Is VanLife Ruining Camping?

This was in my google news feed this AM
https://www.outsideonline.com/2315626/vanlife-ruining-camping

Something I have been concerned about in the back of my mind, ever since the walmart I saw from the highway in Flagstaff last summer...well maybe it was even before that...but it's the first example I can remember seeing.  There we RV's of all sorts parked on the side of the road approaching the walmart, basically the service road on the other side of the interstate fence....  I think the parking lot was choked up too...

The other time that comes to mind was when we evacuated for a hurricane and ended up at a bass pro/walmart/costco parking lot that looked like a hoover city...that was different because most weren't full time van livers, but still the impression left of the site of it, the trash and such, etc.. isn't good.....

Anyway, just something to think about....
how full time rv living is different but similar to this homeless vanlife thing
how the increase in this sort of traffic makes more places outlaw the practice that RV'ers enjoy while enroute.  Stealth users and those that cause problems exponentiate the problem
how it affects how the non-rving public might misinterpret RVing as being the same as vanlife
how it could make getting reservation in places like state parks more difficult....

That's a very interesting read, thanks for sharing.

Now I'm going to call everyone I've told how much we love Rving and try to convince them it sucks, run away from it, it's expensive and not worth it!  :~)

All of the observations in the article are possible, and even more. The booming economy has had several misc effects. More people not being able to find affordable housing, to more people being able to afford some type of RV in which to travel and explore, and everything in between. It all points to the need to be a planner in your travels, especially if you want to be in a popular area in a certain time of year. Some folks don't mind the planning (us) and do it regularly,  and others hate making any kind  of predetermined stops.  Those types are going to have a harder time finding the "just pull over and stop" places. 

This is no different than getting a permit to raft the Colorado River thru Grand Canyon or almost any other expedition length river west of the Rockies. We can all hope that our "competition" decides to quit the game, soon, but that probably won't happen anytime in the near future. I have found, over the last 4+ years, that it is not all that hard to get spots in National Parks, and in and around other attractions, if one is patient and a bit flexible. It also helps to start early and be very persistent. These type of articles really amuse me though. It seems as if some of our fellow RV'ers feel that there is, or at least should be, a seniority system involved in getting a space instead of first come first served. Maybe we should all be greatful that we are able to travel and camp as we do and quit, at least a bit of, the whining. BTW 4000 miles this year and been able to get a camp everywhere we wanted.
RichH

aguablanco said:

This is no different than getting a permit to raft the Colorado River thru Grand Canyon or almost any other expedition length river west of the Rockies. We can all hope that our "competition" decides to quit the game, soon, but that probably won't happen anytime in the near future. I have found, over the last 4+ years, that it is not all that hard to get spots in National Parks, and in and around other attractions, if one is patient and a bit flexible. It also helps to start early and be very persistent. These type of articles really amuse me though. It seems as if some of our fellow RV'ers feel that there is, or at least should be, a seniority system involved in getting a space instead of first come first served. Maybe we should all be greatful that we are able to travel and camp as we do and quit, at least a bit of, the whining. BTW 4000 miles this year and been able to get a camp everywhere we wanted.
RichH

Click to expand...

I am one that plans way ahead, usually 9-12 months in advance, and I am almost always successful getting the space I want at the location I want. This year things are taking a turn. They closed the entire San Juan National Forest at my summer destination, where I had reservations for 4 weeks. So I turned to the Oregon coast.

After about a half dozen calls to RV Resorts/Parks and State Parks via Reserve America without getting anything except two to three days here and there, I began looking today towards Northern Idaho. On Monday I'll begin to reach out. Now I'm not complaining, but it wouldn't be a bad thing if someone canceled for me.

aguablanco said:

This is no different than getting a permit to raft the Colorado River thru Grand Canyon or almost any other expedition length river west of the Rockies. We can all hope that our "competition" decides to quit the game, soon, but that probably won't happen anytime in the near future. I have found, over the last 4+ years, that it is not all that hard to get spots in National Parks, and in and around other attractions, if one is patient and a bit flexible. It also helps to start early and be very persistent. These type of articles really amuse me though. It seems as if some of our fellow RV'ers feel that there is, or at least should be, a seniority system involved in getting a space instead of first come first served. Maybe we should all be greatful that we are able to travel and camp as we do and quit, at least a bit of, the whining. BTW 4000 miles this year and been able to get a camp everywhere we wanted.
RichH

