Fishing Bridge rv park

agesilaus wrote:

rr2254545 wrote:
They are not that tight - the sites are double wide and you park your tow vehicle / car next to your unit

The must have reworked the sites then. When we were there we were about 3 feet from the unit parked next to us and neither of us had slides. We could hear everything that went on in that unit.

But again it's just a parking place for your RV while you look at the park.

I did call to make reservations instead of doing so online as I had specific requests. I was told the same for our 30' tt and our friends 30' fw, you park next to your rv. Hoping this will give us a little "elbow room" as we both have slides.

agesilaus wrote:

rr2254545 wrote:
They are not that tight - the sites are double wide and you park your tow vehicle / car next to your unit

The must have reworked the sites then. When we were there we were about 3 feet from the unit parked next to us and neither of us had slides. We could hear everything that went on in that unit.

But again it's just a parking place for your RV while you look at the park.

We were there last September 2014 - if you look at google earth it is a full campground and of the few cars in the park all are parked next to their RV

I know for a fact updates where done in 2010 as I had a reservation canceled as they closed for major repairs including electrical

For general information Verizon had been updated at the end of last summer and we had excellent phone and data in the campground

Mosquitoes? They're seasonal just like RVers. :)

You haven't seen mosquitoes if you haven't stayed in the UP of Michigan!!

I didn't find it tight at all. Plenty of room side to side and quite a bit of space between us and the rig behind us on the next loop. Will return!

I was there last week and didn't notice much for mosquitos, at least not in the D loop.

We were one of the lucky few to have a decent-sized tree in our site, but with some crafty angling of the motor home and toad, we were able to fit both with just enough room to get the awning up.

They give you a punch card with two showers per day. We just used our RV shower and kept the card as a souvenir.

The water is free, just note that you'll need to fire up your water heater ASAP. Unlike the rest of the park, the water coming out of the ground is COLD!

Regarding electrical service, we were seeing about 110-112 volts most of the time on 30A service, so be aware of that as you use your more sensitive appliances.

If you plan to use the laundry facility there, go before 4pm to avoid waiting in line for a machine. There were a few that were out of order when we were there.

I thought it was just fine. Friendly staff, trees all around, convenient to the figure eight road that leads to all the Park's sights, fuel and propane available, large laundry facility and clean showers, full hookups plus dump stations, paved and level sites. A bison and deer wandered through.

I've never understood why people bash it so much, since I've stayed in some really unsatisfactory places, and Fishing Bridge was not bad at all.... I guess they expect Yellowstone to have very large sites with thick foliage and lots of space in between for privacy like some state parks. It's not like that, but to me it was perfect for busy sightseers.

"I've never understood why people bash it so much, since I've stayed in some really unsatisfactory places, and Fishing Bridge was not bad at all.... I guess they expect Yellowstone to have very large sites with thick foliage and lots of space in between for privacy like some state parks. It's not like that, but to me it was perfect for busy sightseers. "

Federal campsites like that are in the minority. The ones that come to mind are Lassen, Bryce and the North Rim of the Grand Canyon. Even the Yosemite CG are tight and if it wasn't for the overwhelming views people would complain about those. Almost all of these CG were built in the 1950's or earlier and were designed with much smaller RV's in mind.

The NPS refuses to upgrade them since they are hostile to RV campers IMO. The added revenue who pay for CG improvement in a few years.

agesilaus wrote:
"I've never understood why people bash it so much, since I've stayed in some really unsatisfactory places, and Fishing Bridge was not bad at all.... I guess they expect Yellowstone to have very large sites with thick foliage and lots of space in between for privacy like some state parks. It's not like that, but to me it was perfect for busy sightseers. "

Federal campsites like that are in the minority. The ones that come to mind are Lassen, Bryce and the North Rim of the Grand Canyon. Even the Yosemite CG are tight and if it wasn't for the overwhelming views people would complain about those. Almost all of these CG were built in the 1950's or earlier and were designed with much smaller RV's in mind.

The NPS refuses to upgrade them since they are hostile to RV campers IMO. The added revenue who pay for CG improvement in a few years.

This is precisely why I asked all you kind folks opinion! I had just been reading so many horrible reviews,I needed to hear it "straight from the horses mouth".

We are not boondockers and quite frankly I really don't want to spend a couple thousand dollars on an adequate generator to stay in one of the more "scenic" campgrounds.

From the general consensus here it is exactly what we need it to be, a home base for our busy daily activities (and a daily shower!)

Thanks again to you all!!!!

We were there in June. Our site was really pretty small. Some of the sites looked a lot better....guess we just got one of the smaller sites. Mosquitos were terrible. We only stayed there for our 5 night venture into the park. If I were doing it again, I'd camp elsewhere and consider a couple of nights by the south entrance, and then move on to the west or north entrances.

By comparison, the Coulter Bay campground in Grand Teton NP was much nicer.

agesilaus wrote:
"I've never understood why people bash it so much, since I've stayed in some really unsatisfactory places, and Fishing Bridge was not bad at all.... I guess they expect Yellowstone to have very large sites with thick foliage and lots of space in between for privacy like some state parks. It's not like that, but to me it was perfect for busy sightseers. "

Federal campsites like that are in the minority. The ones that come to mind are Lassen, Bryce and the North Rim of the Grand Canyon. Even the Yosemite CG are tight and if it wasn't for the overwhelming views people would complain about those. Almost all of these CG were built in the 1950's or earlier and were designed with much smaller RV's in mind.

The NPS refuses to upgrade them since they are hostile to RV campers IMO. The added revenue who pay for CG improvement in a few years.

Are you sure the sites at other parks were made for RVs at all?