Count the cost(and the intent) - Page 2 - Fiberglass RV
Free 7 Day Trial RV GPS App RV Trip Planner RV LIFE Campground Reviews RV Maintenance Free 7 Day Trial ×


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-19-2016, 10:43 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
Name: Steve
Trailer: 2018, 21ft escapeó 2019 Ram 1500 Laramie
NW Wisconsin
Posts: 4,500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Braun View Post
I think the Wisconsin State Parks are one of the best deals out there. They have some some of the best outdoor locations for camping I have seen in my travels. I think they have a great staff of dedicated state employees and many have active "friends" organizations.

I much prefer the Wisconsin parks over those of neighboring states, and based on the number of out of state visitors there are a lot of those who agree. I have never balked at paying their fees as I have always associated value with what I received in return.

Now being a resident I do pay fees that are lower than non residents, but I do pay taxes, and substantial ones, to be a resident. I do not find the fees in this state much different than those beautiful provincial parks, where I also find value. Also, the state parks are still better priced when compared to private campgrounds.
You and I live in the same state and our vision of the State of Wisconsin is 180 deg apart . This forum is not the place for a discussion on that subject
My point was that with the increased camping fees , increased entrance fees , increased activities fees , increased reservation fees, plus the adding of state sales tax on all of the above , you have raised the price to a point where many Wisconsin citizens can not afford to visit their own parks.
Wisconsin has deferred necessary park maintenance / upgrades for many years due to lack of money and now they have cut their funding further. We have been to Wisconsin State Parks where the water was unfit to drink , so they shut the water off .
I have seen bathrooms at WSP that were shutdown due to inoperative plumbing fixtures or shower houses closed because the structure was unsafe and crumbling.
May programs for children have been eliminated

A one nights stay in a Wisconsin State Park is fast approaching $60 when you add up the camping fee , entrance fee , reservation fee and then sales tax on all of it.
You may believe $50 or $60 / night is a bargain , I DO NOT!!!
We no longer camp in Wisconsin and go to neighboring states.
Try Iowa State Parks , better facilities and far cheaper .
Iowa wants tourism , Wisconsin does not.


We stayed at a Iowa State Park = $16 camping fee. ( water and electric ) $3 reservation fee + $0 park entrance fee + $0 State Sales Tax = Total $19
Wisconsin State Park = $27 camping fee ( electric only ) + $10 reservation fee + $11 entrance fee + sales tax on everything. Total = well over $50
Plus the Iowa State Park had brand new bathrooms and showers
Plus the water was safe to drink.
steve dunham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 12:04 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
ShelbyM's Avatar
 
Name: Shelby
Trailer: Casita SD
Tennessee
Posts: 684
Here in TN, our current administration has been a strong advocate of privatization. There is a lot of evidence that they are letting the parks deteriorate in order to better make their case. Our public lands are an irreplaceable resource. There is no more land being added to the public domain. Can you imagine a Yellowstone or Great Smokies being established today? We have a long history of private interests taking advantage of public property for their own enrichment. Grazing, mining, timber, concessions all come to mind. Of course, this is bordering on politics, but that is the large elephant sitting in the corner, isn't it? As people who enjoy our hobby primarily on public lands, we are inconsistent if we fail to support policies the strengthen public ownership. Fox in the henhouse and all that. I'm new here, though I've lurked for years. If this post is somehow inappropriate, please forgive me and delete it.
ShelbyM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 12:11 PM   #23
Raz
Senior Member
 
Raz's Avatar
 
Trailer: Trillium 2010
Posts: 5,020
The Vermont state parks are self funded. I've been to about 1/3 of them. A site is $18. If it's a "premium" site, on the pond for example, add $2. Out of state, add $2. Bring Fido, add $1. A shower $.50 - .$75 depending how quick you are. Total cost, less than $24.

Most of the parks are on water and have a sandy beach, swim at your own risk.There is usually a dump station, free to guests. There are no hook ups. There's no sales tax, rooms and meals tax, registration fee etc. Typically there is a playground, horseshoe pits, canoe, kayak, row boat rentals and hiking trails. They also sell firewood and ice. There's no swimming pool, no water slide. No disc golf, no tennis courts. The state runs it's own reservation system. No Reserve America. The goal is to attract campers to the state parks. Being affordable keeps the parks busy all summer.

