Zephyr Cove Charging $75 a night!

I get both sides, but I agree with Yosemite Sam that it LOOKS bad when a government owned property considers itself a "resort" and charges such high rates.

I do hope Zephyr Cove stays a rare minority in USFS campgrounds.

westernrvparkowner wrote:
Concessionaires pay for the rights to use the property. Those fees can be in the multiple millions of dollars per year for desirable locations. That $75 a night has to cover that rent, the utilities, the maintenance, the employees and make the concessionaire a profit because if there was no profit, no one would take on the responsibility and work.
Just because the land is publicly owned doesn't automatically mean whatever is operated on that land should be free. Airports are publicly owned and the airlines still charge you to fly on their planes. The hotdog vendor in Central Park shouldn't have to forgo profits just because Central Park is owned by the city. Even the land under the Twin Towers was publicly owned (Port Authority of New York and New Jersey) yet I don't think anyone feels the rents in the new One World Trade Center (Freedom Tower) should be free.

I'm old enough to remember the good 'ol days when no for-profit concessionaire operate public parks but by full time employees and park rangers and they were well-kept and with reasonable fees that makes it accessible to the masses (the aim of public parks).

Now we have two-tiered system where popular public parks are being managed by for profit concessionaire that's now pricey and the less popular ones, or at least, some portions of the parks that set cheaper fees but neglected and with shabby facilities.

Do you really believe that the extra higher fees are going back to USFS?

And for perspective, we were in the same park-resort less than a year ago and paid $35 for a pull-through spot. So that's a 114% jump for those who want to do math or simple price-escalation economics.

BillyBob Jim wrote:
.. to voice her complaint that the coin op dryer was 25 cents more to use than the washing machine. I think she thought I was going to give her a quarter.

Lol. That is penny-pinching to a degree I don't think I've ever experienced.

My wife calls me "cheap", and friends call me a tightwad. I dry camp and use FS campgrounds, as I like their settings, and price, for the most part. I have also seen how poorly many people treat our Public Lands. Disgraceful!

Zepher Cove is in a pricey area. It takes lots of effort and $$$ to maintain what so many people mistreat and disrespect. Yes, it is Public Land, but too many don't treat it as if they own it. They want someone else to clean up after them.

I have no problem with that price, for the area. If one wants to spend less, there are FS campgrounds on the west side of the lake, and north of the lake, also. They cost less than Zephyr Cove. We have choices. Not all of us can stay wherever we wish, even on public land. Prices are market-driven, not entitlement-driven.

Concessionaires pay for the rights to use the property. Those fees can be in the multiple millions of dollars per year for desirable locations. That $75 a night has to cover that rent, the utilities, the maintenance, the employees and make the concessionaire a profit because if there was no profit, no one would take on the responsibility and work.
Just because the land is publicly owned doesn't automatically mean whatever is operated on that land should be free. Airports are publicly owned and the airlines still charge you to fly on their planes. The hotdog vendor in Central Park shouldn't have to forgo profits just because Central Park is owned by the city. Even the land under the Twin Towers was publicly owned (Port Authority of New York and New Jersey) yet I don't think anyone feels the rents in the new One World Trade Center (Freedom Tower) should be free.

2oldman wrote:

time2roll wrote:
Seriously $75 a night is not excluding anybody that can afford to travel by RV.

Reminds me of that saying "An RVer is someone in a quarter-million dollar MH looking for a free place to park."

When camp hosting at state parks where the rates for FHU sites are @ $46+ per night on weekends, we heard quite a few complaints about the rates. Interestingly it was mostly older folks with the new DP class A's towing brand new toads, or the luxury model 45' 5'r being pulled by a $90K pickup doing most of the bitching. Last year one woman went out of her way to come over to the other side of the 300 site campground, and knock on my door at 10:30 PM, to voice her complaint that the coin op dryer was 25 cents more to use than the washing machine. I think she thought I was going to give her a quarter.

time2roll wrote:
Seriously $75 a night is not excluding anybody that can afford to travel by RV.

Reminds me of that saying "An RVer is someone in a quarter-million dollar MH looking for a free place to park."

Yosemite Sam1 wrote:

agesilaus wrote:
If you don't like their prices, then don't stay there.

Seriously, you don't see that we collectively own it as a public USFS and our taxes are paying for it's maintenance then we get hit by higher price for it's use?

Dude, it's not as simple as making choices in buying or using commercial services or products?

I see this as an opportunity to provide a small amount of additional money the USFS desperately needs in many areas. Taxes and funding are a bit light for the total needs of the USFS and National Parks.

Seriously $75 a night is not excluding anybody that can afford to travel by RV.

I'm all for jacked up prices as it keeps out the rif-raf. Remember cousin Eddie? And his dog, Snots? I'm hopin' $75 keeps 'em lookin' fer the cheap campsites.

Hi... That is the highest price for a spot that I know of. Price is what the market will bear... Jim2007.