottom]

These parks fees has been irritating fore years,

I am sailing with guest on my sail yacht and we are paying ex. 7 x 400 a night for me and 6 guest on board.

My Thai wife is normally fore free as our cook; other Thai national has to pay 30 baths some times fore free.

I am paying 2800 bath a night, next day we could sail to the next marine park where we again would have to pay a new park fee 2800 bath.

In a 14 days tour we could be charged 16800 bath and in a yearly high season I could be paying for 4 tours like this

a total of app. 67000 bath.

We do not use any of the houses or other facilities there might or not be on the islands since we have what we need on the boat.

I wish that I could buy a one year season ticket to all the marine parks in the Andaman Sea for the boat incl. 4 - 6 crew.

It is a lot of money we pay, and same time has to watch longtails, fishing boats, trawlers and speedboat fishing illegally with net directly on the reef and sometimes even dynamite fishing on the reef and they are not charged at all.

The even sell the illegal fish to islanders and to tourist.

A yearly charge is ok, but this is way too much one of the overcharged things in Thailand which give a very bad reputation for all who experience it.

First up Larsbo - before you get too vocal about operating a boat for profit, or business, or operating tours, I recommend you read the Thai Visa pages for the Royal Decree's proscribed occupations list, and the Government's lists of controlled businesses - foreigners are not allowed to be tour guides or the operators of vehicles and craft for fare paying passengers (and that includes boats in Thai territorial waters,

That said - i'd be very interested to know how you're doing it without being jumped on by the authorities - a PM would be appreciated because as a lifetime yachty with British RYA/DTI Offshore Skippers license, it's something I'd love to be doing here.

If you're running a fully legit and registered business, then perhaps a word with your lawyer about getting a tour admission annual license may yield dividends? The other leading question is that unless you're landing on the islands, and therefore using their facilities (in however limited a fashion) how are the park rangers approaching you to pay the admission fees? Are they zooming out to your anchored yacht in a zodiac and threatening to board you if you don't pay?

And finally ..... regarding reef damage - do your "guests" use the heads while you're in the marine park? Thus adding human effluent to the pollution of the reefs? Or to you have a "no dumping" rule aboard while in the parks?

Gaz

Edited December 11, 2007 by Gaz Chiangmai

[exexpat]

Farang may be annoyed or irritated by this issue. But this NP thing certainly ISN'T a "hardship". However, one cannot deny its association with racism, nationalism, and xenophobia, and racial profiling, whether "accidental" or intentional. Though farang are not subject, there is state racism, nationalism, and xenophobia which is deadly in Thailand. Look around, its not hard to find. Hmong are actively deported into Laos, which hunts them down, or are so uprooted they starve. Pattani people are imprisoned in a war between its own identity and the Thai one. Burmese are working with very terrible conditions, albeit still better than in Burma, but still very far from acceptable.

My point is, its not the average Thai that is the problem. Thai people in general are quite hospitable, caring and are trying their best. The problem is the official stance of the government, and lack of clear coherent policy to protect minorities. Without that, there is no reference to judge right or wrong, abuse or mere annoyance. The government needs to set a clear explicit policy against racial profiling. That is what I am saying.

Agreed, TOURISTS, whether long stay or not, should not be able to land and take advantage of Thai insurance, NP, or any other subsidized program, except maybe public transit. That is not fair. But there are genuine long stay full time taxpaying, working, permanent resident people working in Thailand who in the future may not be able to afford private healthcare. It may be unreasonable to ask them to give up their passport for a Thai one. I don't believe they should be excluded solely on the basis of their skin color when working here. And that should not matter on how "nice" or "understanding" the person making the decision is that day, or which party runs the nation.

Edited December 11, 2007 by exexpat

[jackr]

Even the 200 is highly insulting for Bill Gates and his entourage and to defend the policy is a little naive in my book... a bit like this trollish entity

This idea that non-citizens living or working in a country should enjoy 100% of the privileges of citizens has to be smashed!

[exexpat]

Thailand, as is much of Asia, is an informal country. As such, they deal with things on a case by case basis without formal rules. This clearly becomes problematic when the group of non-citizens becomes large or demanding, or if rules shift frequently. People compain of unfair treatment and lack of clarity. Though policies were still clearly xenophobic during the Taksin era, foreigners really weren't too concerned because they were stable.

Today, we dont know which junta, which PM, which party will rule or how long it will last. Another source of stability, the king, is fading. All this is disturbing for those who have no rights, i.e. noncitizens. It is particularly disturbing that all that separates us from other minorities that have been abused is money and influence. Take that away and who are we equated to?

Not all foreigners residing in Thailand are well paid corporate executives. There are peace corps workers and others who are scraping by, or on a meager retirement income and aren't physically fit to work nor can afford to live in their home nation.

Thais may often make exceptions for reasonable cases for Farang. But the fear is that they won't when its needed, and that fear is compounded by political instability. For traditionally oppressed races, we already know that abuse of power is widespread.

Edited December 11, 2007 by exexpat

[Lancashirelad]

Some of you guys should try visiting Egypt with their very clear inflated pricing scheme for tourists....... even for train tickets.

When you visit the pyramids, the guide.... who goes everyday, has to show his/her passport to get the locals rate!

[LivinLOS]

Not sure about the racism angle. I have a five year thai licence and when i show this have always been charged the local price.

If this fact were actually coded into the rules of the pricing structure I doubt many would argue. I dont see it as especially unfair that a visitor / tourist should pay more than a local resident. But the definition of local resident needs to be more than purely skin color.

