Think about the last time you tried to book a stay at a really popular campground. You found the dates, clicked reserve… and nothing. Booked solid. Ugh.
For today’s poll, we want to know if you think popular campgrounds should limit stay length?
For some of you, the answer is an easy yes. When demand is sky-high, limiting how long people can stay feels fair. Shorter stays can open up more sites, giving more travelers a chance to experience bucket-list parks instead of watching the same reservations sit on the calendar for weeks.
Others agree, but with conditions. Maybe limits make sense only during peak season, holidays, or high-demand months. When crowds thin out, longer stays might help parks maintain steady occupancy and give travelers more flexibility.
Then there are those of you who feel it should depend on the campground itself. A tiny national park campground might need stricter turnover, while a large private RV park could accommodate longer-term guests without affecting availability as much—context matters.
And, of course, some of you don’t think stays should be limited at all. If someone books a site within the rules, they should be able to stay as long as allowed. Longer visits can support local economies, create community among campers, and reduce the stress of constantly moving.
So what about you? Should popular campgrounds limit how long guests can stay—or leave things as they are? Go ahead and vote below, and feel free to share your reasoning in the comments below. We bet his one is bound to spark some conversation…
MORE POLLS YOU MIGHT LIKE:
- Do you think you’ll ever become a full-time RVer?
- Are you excited about your life?
- Did you buy your RV on impulse or plan ahead?
- Have you ever been unable to leave a campground on time due to a mechanical issue?
- After settling into a campground/RV park, how often do you introduce yourself to at least one neighbor?
- If you get ‘bad vibes’ at an RV park, do you stay or leave?
RVT1248
Tis my belief that length of stay restrictions in privately owned campgrounds is at the discretion of the owners. Many if not most States already have limits as do some municipalities also have limits.
It’s just an opinion on the length of the stay, not on whether or not, private campgrounds shouldn’t have their own discretion in the matter.
So, with that in mind. It would seem that, in any campground, the stay limitation length could be dependent on the length of the season. If a seasonally operating campground in colder climates use a two week limit, that takes up a larger percentage of the season, than a year ’round campground.
are the “popular” campgrounds public or private? Changes my response
I voted No Never
Public already has 14 day limit
Private business, they can run it however they want
Private- No. Supply and demand. Owners decide based on what’s best for their businesses.
Public- Yes. We all pay taxes and our government is the “owner.”
For a privately owned and operated RV park or campground the owners should be able to set the limits that they want.
For the State and National Park campgrounds, limits already exist (as far as I have experienced).
Unlimited stays all but guarantees the great sites will be just as unavailable in the off season as peak except they’ll be occupied by one instead of many.
Nobody stays in the lousy sites for weeks on end so who are we kidding here?
People want to hoard the great spot longer knowing full well their “unlimited” occupancy eliminates competition for that spot while they point to all the lesser spots that everyone else can fight for.
It’s the same for private campgrounds but limits should be the owner’s decision based on their business license within their zoning laws.
Yes- for those who build wood fires outside your window.
This is a very gray topic, meaning not black & white rather than old. The correct answer depends on a lot more specific context.
Long term residents are less work for the staff so it’s a no brainer for private campgrounds, they can also charge whatever the market will bear. Public parks have an obligation to all people and should do what ever allows more citizens to use sites. I live in Florida and no matter what, it’s not easy getting into popular parks private or public.
Public campgrounds should be available to lots of people, so yes, reasonable stay limits can make that happen. If you really want to stay for a month or three – be a campground host. Private RV parks/resorts/etc can do what they want; they’re in business to provide a service and make a profit (or is it the other way round?). Public campgrounds (city, county, state, federal) are for the public and need to be shared.
Nope. Apart from safety issues privately owned businesses are best equipped to decide how to run their businesses.
We miss the days when the Corps of Engineers had first come first serve RV sites.
We could time our travels so we could always find an open sites were not all booked up.
Some popular COE’s are booked up for a year ahead, for only weekends, with Monday through Thursday’s empty sites.
The COE sights I’ve signed up for in Pa are six months in advance.
The ones with long term, weeks or months should have separate areas. It makes it easier for the ones staying short term. Closer to bath houses, pools, playgrounds and the office/store.
Plus, from what I’ve noticed is the long term sites look more like permanents, with bikes, dog pens, mountains of firewood, tables ad chairs scattered all over the site and basically looking like a vacation home.
It makes no sense to have stay restrictions when there are empty sites. If the demand is there to fill the campground, then start requiring the longest tenant to move, using dry camping if available, with stay length adjusted based on the numbers waiting and a desirable minimum stay.