Am I the only one bothered by a pet charge at RV parks?

westernrvparkowner wrote:

Mr. Camper wrote:

Crowe wrote:
Just musing here. I think what BOTH sides (RVers and park owners) have to come to terms with is that a "one-size-fits-all" approach no longer works. With the plethora of RVs now available and the myriad of different types of those who participate I think it's time that a different way of charging might be in order. Do I have the solution to what it should be? No. But I have no issue with a base rate plus a charge for certain elements such as kids, dogs, use of ACs or whatever. I know some get peeved at being nickeled and dimed to death but some also get peeved at paying for things they don't use. I have only one child but always paid the family rate which usually includes two kids. Maybe I have too many other things to concern myself with other than a few bucks on a campsite.

Actually, I can think of five RV parks that have closed due to excessive fees.



What's your basis for this statement? Conjecture or proof?

That campgrounds we used to visit on a somewhat regular basis suddenly raised their daily, weekly rates and began charging for each pet, cable television, each extra person (over 3 or 4), 50 amp, WIFI, pull throughs (even when all back-ins were in use), use of A/C, electric heaters, and one place wanted extra $ for use of a picnic table. We aren't fans of, in your words, being nickled and dimed.

Have those parks subsequently closed? I doubt it. What has happened in they have adopted business models that no longer meet your needs and you are no longer their target customer.
And of course they have raised their rates, just like over the years you have seen the cost of most everything rise and also probably have seen your wages increase as well. Why would RV parks be exempt from raising rates?
If you quit patronizing every business that has raised their prices over the years, you are quickly going to run out of places to patronize.

Hasn't happened yet. I understand the need to raise camping fees from time to time but not to split off what were inclusive fees and begin to tack on additional add on fees. Many businesses, not just campgrounds, go out of bussiness when they price themselves out of business. For the five we know about it wasn't just our business they lost but many others bailed out as well. Should we ever run out of places to patronize we'll adjust and overcome to find places that do meet our needs. Is your yard available to rent?

CA Traveler wrote:
I was making a reservation when they asked if I have a animal. Yes a cat that stays inside. Not acceptable for their rules.

I'm guessing the "it's all about me society we live in.." wouldn't control their pets so the CG had a hard fast rule.

So I called the next door (as in common boundry) CG and we've been there many times. Here's the interesting part: Later we found out that the same owner owned both parks.

Multiple Personalities. ... :)


Anonymous

Mr. Camper wrote:

Crowe wrote:
Just musing here. I think what BOTH sides (RVers and park owners) have to come to terms with is that a "one-size-fits-all" approach no longer works. With the plethora of RVs now available and the myriad of different types of those who participate I think it's time that a different way of charging might be in order. Do I have the solution to what it should be? No. But I have no issue with a base rate plus a charge for certain elements such as kids, dogs, use of ACs or whatever. I know some get peeved at being nickeled and dimed to death but some also get peeved at paying for things they don't use. I have only one child but always paid the family rate which usually includes two kids. Maybe I have too many other things to concern myself with other than a few bucks on a campsite.

Actually, I can think of five RV parks that have closed due to excessive fees.



What's your basis for this statement? Conjecture or proof?

That campgrounds we used to visit on a somewhat regular basis suddenly raised their daily, weekly rates and began charging for each pet, cable television, each extra person (over 3 or 4), 50 amp, WIFI, pull throughs (even when all back-ins were in use), use of A/C, electric heaters, and one place wanted extra $ for use of a picnic table. We aren't fans of, in your words, being nickled and dimed.

Have those parks subsequently closed? I doubt it. What has happened in they have adopted business models that no longer meet your needs and you are no longer their target customer.
And of course they have raised their rates, just like over the years you have seen the cost of most everything rise and also probably have seen your wages increase as well. Why would RV parks be exempt from raising rates?
If you quit patronizing every business that has raised their prices over the years, you are quickly going to run out of places to patronize.

I was making a reservation when they asked if I have a animal. Yes a cat that stays inside. Not acceptable for their rules.

