Author Topic: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.  (Read 17734 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline krisandkev

  • Hard Floor Camper User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1421
  • Thanked: 69 times
Here we go.......   And once started how far will this spread. (It has cost $50 just to drive through Kalumburu for a few years now.)  Better get up there and see it for free while you can.  Well not really free, we spend a lot of money visiting the area......      Kevin

Kimberley traditional owners are looking to charge fees and tighten the regulation of the cruise boat industry to protect the region's cultural values.
Some of the most picturesque sections of the northern Kimberley coast are only accessible by boat or plane.
Each year, around 8,000 people are booking onto cruise boats and charter vessels that allow them to disembark at sites like the Horizontal Falls, and Raft Point.
In recent years, Aboriginal groups like Dambimangari have been granted exclusive possession native title rights of swathes of land and sea.
They are now looking to exercise their legal rights to control where people are travelling.
Dambimangari are proposing a system of visitor permits that would require every cruise boat traveller to pay $110.
Kris and Kev
2008 TTD Landcruiser 200 GXL, Aust Off Road Camper, 20ft Bushtracker.

Offline xcvator

  • 2017 National Meet Volunteer
  • Hard Top Camper User
  • *****
  • Posts: 4328
  • Thanked: 322 times
  • Gender: Male
So can we charge them to come into our city's and towns  >:D
spending the kids inheritance as fast as I can

tug 2018 Isuzu Mux LSU
1999 se diesel Jackaroo
July 10/2012  outback campers "Tanami"
New Age "Little Joey"

Offline Bird

  • Once Was Lost, now am found
  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • Thanked: 1874 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Life is far too long....
    • My Place.
Quote from: xcvator
So can we charge them to come into our city's and towns  >:D
works for me.
-
Click to enlarge

Gone to a new home

Offline jayjay

  • Tent User
  • ***
  • Posts: 100
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Gender: Female
Sooo....... hypothetically:
if you were an Aboriginal on one of these said cruise-boats, would you be subject to this fee?? And if not, why not??
If this were in reverse, would it not be classified as racism? My point is, is this not racism too?? Integration seems to be only in certain circumstances??
Mitsubishi Challenger
Rearfold Safari Trackabout

Offline cruiser 91

  • Soft Floor Camper User
  • ****
  • Posts: 447
  • Thanked: 34 times
Before I make a fool of myself,
Any info on how the $110 fee will be used to protect region's cultural values?

Do the traditional land owners pay land taxes or rates on the land they traditionally own?
« Last Edit: March 30, 2015, 08:32:07 AM by cruiser 91 »
Hell's Gate, Worlds End, South Australia.

Offline krisandkev

  • Hard Floor Camper User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1421
  • Thanked: 69 times
More of the article says,
Dambimangari spokeswoman Leah Umbagai said there needed to be more recognition that people are going onto Aboriginal country and better respect for scared sites.
"It really hurts us to see people are going there without any knowledge or understanding of the country, and our traditions and customs and our beliefs," she said.
"There were quite a few occasions where people went and took chippings of [rock] paintings and then when people found out, they threw them overboard.
"Removing or touching things, that's just not right, and it hurts us."
The money would be channelled into the group's ranger group, to spend more time educating the tour companies and repairing any damage at popular spots.

Now I am not sure if the tour companies would allow people to damage and take things out of the sacred sites, but I may be wrong.  Will find out in June when we do a 12 day boat tour.  Are the aboriginal people going to fund and do all of the work in administrating the permit system, collection and distribution of the fees?  But they have been granted ownership of the land so we have to follow their rules. Is this a life style choice argument?  We love to travel and travel into remote areas. That is our life style choice, but we also are fully self funded, no government hand outs for us. I know, we cannot talk about things like this - it is racist.   ;D   Kevin
Kris and Kev
2008 TTD Landcruiser 200 GXL, Aust Off Road Camper, 20ft Bushtracker.

