โFeb-06-2020 12:38 PM
โFeb-11-2020 02:51 AM
GeoBoy wrote:shelbyfv wrote:
I'd pay extra for a campground that didn't allow dogs.
X2
โFeb-10-2020 11:09 AM
โFeb-09-2020 04:30 PM
โFeb-09-2020 08:29 AM
โFeb-09-2020 06:57 AM
โFeb-08-2020 06:29 PM
โFeb-08-2020 05:02 PM
shelbyfv wrote:
I'd pay extra for a campground that didn't allow dogs.
โFeb-08-2020 02:10 PM
โFeb-08-2020 01:55 PM
winniman wrote:This ^^^^. And, the liability insurance coverage costs for the RV park.
Too many people don't pick up after their pets. If the owner has to pay someone to constantly go around and clean up dog do, you couldn't blame them for charging extra. They could just raise the rates, but that wouldn't be fair to others who don't own pets. According to EVERYONE, they always pick up after their pets. The evidence seems to say otherwise.
โFeb-08-2020 12:53 PM
โFeb-08-2020 10:14 AM
โFeb-08-2020 05:56 AM
โFeb-08-2020 05:39 AM
Charlie D. wrote:winniman wrote:schlep1967 wrote:
I would like to hear from a park owner that has looked into insurance policy pricing for the campground that allows pets versus not allowing pets. If the charge is used to cover an increase in insurance cost because dogs are allowed, they are charging the correct patrons.
I don't like the idea floated by earlier posters relating the charge to park employees cleaning up after the dogs. This implies that if I pay my $5 I don't have to clean up the mess. I paid for someone else to do it.
They are not going to tell you that the fee is to clean up after your pet, but the reality is, someone has to do it. They cant just leave doggie do everywhere. Quite often it is in vacant sites. Do you want to pull in to find a nice pile in your campsite.
Been to 100's of campgrounds. Never seen an employee pick up after the idiots who don't clean up after their pets.
โFeb-07-2020 07:44 AM
schlep1967 wrote:I can understand how some might feel that way but don't agree with it.
I would like to hear from a park owner that has looked into insurance policy pricing for the campground that allows pets versus not allowing pets. If the charge is used to cover an increase in insurance cost because dogs are allowed, they are charging the correct patrons.
I don't like the idea floated by earlier posters relating the charge to park employees cleaning up after the dogs. This implies that if I pay my $5 I don't have to clean up the mess. I paid for someone else to do it.