campsite reservation system

[mark23]

http://www.nationalparkstraveler.com/201...ional-park10420

Looks like the park is going to have a public discussion about having a reservation system for campsites and charging a few to maintain them. I don't camp but I have friends who have had a hard time finding an open site at certain times. I think it would be o.k to do the reservation system not sure about the fee. One plus for this is with the no gas supply on namakan you wouldn't have to burn a bunch of gas searching for a site if you knew where you were going, and if you knew you could choose a site close to a boat landing you could bring more stuff with knowing you didn't have to travel far. The con would be if somebody didn't show up for there site that would suck if it was a site you really wanted.

[walleye977]

Thanks for the link. I'm going to have to try and make one of these meetings to see what they got planned. I can see good and bad coming of this. Im going to post this on the Rainy site to thanks.

[Dock Boy]

Great idea charge to camp in a National Park. I'm all for it!

[h8go4s]

Places like Yellowstone & Glacier charge an entrance fee, plus campsite fees, so there's some precedent. But I don't want to have to make a reservation for a campsite. All the good ones, especially the ones with docks, would be reserved all summer long. Look at the BWCA system. Some areas are completely booked early in the year and never become available after that. If the only campsites available are the farthest ones from the launch ramps, that makes them available only to someone who can risk rough water to get there.

[Wish-I-Were-Fishn]

Great for those that can plan a year in advance... sucks for everybody else, like me!

[happycamper]

I have no objection to charging an entrance/user fee but I am not in favor of a campsite reservation system. As the previous post said, most who camp in the Voyageur's, do not plan that trip a year in advance for the exact date(s). We were camped on Namakan the week of July 4th and there were plenty of open sites the entire week. Often times, these visits are dictated by the weather and fishing conditions. I would suggest that the Park Service send a survey to those who camped there this past summer. Since everyone registers at the point of entry, they would have access to names and addresses.

[Bobcat45]

Last year was the first year that I,ve been to VPN. Went again this year and plan on making it a yearly thing if not more. I guess I am against reservation system. To compromise maybe if they took just a few campsites and made them reservable that would be ok. I'm talking like ten.But what I think would be a better idea would be a way that when you register you put in what campsite your going to use. Then when someone else shows up later they can see which ones are occupied and won't waste there time chasing campsites. Then if its to full you can go to Woodenfrog or something. Still have what your last day is on your register card. Then when you leave put on there that the site is open.I guess they would need some kind of computer system linked between accesses.

[herm]

The devil (or not) is in the details. That said, I support an access fee. I oppose reservations because: it will add costs for enforcement/etc; it seems like there is not a problem now; it will be abused mostly through people not showing up and thereby limiting access/appeal to others who choose to stay home because they can't get a reservation.

Two more things. 1. More sites should be created if this is done. 2. This WILL happen. The govt does not go through a 3-year process and then choose not to do anything.

Please share your voice. The contact info is in the link above.

[i'majigger]

I make 1 or 2 trips every summer to Namakan for camping and would not mind paying a few dollars to camp, but if they are going to start requiring reservations I can see already what is going to happen. People will just reserve the good campsites for every weekend so they will have it when they decide to go. This can be eliminated, when you reserve you pay your few right away, not when you use it. I would really just like to see it left as it is as I have not had to much trouble finding a campsite when I have gone up there.

[Timber]

If anyone goes to one of the Forest Service's meetings (I think in the Falls), would they please give a report here. That would be really helpful. Thanks!

[Hockey Guy]

No matter what they do or how they structure it, there will be empty sites not being used. I come up and plan to camp for 5-7 days all the time and then end up leaving a day or two early if the weather and the forecast are bad. I have even cancelled trips a day before because of forecasts or solid rain for days to come. That being said, the most important thing to me would be for people to only reserve sites that they plan to use. So the question is how do they discourage people from making frivolous reservations just because they might be going to show up? You also want to make sure that if people know they aren’t going to show up for their reservation, they have an incentive to cancel and allow other people to take the site. The only way I can see this happening is charging a $150 reservation fee. When people show up for their reservation they would need to check in at one of the visitor’s centers no later than two days after their reservation start date and show their ID. When they check in they would get their reservation fee refunded minus the camping fee of $20 or whatever they are going to charge. If you need to cancel your reservation, you can do that, but the amount refunded should be progressively less based on how long before the reservation date it is. For instance, if you cancel 30 days or more before your reservation you are refunded $120, 29-15 days you are refunded $100, 14-1 days you are refunded $75, and if you don’t cancel at all and don’t show up you aren’t refunded anything.