Click to expand...

really isn't so much about whining...at least not from my perspective.  It's more like complaining...no lamenting, about bad apples ruining things...or to the non-rv person thinking that all rv'ers are like the bad ones....
Of course not all vanlife people are "bad"...just as a whole, the more people you have cheating the system by finding places to live, will cause teh system to rebel.
Your point about the permit systems to use public lands (or waterways)... very true.  We have limited resources.... be those land, space, official camp sites... but what I was thinking more about are the resources of things like patience and willingness to help, and so on....

I mean, if I were the owner of a business with appropriate space, I might be inclined to set up an area that is conducive to RV travelers stopping for an overnight while en route...or even just let it be known (on allstays for example)  that the parking lot is available after hours....
but if it started to get a huge crowd there every night, the city or community might frown on it, pass ordinances against, and so on... and I would frown on doing it too once many folks started taking advantage.... staying there long term, overfilling my dumpster or leaving trash strewn about, trampling the landscaping or otherwise causing damage..even if form polite overuse...then I would be likely to put up a gate and a sign.

The impression I get as an Eastcoaster is that Vanlife type people are becoming more like squatters on public streets, parking lots and some BLM type lands out West.  The article talks about people living close to Sedona for work and having to move.  It seems as though the intent of free camping on BLM land is not meant to be free squatters camps.  The person who wrote the article wants to be able to find a campsite and not run into a BLM trailer park full of people taking advantage of the system.  If the sites are taken because more people are simply into RVing then we may need more campgrounds/areas.  I'll be in Colorado and New Mexico in July so I hope to poke around to see some BLM type camping.

John Beard said:

I am one that plans way ahead, usually 9-12 months in advance, and I am almost always successful getting the space I want at the location I want. This year things are taking a turn. They closed the entire San Juan National Forest at my summer destination, where I had reservations for 4 weeks. So I turned to the Oregon coast.

After about a half dozen calls to RV Resorts/Parks and State Parks via Reserve America without getting anything except two to three days here and there, I began looking today towards Northern Idaho. On Monday I'll begin to reach out. Now I'm not complaining, but it wouldn't be a bad thing if someone canceled for me.

Click to expand...

Same for us. But this year we had family with medical problems and weren't able to make long range plans. Now sitting at Zion trying to make reservations in CO, MA and the DMV with no luck.

I think that here out East, it's getting harder to get reservations in places like state parks, then it was even just 5-8 years ago....
but I feel like that is probably mostly a function of us RV'ers just creating more demand... but yes I do feel like the industry of camp sites could use a bit more in the supply department....

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the vanlife folks are mostly focused in more urban places, near their jobs...also hitting the free/stealth spots....but I suppose the cheaper state parks and such might be on their radar now that I'm thinking about it.... and the telecommuters can work anywhere, so some of them might be a factor in what I see....

OBX said:

The impression I get as an Eastcoaster is that Vanlife type people are becoming more like squatters on public streets, parking lots and some BLM type lands out West.  The article talks about people living close to Sedona for work and having to move.  It seems as though the intent of free camping on BLM land is not meant to be free squatters camps.  The person who wrote the article wants to be able to find a campsite and not run into a BLM trailer park full of people taking advantage of the system.  If the sites are taken because more people are simply into RVing then we may need more campgrounds/areas.  I'll be in Colorado and New Mexico in July so I hope to poke around to see some BLM type camping.

Click to expand...

While I don't disagree in principle, the law is clear about the dispersed camping regulations and there is no test that should be applied as to what purpose one is camping for. Having been to Sedona many times, I live in Mesa, I can tell you that, in my opinion, that particular issue has been created by the Town and employers. No affordable housing and expensive RV parks. The vast majority of businesses prices should support paying their employees enough money to be able to live where they work and yet that is not happening.
There are also many retirees that have less than adequate income for the high life and also use the BLM land as a cheap way to live and travel. Are they also part of the problem? It seems they could also be called squatters to some degree. As I said earlier, it should always be first come first served no matter the purpose of your stay. Maybe we should start calling, at least the couple in Sedona, workkampers.
RichH

blw2 said:

I think that here out East, it's getting harder to get reservations in places like state parks, then it was even just 5-8 years ago....
but I feel like that is probably mostly a function of us RV'ers just creating more demand... but yes I do feel like the industry of camp sites could use a bit more in the supply department....

