1 2 Jump to
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 3:06 pm |
Here is a link to the minister in charge. He just happens to be in my riding.
https://www.ola.org/en/members/all/jeff-yurek
swedish pimple wrote:
i just got off of the phone from talking to my m.p.p. lori scott's office,, i was told to write the minister in charge and explain the situation ,, the increase did seem outta line with this rep,,,
| Trip Reports » Trip Report Map » Today 2:57 pm |
Hey everyone,
I was playing around with Google Maps and put together a map of every trip report and campsite review I’ve written. Thought people might enjoy it. I’d love to see some others’ maps as well (Peek, looking at you although I guess yours would take a while to put together).
https://goo.gl/maps/8cdrUeBUQh9G7jgY7
Drew
Man, this took a lot more time than I thought it would, but its interesting to see. I haven't linked the waypoints back to my website yet, but the map itself is complete. Each campsite is marked in chronological order, and the notes indicate i) which trip, ii) which nights on said trip, and, iii) rolling grand total of nights camped in APP. EG: (T71) Nights 3 to 5 (274).
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1261JY31pg2XjnSduktXCq6LLgC9dZTvT&usp=sharing
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 2:51 pm |
i just got off of the phone from talking to my m.p.p. lori scott's office,, i was told to write the minister in charge and explain the situation ,, the increase did seem outta line with this rep,,,
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 2:44 pm |
Great point Tripper. With larger groups they would actually be losing money vs the old (current APP) system.
Exactly. And as Martin and Shawn both pointed out, large groups will have much more impact on resources than solo or tandem travelers while potentially harnessing a 'cheat the system' mentality and overloading campsites.
I'm sure most people would agree that solo travelers are usually well experienced and proficient with LNT and respect for the area, and shouldn't be charged almost 4 times what it would cost a group of 4.
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 2:36 pm |
This is a bummer. I guess I should be booking as many solo trips as possible this summer and start planning with 8 of my closest friends for next year.
I agree that this is going to have the unintended (I assume unintended) consequence of pushing people towards camping with larger groups and that in turn is going to result in more wear and tear on the campsites.
I also agree that I don't know how much more revenue this is going to drive. The temptation to go in solo and just take your chance is going to be high, particularly for someone looking to do a week or ten day trip who doesn't feel like spending $300-$400 in site fees.
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 2:30 pm |
Great point Tripper. With larger groups they would actually be losing money vs the old (current APP) system.
I mean a 7 night solo at $40.75 plus booking fee will be over $300.. that is one steep increase.
What is the fine for being caught without a permit?...Bet it isn't $300.
I play by the rules but I'm guessing many won't.I think the fine is $150.
I really don't understand why they wouldn't raise the price per person by a few bucks vs. the flat rate if this was really about revenue.
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 2:16 pm |
I mean a 7 night solo at $40.75 plus booking fee will be over $300.. that is one steep increase.
What is the fine for being caught without a permit?...Bet it isn't $300.
I play by the rules but I'm guessing many won't.
I think the fine is $150.
I really don't understand why they wouldn't raise the price per person by a few bucks vs. the flat rate if this was really about revenue.
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 1:55 pm |
This is a stupid move. They are missing the bigger picture for the sake of small bump in revenue. The impact a group of 6 or 9 has on the park is drastically greater than the impact of a solo traveler. Yet they pay the same. All the garbage, environmental impact, damage, noise, and behavior issues that comes with a larger group is being subsidized by the solo and tandem traveler.
Agreed but not surprising..Common Sense decision making doesn't appear to be their strong suit.
In addition to this, a group of say 10 or 11 are going to squeeze onto 1 site and take the risk of not being caught instead of paying a separate full fee for a second site. This will only increase the amount of damage larger groups have on sites.
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 1:53 pm |
Agreed Martin.
There has definitely been some major over sights towards what I would say is a large segment of Park users.