There is not going to be a perfect system. I do know if people don’t have a significant financial commitment it will be abused. If they don’t make people check in, you could also have people potentially scalping the reservations. If the park requires people to reserve sites and pay online for a $10-$20 fee and that’s it, people will be selling their reservations for whatever they can get. I know if I wanted to go camping on a weeks notice and someone advertised that they had a decent site for $50 I would buy it. Heck, I burned through $100 of gas a couple times this year just looking for an open site. I would pay good money to know exactly where I was going instead…

[Hockey Guy]

I just read my post above and noticed that it sounds like I’m in favor of some kind of reservation system. I just want to be clear that I am not in favor of a reservation system. I meant that I would buy a reservation from someone if a system was already in place and I wanted to go camping. I was simply stating how I think it would have to be instituted to be effective. If they do start a reservation system, I really hope they are smart enough to try it with a few sites first. I really think that you’re going to have people mad no matter what. You can’t please everyone. It is frustrating to go to VNP with the family and a boat load of gear, and then go through $120 of gas just to end up camping on a non-official site somewhere. However, I think it would be more frustrating to go up on short notice and have to stay at a resort, non-official site, or state campground because all the sites were reserved online. Then when you are up there fishing you are going by open sites the entire time because people didn’t show up for their reservations!

[arrow]

I'm 100% of favor of a reservation system. The BWCA system works great, I never have a problem getting a permit. The current system is a joke, I have spent to many hours driving around looking for a site in a fully loaded boat. Paying something to camp is to be expected as there are cost to maintain the park that should be borne by the users not the general public. Most national parks charge to camp and even the BWCA has a fee.

[dillon]

I think you should have to choose your campsite when you get to the visitor's center. All visitor centers could be linked on the internet. That way you would know which sites are available and wouldn't have to drive around searching for an open site. Also, people couldn't reserve sites and never or seldom use them. You can't claim a site until you get to the lake.

Think about this...if you can reserve sites, I could reserve my favorite site for two weeks and my wife could do it for another two weeks. We could tie up the site for an entire month and use it when we feel like it. Add in the three kids and we could have a site for most of the summer. You know people will do that.

A reservation system will definitely lead to abuses.

[Hockey Guy]

I like that idea as well. The only problem with that of course is the visitor centers are never open when I'm there! I usually go up after work and don't get up there until around 9:00PM. There are going to be major issues no matter what they come up with.

[chris63]

Did you or anyone go to the meeting(S)?I'm curious to hear what was said/proposed for the upcoming year.c63

[walleye977]

I went to the last meeting last week that they are having in the falls. Looks like nothing would take affect until 2014. In my opinion they have already made there minds up. The main reason is make money for the park. Looks like large campsites are going to be around 26 a night and 20 for the smaller ones and hey will have to be reserved and paid for ahead of time and when you reserve there is a 9 dollar fee. The reservation system would only be in place from memorial day to labor day. They say they have a lot of complaints of people come to VNP and not finding anything and leaving and saying they are never coming back and then they call or email the park. They also brought up that resorts are saying they need to charge because people don't stay with the resorts cause the park is free. So when this goes through there wont be any more spur of the moment camping trips to VNP going have to plan away ahead. Just for your info there are going to be more meeting around crane/ash river area and in the twin cites times and dates not sure of. here is a number to the park to get more info or to voice your concern 218 283 6670

[Drail1313]

WOW!!! $26 and $20 a night. My 1st problem with this is if you head out an hour from the ramp with a full boat of camping gear for a week campsite and it is taken, what do you do??? You reealy thing a group of have tank guys are going just say "OK We Are Sorry, We'll Move"

If you do not have a marine radio to call the park ranger you will have to drive back an hour to get a ranger. I see big problems ahead for this system.

It is all about planning when you head up there, you do not leave the ramp at 8 pm to go and find a spot on a busy weekend.

Can not wait to see he post in 2014 when this goes foward. (Have to read the police and park reports too.)

If they put on some of the sites on the system and others open (still pay at the ramp would be better.)