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the vanlife folks are mostly focused in more urban places, near their jobs...also hitting the free/stealth spots....but I suppose the cheaper state parks and such might be on their radar now that I'm thinking about it.... and the telecommuters can work anywhere, so some of them might be a factor in what I see....

Click to expand...

I think the problem we are having with Reserve America is there is a minor penalty for canceling a reservation, so almost all weekends are booked and most of the weeks are booked. Since the penalty to cancel is so minor it makes sense to book a weekend and have a spot, then cancel if your not going to use it. We have found one night available where we want to stay and tried to book it only to find there is a two night minimum, but only one night available and they will not book one night. I've been told we can call RA on July 1st to try to book one night.

Cancellations and other fees, as well as two night minimums, etc., are set by the individual park systems, not by Reserve America. RA charges the parks a contracted fee for changes, and how those fees are passed on to the guests is up to the parks. For example, a few years back there was no reservation fee charged to the guests for Florida state parks, but you can be sure RA was still charging for the park system for them. Florida has since added a reservation fee instead of raising the site rates...

Dragginourbedaround said:

I think the problem we are having with Reserve America is there is a minor penalty for canceling a reservation, so almost all weekends are booked and most of the weeks are booked. Since the penalty to cancel is so minor it makes sense to book a weekend and have a spot, then cancel if your not going to use it. We have found one night available where we want to stay and tried to book it only to find there is a two night minimum, but only one night available and they will not book one night. I've been told we can call RA on July 1st to try to book one night.

Click to expand...

Here in NY any 3 day holiday weekend is booked for a full 2 weeks prior. I imagine most of them cancel the first 11 days right after booking. Only a $9 charge to change the dates. Not complaining...it's just the way it is.

Joezeppy said:

Here in NY any 3 day holiday weekend is booked for a full 2 weeks prior. I imagine most of them cancel the first 11 days right after booking. Only a $9 charge to change the dates. Not complaining...it's just the way it is.

Click to expand...

We were able to get exactly the dates we wanted as well as the specific sites we wanted at two NY state parks for the 4th of July week and Labor Day week. I made those reservations within seconds of the reservation windows opening.

I do not have a problem with a cancellation fee. I do have a problem when I am charged that fee if I want to just change sites for the same dates.
We normally do not have a problem finding a reservation at Federal facilities (we do not camp at private CG?s). We normally camp during the week and we just keep searching until find something open.

aguablanco said:

While I don't disagree in principle, the law is clear about the dispersed camping regulations and there is no test that should be applied as to what purpose one is camping for. Having been to Sedona many times, I live in Mesa, I can tell you that, in my opinion, that particular issue has been created by the Town and employers. No affordable housing and expensive RV parks. The vast majority of businesses prices should support paying their employees enough money to be able to live where they work and yet that is not happening.
There are also many retirees that have less than adequate income for the high life and also use the BLM land as a cheap way to live and travel. Are they also part of the problem? It seems they could also be called squatters to some degree. As I said earlier, it should always be first come first served no matter the purpose of your stay. Maybe we should start calling, at least the couple in Sedona, workkampers.
RichH

Click to expand...

You're probably right about the towns and businesses.

Another thing your comment calling them 'squatters' is steering my thought process to is the BLM land usage and 'laws'.  I think that helped me to put my finger on what was bugging me but I couldn't put my finger on it exactly....

I'm going to venture a guess that the overarching principle intention of public land is for recreational purposes.  Right?
so,
how is a weekend or holiday family's use of the land in an RV different from a RV full timer retiree's use, or a person using the RV because they can't afford "normal housing"? 
I'm going to guess that most "vanlife folks" could afford some sort of housing if they wanted to, but it may result in a long commute or moving to a different job and different location.  So it's a choice in a way, in one regard.  A difficult one maybe, but a choice it still is. Not so different that a full timer retiree choosing to live in an RV rather than a traditional home....but in my mind I see a difference in purpose.  I feel like most full timer RV'ers are probably more in it for the recreation, as they roam around, while the others are more like the old stereo type gypsy squatting on public land...& I guess that seems like taking advantage of it to me, and I'm sensing the harm that it's doing to the more traditional RVing purpose.

