Hit a tree in the rv park

I was in a tight turn and my awning hit the tree that was leaning over the road. In this turn you must put the front end over completely off the toad. The back end rides close to the tree. after looking at the tree where my awning hit you could tell it had been hit many times. I reported it to the camp ground office and they sent a police officer to take a report for my insurance claim. He gave me a number to call on Monday and the report would be there for them to send it to me. I explained it to the investigator and he transferred me to who it turned out to be the lady in charge of all parks. I was told to get an estimate and send it to them. two days latter I received a check for the entire amount with a note saying they have many people hit that tree and they cannot cut it down. That is why they pay for the damage.

One of the most painful things I ever watched was a very large, and very new trailer being freed from being wedged between two trees. The owner was obviously a newbee, and decides that his huge bumper pull would fit just fine, down a paved campground road that was slightly bigger than a golf cart path. This was in the tenting section, BTW, where NOBODY pulling anything belonged, or could fit. He came to a jog in the road (think of a mini serpentine section)and negotiated it with the Excursion he was driving. As he wove the trailer through it got stuck on one side, and he tried to correct and managed to lever it hard, between two trees. He has it so stuck that the recovery crew, used a steel beam, on a forklift, to raise the back end. They then used a winch to pull the trailer sideways, as the trailer frame slid on the beam. The noise was like nails on a chalk board, as the trailer crushed and crumpled. The TT was crushed severely at the drip edge, on both sides. I wouldn't be surprised if he had totaled it. Yep, those trees were also guilty.

I've been reading through both of these threads, and have yet to see the OP acknowledge that he violated one of the most basic tenants of backing with a spotter. If you can't see the spotter, STOP!

It should have died the first time. But, OP (or OTK) must want to perpetuate it.

OTK = Original Tree Killer (grin)

Mike

SNORE! Why is this thread still living? It's just getting sillier and sillier with every post......Including this one!

SNORE! Why is this thread still living? It's just getting sillier and sillier with every post......Including this one!

GordonThree wrote:

DrewE wrote:

GordonThree wrote:

dave17352 wrote:

GordonThree wrote:
Did you severely injure the tree when you hit it with your vehicle? It's a shame that a healthy tree should be removed.

You must be joking right?

What don't you understand about my question? I can understand an injured tree being cut down, but a healthy one, it makes no sense to kill it for someone's mistake.

Maybe, just maybe, the management of the campground realized that the tree was in the way of the intended use of the campsite, and thought it better to remove it than to limit the site to small units. I suspect they may have erred originally in leaving it there when laying out the campground or possibly when reconfiguring the site, as evidenced by their agreement to cover the damage to the poster's RV and their quickness to remove the tree.

Obviously one wants to avoid backing into anything, tree or otherwise, when maneuvering a vehicle. That doesn't mean, however, that a campground would want to leave obstacles directly in the path of people setting up camp. From the description I've read here, it sure sounds like the tree was rather blocking the site, being at the end of the pad for the RV where the back end would of necessity need to hang out.

Sounds like a valid reason to cut down all the trees in a campground, in one way or another they'll be in someones way. Then monster rigs can park whichever way they want in any site... oh wait, they have those "parks" already, they're called RV resorts.

Nothing but pavement, maybe some grass here or there - I don't know about grass though, it's worse than trees. It gets in the way too, right when its least expected, the grass will turn to mud and trap rigs.

So now we have to be politically correct when making a camping pad useful. I totally agree that the rear area of a 5th camping site should be clear if at all possible to allow for rigs to be back in to full depth. I hope the tree has a nice place in Tree Heaven.

DrewE wrote:

GordonThree wrote:

dave17352 wrote:

GordonThree wrote:
Did you severely injure the tree when you hit it with your vehicle? It's a shame that a healthy tree should be removed.

You must be joking right?

What don't you understand about my question? I can understand an injured tree being cut down, but a healthy one, it makes no sense to kill it for someone's mistake.

Maybe, just maybe, the management of the campground realized that the tree was in the way of the intended use of the campsite, and thought it better to remove it than to limit the site to small units. I suspect they may have erred originally in leaving it there when laying out the campground or possibly when reconfiguring the site, as evidenced by their agreement to cover the damage to the poster's RV and their quickness to remove the tree.

Obviously one wants to avoid backing into anything, tree or otherwise, when maneuvering a vehicle. That doesn't mean, however, that a campground would want to leave obstacles directly in the path of people setting up camp. From the description I've read here, it sure sounds like the tree was rather blocking the site, being at the end of the pad for the RV where the back end would of necessity need to hang out.

Sounds like a valid reason to cut down all the trees in a campground, in one way or another they'll be in someones way. Then monster rigs can park whichever way they want in any site... oh wait, they have those "parks" already, they're called RV resorts.

Nothing but pavement, maybe some grass here or there - I don't know about grass though, it's worse than trees. It gets in the way too, right when its least expected, the grass will turn to mud and trap rigs.

GordonThree wrote:

dave17352 wrote:

GordonThree wrote:
Did you severely injure the tree when you hit it with your vehicle? It's a shame that a healthy tree should be removed.

You must be joking right?

What don't you understand about my question? I can understand an injured tree being cut down, but a healthy one, it makes no sense to kill it for someone's mistake.

Maybe, just maybe, the management of the campground realized that the tree was in the way of the intended use of the campsite, and thought it better to remove it than to limit the site to small units. I suspect they may have erred originally in leaving it there when laying out the campground or possibly when reconfiguring the site, as evidenced by their agreement to cover the damage to the poster's RV and their quickness to remove the tree.

Obviously one wants to avoid backing into anything, tree or otherwise, when maneuvering a vehicle. That doesn't mean, however, that a campground would want to leave obstacles directly in the path of people setting up camp. From the description I've read here, it sure sounds like the tree was rather blocking the site, being at the end of the pad for the RV where the back end would of necessity need to hang out.

dave17352 wrote:

GordonThree wrote:
Did you severely injure the tree when you hit it with your vehicle? It's a shame that a healthy tree should be removed.

You must be joking right?

What don't you understand about my question? I can understand an injured tree being cut down, but a healthy one, it makes no sense to kill it for someone's mistake.