I guess my point is that if Vermont can rent you a camp site for $24 a night, and remain self funded, others should be able to aswell.
Raz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 12:51 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
floyd's Avatar
 
Trailer: 2004 13 ft Scamp Custom Deluxe
Posts: 8,186
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShelbyM View Post
Here in TN, our current administration has been a strong advocate of privatization. There is a lot of evidence that they are letting the parks deteriorate in order to better make their case. Our public lands are an irreplaceable resource. There is no more land being added to the public domain. Can you imagine a Yellowstone or Great Smokies being established today? We have a long history of private interests taking advantage of public property for their own enrichment. Grazing, mining, timber, concessions all come to mind. Of course, this is bordering on politics, but that is the large elephant sitting in the corner, isn't it? As people who enjoy our hobby primarily on public lands, we are inconsistent if we fail to support policies the strengthen public ownership. Fox in the henhouse and all that. I'm new here, though I've lurked for years. If this post is somehow inappropriate, please forgive me and delete it.
Since this is the second reference to privatization which I have noticed, I just wanted to point out that there is a profound difference between privatization and contract coordination.
floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 01:22 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Name: Steve
Trailer: 2018, 21ft escapeó 2019 Ram 1500 Laramie
NW Wisconsin
Posts: 4,500
Quote:
Originally Posted by floyd View Post
Since this is the second reference to privatization which I have noticed, I just wanted to point out that there is a profound difference between privatization and contract coordination.
There may be a difference but if the end results are the same then what difference does it make. The park reservation system was a huge source of revenue for many State Park systems . When the reservation systems were farmed out to out of state concerns, the park system lost , the in state jobs were lost and so we're the state / local taxes payed by the reservation systems employees . The only one that gained was Reserve America .
If we are going to sell off or privatize our public parks then the public should receive the benefits .
steve dunham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 01:57 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Kai in Seattle's Avatar
 
Name: Kathleen (Kai: ai as in wait)
Trailer: Amerigo FG-16 1973 "Peanut"
Greater Seattle Metropolitan Area, Washington
Posts: 2,566
Registry
Hi, DonnaD, Jon, good posts, thanks! Agreed. We pay what we have to in order to go where we want and when...and when we can't afford it, we'll do something else, cheaper. And fun campgrounds are more interesting than blah ones...we're still working on a "best of" list for where we most want to go.


There are so MANY choices just in WA and OR!


BEST
Kai
__________________
Semper ubi sub ubi.
Kai in Seattle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 02:52 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
ShelbyM's Avatar
 
Name: Shelby
Trailer: Casita SD
Tennessee
Posts: 684
I'm not sure what "contract coordination" means in this context, but if it means what is commonly known as "contracting out," then I agree with Steve. If it walks like a duck.... There are plenty of funding options, be it fees, general revenues or some combination. Something may work in one state that would be less palatable in another. Bring in a third entity whose primary goal is to profit from a situation where there was no profit previously, well somebody is going to pay more!
ShelbyM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 03:11 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
floyd's Avatar
 
Trailer: 2004 13 ft Scamp Custom Deluxe
Posts: 8,186
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve dunham View Post
There may be a difference but if the end results are the same then what difference does it make. The park reservation system was a huge source of revenue for many State Park systems . When the reservation systems were farmed out to out of state concerns, the park system lost , the in state jobs were lost and so we're the state / local taxes payed by the reservation systems employees . The only one that gained was Reserve America .
If we are going to sell off or privatize our public parks then the public should receive the benefits .
An example... Chicago SOLD (privatized) the rights to street parking in the city.The buyer then collected the money and kept it. They even used municipal enforcement to collect fines for themselves.
Meanwhile, the city squandered the purchase money and left the public at the mercy of pirates.

A coordinated contract would have left the ownership and management of parking in the hands of the city, the contract owner would simply provide the personnel and their direct supervision to maintain and collect parking fees for the city. The city(taxpayers) would still receive the funds and the city would collect the fines. This would reduce the number of direct government employees but it would also maintain the quality of service at a reduced cost to the taxpayer.