I'm guessing the "it's all about me society we live in.." wouldn't control their pets so the CG had a hard fast rule.

So I called the next door (as in common boundry) CG and we've been there many times. Here's the interesting part: Later we found out that the same owner owned both parks.

What amazes me is the thought that private campgrounds are "filling their wallets" with extra fees... like they don't have the right to make money since they are... wait for it... a business.

Not sure how many here worked to just make people happy, not to survive and pay their bills.

Or the other thought that I will spend tens of thousands of $$$ on all of my RV/TV needs and quibble about private campground fees.


westernrvparkowner,

I also find your posts a great read and wonder how you do it. If the posts on this site are indicative of a sampling of visitors to your campground, you probably have your hands full at times. :)

Crowe wrote:
Just musing here. I think what BOTH sides (RVers and park owners) have to come to terms with is that a "one-size-fits-all" approach no longer works. With the plethora of RVs now available and the myriad of different types of those who participate I think it's time that a different way of charging might be in order. Do I have the solution to what it should be? No. But I have no issue with a base rate plus a charge for certain elements such as kids, dogs, use of ACs or whatever. I know some get peeved at being nickeled and dimed to death but some also get peeved at paying for things they don't use. I have only one child but always paid the family rate which usually includes two kids. Maybe I have too many other things to concern myself with other than a few bucks on a campsite.

Actually, I can think of five RV parks that have closed due to excessive fees.



What's your basis for this statement? Conjecture or proof?

That campgrounds we used to visit on a somewhat regular basis suddenly raised their daily, weekly rates and began charging for each pet, cable television, each extra person (over 3 or 4), 50 amp, WIFI, pull throughs (even when all back-ins were in use), use of A/C, electric heaters, and one place wanted extra $ for use of a picnic table. We aren't fans of, in your words, being nickled and dimed.

Crowe wrote:
Just musing here. I think what BOTH sides (RVers and park owners) have to come to terms with is that a "one-size-fits-all" approach no longer works. With the plethora of RVs now available and the myriad of different types of those who participate I think it's time that a different way of charging might be in order. Do I have the solution to what it should be? No. But I have no issue with a base rate plus a charge for certain elements such as kids, dogs, use of ACs or whatever. I know some get peeved at being nickeled and dimed to death but some also get peeved at paying for things they don't use. I have only one child but always paid the family rate which usually includes two kids. Maybe I have too many other things to concern myself with other than a few bucks on a campsite.

Actually, I can think of five RV parks that have closed due to excessive fees.

What's your basis for this statement? Conjecture or proof?

And those parks would be? And the documentation they closed because the sites were too high priced can be found where?
Parks close all the time. Sometimes, the market has changed and there are no longer enough customers. Sometimes they can't compete with the other parks in the area. Some have been regulated out of business. Sometimes the reason is they are being converted to other usage, but I haven't heard of any that closed because the site rates were too high. (well I do know of one that tried to do the lot sale thing and that fell flat on it's face because there were no buyers for the lots, but I don't consider that a failure due to high rates, that's failing to have a viable business plan.)

Doesn't bother me. I am a responsible pet owner willing to pay.
When I find a park that allows pets that has no stray mysterious pile around I will know all owners are 100 per cent incompliance.
However I have yet to find such a campground with zero piles.
Wonder who is leaving those piles,Maybe it's the greedy CG owners. You know the one's that are just trying to gouge us pet owners.
Of course none of our pets left the piles I see at every CG. We are responsible pet owners.:h
In the end us responsible owners must pay the fee to cover the irresponsible owners. Not fair but I understand.

We are responsible pet owners and always have our dog on a leash, always pick up after her and she seldom barks ( her breed is a quiet breed). We also will not stay anywhere that there is a pet charge. Our dog does not add to the owners expenses in any way. Agree they should charge for kids. Have had to clean up after them in the bathrooms, and they run wild. Should be leashed and require parents to be hanging onto the other end of the leash, just like the dogs.

If they charge extra for them they better have access to the club house, laundry, shower, and pool. If they are paying for it they should be able to use it. Same with kids or guests.

After all they are paying client's.