Offline Heavyweight

  • Learning the Ropes
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Thanked: 1 times
$110....Not sure if that amount will help....maybe more maybe less, but something has to be done to protect these areas...

I have traveled to many of these places and no matter where you go most of these places have been affected by tourists, whether it by them leaving rubbish, or going off the designated path for a better photo, scratching their mark into rocks or trees, taking a souvenir, every visitor has some impact on these areas...

Whether you agree with the governments position on Native title or not, currently it is their land and they are entitled to use it/charge for it/conserve it as they please.

"just my two cents"

Offline edz

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 6880
  • Thanked: 926 times
  • Gender: Male
  • " I dont like Sheeple "
Simples as the Meercat says, boycot these places with total exclusion and see how long it takes till we see if its realy cultural protection or $$$ the owners are interested in . ;D
" IMPROVISE  ADAPT   OVERCOME   and  PERSEVERE  "

Offline Barry G

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 2613
  • Thanked: 29 times
  • Gender: Male
  • For my 'Pop' l.Cpl Tom Powell, A Comp.21Batt.6Brig
Simples as the Meercat says, boycot these places with total exclusion and see how long it takes till we see if its realy cultural protection or $$$ the owners are interested in . ;D
Given the quote from the article I think that they wouldn't miss those who chose to not go.
2000 Jackaroo Monterey 2002 Jackaroo 'Equipe' & Heaslip soft floor rear fold camper.
05 Subaru Outback Weekender GOGO Camper
 i hope for a better world for my kids, and yours, not just a bigger slice of the current one!

Offline Barry G

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 2613
  • Thanked: 29 times
  • Gender: Male
  • For my 'Pop' l.Cpl Tom Powell, A Comp.21Batt.6Brig
More of the article says,
Dambimangari spokeswoman Leah Umbagai said there needed to be more recognition that people are going onto Aboriginal country and better respect for scared sites.
"It really hurts us to see people are going there without any knowledge or understanding of the country, and our traditions and customs and our beliefs," she said.
"There were quite a few occasions where people went and took chippings of [rock] paintings and then when people found out, they threw them overboard.
"Removing or touching things, that's just not right, and it hurts us."
The money would be channelled into the group's ranger group, to spend more time educating the tour companies and repairing any damage at popular spots.

Now I am not sure if the tour companies would allow people to damage and take things out of the sacred sites, but I may be wrong.  Will find out in June when we do a 12 day boat tour.  Are the aboriginal people going to fund and do all of the work in administrating the permit system, collection and distribution of the fees?  But they have been granted ownership of the land so we have to follow their rules. Is this a life style choice argument?  We love to travel and travel into remote areas. That is our life style choice, but we also are fully self funded, no government hand outs for us. I know, we cannot talk about things like this - it is racist.   ;D   Kevin
Of course no reputable tour operator would 'allow' tourist to cause damage.  However that doesn't stop it occurring - especially by those who see such instructions as a breach of their 'right' to do whatever they like.
Seems to me that $110 isn't a large figure in the total cost of such tours. If the money is going towards funding jobs in the local communities - rangers etc - then it is entirely reasonable, especially as it not only increases the financial viability of the communities but also assists in protecting these sites for others to visit later.
AFAIC it is no different to a charges to visit other 'tourist attractions'.
2000 Jackaroo Monterey 2002 Jackaroo 'Equipe' & Heaslip soft floor rear fold camper.
05 Subaru Outback Weekender GOGO Camper
 i hope for a better world for my kids, and yours, not just a bigger slice of the current one!

Offline Bird

  • Once Was Lost, now am found
  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • Thanked: 1874 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Life is far too long....
    • My Place.
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #10 on: March 30, 2015, 09:30:05 AM »
Given the quote from the article I think that they wouldn't miss those who chose to not go.
no, but once the money stops they wont miss it, but the shonks that always seem to be doing scams on these "INCOMES" will..

