RVs in the News
Sign up for a feed and get posts automatically.rss

Friday, June 29, 2007

Motorhomer Cries "Foul!" at Colorado State Park Policy

An RVer with a motorhome and a "toad car," visiting Colorado's Cherry Creek State Park feels the state discriminates against motorhome owners. On pulling into the state park, the RVer was charged--in addition to his $22 per night campsite fee--$7 for his motorhome and $7 for his towed car. These latter two charges are assessed "gate fees," charged for entering the park. At the same time, he discovered an RVer with a pickup truck pulling a trailer or fifth wheel would only be hit with a single $7 gate fee. Feeling a bit nettled, and in his view, discriminated against, the RVer wrote to our parent website, RVTRAVEL.COM

Our diligent research elves put in a call to the rangers at Cherry Creek. They cheerfully told us, indeed, since the vehicle pulled by the motorhome was a motorized vehicle, there would be an additional gate fee; at the same time since the trailer wasn't motorized, there would be no additional charge. We decided to 'give the dog another bite,' so we checked with the home office. A slightly different version of the tale was related by the agency's public information officer, Clare Sinacori.

Ms. Sinacori told RVs in the News that if the toad car remained hitched to the motorhome, then only one gate fee would be charged--that for the motorhome. We explained that in the "real world," it was highly unlikely a motorhome could be backed into a campsite with a towed car in place. "That would be fine," we were told, "As long as once you were settled, the towed car is hooked back up to the motorhome and isn't used."

Having never visited Cherry Creek, but drawing on our experiences at other state parks around the country, the likelihood of hitching the toad back up to the motorhome once it was "settled," is pretty unlikely. The typical design of campsites would likely not allow for maneuvering the car back around behind a parked motorhome, at least not without driving off onto "sacred" non-paved ground. If that is the case in reality, then RVers, prepare to pay more for the privilege of bringing your toad car with you to Colorado State Parks.
Why such a stringent policy? It may lie with the fact that Colorado legislature reduced its park system's share of general funds by $750,000 for the current biennium. As a result, in the park system's own words, it has, "increasingly focused on cash generation." At $7 per day, per "motorized vehicle," "cash generation" falls primarily to the wallets of motorhome owners.

Labels: , , , , , ,

posted by Russ and Tiña De Maris at 6/29/2007 03:23:00 PM

27 Comments:

  • Thank you for making us aware of the new policy. We have a simple answer. If the extra fee is a problem. Just avoid the park system. There are many other wonderful places to go and enjoy. Colorado may not be on our list this year!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:47 AM, June 30, 2007  

  • KANSAS STATE PARKS ARE THE SAME DON'T SEE MINEY MOTOR HOMES IN THERE PARKS. USE FEDAL PARKS.
    LARRY BLANKENSHIP
    RETIRED MOVE OUT OF KANSAS

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:02 AM, June 30, 2007  

  • Minnesota eliminated mid-week senior discounts to generate more fees because of budget cuts. The end result......empty spaces mid week because many seniors are not willing to spend $25/night for a state park site!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:03 AM, June 30, 2007  

  • I do not have problems with whatever the various parks charge as long as it goes to the parks. In Texas, the money for the tax on sporting goods, etc is supposed to go to the state parks, uh oh, the politicos, who are smarted than we who elected them and only got that smart after being elected, uses it for other pet projects.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:15 AM, June 30, 2007  

  • Michigan also charges $6.00 for a towed vehicle in thier state parks.

    By Anonymous Kathy, at 6:04 AM, June 30, 2007  

  • I think that Arizona has a rule about like this one. I know that it was less expensive to stay in a private RV park just around the corner than to stay in the State park. Plus the Private park had wifi, full hookups, and clean restrooms. None of which were available in the State Park.

    By Blogger RonR, at 6:25 AM, June 30, 2007  

  • This is a very poor and ill conceived plan to obtain additional park fees at the expense of the motor home owner. It appears that dumb and dumber are in charge. I own a fifth wheel, but I would avoid the state park system until this discriminatory practice was repealed. Rv'ers should protest to the Colorado state park system and support the motor home owners.

