I'm halfway home from a trip from Florida to California and back. I have been quite surprised by how many RV parks tell outright lies on their websites. Calling themselves a "resort" when all they have is basic hookups. Calling themselves "pet friendly" when the only place to walk a dog is a foxtail and sandspur infested strip of rock hard dirt along the pavement. Advertising free cable when there is none, advertising free wifi that doesn't work. Saying it's quiet at night when they back up to a highway. Squeezing RVs together within inches of each other. Making no attempt to provide level sites.I realize these are minor things to many people. For me, it's a problem. I base my travels on my next stop and seldom stay in a place for only one night. Usually I'll reserve for a minimum of 2 nights. Frequently I base those reservations on what I read at the RV Park Reviews website and the park website.My 2 dogs are quite old and I like to provide them with a little off leash time whenever possible. It's also better for them if the potty area isn't too far away.I'm pretty sedentary myself and spend a lot of time on the computer or reading or watching TV. I like to open up all the windows and sit with the dogs and just enjoy my surroundings.It is darn disappointing to arrive at a park that I have already paid for 2 nights at only to find it's a run down place full of permanent residents and marginal (if any) amenities.I'd say this applies to a good 30% of the parks I've been to. I suppose they get away with it because of the transience of anyone who might care. I wish people posting RV park reviews would give more details and note such discrepancies, as I do.There. I'm done ranting now. Thank you.

just a couple points....offered with a smile of sympathy.you're not going to find many rv parks that have a fenced area to let your dogs run freely. I think I've only seen one, and that is a city campground in Dumas, TX, if it's still there.you say you like to spend your time reading, computing or watching tv, and maybe just sitting and watching people, etc. that's fine, but you can do that without any amenities.now, if you want pretty surroundings, trees, grass, water, scenery..you're going to have to check into state parks and BLM rec. areas. Those usually have fairly nice campgrounds.some states, like kansas and nebraska... if you get off the interstate and run the state roads, you'll find that most the little towns have a tiny city campground with hookups. some of them are in the city park, others are right in the middle of town. interesting places. Marysville, KS comes to mind, a nice park. Great Bend, KS is another and Moberly, MO has a nice one. Some of these have a bathroom, most just have elec hookups and water. some have a dump station.

I agree with much of what you are saying and would add that I have seen many web and print advertising photos that inaccurately depict an rv park. The photo shows one small part of the park from a flattering angle while the rest of the park is a run down shambles. I think we would both admit that there are many rv parks that are very honest in their advertising. It is those few bad apples that need to be properly reviewed.

bertnspike wrote: I wish people posting RV park reviews would give more details and note such discrepancies, as I do.As one of the volunteer administrators who manage the RV Park Reviews website, I applaud what you are saying and would encourage others to put more detail into their reviews. We're not expecting people to write essays, but reviews such as "nice place, will return" don't provide much assistance in determining if a particular campground is one you might enjoy. If you really liked a CG, try to describe why and if you didn't let people know your reasons for that as well.IMHO it's less important what numeric rating you give a CG than what you say about it. You may have given it a "3" because it didn't have a good dog walk, but someone without a dog may not care so they can mentally "adjust" your rating to reflect their situation. However, if you don't provide your reasoning there is no way for anyone else to make that sort of adjustment.

TexasShadow wrote: some of them are in the city park, others are right in the middle of town. interesting places. Marysville, KS comes to mind, a nice park. Great Bend, KS is another and Moberly, MO has a nice one. Some of these have a bathroom, most just have elec hookups and water. some have a dump station.thanks for these! I will add them to my list. City parks are so hard to find.To the OP, I tend to avoid private parks specifically for the reasons you listed (I have only stayed at one and regretted it). State Parks and COE parks are great places to be able to spread out. I think I have only been disappointed once out of the 100 or so I have stayed at all over the country.

RV Park Website lies rant | Good Sam Community

44 Replies

tnt4utvols
Explorer
May 23, 2013
deleted
ngreen
Explorer
May 08, 2013
Everyone has there own idea of a great RV site! Currently we are in a wooded secluded rv park, but our friends would rather stay close to the interstate where they dont have to worry about the trees that intervere with thier satellite reception or the mud at their site -no paved parking lot on the highway for me!
Gunship_Guy
Explorer
May 07, 2013
docj wrote:

As full-timers we have been to quite a few RV parks in the past couple of years. If your parks do not have long-term residents then you are in the minority. Almost every park we go to has at least some long-term customers, even KOA's which we normally would not consider locations for more than a few days or a week, at most.

You make it sound as if long term residents are the sort of people you'd rather not have at your CG and I'm sure you make your feelings known when they attempt to rent space. Personally, I've not had any issues with long term residents at any CG we've stayed at and, as long as people mind their own business and keep their sites neat, I don't think it's my business to inquire why they are living in an RV. As someone who voluntarily lives in less than 400 sq ft, I don't think I can be judgmental about anyone else who does.

