Reservations

Wow. The one statement that jumped out at me was "...I would think it wouldn't be more than a few cents a day."

I recently was forced to use the ReserveUSA system to "reserve" a site at Curecanti Nat'l Recreation Area in Colorado. This despite the fact that I was sitting in the campsite and it was empty. Why? Because it was in the "reservable" loop of Elk Creek Campground. Now, I could have settled for cramming my rig into an undersized site down with the party animals in the weeds, but I happened to like the nicer sites in the non-electric loop and after all, there was nobody in it. But in that loop, you can only take a site for 3 days max and someone can "reserve it out from under you", to quote the camp host. To ensure you can keep the site, you must "reserve" it. OK, where's the ranger?? "Oh NO! you have to CALL the reservation system. Here's the number. Have a nice day."

45 minutes of cell phone time later, I got my "reservation". I even got my Golden Access discount. Plus a $25 "Reservation Service Charge" for the privilege of using ReserveUSA to reserve a site for the next two weeks that I was already occupying. (It would have been the same if it had been for a week.)

I'm sorry to say the MCG are very close to not being all that good a deal to begin with, financially, and if you think a centralized reservation system could be turned over to a contractor/conncessionaire without it costing at least as much as as it does to use the NPS system, think again.

And that's not the worst part. Start privatizing the MCG and it won't be long before the base commanders say, "Who needs this aggravation?" and start turning the MCG's over to concessionaires altogether. Some contractor does the work and the base takes their cut. BAD idea.

I suggest you take a look at the costs of campgrounds run by the US Forest Service and those contracted out by the Forest Service to be run by concessionaires. Or check out the campgrounds run by concessionaires for the National Park Service and compare their costs to those run exclusively by the NPS. And don't even think about waving your Golden Access Card (or whatever they're calling it this year) at an NPS camp ground concession. Darn few of them accept them.

Turn the MCG's over to a contracter/concessionaire to run, and the initial cost increase will be no LESS than 50% within the first year. I'll give odds on that.

AND... the campgrounds will not noticeably improve in quality. Visit Trailer Village at Grand Canyon, Fishing Bridge CG at Yellowstone, or Morefield Campground at Mesa Verde NP if you doubt that.

So if anyone is counting votes on this issue, mark me down as a 'No'.

I suggest you take a look at the costs of campgrounds run by the US Forest Service and those contracted out by the Forest Service to be run by concessionaires.

I work for one of these concessionaires and I agree prices are outrageous! I'd never (okay, very rarely) would pay what is charged for a DRY Forest Service campground. However, if these USFS campgrounds were not turned over to a private company to operate, these campgrounds would close. I'm not trying to defend the concessionaire. In a perfect world, the government shuld be able to properly operate government campgrounds, but this isn't a perfect world anymore. The USFS can barely afford to fight fires, let alone purchase toilet paper.

Back on topic - I deal with the national recreation reservation system (ReserveUSA or Recreation.gov - the same system) daily. WHAT A JOKE! Unfortunately, as stated earlier, it's becoming a neccessary evil to make reservations for most government camping facilities. Personnally, it would be a disaster to have military campgrounds utilize this same central reservation service.

If the military got off their backsides they could do like KOA does.

KOA can afford the reservation system they have. I don't use KOA due to the cost. They charge are everything and their rates are entirely too high considering most of them are not any better than most other private campgrounds. You want a KOA reservation type system, get ready to pay for it.

Personally I prefer a no reservation system. Take no reservations, first come first serve with a maximum two week stay. That way we all would have a chance to get into a campground.

Count us as a BIG NO!!

What a Hornet's nest this would be....centralizing reservations would cost more than what it is worth......I think the goal should be that each service MWR uniform their reservations policy and length of stay policy, so that at least we would know what to expect when we call or drop in to stay in their campgrounds....that would help alot.... ....

Lori and Dock

I may not always LIKE the reservation policy at MCg's but I do like the fact that base commanders can still decide on a policy for their own base without DOD approval or a vote in Congress. I've always been an advocate for state's rights, so now it's "hurrah" for base rights. lets not try & make the best MCG's like the worst ones. That IS what would happen you know...

I may not always LIKE the reservation policy at MCg's but I do like the fact that base commanders can still decide on a policy for their own base...

Like letting some folks camp there for years - to the exclusion of everyone else?

No thanks, I think a little standardization is OK.