    By Blogger Norman, at 6:32 AM, June 30, 2007  

  • Hmmm, I can avoid Colorado State Parks. But, as most State Parks are in a similar situation, we may be seeing a trend. Coq

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:49 AM, June 30, 2007  

  • I used to work at Cherry Creek. At that time the rule was that a Class A with a toad (dingy) only required a pass for the vehicle that was going to be used on Park roads. Thus, when a rig with a toad pulled up to the gate, we instructed the driver to secure his RV in the campsite and then put the pass in the toad to go in and out. The campsite receipt was supposed to be displayed in the RV for ID purposes.

    Looks like the Park and/or state is trying to make up the budget deficit on the campers. The daily rate for casual visitors hasn't gone up yet. Although across the board rate increases are scheduled for this fall.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:05 AM, June 30, 2007  

  • This doesn't suprise me at all. The state as a whole hates moterized and/or pullable devices. They closed down most all trailer parks, no parking, even overnight, of RVs on streets.
    I got so feed-up with the state and their money grubbing ways, back in the 50's, I moved out.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:46 AM, June 30, 2007  

  • That's a sure-fire way to reduce tourism and tourism dollars in a state, isn't it??? In Oregon, as of last summer, you were charged an extra fee on if you drove the "toad" in....as we did to a park near our home. If it had been toad in, we wouldn't have had to pay.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:40 AM, June 30, 2007  

  • We spent two weeks at Cherry Creek in January, and this $7.00 per day policy was definitely in practice at that time. After some complaint by us, they allowed us to only pay the fee for our Jeep and not the motorhome since the motorhome was going to remain in the park and not go in and out. We ended up buying an annual pass for the Jeep, which was much less than paying $7.00 per day for the 14 days. Had there been anywhere else for us to stay and/or had we NOT had to be there for those two weeks, we definitely would have gone elsewhere. This is a ridiculous policy and will COST the state more in the long run than it will earn. I know we definitely won't return to a Colorado state park!

    By Anonymous Beverly Adams, at 1:21 PM, June 30, 2007  

  • About State Parks, Oregon has the best I have been to. Also at $20.00 for full hookups its a deal. Also out west, they are the only state that gives Disabled Vets 10 days free camping per Month at any of the state parks. I got my pass and loved it. You can also pay if you need anymore time. You can only use 5 free at a time. But no one else does this for the vets. bob

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:05 PM, June 30, 2007  

  • Washington state also has a disabled vet pass which enables the holder to camp free in Wash state parks. The ID is valid in Oregon also but Oregon doesn't accept reservations while Wash does on some parks. Check out the websites for more info.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:17 PM, June 30, 2007  

  • My wife and I were travelling through New Mexico and stopped at Logan State Park. I was driving the motorhome and the wife was following in a separate car. When we checked in we found that the motorhome charge for a campsite was $14 plus we were charged $14 for the car as it was not being towed. The next morning we happened to see a sign stating an extra vehicle charge was $10. As it was too early to get our extra $4 returned we travelled on. Upon our return home I requsted a refund for the extra $4 that we paid. Instead of cash I received a voucher for use if I used a New Mexico State Park again. I feel that the extra charge for a second vehicle is unfair as we did not occupy any extra space. South Dakota State Park has a similar charge. I do not use any state parks any longer that have a similar policy. I still have the $4 voucher and will never use it!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:32 PM, June 30, 2007  

  • Thats simply double dipping. Chances are you'll park the MH and drive the toad, just as I do my fiver but drive my TV out. Its unfair and should be changed.

