Empty parks with no open sites.

ferndaleflyer wrote:
As I said, I already paid for it. That example you use don't hold any water. What its worth, what it is close to, etc don't matter if I have paid the price they ask far a spot I have fulfilled my obligation and they should provide me what I paid for for as long as I paid for it even if I am not there.

But you didn't fulfill your obligation to occupy the site. The Contract you agreed to says they can resell the site without refund if you don't show up.

They offer sites at significantly below market value because it's a public service...you don't get to take sites out of use because you have money to waste.

Years ago, NC state parks on Kerr lake required a 4 night minimum to reserve a site. Folks would reserve wed-sat nites, and only show up fri afternoon. Their plan had always been to only come for two nites, but they would pay for four to get a waterfront site.
I'm sure a lot of the cases all of you are talking about are something similar, folks willing to pay for extra nights, to get the ones they want.

I know that a lot of people game the system by paying for nights that they never intend to use. So yes, they've paid for them, but does that mean they're rightfully entitled to them? I don't think so.

Sometimes I'll pay for a first night even though I'm not sure whether I'm going to arrive late that evening or early the next morning before check-in. To me that's justified because I'm still arriving within that "day" (before the next day's check-in time).

I'm glad to see more entities taking steps to thwart people gaming the system.

This is a hot button for me. I reserve the last spot at an Oregon State park and show up on a Wednesday to an empty park which fills on Friday. Families that want to take their kids camping can't get a reservation because the "seasoned pros" are gaming the reservation system and think since they paid for the site they own it. The systems should charge a "show up reservation fee" which would be refundable when they show up on time the first day of their reservation. No other excuses.

I used to pose this fee as $200, but am now suggesting $300 due to inflation. That doesn't work, increase it. Personally, I only make reservations I plan to keep.

As I said, I already paid for it. That example you use don't hold any water. What its worth, what it is close to, etc don't matter if I have paid the price they ask far a spot I have fulfilled my obligation and they should provide me what I paid for for as long as I paid for it even if I am not there.

ferndaleflyer wrote:
So you think you should be given something I already paid for. Really?

But did you actually pay for it?

Let's take an example: Van Buren State Park in Michigan is a little over an hour from Chicago. It's 400 acres with a mile of prime beachfront that would be packed with weekend 2nd homes if it were resold as private parcels.

If you look at prices nearby, $3-5million houses on half an acre or less are common. Let's be generous and say the land is only worth $100million on the open market.

Do you really think $30/n on a 220 site campground that is only open in the summer is going to cover the cost of amortizing a $100million dollar property along with ongoing staff, maintenance and periodic upgrades?

Assuming 180days at 100% occupancy, it's going to generate just under $1.2million per year. If you had a 0% interest loan, it would take 83yrs to pay off if the staff and maintenance cost nothing. If you assume a modest 4% interest, it would be losing a few million per year before staff and maintenance costs.

Reality is they aren't going to be at 100% occupancy and likely are around break even or even losing money on staff & maintenance.

State parks typically have artificially low prices subsidized by the taxpayer in order to protect that land and provide recreational access to the taxpayer (even those who are not wealthy enough to just waste a reservation).

If you aren't going to use it, it should be returned to the reservation system to allow others access.

Tvov wrote:
One way to help this would be to make reservations 100% prepay in advance, and cancellations require a 2 week notice - or you lose your prepayment.

There have been so many times where I read about people using "the system" to reserve and cancel at popular places in order to get what they want. Fort Wilderness is a prime example of this - or at least was 10 years ago, the last time we were there.

I don't see how that would help. Especially at state parks where the site is so cheap that you can book sites on days you "might" want to go, and if you don't go, it's not that much money and you don't even bother to cancel, since you won't get a refund.

A better policy would be to allow refunds up to the day of arrival with, say a 50% penalty (if there's no penalty, people would just book every weekend until they decide when they want to go), at least that way there's incentive to cancel. They could even charge a no-show fee. You get 50% back if you cancel before arrival, but pay a $100 fee if you no-show without cancelling.

But this all assumes that the goal is to maximize the number of people that can enjoy the park -- in reality, parks don't care about non-refundable no-shows since they get paid without doing any work.

phillyg wrote:
Don't know about the OP's particular circumstances, but I've been told in FL state parks, and in retail parks, once the reservation is made they cannot book someone else in it. I've seen sites empty for a week at a time, yet the park shows no vacancy. It's very frustrating.

If you read the article, in Colorado, if a reservation doesn't show up after a certain time limit, the staff at the park are supposed to log in and cancel the reservation opening it up for other people (all per the terms of the reservation).

If the journalist is correct, staff were simply not going into the system to cancel no-shows or it was suggested, purposely gaming the no-shows to resell to friends and family.

I'm not sure about Florida state parks but private parks (retail parks) would just need to include a clause in the reservation that if you don't show up or notify the park in a certain time frame, they can resell the site and there is no refund but that's a different matter. Private parks are under no obligation to maximize the sites that are occupied. It's up to the owner to determine the policies and how much it is driven by profits.

Public parks have an obligation to the public (who are ultimately the owners) to make a reasonable effort to give access to the public. They should attempt to cover their costs but not at the expense of letting the public utilize the park.

If the article is correct, in Colorado, the staff are at the very least guilty of not doing their job and at worst committing some form of graft. If this was corrected, it sounds like a lot of sites would be recycled back into the reservation system allowing more people to utilize the parks.

So you think you should be given something I already paid for. Really?

We live in Florida as well, and have seen the same problem. Site vacant for days, but can't use it because it's reserved, but no one occupies it.