I can't figure out how to use Recreation.gov

bukhrn wrote:
they actually had the sites numbered backwards, their maps really sucked with sites in the wrong place, roads were in the wrong places, no site photos where there was before

That data is all supplied by the campground. The website vendor does not get paid to update or verify the data.

When Reserve America lost the bid, they refused to return to the government years of data they had received on campgrounds - maps, site numbering, pictures, site amenities, etc.

The contract for Recreation.gov is a US Department of Agriculture contract for National Forests campgrounds. Other agencies like the Department of Interior National Parks and the Department of Defense Corps of Engineers are able to use Recreation.gov on a courtesy basis.

Those agencies were very upset that what they considered their data was not transferred to the new contractor.

Also most agency campgrounds, even USFS, did not have copies of what had been submitted in the past to Reserve America. A manpower extensive and expensive task to recreate all that data.

Ever since the new contract was given, the site sucks, when they took over, at one of our favorite CG's in Va., they actually had the sites numbered backwards, their maps really sucked with sites in the wrong place, roads were in the wrong places, no site photos where there was before.
in their defense, they have gotten slightly better, not really good, but better.
Trouble with govt. & their contractor sites, they are built, without asking the end user what they need it to do, in this case, probably by someone who has never camped a day in their lives, or tried to make a reservation.

agesilaus wrote:
But the site is built by the low bidder.

Are you sure? Usually consultant work is qualifications based. Only after selection, do they negotiate price.

The issue is the proposals are based on what is asked for in the RFP...if the RFP is poorly written and doesn't reward a user friendly system, the proposals won't prioritize a user friendly system (and it's not as simple as saying build a user friendly system)

As for selecting dates, once you press the arrival date and the button-like thing seems to change to "select check-out date", just click on the check-out date and the range will be highlighted and you can click "apply".

It is not the most intuitive user interface.

A few years ago when the contract changed, this forum was full of cheers to see the hated, dreaded Reserve America gone.

I have occasional frustrations with the new site, because I still use Reserve America for state parks, and another older website for a membership campground that was old and outdated when I retired from the IT world in 2009.

Like anything, it just takes a little practice.

#1Flyboy wrote:
....It’s a government run website, reason it is not user friendly; wish that government websites were more navigable such as Amazon, Apple, etc....

I never have trouble.

I must be doing something wrong. Recreation.gov is easy for the COE we usually go to. I google the COE name and click on the link to that park. The opening screen has a link to "Continue to booking". Click on that and the next screen brings up clickys to select "Equipment type". Then "More filters". There I can select water, sewer, and 50 amp electric. Then click "Apply" and then click on "Availability grid" and it shows on a calendar all the available sites and the days they are available with an "A". Select an available site for dates you want and book. Pretty darn simple.

..It’s a government run website, reason it is not user friendly; wish that government websites were more navigable such as Amazon, Apple, etc....

Actually it is a contractor not directly the government but yes it stinks and has no competition. About two contract cycles ago, maybe 4 or 5 years ago the site was not great but was easier to figure out. Then that company lost the bid and the Dept. of Interior stupidly allowed them to pack up and take all their data and code with them leaving the winners with nothing. And it has been worse ever since.

But the site is built by the low bidder, remember an elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.

#1Flyboy wrote:
....It’s a government run website, reason it is not user friendly; wish that government websites were more navigable such as Amazon, Apple, etc....

Actually a lot of large corporate websites are pretty bad.

It's much easier for an individual campground to set up a website. They might have half a dozen pages with one being reservations. Reservations are simple as they only have to consider the options for one park with one owner.

But I do agree, rescreation.gov is pretty bad and it's likely because there is no link between customer satisfaction and profits. If a company gets the contract to update the site and they meet the specifications put out...the govt can't complain. In fact, they are obliged to give them a good review which sets them up to win more work.

I will add that we have used it several times, most recently to book 5 days at Sugar Bottom campground on the Iowa River at Iowa City, IA. I knew they had some full hookup sites, and since we were staying longer than a weekend, thought that would be great. But the FU loop shows water/elec, and ONLY after you dive way down into the details of the campsite, does "amenities' show that it does have a sewer hookup. Point is, not always easy to find the "amenities" you want. It can say FU, but only show water/elec. Kind of strange to me. On a positive note, at that campground, just so happens google maps has a full drive thru of every loop....so I could see in a recent pic that indeed, the site we picked has sewer.