I say
-
Click to enlarge

Gone to a new home

Offline glenm64

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 1948
  • Thanked: 495 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #11 on: March 30, 2015, 09:31:43 AM »
 remote communities dont really see any money from tourism, so a boycott wont bother them at all, in fact probably make it easier not seeing the rubbish and damage done by the small amount of bad tourists that give the majority a bad name.
If the money is used to manage the area, and is used to give employment opportunities to the communities then I think its not a bad thing.
Our government agencies charge all sorts of fees to ( at times poorly) manage national parks etc when we already pay for in our taxes.

Anyway just my 2 bobs worth

Cheers Glen
There's a big difference between kneeling down
......... and bending over.
The following users thanked this post: Azz

Offline Barry G

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 2613
  • Thanked: 29 times
  • Gender: Male
  • For my 'Pop' l.Cpl Tom Powell, A Comp.21Batt.6Brig
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #12 on: March 30, 2015, 09:40:07 AM »
no, but once the money stops they wont miss it, but the shonks that always seem to be doing scams on these "INCOMES" will..

I say


Now I understand, Park Rangers, like Council employees,  are on Bruce's Definitive List of "Scroates"
2000 Jackaroo Monterey 2002 Jackaroo 'Equipe' & Heaslip soft floor rear fold camper.
05 Subaru Outback Weekender GOGO Camper
 i hope for a better world for my kids, and yours, not just a bigger slice of the current one!

Offline cruiser 91

  • Soft Floor Camper User
  • ****
  • Posts: 447
  • Thanked: 34 times
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #13 on: March 30, 2015, 09:53:39 AM »
Just a funny thought

Over the last 200 years the white man wanted the Aboriginals to be more like the white man and adopt his way................it's starting to be fulfilled  :laugh:
« Last Edit: March 30, 2015, 09:56:15 AM by cruiser 91 »
Hell's Gate, Worlds End, South Australia.

Offline krisandkev

  • Hard Floor Camper User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1421
  • Thanked: 69 times
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #14 on: March 30, 2015, 10:33:34 AM »
Of course no reputable tour operator would 'allow' tourist to cause damage.  However that doesn't stop it occurring - especially by those who see such instructions as a breach of their 'right' to do whatever they like.
Seems to me that $110 isn't a large figure in the total cost of such tours. If the money is going towards funding jobs in the local communities - rangers etc - then it is entirely reasonable, especially as it not only increases the financial viability of the communities but also assists in protecting these sites for others to visit later.
AFAIC it is no different to a charges to visit other 'tourist attractions'.

Very good points.  I would love to see the local communities get involved in the tours, even running some  tours.  The most disappointing thing is to go to an aboriginal owned attraction and not seeing any aboriginal people working there!  Only non aboriginal people working.  For those who have done the Great Central Road trip and have visited the towns/communities and their shops, tourist centres and art centres would have noticed that there are no aboriginal people working in them.  When we did it in 2013 there were Fijian’s and Samoa’s working in them and they were very open about the lack of interest from local people, quote, ‘We advertise locally but they just don’t want to work.’  So yes charge a fee in the Kimberley but use the money wisely and have rangers to look after the area, maybe do the same in the communities to try and stop the destruction of buildings and the graffiti.  ;)   Kevin
Kris and Kev
2008 TTD Landcruiser 200 GXL, Aust Off Road Camper, 20ft Bushtracker.

Offline tk421

  • Hard Floor Camper User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1050
  • Thanked: 108 times
  • Gender: Male
    • Out of the Office... Road trips round Australia
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #15 on: March 30, 2015, 12:39:39 PM »
Just a funny thought

Over the last 200 years the white man wanted the Aboriginals to be more like the white man and adopt his way................it's starting to be fulfilled  :laugh:

Ha ha. Good point.
“It is good to have an end to journey toward; but it is the journey that matters, in the end.”  - Ernest Hemingway

Offline jetcrew

  • "Lar's N Crew"
  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 4028
  • Thanked: 169 times
  • Gender: Male
  • The more you spend the less you go ? make sense!
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #16 on: March 30, 2015, 06:36:31 PM »
Certainly not to be argumentative but the law of this country has deemed it fit for people of Aboriginal and Torres straight to receive extra protections under the crimes act and other relevant state legislations..I am not speaking against this... as smarter people than me worked out was needed and i prob agree to a degree...

the issue i have is this..

under all laws that i can find that allow these protections or concessions in law..no where does the person actually have to PROVE that they are from these groups. Crazy i know ..but simply identifying as member of these groups is enough to earn your the legal concessions.

