Additional charges to carry camera in National Parks

L

litojohn

New Member
Just got to know from one of the website that there is an additional charge to carry a camera in national parks, is that true? The fee for Camcorder (video camera) is mentioned as $100 per camcorder and $50 for a digital camera for foreigners, which sounds too much to me. My friend and I are planning to visit some national parks soon, but if they are charging so much then we will prefer not to carry our cameras. Does anyone here know the facts and any way around?
 
There is a separate fee for camera in most of the national parks but not in all the national parks and the fee which you have mentioned is not correct. In most of the national parks it is INR. 100 for a video camera and INR. 50 for a digital camera. I do not know of any way around and I think INR. 100 is not too much to collect wonderful pictures and memories.
 
There are charges for camcorders and still digital cameras, some parks charge for them and some do not, some parks do not have a different tariff for foreigners and tariffs are the same be it an Indian national or foreigner, so it would all depend on which park you visit.
 
Do have a list of the parks that you will be visiting, so that information regarding the particular parks can be given?
 
Difference of camera charges for foreigners usually apply at sight seeing places like Taj Mahal and not for national parks. I don't know whether this has changed or not but it would be good to pre check with the park before you leave either via phone or from the internet.
 
Pardon me but isn't it strange for a park to charge a camera or camcorder? Logically most of the tourists have their cameras. Is it a money-making scheme or just a policy to control cameras? We have here a small area called Intramuros located in the heart of Manila. The setting is Spanish period in the 1800s with cobblestone roads and stone houses now being occupied by establishments like offices and restaurants. They don't charge cameras but forbid the use of it.
 
This is a standard practice to charge for cameras and camcorders and it is not restricted to National Parks alone. Also it is not just foreigners who are being made to pay for carrying their equipment, even the locals have to pay them. And the amounts mentioned are in rupees not in dollars as quoted. Hope I have cleared any misconceptions.
 
To be honest I don't think I mind the fact that you have to pay a little more to carry a camera and take pictures or videos. As already mentioned, there's a lot of places that ban the use of camera's altogether, so if it's a choice between the two, I'd rather pay and be able to take pictures and the price isn't to much either.
 
Memories are simply memories if you do not have the pictures to show the memories and events. I would absolutely want to have a camera to record my experiences. If faced with the choice of a still camera and or a video camera, and they charge separate for each; I believe I would choose to bring only the video camera since my video camera also takes still pictures.
It is not clear to me exactly what the 100 or 50 are in American dollars. If it were 100 American dollars I would find that expensive yet I would absolutely want to have pictures for my photo memories so I would pay it. However hopefully before I traveled I would know the rules and the price and try to budget accordingly.
These days most every cell phone has a camera and video capabilities I wonder if they also charge for them as well.
 
greybird29 said:
It is not clear to me exactly what the 100 or 50 are in American dollars.
Click to expand...
Yes, those prices are in US Dollars.

This charge for bringing a still camera or video camera has been there for decades and when it started. There were no mobile phones, and a still camera had no video recording option as they had film rolls in them. Back in the days, only well to do people would carry a video camera or film crews, and charging them a fortune was more or less justified but with video cameras going digital, everyone carries one nowadays and that $100 charge is way too much. The government needs to look into this. They could make it free for tourists and maybe charge a bit of money from those who have professional equipment.
 
I thought the OP was corrected and the price quoted is actually in rupees and not dollars further on in the thread?

Either way I think while I can see the reasoning behind charging, I'm not to sure how long they're going to be able get away with the practice for much longer. As people have already said, nearly all smartphones these days have a still and video camera on them, so I'm not sure how they are going to be able to legislate for that.
 
Thank you for clarifying the American dollar amount it would cost. I understand the reasoning of the cost; however if the charge would be per device I would only bring one. As mentioned by others many smart phones do most things specialty devices can do so I would make that my picture device choice and pay the fee as I would want pictures of the beautiful, scenery, wildlife and people to help secure my memories.
As long as everyone is charged the same price with an acknowledged upfront fee so there are no hidden charges once you exit it should not be an issue. Yet it does seem it could be an issue to regulate. Some folks are going to the park hoping to capture the next splendid million $ dollar caption photo of anything that can help them make money. Some for memories and nature; what if a family of eight went to the park for a weekend picnic, each of them have cell phones and a maybe a camera. Some are not interested in taking pictures yet they would not want to leave their phone very far from their finger tips at any moment; would each $100 or more? If that would be the situation family picnics at the park will become mighty limited or obsolete and that would not be acceptable.
 
Stopping people taking photographs in a museum or a church is one thing, but how are they going to police that in an area as vast as a national park? Sure there's guides who will be with you but they can't keep their eye on everybody all of the time, and even if they did I would have thought they'd have beeter things to do than stop people taking pictures?

Like stopping people getting eaten by a lion for example!
 
In most of the National parks visitor is supposed to collect ticket for digital camera, video camera etc. And also prices vary for NRI and localites. Visitor is charged per camera not per person. suppose if a visitor is carrying both digital camera and video camera, he/she should buy tickets for both.
 
I don't understand why they would charge! I think to myself that a lot of the time, the reasons that I visit certain sights around the world is because I've seen beautiful pictures of them - so in a way, it's free advertising for them if people are taking pictures there. I can understand if there's no admission fee to the parks that it would be reasonable to charge a nominal fee to carry a camera - or even just an overall small admission fee or something - but I think it's a bit counterproductive to charge for carrying a camera.
 
I think it makes sense to charge that much because to be honest, some visitors just take tons of pictures and then they sell them. They are making money off of the beautiful land and so it makes sense to have some of that money go to the locals.
 
sillyllucy said:
I think it makes sense to charge that much because to be honest, some visitors just take tons of pictures and then they sell them. They are making money off of the beautiful land and so it makes sense to have some of that money go to the locals.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't a better way to do it though be just to increase the admission price instead? Having to try and control who's taking what, how many pictures and how many cameras they have is going to be a lot harder than just raising the entrance fee I would have thought.
 
pwarbi said:
Wouldn't a better way to do it though be just to increase the admission price instead? Having to try and control who's taking what, how many pictures and how many cameras they have is going to be a lot harder than just raising the entrance fee I would have thought.
Click to expand...

That's totally my thoughts too. I like taking pictures when I'm in beautiful nature places because I like having those memories. I wouldn't even have had selling the pictures on my radar of thoughts. But if you tell me "hey, we're gonna charge you extra to bring your camera", then I'm probably going to find somewhere else to go that doesn't impose those kind of restrictions/extra fees.
 
The cost does seem a little excessive. Although the memories of such a beautiful place would be treasured by any visitor, such a large fee may put some tourists off visiting entirely. I think this system needs to be re-thought with the advent of modern technology that gives almost every single visitor a phone capable of taking videos and still images. Perhaps a smaller fee would actually encourage more visitors and give a greater all-round experience.
 
Your best bet is to call ahead to the places that you plan to visit and ask about their particular policies. Every place is different, but it is common for places to charge fees to tourists for cameras and taking pictures. How well those fees are enforced, I don't know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top