- This topic has 13,939 voices and 19 replies.
- Posts
The following email was received asking questions as to why the declining number of people walking. As we have a lot of people who come to our forum from all different trekking companies, I thought I would put it to you to post your answers. If you have time to post, we would appreciate your feedback.
Papua New Guinea Tourism Promotion Authority is seeking information from Kokoda Track tour operators to assist in identifying the causes for downturn in bookings.
This information will be used to inform the marketing and communications activity that aims to recover tourism to PNG.
What do you see are the main factors that are leading to the downturn in bookings from Australians to PNG? Please rate these on the following scale:
a) Concerns about personal safety is a major reason bookings have declined
Strongly agree – agree – neither agree nor disagree – disagree – strongly disagree
b) Concerns about financial outlay in view of Global Financial Crisis
Strongly agree – agree – neither agree nor disagree – disagree – strongly disagree
c) other (specify)What are the main concerns your customers are raising. Please rate on a scale of 1 – 5 (1= minor, 5 = major concern)
a) Air safety: It’s not safe to fly in PNG – planes are overloaded, poorly maintained
b) Access to the Track: Once on the KT, it’s almost impossible to turn back or get airlifted out
c) Physical safety: Young, seemingly fit people have died – it’s simply too dangerous
d) Medical checks: There are no clear medical checks to establish that you are OK to tackle KT
e) Fitness training: It’s not clear how much training you need to put in to be fit enough
f) Quality of operators: Some operators know what they are doing, but there are too many cowboys
g) Financial cost: It’s a big financial outlay that I can’t really afford right nowAre there other concerns customers are raising? If so, please specify.
KTA_Logo.jpegI dont know why any of those reasons(except lack of finances) would deter anyone who is even slightly adventurous from walking the Track.
Adventure is about taking risks and doing something out of the ordinary.Whilst I largely agree with the last two posts.
My own personal experience is that I found every effort was taken by the company that I trekked for my personal safety and I would on safety grounds have no hesitation in recommending this particular company.
I am well aware that there are certainly "Cowboys" out there that are not taking such care.
The current financial situation certainly is not helping this coupled with some companies particularly within Australia trying to make a "Killing" from trekking, cutting themselves out of the market and with the higher pricing prohibiting many from even considering trekking Kokoda in the first place.
Air Safety to me personally is of no major concern as I firmly believe with the hundreds of flights in or around Kokoda each year and considering their excellent record, whilst one very unfortunate accident did happen, I do not feel that air safety is a major reason prohibiting most from coming.
There are ample warnings about access to and from the track whilst on it and all are advised in some cases insisted that personal accident including medivac insurance be taken.
The company that I trekked with insisted on a full medical clearance and letter from my GP prior to them taking me on, they also recommended training that I should undertake as part of their agreement to take me on. I did celebrate my 70th birthday whilst on the track.
Talking to some who may consider trekking Kokoda, the one main item stopping most if not all, from doing so, was the cost. As many have mentioned for the same cost of them personally trekking Kokoda they could take their partners spending two weeks or even longer hiring a car and touring New Zealand.
I agree with Brians view on air safety. I could'nt imagine a more dangerous place to fly into. I got my pilots license about 20 years ago but cant afford to fly anymore, and I was a bit nervous on the flight in. But , on saying that, their record has been pretty good really.
I also couldnt imagine a company such as KTL putting its valued customers (and its reputation) on a plane that was'nt airworthy. Gail's husband is a pilot so she would have some idea about what goes on with the planes.
I think a lot of the bad press about the track is unwarranted. Sure it's a dangerous place, but thats why people go there.
If all the bleeding hearts had there way there'd be handrails and concrete steps up all the hills and proper bridges across all the rivers….where's the fun in that!
QUOTE(peterh13 @ 6 Dec 2009, 09:48 AM) [snapback]11106[/snapback]I think a lot of the bad press about the track is unwarranted. Sure it's a dangerous place, but thats why people go there.If all the bleeding hearts had there way there'd be handrails and concrete steps up all the hills and proper bridges across all the rivers….where's the fun in that!
Totally agree with you there Peter and isn't that one of the reasons why 'adventure seekers' do such activities – for the adventure?! Where's the adventure in handrails, concrete steps and proper bridges? Not to mention it would definitely take away the heritage/importance/sacredness of what our Diggers and the Fuzzy Wuzzys did back in the day…Bad press is horrid – a lot of it really is unwarranted. We didn't take a lot of notice of the negativity surrounding the Kokoda Track – we had booked, we had paid and we were going to go regardless.
If I was to die, well then so be it – I could also step outside my door and get hit by a car or worse, a bus, but does this stop me from day-to-day activities like paying the bills or grocery shopping or going out for a coffee with friends? I think not. I have a chance of being electrocuted too – but does this stop me from watching TV or using my computer or microwave? Nothing is 100% foolproof. There is always a chance of some sort of danger with everything.