MY$.02

[walleye977]

This was in the paper yesterday just thought I'd inform others there going to be meeting in the cities and in duluth

http://www.ifallsjournal.com/news/voyage...7afe4aa260.html

[h8go4s]

Here's the official announcement from the VNP website:

http://www.nps.gov/voya/parknews/newsreleases.htm

[badfisherman]

If its $$$ they are after they should make you buy a sticker for your boat if u want to camp or something.Please don't f up my favorite summer vacation spot. People are complaining they couldn't find sites?? Really?? do they have a map?? Every time I've been there we have checked out a few open sites and taken the best one. We do try to head up on a Wednesday or Thursday morning. Now I'm worried I'm not going to be able to get a site. I'm kind of upset about this. Campsite trolling is half the fun. Leave it to the government to make everything more complicated than it needs to be!

[h8go4s]

I went to the VNP meeting in Maple Grove in December, just haven’t gotten around to writing a report. There seem to be three main things driving this:

First, the park gets a lot of inquiries and complaints about not offering reservations, both from people who won’t even make the trip without a reservation and people who couldn’t find a campsite. I have never failed to find a campsite, but I wouldn’t think of arriving later than Thursday afternoon in the summer peak.

Second, the area resorts want campers to be charged a fee because they feel that would make their businesses more competitive pricewise.

Third, the park has a budget problem. They can’t add more campsites or offer more services with their current resources, and the likelihood of getting more funding allocated is zero. Reservation fees and daily camping fees seem to be a practical solution. By my count, there are 240 campsites, houseboat sites, day use sites and back country sites. The maximum allowed in the park is 320, but again there is no money to add more sites.

The majority of the people who attended the meeting were opposed to reservations, but camping fees not so much. If any changes are made, they will not take effect until the 2014 season.

Here’s a copy of the email I sent to VNP in mid-December. I have yet to receive a response:

Thank you for conducting the meeting Dec. 15 regarding the campsite reservation and amenity fee proposal. I now have a much better understanding of the financial challenges at VNP. I have several observations.

1. Quote from VNP news release: “In discussions with communities alongside the park, there have been many who feel the park should charge for sites and offer reservations in order to bring new users to the area.” This statement seems to focus on the concerns of the surrounding communities regarding increases in tourism spun off park visits, not improving the park for the park’s sake. That position has some merit, but should be secondary to the concerns of the park users.

2. I have camped at VNP 4-5 times a summer for the last 4 years, each time filling out my name and address on the registration form. Yet no one has ever contacted me about this proposal, which has apparently been discussed for 2-3 years. I have to assume that either there is no funding for such an outreach or there is some regulation which does not allow use of the registrants’ personal information in that way. Nonetheless, I think park management could have done a better job of publicizing the issue and informing the current users.

3. There was mention of many emails and phone calls from people who were asking for a reservation system or who complained about failing to find a campsite and would never return. Can you quantify those complaints? I like solid data, but again I suppose that’s difficult to compile without funding.

4. Most of the current campsite users are opposed to a reservation system for reasons we discussed at the meeting. See also the comments at these websites, where the vast majority oppose a reservation system: http://tinyurl.com/cj6xd98 http://tinyurl.com/c4gnyud . The two primary oppositions in my opinion are the potential for abuse of the reservation system and the difficulties of vacating a campsite as scheduled in inclement weather (fog, high wind, electrical storms).

5. Therefore, enforcement of compliance will become a new problem and will consume unknown resources. At the least, I’d assume rangers would have to do daily patrols of the park with a reservation list in hand to assure compliance and prevent confrontations. Presumably this would become less of a problem as the years go by and the users become acclimated to the system. (Some of us cantankerous geezers will die off).

6. The VNP website doesn’t do a very good job of pointing out the current “first come, first served” policy. If you receive constant complaints about it, the policy should be in bold type at the top of the camping page. Point out that it can be hard to find an open designated campsite between Thursday afternoon and Sunday afternoon most summer weekends but camping at non-designated sites is allowed, with restrictions. Being retired, I normally arrive on Monday and have never had trouble finding a campsite.

7. I love VNP and will continue to visit regardless of the outcome of this process. I oppose a reservation system, but support camping fees. I would ask that you honor the National Parks Senior Pass for reduced camping fees as it often is at other national parks.