Perhaps we should all be reaching out to our MPP's to highlight the shortcomings of this change in hopes of improving it before it gets rolled out to more parks.
This is a stupid move. They are missing the bigger picture for the sake of small bump in revenue. The impact a group of 6 or 9 has on the park is drastically greater than the impact of a solo traveler. Yet they pay the same. All the garbage, environmental impact, damage, noise, and behavior issues that comes with a larger group is being subsidized by the solo and tandem traveler.
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 1:45 pm |
Good point Shawn about people taking the chance of no permit. Could be an unintended or unforeseen consequence.
I, like you, follow the rules.
I'm angry about the effect on smaller groups seemingly not being considered.
Less paying solo trippers will go and you will have an increase in no - permit solo trippers taking their chances.
I mean a 7 night solo at $40.75 plus booking fee will be over $300.. that is one steep increase.
What is the fine for being caught without a permit?...Bet it isn't $300.
I play by the rules but I'm guessing many won't.
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 1:37 pm |
This is a stupid move. They are missing the bigger picture for the sake of small bump in revenue. The impact a group of 6 or 9 has on the park is drastically greater than the impact of a solo traveler. Yet they pay the same. All the garbage, environmental impact, damage, noise, and behavior issues that comes with a larger group is being subsidized by the solo and tandem traveler.
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 1:29 pm |
I'm angry about the effect on smaller groups seemingly not being considered.
Less paying solo trippers will go and you will have an increase in no - permit solo trippers taking their chances.
I mean a 7 night solo at $40.75 plus booking fee will be over $300.. that is one steep increase.
What is the fine for being caught without a permit?...Bet it isn't $300.
I play by the rules but I'm guessing many won't.
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 1:09 pm |
Now that my shock is warn off I'm not angry about the price changes per say. I'm angry about the effect on smaller groups seemingly not being considered.
A two level price system would be more fair, if you want to call it that. A lower price or the same indvidual pricing for groups of 2 or 1 and the higher price for any number above that. Would allow the park to still increase Rev but not scare off the tandem or solo paddlers. I know, that makes too much sense and the Gov't aren't ones for doing what makes sense.
I'm not angry about it. ON Parks has the right to make decisions that it thinks are in its best interest and customers have the right to react to it.
For me, once implemented it will mean for the most part group trips only for APP. Solos will move out to unmaintained parks which is just fine with me. Lots of places to explore.
As people make similar decisions or decide to not go at all I wonder if it will actually mean more revenue for ON parks. I for one will be sending them less.
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 12:47 pm |
I'm not angry about it. ON Parks has the right to make decisions that it thinks are in its best interest and customers have the right to react to it.
For me, once implemented it will mean for the most part group trips only for APP. Solos will move out to unmaintained parks which is just fine with me. Lots of places to explore.
As people make similar decisions or decide to not go at all I wonder if it will actually mean more revenue for ON parks. I for one will be sending them less.
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 11:39 am |
wow,, i can just about hear the laughter coming from the ice huts planted on algonquin lakes now as i type!!!
keep those logging trucks rolling too !!!
while we pay the freight costs,, new chevy trucks for all m.n.r. employees
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 11:18 am |
While better for 3 or 4 plus people it is certainly going to make people like yourself think twice. True, it is Paradise Spartan. I'm just concerned that for some who love the park, it will no longer be an affordable option and be priced out.
As someone who spends a lot of time solo in the parks, I really don't like this. What used to be an inexpensive getaway is turning into a costly trip when you factor in the cost of gas, park fees, etc. It's going to be difficult to justify the cost of a 7 or 8 night solo trip, that's for sure.
| Catch-all Discussions » Park Fees...future » Today 11:03 am |
As someone who spends a lot of time solo in the parks, I really don't like this. What used to be an inexpensive getaway is turning into a costly trip when you factor in the cost of gas, park fees, etc. It's going to be difficult to justify the cost of a 7 or 8 night solo trip, that's for sure.
1 2 Jump to