[Felt 35]

Why do it have to cost anything to be in a National Park, i.e. a preserved and protected natural area!

It should be in the Governments and the citizen’s interest to use funds to keep any National Park preserved for enjoyment of people now and for future generations.

For fishing there should be a fee and people could buy fishing cards for a day, week or month and it should not be allowed to fish with fishing net. Hunting should be regulated and only allowed in periods of the year and only on animals where research shows that it’s more of a kind than what is good for the vegetation in that specific area.

[Foggy Bottom]

Felt

Are you American by any chance? I ask this because in the context of a British National Park, Hunting is a totally alien concept - only park staff would be able to trap or shoot wildlife, and only then under the strictest control measures. Even 12th August - the infamous start of the game sport season in the UK, shooting parties for grouse and pheasant are not held within National Park boundaries, even if those parks contain fowl-farms breeding birds for that specific purpose.

Fishing (in the UK) is heavily regulated by the authorities with different national rod licenses required for coarse and game fishing, and local permits needed for most waters - the rod licenses are needed for any water except a few privately owned, where you would normally need a day permit.

British National Parks normally encompass "Areas of outstanding Natural Beauty" and/or "Sites of Special Scientific Interest" (SSIs) in relation to wild flora and fauna. Any form of development is very strictly controlled with regards to aesthetics, placement, size, impact on the environment etc - generally speaking, a building or planning application within a UK national park, other than essential agricultural construction, is pretty much guaranteed a "rejected" stamp.

The primary difference between UK & Thailand in terms of collective government+business+public attitude towards, and maintenance of, national parkland has very little to do with wealth of the individual, it is far more to do with the overall national educational level, and understanding the value and importance of protecting the national parks.

Despite having almost the same populace, the UK is only about half the size of Thailand in acres / square miles (whatever measurement you prefer) and Thailand is far longer/wider than the UK - this dispersal and the predominantly village-centric mindset of the majority in rural Thailand, coupled with low educational levels (compared to developed countries) leads to a lack of recognition of the importance of national parkland as a permanent asset. In this context, the government does a fairly good job of protecting those lands here (not great, just fairly good as all the encroachment stories attest to) but where they completely fall down, is in preventing the creation of food and souvenir metropolises immediately outside every entrance to any park entrance or other tourist-popular location - and lets be honest - they are eyesores.

I've always maintained that Thailand has more than enough legislation in every aspect of managing the country, but that enforcement (or rather, lack of it) and obedience (or rather, lack of it) to the laws are the problem. Private "facility" development within, or on the edge of, National Parks is another example of this - whether it be Khun Doi selling barbequed pig intestines, or Pooyai Minister developing a dry ski slope and cable car. The law should apply to all, and the enforcement, regulatory, and decisive bodies should be truly independent and non-bending in the face of feudalistic bullying by those on high. Until they are, this discussion, like the ones about dowries, driving standards, nationalistic protectionism et al, will continue to surface repeatedly.

Any farang who is sufficiently angst-ridden, to want to truly do something about this, should remember there is only one way they can - pay for, and acquire, Thai citizenship, then use that citizenship to pursue their individual cause celebre. Until then, find a windy hill top, face the wind, and urinate into it - it'll be a whole lot more fun, and infinitely less stressful.

Gaz

[Felt 35]

Gaz

You are of course right in your observation, included our piss facing the wind whatever the subject is as long as we not are citizens of Thailand. But even if we was (citizens) don’t I think it will help much. To see the importance of preserving the nature for the future have in my opinion something to do with how you are. Not who you are.

[exexpat]

 Economic force of migrant labour,  BangkokPost Dec 18 2007

Thailand's estimated 1.8 million migrant workers earned $2 billion in wages last year but may have contributed $11 billion, or 6.2 per cent, to the gross domestic product, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) revealed.

According to the ILO report - Thailand Economic Contribution of Migrant Workers - the kingdom is getting a better deal off its migrant workers than it is giving them. "If migrants are as productive as Thai workers in each sector, their total contribution to output should be in the order of 11 billion dollars or about 6.2 per cent of Thailand's GDP," said Manola Abella, the ILO's chief technical advisor in Thailand, summing up the report's findings.

The total number of migrants in Thailand rose from about 700,000 in 1995 to 1.8 million in 2006, according to the report. Last year about 75 per cent of the migrant labourers came from neighbouring Burma, who now represent 5 per cent of Thailand's total labour force of 36 million.  The remainder came from Laos and Cambodia, Thailand's neighbours to the north and east.

Thailand has been registering migrant workers since 1992, but many stay unregistered to avoid the relatively expensive and time-consuming process.  In 1995, some 45 per cent of the estimated 700,000 migrants were registered, while only 26 per cent of the 1.8 million were registered last year.  Migrant labourers are limited to certain sectors such as agriculture, fisheries, construction and as domestics. Nearly half of Thailand's domestics are now believed to migrants, said the ILO report.

It found that migrants, on average, earn about half the minimum wage and are not eligible for state services such as medical care and education for their children.

"What worries the ILO is that migrants are not receiving equal treatment," said Abella.  The ILO called on the Thai government to abide by fundamental principles is dealing with their migrant labour and to make procedures flexible.

"If the government were to acknowledge that the Thai economy is likely to continue to employ migrants over the medium term, create mechanisms to involve social partners in development of a transparent migrant policy, and promote cooperation with migrant countries of origin, Thailand could reap the benefits of migration while protecting the rights of migrants in Thailand," concluded the report. (dpa)