    By Anonymous Rockn DZL, at 8:49 PM, June 30, 2007  

  • Expect to pay an extra $16.00 to use the dump station if you come to Island Acres Park in Grand Junction Colorado.
    this is one reason I quit going to the State Parks.
    Bob Cress

    By Anonymous Bob Cress, at 12:07 AM, July 01, 2007  

  • All states have different ways of generating money and many feel free to fleece the users of state parks. That said, all states are struggling to meet their budgets. There is the money being spent for the education and health care of millions of illegal immigrants. The food stamp programs and other programs for the ones who refuse to work etc. However, I find it rather amusing when the biggest complainers are the haves rather than the have nots. To take issue with a $7.00 charge while driving a vehicle worth enough to feed several hundred people in other countries is beyond me. My parents tought me to pay my own way through life and it has worked out very well. Gareth H Goetsch USAF Retired

    By Blogger Gareth Goetsch, at 3:55 AM, July 01, 2007  

  • We love Colorado and definitely will continue to camp there. However with this policy in place we WILL NOT camp in the CO State Parks. There are many options. BTW this would be our personal practice with any state charging for both the MH and toad.

    Regarding the Disabled Vets camping. Oregon is unique in that the vet does not have to be a resident of that state the receive 10 days free camping a month in it's state parks. When I thanked several park managers, including the state director, they all replied that it didn't matter where the vet was from, they were disabled as a result of serving the country and they were glad to provide this benefit. Pretty open minded!

    By Anonymous Jerry, at 2:29 PM, July 01, 2007  

  • We are watching the "state park" problems unfold here in Arizona. It seems the same wing nuts are running the asylums (state parks). They somehow seem to forget that when you run off your customers you run off your job. But they'll spend another couple of years trying to figure out how to fix what wasn't broken in the first place. Ya gotta love an inept manager.
    All of you travel safe.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:00 PM, July 01, 2007  

  • This is not a new policy, it has been that way since I bought my first Colorado State Park pass. Staying in my state parks as often as I have, I've seen some attempted rip offs of the state including toads leaving with one driver and the same vehicle returning for a picnic and day use with a completly different family. Our NFS fees in Colorado continue to climb since the Forest "Service" has handed our campgrounds over to private managing organizations. A number of NFS campgrounds are running out of water here. If we want to play, unfortunatly, we are going to have to pay! By the way, if the camper had chose Chatfield State Park the fees would have been $5.00 per vehicle.

    By Blogger RV Lover, at 9:35 PM, July 01, 2007  

  • It seems to me that this is a matter of the free market. If you object to these fees you have the choice of saying no and making alternative arrangements: either staying in a private campground or seeking to camp at a Wal-Mart, on Forest Service land or some other alternative.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:07 PM, July 02, 2007  

  • I Think some of you are missing the point. It is not how much money a MH owner has, it is getting short changed by the system. If you do not care what happens to a fellow camper today, It may happen to you tomorrow.

    By Blogger Taylor, at 2:35 PM, July 04, 2007  

  • A lot of whining for the wealthy folks out there .....If you can't afford the 7 extra dollars just stay home with your $100,000.00 rig. Good Luck

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:49 AM, July 21, 2007  

  • We have a similar fee situation in American Fork canyon in Utah. Our Federal taxes fund the forest service or national parks people and then you have to stop at the "guard shack" to pay another fee just to drive into the canyon! Then if you go to the campgrounds, you pay the fee for that! I wonder how much of the "guard shack" fees go just to fund the Guard expenses. Of course the Feds want to establish that "They" own the parks; when you pay a "fee" (actually a tax), that establishes that The Feds do own the place.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:59 AM, August 03, 2007  

  • We all are not rich... My budget per month is $1100 for traveling, eating, and parking. Sure doesn't look like I'm going to spend any time in CO.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:40 AM, August 05, 2007  

  • I HAVE tv AND 5TH WORTH WELL OVER $100,000 WITH NO PAYMENTS. WE ARE DEBT FREE WITH NO OTHER HOME AND LIVE ON SOCIAL SECURITY...THE BUDGET IS TIGHT.,.GETTING RIPPED OFF IS NOT AN OPTION ON OUR BUDGET! wE ARE PROUD OF OUR BEAUTIFUL TRUCK AND TRAILER AND KEEP THEM NICE LOOKING, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO THROW AWAY!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:41 AM, September 04, 2007  

Post a Comment

<< Home