Registration Fee: A Required "Fee" to Pay Another "Fee"

[Winston]

Today we don't write about our principal pet-peeve - - 100% Reservation Systems - - but to observe that we're apparently not the only citizens to question "Registration Fees" - - Fees one must pay in order to pay other fees.

Not so many years ago, campgrounds hired staff to take your money and place you in a site. This was an expense of doing business which campgrounds paid. Like other expenses, presumably this cost was integrated into each campsite fee.

One might expect that with automated payment kiosks and self-directed, on-line reservation systems that the cost to the campground would be less than in the old days with ‘hired staff’. The campground can create their own reservation system or contract with third party vendors for the service but, in either event, why shouldn’t this expense be borne, as historically it has, by the campground?

We suspect some will argue we’re nit-picking - - what’s an extra $8 charge when reserving a $50 campsite for a week? Ok. But not all of us stay for a week nor focus on those $50/night options. Recently, for example, we attempted to reserve a Forest Service site in Utah - - with our senior discount, the site would have been $7.50 - - the added “fee to pay” for the site would have more than doubled our cost.

We make this post to share a link to a National Parks Traveler article that opens with this paragraph:

“In the wake of articles by the National Parks Traveler and the Wall Street Journal, two U.S. senators are wondering why a private company is being paid millions of dollars to manage the website that serves as a national portal for accessing recreational activities on federal lands.”

You should find this article and the Senators’ letter interesting and you may want to add your two-cents-worth by writing your Congressmen.

https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2023/07/senators-why-private-company-managing-recreationgov

[mkguitar]

We are fortunate to have amazing public lands.


We are unfortunate to have representatives who move control of these lands to private businesses.








BTW a recent cancelled reservation at a NP got us a cancellation fee 100% equal to the "refund" from the National Park system.

Can assume the funds for campsite, were moved to the reservation business.
I processed the cancellation to open up a site for another traveler.

[booster]

My "favorite" irritation is the no staff campground that is nearly empty with lots of sites avaiable.


You get the "pleasure" of sitting in the site, in the campground, but then have to do a reservation over the phone or internet to be able to stay there, and of course pay their $7-9 fee to do it.

[peteco]

Yep, us one or two night folks now pay an extra premium for the privilege of short term stays.

[N147JK]

Ah yes, the blood-sucking leeches over at recreation.gov. Just 3 words best describe these folks and their enablers: white collar criminals.

I do hope the lawsuit is successful and brings this scam to an end. But in today's greed-soaked world, my hopes are not very high.

[phantomjock]

Steve Martin:



Its a Profit Deal. That takes the pressure off...

[GroupB]

I suspect that the reservation company’s accountants are telling their lobbyists to get the NPS to make a change to the reservation system.

Have a maximum reservation of one night.

Right now the maximum is 14 nights. Assuming a reservation fee of $8, they are “losing” 13x$8=$104 for a 14 day reservation verses 14 one day reservations. They are “losing” in any example over one day.

The policy makers will have to decide how to resolve this inequitable plight.

[N147JK]

Originally Posted by GroupB

Have a maximum reservation of one night.

No one will put up with that. Good grief the existing system is bad enough already. Here's hoping the lawsuit will bring this insanity to an end. Write your congresspersons. I've sent in 3 letters. Everybody get onboard and help get this thing changed for the better.

[W9TR]

What’s even worse is that for lottery-based reservations for backcountry or river trips you lose the application fee if you don’t win the lottery. That feels like organized theft to me.

I’m guessing the Booz-Allen owns the recreation.gov IT assets, not the US government. Even at that, it’s time for a change and even if the US government has to buy them out it will be worth it.

[tgregg]

Originally Posted by Winston

Today we don't write about our principal pet-peeve - - 100% Reservation Systems - - but to observe that we're apparently not the only citizens to question "Registration Fees" - - Fees one must pay in order to pay other fees.

Not so many years ago, campgrounds hired staff to take your money and place you in a site. This was an expense of doing business which campgrounds paid. Like other expenses, presumably this cost was integrated into each campsite fee.

One might expect that with automated payment kiosks and self-directed, on-line reservation systems that the cost to the campground would be less than in the old days with ‘hired staff’. The campground can create their own reservation system or contract with third party vendors for the service but, in either event, why shouldn’t this expense be borne, as historically it has, by the campground?

We suspect some will argue we’re nit-picking - - what’s an extra $8 charge when reserving a $50 campsite for a week? Ok. But not all of us stay for a week nor focus on those $50/night options. Recently, for example, we attempted to reserve a Forest Service site in Utah - - with our senior discount, the site would have been $7.50 - - the added “fee to pay” for the site would have more than doubled our cost.

We make this post to share a link to a National Parks Traveler article that opens with this paragraph:

“In the wake of articles by the National Parks Traveler and the Wall Street Journal, two U.S. senators are wondering why a private company is being paid millions of dollars to manage the website that serves as a national portal for accessing recreational activities on federal lands.”

You should find this article and the Senators’ letter interesting and you may want to add your two-cents-worth by writing your Congressmen.

https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2023/07/senators-why-private-company-managing-recreationgov

Winston,

We haven't been to a NP in awhile, our current favorite campsites are Army Corps of Engineers.

Currently on our way to Oshkosh.

Made a reservation on reservation.gov for 1 night at Nashville COE, no fee, site w water and elec was $14.

Drove to Rend Lake, IL COE. Walk in no reservation, site w electric $9. No extra fee.

Drove to Thomson, IL w/o a reservation. About 10 sites left. Attendant made the necessary reservations for 2 nights, no fee. Site w/ electric and water $10.

While driving to Galena, Charlotte made a reservation at Grant River COE, 1 night water and electric $10, no extra fee and 2 nights back at Thomson COE, no extra fee, water and electric $10.

Then on to Oshkosh.

Don't know why we are having a different experience with reservations and walk ins than you

Say hi to VJ for us,

[Winston]

Originally Posted by tgregg

Currently on our way to Oshkosh.

Your 'litany of success' is what it should be . . . and, for us, is what we find, mostly. We don't understand why some Recreation.gov reservations have no fee and others do. But things rarely remain status quo. And if we don't speak up now . . . the trend suggests that reservation fees will become standard. By the way, enjoy those low cost camping experiences - - we're out here in "The Maritimes" and haven't found a site under $30 (US) in weeks!

Wish we could join you at Oshkosh. Maybe next year?

Winston

PS: VJ returns the greetings and, likewise, pass our well-wishes on to Charlotte.