I have spent a lot of time in the outback and up north fishing so much so I feel at one with the land.. and when i am up north i feel even more like somewhere in my ancestry someone must have been aboriginal ..although i cant prove it just yet ..luckily I don't have to under law..and even better I cant be prosecuted for maybe thinking i was if ....in fact i was not ....

so the fees don't matter to me because all i need to do is identify as such and i don't have to pay.... ;D ;D ;D ;D

its simply a matter of how you identify or feel at the time .. if the fed govt cant prove someone's ancestry to a degree required by law i,m pretty sure i,m safe up north..  I just refuse to pay ..full stop

equality is about just that... esp when it comes to children seeing the land they are born in. why does my son have to pay and others don't..

Jet ;D ;D

i,ve seen plenty of the "more local rangers" just means more people on pay roll with not much change in the area.



RV POWER SOLUTIONS
sales@rvpowersolutions.com.au
Solar and RV Power Specialists
https://www.facebook.com/pages/RV-Power-Solutions/1610471999204535

Offline Barry G

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 2613
  • Thanked: 29 times
  • Gender: Male
  • For my 'Pop' l.Cpl Tom Powell, A Comp.21Batt.6Brig
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #17 on: March 30, 2015, 09:19:58 PM »
As I understand it Jet, it is about 'identifying as' indigenous, which is taken in part to be determined by 'being accepted as' by the community in question.

I know what you mean about feeling at one with the land, I'm like that where I can trace my family back 5 generations.  What I 'get' from that is that it must be really special if you have links back 50,000 years, rather than 150 years as in my case.

Yes, your kids and mine were born here and have links back for up to 200 years tops.  So I guess the difference is still about 50,000 years, give or take.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2015, 10:10:52 PM by B&B »
2000 Jackaroo Monterey 2002 Jackaroo 'Equipe' & Heaslip soft floor rear fold camper.
05 Subaru Outback Weekender GOGO Camper
 i hope for a better world for my kids, and yours, not just a bigger slice of the current one!

Offline lyn4680

  • Swag User
  • **
  • Posts: 55
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • Gender: Female
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #18 on: March 30, 2015, 09:56:57 PM »
.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2017, 06:19:51 PM by lyn4680 »
The following users thanked this post: Davepatrol, Barry G

Offline edz

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 6880
  • Thanked: 926 times
  • Gender: Male
  • " I dont like Sheeple "
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #19 on: March 30, 2015, 10:34:23 PM »
Private property owners usualy dont get taxpayer funding to the tune of multiple millions either like the ones in question already do .
Want to run these areas as a business and charge a fee is fine, pay taxes on earnings and receive no  taxpayer funding as other  property owners have to, No problem ..I'd  pay the $110 to visit if we wanted to go there .
That $110 you have to pay isnt just for the land access,  if you just want to travel past that area  it covers a few klicks out to sea from the coast as well .
" IMPROVISE  ADAPT   OVERCOME   and  PERSEVERE  "

Offline glenm64

  • Hard Top Camper User
  • ******
  • Posts: 1948
  • Thanked: 495 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #20 on: March 30, 2015, 11:03:42 PM »
I dont think the remote communities even think about trying to run as a business. These are people who have lived in their home area for thousands of years. They have a very real connection to their land and are desperate to provide any sort of a future for their children (as we would want)
If they move from their traditional lands then they would loss any  claim to traditional ownership under land right legislation. Can you imagine the greedy multinational mining companies if they didnt have the restrictions of dealing withtraditional owners?
I for one am grateful there is a barrier to keeping these greedy bastards out.
Think about access to complete areas locked up by mining companies?
I'm no bleeding heart, but I do have empathy.
Funny how a white community can pop up in the middle of nowhere and have all the services required (yes it is a profitable tax paying entity) , but what about communities that have existed for who knows for how long?
I dont know what the solutions are, but lets not take the easy road and blame remote communities for the consequences of external  changes they have no control over.
There are many proud and noble people trying to hold their families together and I for one have much respect for them

