RV.Net Open Roads Forum: Sad state of our National Parks-II

RV Blog

  |  

RV Sales

  |  

Campgrounds

  |  

RV Parks

  |  

RV Club

  |  

RV Buyers Guide

  |  

Roadside Assistance

  |  

Extended Service Plan

  |  

RV Travel Assistance

  |  

RV Credit Card

  |  

RV Loans

Open Roads Forum Already a member? Login here.   If not, Register Today!  |  Help

Newest  |  Active  |  Popular  |  RVing FAQ Forum Rules  |  Forum Posting Help and Support  |  Contact  

Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Public Lands, Boondocking and ...

Open Roads Forum  >  Public Lands, Boondocking and Dry Camping

 > Sad state of our National Parks-II

This Topic Is Closed  |  Print Page  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 20  
Prev  |  Next
Sponsored By:
westernrvparkowner

montana

Senior Member

Joined: 11/29/2008

View Profile



Posted: 08/09/19 07:39am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

pnichols wrote:

Now, one small step back towards the OP's topic: IMHO, I think something that could partially replace National Park/Lands camping that would be popular with some RV'ers for their vacations (as opposed to most folks living in their RVs for long periods) would be the availability of recreation drycamping on large private land-holdings with beautiful scenery and maybe on the edge of ponds, lakes, or rivers with say, a hundred yards or more, between camping sites.

ATV's, fishing, hiking, photography, bird watching, rockhounding, etc. would be allowed as available and appropriate. Checkout would be required so that before leaving, the camper would have to wait while the camping manager (or ranch owner) could have each vacated "boondock type" campsite inspected to make sure no trashing or tank dumping had occured. If the inspection showed that the campsite was left in good condition, a deposit would be returned to the camper at checkout time.

I guess this could be called "paid private land boondock camping". I'd be willing to pay hundreds of dollars per week for this kind of isolated, pristine, private camping ... maybe once or twice a year if and as I could budget for it. There may be a very few "dude ranch type" private RV camgrounds like this in the U.S. already, but I haven't yet researched it.
The risks and liability would be too great for a landowner. The landowner wouldn't want ATVs racing across their pastures and cropland. Roads would be needed to prevent the RVs from just tearing up the landscape. One person's rockhounding is someone else's license to dig for buried treasure.
Relying on strangers to open and close gates is a fool's errand. I know from experience that people will tell you what they think you want to hear and if left unsupervised do what the heck ever they want. The landowner can tell those boondockers not to cut down trees for firewood, that all fishing is catch and release, that open fires are prohibited, that they can't have 100 people join them for a big party but if they don't actively monitor those guests the is no assurance that is what is going to happen.
Nothing but common sense is currently stopping what you describe.

monkey44

Cape Cod, MA and Central Fla

Senior Member

Joined: 11/12/2002

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 08/09/19 01:18pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

In case anyone want a good investigative resource for NPS fees and services

www.nps.gov/aboutus/fees-at-work.htm

AHHH, can't make the link work [emoticon]

If the funds are NOT enough, we have no problem paying higher fees as long as it stays in the park. As seniors, we get some discounts ... and at one point and even in some parks, the discounts are not allowed or lessened. That's picking on ONE segment of population. If we remove discounts completely, it will probably lose seniors and disabled who often fill sites when the "busy seasons" end. A benefit to the park in general.

However, if we raise park fees a small amount for everyone, that spreads the funding over all users, instead of one population category. Would probably raise more money too. Think of it as a ten million camping seniors paying no discount (about $8 a night) total Eighty million bucks over a season?? And only seniors pay it. OK, think about 300 million NPS (2017 NPS count) visitors over a season, all paying $2 more per admission.

Right, a lot of people use passes ... so not a direct equation, but illustrates how one group should not individually fund any more than all groups collectively, but this is more about perspective than actual fees. And an small overall fee increase increases the cost to all who use the parks, not just one population segment.

* This post was edited 08/09/19 01:40pm by monkey44 *


Monkey44
Cape Cod Ma & Central Fla
Chevy 2500HD 4x4 DC-SB
2008 Lance 845
Back-country camping fanatic

Yosemite Sam1

Under the pines.

Senior Member

Joined: 03/28/2018

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 08/09/19 05:15pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

JRscooby wrote:



I don't know of anything that would stop a landowner from doing this. But I take issue with the idea of privatizing any of the commons.


Well said. We have many of public lands -- except a lot of them are effectively locked in private hands for exclusive explorations or pasture lands that the public are not allowed access.

There are more that just need rudimentary roads and probably potable water and dump site for us who choose isolation for boondockers. It can even operate on self-managed basis for fee collections.