[duckster]

One important piece of information. The parks general management plan says that once all the sites are built, undesignated camping will no longer be allowed. So that means you will have to stay in a designated campsite. Not sure how far out this is but I know it is not too far in the future.

At that point I don't see how you could do it without a reservation system. Drive around looking for a designated site, not find one and have to leave? That doesn't sound great either.

Duckster

[chris63]

Even if "someone"is occupying your reserved campsite who and when is a ranger(if you can find one)going to come out and kick them out.Seems like this is ripe for trouble.I don't want to be negative but this has the potential to get ugly.c63

[Xplorer]

I've been thinking about this since the whole post was put up last year.

I and my family have been boat-in camping on Kab/Nam and Rainy since 1997, averaging 20 nights per summer between Memorial weekend and the 3rd week of August. When I looked back last year, I had spent over 300 nights camping in Voyageurs. So I have a pretty big interest in how this goes down, as I see my visits only increasing as my son gets older.

I'm thinking that at some point sooner than later, non-designated site camping will have to be eliminated to minimize camper conflicts.

And the system will have to be either entirely site specific (reserve a site for a specific time frame and all fees are paid upfront), or they establish "zones" of campsites where each area's quota (total number of established campsites)is open until the quota is met. This would mean that you would be guarenteed a campsite in a given zone, but not a specific site. (This is more along BWCA reservation model where entry points are set for a limited number of parties per day) This method would still lead to "campsite trolling", but with the guarentee that you would find an open site in your zone (theoretically). Either plan would definitely require additional Park Ranger's and a communication system to deal with camper conflicts 24/7 during the summer season.

My typical trip is 5 days/4 nights at a small campsite. We both work, so our trips start on either a Wed or Saturday morning. Lets say a yearly park pass is $35 (the rate for Glacier Nat'l), and a $20 per night rate is established for small campsites. My cost for the summer would be the $35, plus 16 x $20= 320. So total cost is $355 for 16 nights, or $22 per night for my family. Still less than 3 nights stay at a resort on Kab. I've wondered out loud for years when the free camping would end.

I'm OK with the cost, IF those fees go back into the park for improvements, upkeep, enforcement, and a communication system. If the max limit of campsites is 320, I want to see a plan that establishes a timeline on adding sites to get to that capacity with this additional revenue. I will be watching with much interest this next year, as I would think that any reservation system would need to be operational around Jan 1, 2014.

Just my thoughts as a long time park camper

[duckster]

xplorer,

No talk of a entrance fee at this point just a camping fee and only for June-August.

Duckster

[Timber]

What about day use? Now, people can use a camping site until 2:00 pm. There are lots of people up for the day, or who own cabins, that stop at camp sites for lunch, etc. What about them?

[duckster]

Have not heard that day use will change. You can use day use sites undesiganted sites or campsites until 2pm. I guess the difference may be if you are in a site and the person with the reservation shows up you may have to vacate. I do know the park has been developing additional day use sites.

-duckster

[h8go4s]

Duckster: "No talk of a entrance fee at this point just a camping fee and only for June-August."

1. I don't remember hearing about camping fees only in June-August at the meeting I went to. Could be, as the group sites are reservable Memorial Day week through Labor Day week.

2. On entrance fees, the Park Service will not allow any NEW entrance fees. That means parks which already have them can continue to collect them, but parks that don't can't start. Anyway, it would be hard to collect entrance fees at VNP with all the points of access available.

3. "Additional day use sites"? I know a new one was developed on Namakan a couple of years ago, and they're working on the Hoist Bay site. I don't know much about the rest of the park, but it seem the focus is on more campsites now, and the reservation/campsite fee system would be the revenue source for that development. Which brings to mind my main gripe on this process: The VNP website has nothing on planning. If it weren't for this forum, I would probably know nothing about this proposal.

[Xplorer]

After posting I realized that an entrance fee would be tough in this park since sections of most of the lakes are out of the park boundaries, and thusly pretty much unenforceable.

I would think that day-use sites are not included in the park campsite max of 320 since they do not represent overnight guests (tho i have seen houseboats and private boats with sleeping quarters stay at them overnight). I would tend to believe that reservations would only run from the weekend before Memorial day to Labor day.

I too wish the NPS would provide MUCH more info on this process and the planning going on, on their website so users could keep up to date