But even within the 'vanlife' thing, I recon that many of them really do fall more into the category of a traditional full timer RVer.  Earning a living,  being respectful to the land and others, and all of that.  I don't want to admit it, but I suppose I probably have a little bit of jealousy for these folks living life in adventure...

So maybe we have four different types of 'RV'ers' then...
the purely recreational, vacation and temporary
the full timer in permanent or semi permanent vacation mode in a traditional RV
the 'working folks' living in converted vans that are stealth RV's that have jobs which allow them to be on a 'vacation adventure' and work at the same time
and then there's the "squatters" that I've seen so many news articles about, working jobs while living on nearby neighborhood streets or parking their vans in business parking lots after hours hoping they aren't noticed, or on nearby public land.

Oldgator73 said:

I do not have a problem with a cancellation fee. I do have a problem when I am charged that fee if I want to just change sites for the same dates.
We normally do not have a problem finding a reservation at Federal facilities (we do not camp at private CG?s). We normally camp during the week and we just keep searching until find something open.

Click to expand...

It takes about the same effort for someone at RA to do a cancellation as it does to change dates, sites, etc. And that someone has to be paid along with the overhead required to make the change plus RA's profit margin. If the park system chooses to pass those fees along, then you have little choice in the matter.

NY_Dutch said:

It takes about the same effort for someone at RA to do a cancellation as it does to change dates, sites, etc. And that someone has to be paid along with the overhead required to make the change plus RA's profit margin. If the park system chooses to pass those fees along, then you have little choice in the matter.

Click to expand...

I have no choice in the manner. But I have to disagree with your premise about cancelling and changing dates being the same. The difference is I am not cancelling the reservation. RA and the government are still getting the full fee for the reservation. The RA employee is working on commissions or performing piece work. That employee is there for 8 hours or whatever their shift is. It does not cost RA anything for me to change sites. It does cost them money for me to cancel.

Oldgator73 said:

I have no choice in the manner. But I have to disagree with your premise about cancelling and changing dates being the same. The difference is I am not cancelling the reservation. RA and the government are still getting the full fee for the reservation. The RA employee is working on commissions or performing piece work. That employee is there for 8 hours or whatever their shift is. It does not cost RA anything for me to change sites. It does cost them money for me to cancel.

Click to expand...

RA collects a fee from the park for making a reservation, and also collects fees from the park for any changes that are made to the reservation. A cancellation does not change that, and no fees are refunded to the park except in the case of an error on RA's part. Do you really think there's no cost to RA to effectively cancel a reservation for site A and re-book it for site B when you ask for a site change? Really? Does it happen by magic? As far as I recall when I was involved in negotiations with RA, there was no indication that their employees are on commission or piece work. RA is a customer service center that manages reservations for a hundred or so state and private clients, and they get paid to provide that service.

NY_Dutch said:

RA collects a fee from the park for making a reservation, and also collects fees from the park for any changes that are made to the reservation. A cancellation does not change that, and no fees are refunded to the park except in the case of an error on RA's part. Do you really think there's no cost to RA to effectively cancel a reservation for site A and re-book it for site B when you ask for a site change? Really? Does it happen by magic? As far as I recall when I was involved in negotiations with RA, there was no indication that their employees are on commission or piece work. RA is a customer service center that manages reservations for a hundred or so state and private clients, and they get paid to provide that service.

Click to expand...

I know RA collects fees for cancellations and changes. I do not have a problem with the cancellation fee. I have a problem with paying the change fee. As far as any fees being returned to the park or not, I don?t care. I realize there is a few minutes work involved with changing a reservation. My contention is neither the park nor RA are LOSING any money when a change vs a cancellation is processed. I fat fingered the sentence about commissions and piece work. Meant to say RA was not paid on commission or piece work. Now, having said all that, I have shown up at a park and asked to move sites and the change was granted at no cost to me.