I do understand there are arguments against coordinated contracts and I am not here endorsing the practice. I am merely pointing out that there is a difference. I see no merit to the former, but the latter has some legitimate applications.
Some things need to be privatized, but not legitimate government functions. Remember ROBOCOP?!
floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 07:38 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
BillE's Avatar
 
Trailer: Scamp 16 ft
Posts: 347
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by floyd View Post
An example... Chicago SOLD (privatized) the rights to street parking in the city.The buyer then collected the money and kept it. They even used municipal enforcement to collect fines for themselves.
Meanwhile, the city squandered the purchase money and left the public at the mercy of pirates.

A coordinated contract would have left the ownership and management of parking in the hands of the city, the contract owner would simply provide the personnel and their direct supervision to maintain and collect parking fees for the city. The city(taxpayers) would still receive the funds and the city would collect the fines. This would reduce the number of direct government employees but it would also maintain the quality of service at a reduced cost to the taxpayer.

I do understand there are arguments against coordinated contracts and I am not here endorsing the practice. I am merely pointing out that there is a difference. I see no merit to the former, but the latter has some legitimate applications.
Some things need to be privatized, but not legitimate government functions. Remember ROBOCOP?!
AGREED, THERE IS NO GOOD ANSWER. BUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN $80 AND $150 IS TYPICALLY NOT GOING TO MAKE OR BREAK AN OUTING. BUT I DO AGREE THE COST OF LIVING SURE IS GETTING STEEP. JUST PAID MY PRPERTY TAX OF $4,800 HERE AND $3,750 IN REEDSBURG, and $2.52 ON MY PROPERTY BY THE MISSISPPI.
__________________
A three egg family..


(2) Big Green Eggs for cooking..(1) Egg for camping
BillE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 08:00 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
Name: Steve
Trailer: 2018, 21ft escapeó 2019 Ram 1500 Laramie
NW Wisconsin
Posts: 4,500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillE View Post
AGREED, THERE IS NO GOOD ANSWER. BUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN $80 AND $150 IS TYPICALLY NOT GOING TO MAKE OR BREAK AN OUTING. BUT I DO AGREE THE COST OF LIVING SURE IS GETTING STEEP. JUST PAID MY PRPERTY TAX OF $4,800 HERE AND $3,750 IN REEDSBURG, and $2.52 ON MY PROPERTY BY THE MISSISPPI.
The difference between $150 and $ 80 is $70 . Not much money to some and a lot of money to others . To pretend that everyone in a America is living the good life and has tons of disposable income is naive at best . I remember when we were first married , I went to work with no money in my pocket and with no lunch in order to make my house payments . On weekends I worked a second job so my children were fed . $50 a night camping fees often make it impossible for young families especially with children to camp in a local park in which they pay taxes to support. Why is it the ones who have money have so little regards for those who do not ?
steve dunham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 08:10 PM   #31
Senior Member
 
sokhapkin's Avatar
 
Name: Sergey
Trailer: 2014 Scamp 16 layout 4, 2018 Winnebago Revel 4x4
SW Florida
Posts: 812
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve dunham View Post
$50 a night camping fees often make it impossible for young families especially with children to camp in a local park in which they pay taxes to support.
I can afford $50/night camping, but I will never do it. And never did. I'd stay overnight on walmart parking lot while travelling, but I will not shell out $50 for an overnight stay.
__________________
Sergey
sokhapkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 08:14 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
BillE's Avatar
 
Trailer: Scamp 16 ft
Posts: 347
Registry
Steve - not my intent

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve dunham View Post
The difference between $150 and $ 80 is $70 . Not much money to some and a lot of money to others . To pretend that everyone in a America is living the good life and has tons of disposable income is naive at best . I remember when we were first married , I went to work with no money in my pocket and with no lunch in order to make my house payments . On weekends I worked a second job so my children were fed . $50 a night camping fees often make it impossible for young families especially with children to camp in a local park in which they pay taxes to support. Why is it the ones who have money have so little regards for those who do not ?
Steve, I was just merely trying to state that $70 for 4 nights ($17.50/night) typically can be saved up somehow. As Donna stated "you can't take it with you". Believe me, I know what pinching pennies are ..I am just trying to say..try and find some positives..enjoy the time we get rather than complaining about things we can not change.
__________________
A three egg family..