Again just my 2 bobs worth

Cheers Glen
There's a big difference between kneeling down
......... and bending over.
The following users thanked this post: Barry G

Offline steppenwolf

  • Swag User
  • **
  • Posts: 70
  • Thanked: 8 times
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #21 on: March 30, 2015, 11:06:09 PM »
Well, I've got a few hectares and some parts of it - like where my dad's ashes are - are pretty special to me. I'm the owner. I have 100% say about who camps here. Yes, I get some tax concessions for being an agroforester. There are some bits on my place that are pristine and fragile, some bits that shelter endangered species. I make sure that even I keep well away from them. I want 100% say about who goes where and what they do there. I've been gratefully reading this site for a while now, and I read legitimate condemnation after legitimate condemnation of drunks, yobbos, vandals, skinflint grey nomads who overstay their welcome, hoons who cut things down for fun, drongos who s**t anywhere they like, and so on. I want to have 100% right to say to these losers - go elsewhere. Ruin somewhere else. Lots of those people feel entitled to go where they like and do what they like just because they can chant Oi Oi Oi. They think people owe them a favour. I don't agree. I do agree with the swaggers here who say that owners - all owners - should be able to control their own destiny and make their own decisions.
The following users thanked this post: Bongo, Azz

Marschy

  • Guest
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #22 on: March 31, 2015, 01:35:31 AM »
Many years ago I visited Outer Reef on the Great Barrier Reef. The tour operators were very strict about standing on the coral, which largely due to this request, was pristine.

I have just returned from a cruise to New Caledonia, the location of the second largest barrier reef in the world, where we visited 4 different locations. The last, the Isle of Pines was supposedly the best as far as the condition of the reef and coral was concerned.

It was saddening to see around a 1000 people basically doing what they wanted with no regard to the health of the reef. The coral was trashed. It looked like a gravel pit. Only in water too deep for people to stand on the coral was there any indication of 'healthy' coral, and I use the word 'healthy' with reservations. Unlike the Great Barrier Reef, the coral was covered in parasitic plant life that is effectively choking the coral.

Add to that nickel mining where the tailings are dumped into the sea. The effect that this has on the oceans ecology doesn't need much thought to determine the outcome.

The cruise organisers push the passengers to organise their land based activities by paying for pre-organised tours on-board, which is always more than similar tours on offer by the locals at the location the ship is berthed. Approximately half of the people who were partaking in swimming activity in the morning were back on the ship by lunch time for the free lunch on offer at the buffet. So the net effect on the local economy from more than half of the people I saw who went to the islands was 'zero'. The same cannot be said about the impact those same people had standing on the coral.

Many of the locals inhabitants of the islands had food and drinks for sale, but there were very few people buying from the locals from my observations.

This was my first and last cruise. They are organised in a manner to maximise the amount of money the cruise operator can make and little regard is given to the inhabitants of the islands/locations they visit.

Here is a perfect example, not 2 weeks ago Vanuatu was flattened by cyclone Pam. Now one of the islands they visit on this particular cruise was Mystery Island, which is uninhabited. The cruise operator drops passengers off by tender, and locals from surrounding islands make their way to Mystery Island to offer food, drink and souvenirs for sale. Due to the cyclone, Mystery Island was bypassed, and another island in the New Caledonia Loyalty Island chain was added to the itinerary. I boarded the ship thinking that there would be some means by which the cruise operators would give people an opportunity to make donations to the islanders surrounding Mystery Island who rely on the tourists visiting the island for their income. There was nothing, not so much as a mention in passing of cyclone Pam and absolutely no mention of the effect the cyclone has had on Vanuatu. That is how much cruise operators care about the inhabitants of the islands/locations they deposit their passengers. In my opinion, they couldn't give a sh!t about the local economies and ecologies in which they operate.

