Confirmed. That is the plan. Ontario parks is migrating all southern/central interior camping fees to pay by the site as opposed to pay by the person. The 2 pilots were Massassauga and Lady Evelyn. The rest of the parks were supposed to migrate this year. COVID or a change in direction may have slowed this down.

Here is a copy of a letter from OP

Dear Ms. ***

Thank you for your email of February 9, 2020 to Minister Yurek regarding the changes to the fee structure for backcountry camping in provincial parks. As the Manager of Operations and Development for Ontario Parks, I have been asked to respond on behalf of the Minister.

Ontario Parks is committed to the protection of Ontario’s natural environments for future generations and providing world-class recreational opportunities in provincial parks. We manage a system of 340 provincial parks which is largely funded through user fees collected solely for the use of Ontario Parks. The money that visitors pay for services like backcountry access and camping in Ontario Parks stays in Ontario Parks and in 2019, Ontario Parks operated at over 90 percent self-sufficiency.

Ontario Parks is moving from the current per-person-per-night fee to a flat-per-campsite fee model for backcountry camping. By doing so we are streamlining the backcountry fee structure across the province and making it consistent with our car camping fee model.The per night fees at The Massasauga and the Temagami Cluster of Parks are reflective of the amenities available at the respective parks.

The per-night fee for Massasauga backcountry campsites is higher than the fee for the Temagami cluster of parks as campsites at The Massasauga are outfitted with a picnic table, fire pit, and box privy and some have food lockers. The Temagami Cluster of Parks offer a more rustic experience with no extra amenities.

Thank you for taking the time to provide your feedback and your suggestions. Hearing from visitors to Ontario Parks helps us to continually improve what we have to offer in the future.

Sincerely,
Greg Wake | Manager – Operations and Development – Ontario Parks

Last edited by MartinG (3/02/2021 9:52 am)

Thank you for the information Martin.  While I understand their need to streamline and increase revenue to help maintain the parks, I feel that the flat flee will push out many solo people and possibly even duo's to crown land or non-operating parks.  As well it would discourage younger folks, who may not have the disposable funds to take a trip based on the proposed new fees.

MartinG wrote:

Confirmed. That is the plan. Ontario parks is migrating all southern/central interior camping fees to pay by the site as opposed to pay by the person. The 2 pilots were Massassauga and Lady Evelyn. The rest of the parks were supposed to migrate this year. COVID or a change in direction may have slowed this down.

Here is a copy of a letter from OP

Dear Ms. ***

Thank you for your email of February 9, 2020 to Minister Yurek regarding the changes to the fee structure for backcountry camping in provincial parks. As the Manager of Operations and Development for Ontario Parks, I have been asked to respond on behalf of the Minister.

Ontario Parks is committed to the protection of Ontario’s natural environments for future generations and providing world-class recreational opportunities in provincial parks. We manage a system of 340 provincial parks which is largely funded through user fees collected solely for the use of Ontario Parks. The money that visitors pay for services like backcountry access and camping in Ontario Parks stays in Ontario Parks and in 2019, Ontario Parks operated at over 90 percent self-sufficiency.

Ontario Parks is moving from the current per-person-per-night fee to a flat-per-campsite fee model for backcountry camping. By doing so we are streamlining the backcountry fee structure across the province and making it consistent with our car camping fee model.The per night fees at The Massasauga and the Temagami Cluster of Parks are reflective of the amenities available at the respective parks.

The per-night fee for Massasauga backcountry campsites is higher than the fee for the Temagami cluster of parks as campsites at The Massasauga are outfitted with a picnic table, fire pit, and box privy and some have food lockers. The Temagami Cluster of Parks offer a more rustic experience with no extra amenities.

Thank you for taking the time to provide your feedback and your suggestions. Hearing from visitors to Ontario Parks helps us to continually improve what we have to offer in the future.

Sincerely,
Greg Wake | Manager – Operations and Development – Ontario Parks

Not good for solos but better for larger groups, no? Will avoid individuals booking the lake multiple times and only taking up one site. 

I plan only to mostly tandem and solo this year making it more expensive if that's the way APP goes. Oh well, it's the cost of entry into paradise. 

Last edited by RCSpartan (3/02/2021 11:01 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. 

Steve E wrote:

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.

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.

BB wrote:

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.

Good point Shawn about people taking the chance of no permit.  Could be an unintended or unforeseen consequence. 

I, like you, follow the rules. 

ShawnD wrote:

BB wrote:

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.

MartinG wrote:

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.