(2) Big Green Eggs for cooking..(1) Egg for camping
BillE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 10:00 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
Jon in AZ's Avatar
 
Name: Jon
Trailer: 2008 Scamp 13 S1
Arizona
Posts: 10,682
Registry
It helps to compare it to the alternatives. Motels are also getting more expensive. And for most of us, the campground is closer to the activities we travel to enjoy.
Jon in AZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2016, 11:32 PM   #34
Senior Member
 
Raspy's Avatar
 
Name: John
Trailer: Xplore X22
Smith Valley, Nevada
Posts: 2,583
State or Federal parks are places we have decided are worth protecting or saving for the future. Protecting these places, as in the case of Yosemite, for instance, meant protecting the place from loggers, minors or developers that would ruin the natural beauty and change the natural wonder of it. So, if a place has been determined to be worth saving, it should be saved for all by paying for it with public funds. We are not saving these places just for the folks that camp there, wer'e saving them for all of us, forever. If it's important enough to save, it's important enough to pay for. If it's public land, it should be available without hardship to the public always. I disagree with the notion that camping fees should support the parks. If the State turns control of these natural wonders over to private corporations to manage, how is it still public land owned by you and me?

Bodie State Park in CA is a perfect example of "managing", but not of a public system of "protecting it for all of us as public land". The rangers treat the place as though they own it and visitors are trespassing. They lock away the historical artifacts and declare them unsafe to look at. But if you join a special club and pay more fees, you can get access. The history is protected from the public, not for the public. And the public is who owns it.

We went camping in the Petrified Forest when I was a kid. As we left, a Ranger stuck his head inside the car and asked if we had taken any of their rocks. My father commented that out back there was a front end loader digging up tons of "their rocks" and loading them into trucks to be sold. Protecting our land for our use and our study? Hardly.

The Bristlecone Forest in eastern CA is the opposite. No entrance fee. An amazing place with fantastic historical and scientific significance. A large beautiful campground with a "suggested" donation of only $5. per night. A visitor's center and trails worth spending several days to fully comprehend. Ranger guided walks with explanations that reveal wonders I never would have seen on my own. It's a real gem.

Interesting too, that I finally was able to build my home on five acres that backs up to BLM land in rural Nevada and the Pine Nut mountains. Now I find I have much less desire to "get away". We're also getting very good at avoiding the modern hassles that seem to often accompany camping trips that should really be about peace and quiet, such as lots of fees and lots of traffic.
__________________
I only exaggerate enough to compensate for being taken with a grain of salt.
Raspy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2016, 12:08 AM   #35
Senior Member
 
Borrego Dave's Avatar
 
Name: Dave
Trailer: Casita SD17 2006 "Missing Link"
California
Posts: 3,738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raspy View Post
Bodie State Park in CA is a perfect example of "managing", but not of a public system of "protecting it for all of us as public land". The rangers treat the place as though they own it and visitors are trespassing. They lock away the historical artifacts and declare them unsafe to look at. But if you join a special club and pay more fees, you can get access. The history is protected from the public, not for the public. And the public is who owns it.
Interesting, I've been there a few times and have never had any thing but good vibes and info from the rangers. Never heard of any special club, can you give any other info on that? Been all over Bodie, can't say where they may be hiding anything out of site unless it would be in one of the private residence houses.
Borrego Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2016, 12:31 AM   #36
Senior Member
 
Raspy's Avatar
 
Name: John
Trailer: Xplore X22
Smith Valley, Nevada
Posts: 2,583
I didn't say they were "hiding" it. Just not allowing close study of the old equipment that is locked up in buildings. One excuse was it was too dangerous. Some of the old abandoned buildings with windows have early motors and other electrical and mechanical equipment that was unique to Bodie when it was a big and active town. Very early transmitted power came to Bodie and some of the equipment is still there. Very historic stuff and interesting especially to gear heads or mechanical historians.