But then again, if the more popular national parks and forest with lees-than primitive camping facilities are way behind in maintenance, then we cannot hope that these ones will get funding for development.

ppine

Northern Nevada

Senior Member

Joined: 07/04/2016

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 08/21/19 08:42am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Acess is not the problem in National Parks. Just the opposite. They are loved to death. The maintenance and law enforcement budgets have gotten pretty big.

That leaves little money for improvements. The majority of the older National Park and National Forestcampgrounds do a crummy job of accomodating RVs in general and larger RVs in particular. The roads are windy with sharp turns and too many trees and rocks in the way. They need to be retrofitted. Some day the campsites might be made level. Hookups are optional, but camping spaces need better access and more room for vehicles.

JRscooby

Indepmo

Senior Member

Joined: 06/10/2019

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 08/21/19 10:20am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

fjoosi wrote:

This is completely political,


Yes, could the Mods put a PG-13 label on each page?

Quote:

and those problems have been going on for many years. If that diversion occurred it is hardly the cause of the trouble.


Yes, it has been a long time without the public parks getting the attention they deserve. But of late, we are appointing people that are hostile to the idea of commons, and even worse, appointing them as "Acting" so even the few that pay attention do not get to watch the vote.

Quote:

What needs to happen is that the parks need to deal with maintenance issues and put new land acquisition on hold until that is dealt with. They also need to slash regulations that make fixing problems stupidly expensive.


Not sure what regulations you are referring to

Yosemite Sam1

Under the pines.

Senior Member

Joined: 03/28/2018

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 08/21/19 08:36pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

JRscooby wrote:



Yes, it has been a long time without the public parks getting the attention they deserve. But of late, we are appointing people that are hostile to the idea of commons, and even worse, appointing them as "Acting" so even the few that pay attention do not get to watch the vote.


We will also understand if the government will temporarily cut budget for the parks as with other government agencies during difficult times in economic crisis as when it happens during the Great Recession.

It should be restored and do a catch up basis maintenance and repairs as the economy recovers as what actually happened.

But as what's been happening, the administration is boasting strong economy and yet the parks' budget is still getting bigger and bigger cuts. And putting salt to the wound by appointing people who are actually against the agency's missions.

lane hog

Tucson, AZ & NW Chicago Burbs, IL

Senior Member

Joined: 07/06/2003

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member


Posted: 08/22/19 06:52am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Maybe it's time to raise the user fees.

Yeah, I know, some of you want your free/reduced rate access, as long as everyone else pays for your free stuff...



  • 2005 Winnebago "Minnie" 31C (was a three-time Jayco owner)
  • 2012 MasterTow Dolly pulling a 2003 Jeep Liberty (had Ram 2500 CTD, Dodge Durango, Honda Odyssey...)
  • Onan Microquiet 4000, plus 130W solar and Honda EU2000i twins for backup



JRscooby

Indepmo

Senior Member

Joined: 06/10/2019

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 08/22/19 07:08am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

lane hog wrote:

Maybe it's time to raise the user fees.

Yeah, I know, some of you want your free/reduced rate access, as long as everyone else pays for your free stuff...


Yes, raising the fee again might help. How much would the fee need to go up to pay for the backlog? And would that price increase reduce the number of visitors to the point fees bring in less money?

DallasSteve

Texas

Senior Member

Joined: 05/28/2015

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 08/22/19 09:17am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Yosemite Sam1 wrote:


But as what's been happening, the administration is boasting strong economy and yet the parks' budget is still getting bigger and bigger cuts. And putting salt to the wound by appointing people who are actually against the agency's missions.

And the "non-political" comments from Yosemite Sam continue.
[image]





JRscooby

Indepmo

Senior Member

Joined: 06/10/2019

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 08/22/19 09:51am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

DallasSteve wrote:


And the "non-political" comments from Yosemite Sam continue.


Ok, please explain how any discussion of funding/maintenance/existence of the public parks, or anything else that is owned in common, can happen, other than talking about the policies of the people we elect to control the common? I can understand nobody wants dispersions cast on the ones we think are acting in our interest, but if we are not allowed to look at other policies that might be contrary to our interest can we call ourselves educated?

This Topic Is Closed  |  Print Page  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 20  
Prev  |  Next

Open Roads Forum  >  Public Lands, Boondocking and Dry Camping

 > Sad state of our National Parks-II
Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Public Lands, Boondocking and ...


New posts No new posts
Closed, new posts Closed, no new posts
Moved, new posts Moved, no new posts

Adjust text size:




© 2020 CWI, Inc. © 2020 Good Sam Enterprises, LLC. All Rights Reserved.