Wouldn’t it be good if heritage sites could be more or less self sufficient?  Entrance fees, profits from souvenirs, etc, all monies should go towards the upkeep of the site and staffing costs.  Is it fair to charge visitors to see what is their own heritage?  How many visitors are locals or even nationals of the site?  It would be naive to suggest that I should be able to go to the cinema without paying for a ticket - after all the film had to be made, the actors paid, the cinema has bills to pay to enable it to run and it also has to make a profit or it will close down.  Is it the responsibility of the local taxpayer to subsidise my visit to the cinema?  I’ve chosen to go there.  If I choose to visit an ancient site, why should the local taxpayer subsidise my visit there?  It must be possible to charge a fair entrance fee to a site that doesn’t result in a burden on people who happen to live nearby and, of course, the site doesn’t actually have to turn in a profit, it only needs to break even.