I've personally been told by the rangers I could not go in and look closely at the stuff, and would have to look at it through the windows. It's as if they personally owned it. But the windows are too dirty to see much. I recently complained to my neighbors (we all live only about 1 1/2 hours from Bodie) because they were having horse events there and going occasionally. I was told that they are members of the historical society, not sure of the real title, and they can go into those buildings that the public cannot. I'm not willing to pay to become part of an elite group in order to qualify to study history on public land.

I've seen the attitude before and it always rubs me the wrong way. The rangers don't own the property, but they sometimes act as if they do and as if the public is just a nuisance that must be managed. It's not that way everywhere.
__________________
I only exaggerate enough to compensate for being taken with a grain of salt.
Raspy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2016, 12:38 AM   #37
Senior Member
 
Glenn Baglo's Avatar
 
Name: Glenn
Trailer: 2009 Escape 17B
British Columbia
Posts: 8,049
Perhaps the rangers are protecting the artifacts from vandals and souvenir hunters?
Perhaps if you really cared, you would join these people who are helping to protect and restore?
__________________
What happens to the hole when the cheese is gone?
- Bertolt Brecht
Glenn Baglo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2016, 02:34 AM   #38
Senior Member
 
Raspy's Avatar
 
Name: John
Trailer: Xplore X22
Smith Valley, Nevada
Posts: 2,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn Baglo View Post
Perhaps the rangers are protecting the artifacts from vandals and souvenir hunters?
Perhaps if you really cared, you would join these people who are helping to protect and restore?
I care more about the history of the West than most. I'm sorry you missed the point, but perhaps you should learn more about the subject if you're going to give advice.

Meanwhile,

I know historical items have to be protected against vandals. I live and play in the old west and have for most of my life. I visit places and study them in depth. I watch their evolution.

I don't want to stray too far from the point of the discussion, but my point is and has been that if places are important enough to protect for all of us and our future, we should all pay to protect them and all have access to them without undue burden. Yosemite and Yellowstone are good examples of this.

Interpreting what protecting means is an interesting subject in itself. Death Valley is a very historic area. As it changed from open land to monument to national park, the interpretation of protect and preserve has evolved. Where does history begin and end? One interesting area that I used to visit was filled with old mining equipment, cars and all sorts of stuff. Then it all got bulldozed onto a pit and covered over to return the view to its natural state. Is that protecting history? Is it preserving the land? One of my friends joked "it's a place where it's illegal to drop a can and illegal to pick one up". It's one of the most desolate places on earth and you can be many miles from the next person or from any water, but if you let your dog out of the truck for a minute and he's not on a leash, and a ranger sees you, it's ticket time. There is currently a fight to decide on the future of a delightful hot springs in the area. It has been cared for and improved for many many years and is visited by people that cherish it. The park service wants to bulldoze the area and eliminate any evidence that people have ever been there. Funny thing is, it takes hours of travel on dirt roads to get there and only a few people know of it. It's an oasis where wildlife and the public meet. Once a month or so, uniformed officers arrive in Humvees and if anyone is there, they are likely to get their licenses and registrations checked. "Have a good day out here on our public land".

Then there's the mines near Randsburg. If ever there were places that should be closed or filled in, it was these. Deep holes in sandy soil dug hundreds of feet straight down with flimsy shoring. Just waiting to seal anyone's fate that was not paying attention as they walked. We would throw rocks in and wait and wait for their report. But not from too close or the funnel of sand would start you sliding towards doom.