As Brian has stated, the financial outlay is what I believe prevents a lot of people from trekking Kokoda. "As many have mentioned for the same cost of them personally trekking Kokoda they could take their partners spending two weeks or even longer hiring a car and touring New Zealand". Too true. We could've finished the renovations our house with the money it cost us both + gear (boots, foot care specialists, tent etc) + flights + extra night in hotel for Kokoda.
But having said that, it was an experience that I will treasure for the rest of my life, worth every cent scrimped and saved and I would do it again in a heartbeat – in fact I still want to trek in the other direction in 5 years time (if we have the finances)…
fluppy
Edit: Also, I don't know if I would want the Kokoda Track commercialised and advertised and becoming like a touristy place. If Kokoda was full of praise & over-the-top glorification, then everyone would go. If everyone goes then it has the potential to lose the appeal to a lot of people. Many people do it for many various reasons, but a lot of people decide to trek Kokoda because it is different. If every man & his dog went, would it still be as special as what it is now?
They would have billboards along the track "This section of the Kokoda Track proudly sponsored by The McDonalds corporation' and then a fast food shop further along that sold MyFuzzy Wuzzy or McDigger burgers.
Heaven help us !QUOTEThey would have billboards along the track "This section of the Kokoda Track proudly sponsored by The McDonalds corporation' and then a fast food shop further along that sold MyFuzzy Wuzzy or McDigger burgers.
Heaven help us !God forbid it should ever come to that! I was disgusted enough by the amount of litter along the track and in the campsites, as it is a desecration of a sacred site in my view. And half the fun of Kokoda was the log crossings was it not? Let's hope they never put in "proper" bridges.
I'm not really qualified to answer the survey as I trekked last year, two friends trekked this year, and two of us are planning to go back again in a couple of years. Safety did not worry me too much – I put my trust in Gail and my training, and if I had died along the track it would have been fulfilling Item One on my Bucket List in any case, so I wasn't too concerned.
I suspect that the Global financial crisis probably slowed people up this year. If reports are to be believed, more people holidayed at home in Aus than usual.
Here is another perspective. Rather than just responding to the survey question, I think that the KT authority shouldn't just be focused on why there has been a downturn in numbers in the last year or so. Instead, a better question is – what would be the maximimum (or desireable) number of trekkers each year for the track? If the track becomes overused, it will lose its appeal and also there will be environmental degradation (examples of litter, problems with toilets etc abound).
Therefore, the fact that fewer people are trekking is not automatically a bad thing. In the long term, a steady but stable stream of trekkers would ensure that the unique challenge, environment and importantly, culture of communities on the track will not be changed forever. Exponential growth as occured about 3 or 4 years ago is not the answer.
Just an alternative point of view to encourage discussion!
Cheers
Brett from Noosa
Trekker in 2006 and visitor back to Kokoda in 2008Great point Brett!
Statistics can be interpreted in many ways but the real issue here is the sustainability/preservation of the Track, not just for the tourists but for the PNG people.
Regarding litter, my husband walked the Track in 1996 and was surprised at how much cleaner it was when we walked it again this September.
I walked it this last July (just before the plane crash) and thought it was pretty clean and in good shape.
I agree that the fewer people using the track, the better off the actual track itself would be. I was talking to Charlie Lynn on the track and he had a group of 70 odd.There was just on 20 of us all up with porters etc.Peter you mentioned 70 odd with the group you bumped into this is ridiculous not right in my opinion certainly not good for the track and the village "facilities" that they pass through.
They the trekking company are only in it for the dollar obviously with no real interest at all in preserving the track etc.We had 15 including porters on our trek.
I believe that trekking group numbers should be set a combined limit of both trekkers and porters and if this was to go ahead be policed at the start on any trek.
Past growth, prior to recent downturn, in my opinion, was simply not sustaintable without the prospect of further severe track degregation. Inevitably facilities will improve overtime, but hopefully, not too quickly that full scale commercialism takes over.
The global financial crisis has obviously been a major contibuting factor in this downturn which may turn out to have been a good thing to bring about this current analysis.
I agree with the view expressed by Brett that future growth must take into account what is sustainable. A similar situation was identified with Tasmania's Overland Track 20 years ago and group numbers were restricted to 15.
I have made my thoughts well known on this forum in the past about Charlie Lynn's trekking groups being excessive. Charlie, to give him his due, has achieved many good things for the Track over a long period however it is well overdue when he must be confronted "head on" about the overall adverse ramifications of his large groups. In our trek in 2007 we crossed paths with one of his large groups (100 plus inc. porters) so I know first hand what the consequences were.
Geoff Hardie
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.