Watch out for cost of Michigan State Parks

[Jayco-noslide]

I've complained before and am again though I don't expect it to change anything. But sometimes I wonder if anyone really complains about price any more so the seller never knows?? We are from Illinois and were just camping at Sleeping Bear Dunes NP campground. No hook-ups but nice campground for $6 (senior pass). We called to see about reserving Ludington St Pk. It would have totaled $49 for 1 night. Rediculous. This crosses the line! This includes entrance fee(which many states waive if camping and I think maybe it's more for non-residents), The camping fee and a way too high $10 reservation fee. Most of the states which charge a daily entrance fee have a lower camping fee so that the total is around $30. PLUS the sites have only elec, no water. So we found a public park several miles away for $30 with full hook-up plus Wi-Fi. We drove through Ludington SP for a look and I've never seen a sate park campground so crowded and with sites so close together. Boy, I sure am glad it was so outrageously expensive so that we did not stay there.

[jaycocamprs]

westernrvparkowner wrote:

There is no one in Georgia who was planning to spend two weeks in the Upper Peninsula but cancelled the trip because the state park's camping cost out of state residents $49.00 while in state residents only Pay $44.00.

No we did not cancel a trip due to the resident/non resident price differential. But we did change one because Michigan charges that high entry fee every day of the stay. That was 4 years ago. Michigan lost out in the planning of next years trip also. Still going back to the Great Lakes, just not Michigan.

[mikensallyt]

wbwood wrote:
$49 for a state park with only electric is pretty steep...You can stay down in the Keys at a state park with water and electric and be right on the water for less than that...we camp at Stone Mountain State Park here in NC. $25/night including the reservation fee. Water and electric. Sites are spacious. No entrance fee to the park whatsoever....

Now that looks like a real nice park, spacious with paved sites. They even allow fire pits. My kind of place. If I ever get more time on my hands and can get out of Texas while traveling, this place is on my list of parks to visit.

[fla-gypsy]

Down here in Florida state parks you can get a FHU site for about $30 except in the keys (about $40) and that Frankenstein park they call Topsail Hill ($46).

[Pirate1]

Cost around 50 bucks a night to stay at a mediocre state park in MI with 30 amp, no water, and plenty of noise from an adjacent highway. That was around 7 years ago and haven't given the state of MI a penny since then. Bad management to make it more expensive on non-residents and then leave campspots open and unrented.

[wbwood]

$49 for a state park with only electric is pretty steep...You can stay down in the Keys at a state park wit hwater and electric and be right on the water for less than that...we camp at Stone Mountain State Park here in NC. $25/night including the reservation fee. Water AN electric. Sites are spacious. No entrance fee to the park whatsoever....

[westernrvparkow]

Calicajun wrote:

kknowlton wrote:
Silver lining: Michigan state parks are generally nicer & in better shape than Illinois ones, which do not charge an entry fee. You get what you pay for, sometimes - and we have found that usually applies to state parks.

Not that it seems to be an issue with the OP, but some on this forum have from time to time complained about states that charge more for non-residents. I have never had a problem with that, since state income taxes often are used partly to support the state parks. Nonresidents don't pay those income taxes (though they may pay their own states), so it's only fair, IMO, to charge nonresidents a bit more to use facilities in another state whose own taxpayers help foot the bill.

Don't agree with you on the point of charging someone more because they are from out of state. All states want tourist and the money they spend while traveling. Charging more for being out of state just makes me want to stay away. How much money does or will a state loose if people don't visit some place out of state. They will loose more than they are making charging an out of state fee.

If someone is going to refuse to travel to a state over a $5.00 or $10.00 fee, I seriously doubt they were going to spend a whole lot of money elsewhere in the state. There is no one in Georgia who was planning to spend two weeks in the Upper Peninsula but cancelled the trip because the state park's camping cost out of state residents $49.00 while in state residents only Pay $44.00.

[Calicajun]

kknowlton wrote:
Silver lining: Michigan state parks are generally nicer & in better shape than Illinois ones, which do not charge an entry fee. You get what you pay for, sometimes - and we have found that usually applies to state parks.

Not that it seems to be an issue with the OP, but some on this forum have from time to time complained about states that charge more for non-residents. I have never had a problem with that, since state income taxes often are used partly to support the state parks. Nonresidents don't pay those income taxes (though they may pay their own states), so it's only fair, IMO, to charge nonresidents a bit more to use facilities in another state whose own taxpayers help foot the bill.

Don't agree with you on the point of charging someone more because they are from out of state. All states want tourist and the money they spend while traveling. Charging more for being out of state just makes me want to stay away. How much money does or will a state loose if people don't visit some place out of state. They will loose more than they are making charging an out of state fee.

[garmp]

Missouri State Parks are hard to beat. NO entrance/use fee. No up charge for out of state. Paid for by an 1/8 of one percent state sales tax. Not big on discounts for various things,(10% senior/disabled) but the cost is already more than reasonable.

[kknowlton]

Silver lining: Michigan state parks are generally nicer & in better shape than Illinois ones, which do not charge an entry fee. You get what you pay for, sometimes - and we have found that usually applies to state parks.

Not that it seems to be an issue with the OP, but some on this forum have from time to time complained about states that charge more for non-residents. I have never had a problem with that, since state income taxes often are used partly to support the state parks. Nonresidents don't pay those income taxes (though they may pay their own states), so it's only fair, IMO, to charge nonresidents a bit more to use facilities in another state whose own taxpayers help foot the bill.

[coolmom42]

Yep, I agree. It's pretty ridiculous.

[darsben]

See a silver lining