Last year I stayed at a resort/cg for 3 months while in town on business. The place where I stayed had long term/year round residents. Most sites were pristine. The residents took great pride in maintaining the appearance of their sites. Almost like a yard-of-month competition. Planted or potted flowers. pavers, archways, etc. All at their own expense.
bertnspike
Explorer
May 07, 2013
Now I have another rant about people who ASSUME they know where I go and how I go there. Who ASSUME they know what I'm going to say without reading the whole post. Who ASSUME I'm an idiot driving around out here without an idea or brain in my head....

I ASSUME they are they same people who write those pathetic reviews saying "nice park, would stay here again".

ugh. This is not a forum about brains or manners, so I'll quit now.
SDcampowneroper
Explorer
May 06, 2013
klm wrote:
And where do the campgrounds get those photos they use on their websites? Maybe from long ago or photoshopped!!!

Campsite Photos.com photographer/ bloggist Greg is now working his way through Nebraska to Minnesota then So. Dakota, back to Ca.
Join me in supporting their effort to expand a third party pictoral review of camps.
Greg is an expert photographer with an eye and to show the experience in a given camp. contact
eric@cmjmedia.com
Max
docj
Explorer
May 06, 2013
westernrvparkowner wrote:
If you think RV Parks are having a hard time and are letting things go downhill it is probably because you are staying at parks that cater to long term stays. Parks that have people staying 9 months and longer are not Recreational Vehicle Parks, they are mobile home parks or, if you prefer, trailer courts. They have given up on the recreational traveler and now are just another housing development.

As full-timers we have been to quite a few RV parks in the past couple of years. If your parks do not have long-term residents then you are in the minority. Almost every park we go to has at least some long-term customers, even KOA's which we normally would not consider locations for more than a few days or a week, at most.

You make it sound as if long term residents are the sort of people you'd rather not have at your CG and I'm sure you make your feelings known when they attempt to rent space. Personally, I've not had any issues with long term residents at any CG we've stayed at and, as long as people mind their own business and keep their sites neat, I don't think it's my business to inquire why they are living in an RV. As someone who voluntarily lives in less than 400 sq ft, I don't think I can be judgmental about anyone else who does.
Eurocamper
Explorer
May 06, 2013
We live in a society that can't distinguish the difference between advertising and reporting - heaven help us.
Eurocamper
Explorer
May 06, 2013
docj wrote:
rockhillmanor wrote:

I don't use rvparkreviews that site is a joke.

Found out you have to write X amount of reviews BEFORE they will post any of your reviews.

RVParkReviews requires that a total of three reviews be submitted and approved before any are posted on the site.

I have only written one review of a campground for rvparkreviews and it was published within a few days.
docj
Explorer
May 06, 2013
rockhillmanor wrote:

I don't use rvparkreviews that site is a joke.

Found out you have to write X amount of reviews BEFORE they will post any of your reviews.

RVParkReviews requires that a total of three reviews be submitted and approved before any are posted on the site. The purpose of that rule is to try to weed out individuals who join solely for the purpose of submitting highly unfavorable or highly favorable reviews about a particular campground. Most RVers use their RVs often enough that submitting three reviews is not too great a burden particularly since the reviews do not have to be submitted within any specific time interval.

As for your comment that there are lots of campgrounds not included on the RVParkReviews website, there are, at present, over 180,000 posted reviews on the site. It may not have all campgrounds in the US, but I think it sure has a large percentage of them.
Oaklevel
Explorer
May 06, 2013
rockhillmanor wrote:
lostmarbles wrote:
Alright! I'll be the first to admit. I actually go to any park that is open to try them out as I have an sedetary/boring lifestyle and need some excitement to get that heart rate up enough to feel like I have just exercised. Now. Who else wants to admit it?

I stay at the closest CG off the interstate when I start getting tired of driving. Some are nice and I might stay a day or two. Some are not so nice and then I just stay the night and hit the road in the morning. I use pull thru's for staying over night, don't rightly care what amenities they offer or the scenery.....I'm sleeping.:B

I don't use rvparkreviews that site is a joke. For every one CG that has a review in a certain area.....there are at least 4 'other' CG's in the same area without reviews. Use this site to determine where you will stay and you are missing out on MANY other CG's in the same area.

One particular CG I pulled off to stay at that I needed to stay a few days for mobile repairs was SO BAD I thought I would write a review to warn my fellow RV'ers not to waste their gas to pull off to this CG especially if they had their kids with them.

Found out you have to write X amount of reviews BEFORE they will post any of your reviews. Sorry I am not going to spend my time reviewing CG's for the next month for this sorry butt site so that the ONE I did write gets posted. That is WHY it is not correct info. I'm sure I am not the lone ranger that tried to post a review to find out it will NOT be posted until you turn into a full time reviewer for them. :R

?????? I have only posted 1-3 RV Reviews on their site & each one was posted right after I wrote it.............

Forum Discussion

RV Park Website lies rant

44 Replies

About Campground 101

Related Content

Camping at National parks

heat and Li batteries.

Website ??

Li-S Battery

why i call Li fussy