Mind bending history and time warps are just around the corner in the desert. I once visited an old railroad station, sitting quietly in the empty area near Amboy Crater. Just a lot of white sand and some old railroad ties next to a frame of an old building that once was the station. I could sort of tell the shape of the platform. While wandering around enjoying the quiet, I spotted a corner of a piece of paper in the sand. I carefully pulled it out and began to read the barely legible writing. It was a letter from some official about the new station they were going to build there. The very station I was standing at that was now long abandoned. Yikes. It's the magic of the desert. Time stands still. The past handshakes with the present. A dry landscape shaped by violent flash floods. Endlessly fascinating.
__________________
I only exaggerate enough to compensate for being taken with a grain of salt.
Raspy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2016, 04:22 AM   #39
Senior Member
 
Borrego Dave's Avatar
 
Name: Dave
Trailer: Casita SD17 2006 "Missing Link"
California
Posts: 3,738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raspy View Post
I didn't say they were "hiding" it. Just not allowing close study of the old equipment that is locked up in buildings. One excuse was it was too dangerous. Some of the old abandoned buildings with windows have early motors and other electrical and mechanical equipment that was unique to Bodie when it was a big and active town. Very early transmitted power came to Bodie and some of the equipment is still there. Very historic stuff and interesting especially to gear heads or mechanical historians.
I've personally been told by the rangers I could not go in and look closely at the stuff, and would have to look at it through the windows. It's as if they personally owned it. But the windows are too dirty to see much. I recently complained to my neighbors (we all live only about 1 1/2 hours from Bodie) because they were having horse events there and going occasionally. I was told that they are members of the historical society, not sure of the real title, and they can go into those buildings that the public cannot. I'm not willing to pay to become part of an elite group in order to qualify to study history on public land.
I've seen the attitude before and it always rubs me the wrong way. The rangers don't own the property, but they sometimes act as if they do and as if the public is just a nuisance that must be managed. It's not that way everywhere.
Guess I did kind of miss read your comments John. I know what you mean about the dirty glass as it does make it a bit hard to see. Fortunately most don't have glass but wire fencing to look through. I'm not a die hard gear head so seeing the equipment from a distance is fine with me but I can understand your point. I retired from a water district, we did have tours through our treatment plant but no one was allowed in certain areas for safety/security reasons. There were folks in the business from other districts that got to see many more areas. For the last 17 years I was in charge of repairing/replacing pretty much anything on our out buildings that vandals decided they wanted or liked. Can I say I hate graffiti artists? It's the 2% that the rangers are worried about, not someone like you. Wonder if getting to know one of the rangers would open some doors.
Borrego Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2016, 07:23 AM   #40
Senior Member
 
Kai in Seattle's Avatar
 
Name: Kathleen (Kai: ai as in wait)
Trailer: Amerigo FG-16 1973 "Peanut"
Greater Seattle Metropolitan Area, Washington
Posts: 2,566
Registry
"Protecting these places, as in the case of Yosemite, for instance, meant protecting the place from loggers, minors or developers that would ruin the natural beauty and change the natural wonder of it. "


I'm all for protecting "public" (ought to be public!) lands from loggers and developers. Generally, though, some minors are nice little tykes, and others are hellions. So I suppose we have to protect the lands from the little hellions, too. Darn those hellion minors!


I used to wonder why our local bar would serve anyone but minors. They have something against mining?


Just a lighter note. 8) BEST later December to you all, Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas or whatever holiday you celebrate.


Especially Festivus! Only 3 more complaining days until Festivus! Today, the next day, and the day after--then FESTIVUS! Yaaaay!


We're having the traditional meatloaf.


BEST
Kai
Paul
The pug girls, Old Nimble and Cinder
From our driveway to yours, across the miles
Attached Thumbnails
050.jpg   017.jpg  

2005 Xmas tree.jpg   Cinder from Kanaskat Palmer.jpg  

__________________
Semper ubi sub ubi.
Kai in Seattle is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best RV club for low cost camping and where do I find a local camping club? ShawnKK General Chat 28 06-11-2015 01:21 PM
Five (Count Em') Hunter/Campsters For Sale Bob Miller General Chat 0 05-06-2014 08:45 AM
Scamp Rivet and Bolt Count Thee Jimbo Problem Solving | Owners Helping Owners 13 03-21-2014 06:52 PM
checking out a scamp in albert lea MN? and cost to install heater? sdsjdo General Chat 23 12-04-2011 10:43 AM

» Trailer Showcase

Beachcomber

Bear

Burro

Burro1
» Upcoming Events
No events scheduled in
the next 465 days.
» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.