The island in New Caledonia that was substituted for Mystery island is not favoured by the cruise operator because the nearest beach is a 20 minute bus ride which is strictly controlled by the locals, but paid for on the ship. What percentage the islanders get of the bus fee, I don't know, but bet your boots it's not 100% of what the ship collects. When Vanuatu recovers, which they will, and without the help of the cruise organisers, the cruise ship will bypass the New Caledonia location with the 20 minute bus ride and revert back to Mystery Island who will have recovered without any help from those same people who come in their 1000's to trash their pristine beaches.

If the indigenous people of the Kimberley want to protect their home and ecology against the cruise operators and the 1000's of people they deposit onto their pristine beaches, I wish them all the luck in the world. But I don't hold any hope for their success against the money machines that the cruise operators are.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2015, 02:24:22 AM by Marschy »
The following users thanked this post: Barry G, Azz

Offline MsTree

  • Swag User
  • **
  • Posts: 59
  • Thanked: 4 times
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #23 on: March 31, 2015, 06:42:55 AM »
As u know we are planning our Kimberley adventure and departure date is set at 2nd of May
one thing I am desperate to do is the Argyle mine tour which for the last 10 years has only been available at the time of the Ord muster at a cost of $105pp
last year after the muster the traditional land owners started joined with a local flight group and flew ppl in for tours of the mine
this year traditional land owners are now organising their own land tours of the mine at a cost of $245 pp
after having spoken to the Kununurra Visitor centre (wonderful helpful people) the tours that they previously ran and that offered by the traditional land owners are EXACTLY the same .. same cultural info provided some tour content .. just ripping an extra $140 pp out of our pockets
apparently talks are continuing about Kununurra VC running a tour but I'm not holding out a lot of hope

Argyle mine already do a hell of a lot to encourage and promote cultural knowledge and protection, infrastructure and employment  ... so I wonder where my $140 is going if I book the tour .. yet to speak with GeoffA and Kay about this but I know Speewa not so happy

Marschy

  • Guest
Re: Kimberley traditional owners want tighter controls and to charge a fee.
« Reply #24 on: March 31, 2015, 06:53:34 AM »
As u know we are planning our Kimberley adventure and departure date is set at 2nd of May
one thing I am desperate to do is the Argyle mine tour which for the last 10 years has only been available at the time of the Ord muster at a cost of $105pp
last year after the muster the traditional land owners started joined with a local flight group and flew ppl in for tours of the mine
this year traditional land owners are now organising their own land tours of the mine at a cost of $245 pp
after having spoken to the Kununurra Visitor centre (wonderful helpful people) the tours that they previously ran and that offered by the traditional land owners are EXACTLY the same .. same cultural info provided some tour content .. just ripping an extra $140 pp out of our pockets
apparently talks are continuing about Kununurra VC running a tour but I'm not holding out a lot of hope

Argyle mine already do a hell of a lot to encourage and promote cultural knowledge and protection, infrastructure and employment  ... so I wonder where my $140 is going if I book the tour .. yet to speak with GeoffA and Kay about this but I know Speewa not so happy
I don't think many of the cruise passengers make their way to the Argyle mine tour.

To put some perspective on how much money is involved here, a video aboard ship indicated that the last ship built by the cruise operator whose ship I was aboard cost the company 800 million US dollars to build, that is over a trillion AUD. The latest of these ships on this companies fleet operates out of Perth and sails up to the Kimberley.

With vast amounts of income generated by these cruise companies comes the ability to influence and lobby governments. I for one will not begrudge the indigenous people of the Kimberly charging for entry to their lands. They are going to need a pretty large wallet if it comes down to a fight against the cruise operators.
The following users thanked this post: Barry G