2015 Nitinaht Lake Fees and Politics
we don't make the rules, they can and will charge what they want. Is camp group "party" defined? Likely members of same family, max 4. Bc forestry site 2 vehicles max. If you could collect per vehicle wouldn't you?otisdadog wrote:So I want to be clear about this
Wish less, sail more!!
Vancouver Island Windsports
Chinook /Takuma /KA Australia (Tribal) /Aztron
You're either in or in the way....
Doing things the hard way since 1963....
Vancouver Island Windsports
Chinook /Takuma /KA Australia (Tribal) /Aztron
You're either in or in the way....
Doing things the hard way since 1963....
Thanks Chris for championing this effort!
One issue also worth mentioning is charging extra $3 for supposedly "premium" beach sites located beyond the parking loop in the forest/beach around in the kiting area. These sites are very primitive, small and it takes considerable effort to carry gear to them. There are no designated fire pits nor access to tables.
These would be compared to "walk in" tent sites in other parks which typically are cheaper than usual sites. The point I am trying to make is that charging extra premium for these sites seems a bit over the top. These rules were introduced last year and I was never too crazy about them but of course complied...
I don't mind paying whatever flat fees are imposed. My feeling is that keeping the system simple with one base reasonable flat fee per vehicle (which would be more or less in the ballpark what it always used to be) makes the most sense.
One issue also worth mentioning is charging extra $3 for supposedly "premium" beach sites located beyond the parking loop in the forest/beach around in the kiting area. These sites are very primitive, small and it takes considerable effort to carry gear to them. There are no designated fire pits nor access to tables.
These would be compared to "walk in" tent sites in other parks which typically are cheaper than usual sites. The point I am trying to make is that charging extra premium for these sites seems a bit over the top. These rules were introduced last year and I was never too crazy about them but of course complied...
I don't mind paying whatever flat fees are imposed. My feeling is that keeping the system simple with one base reasonable flat fee per vehicle (which would be more or less in the ballpark what it always used to be) makes the most sense.
-
Ridelikehell
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 10:53 pm
- Contact:
Otisdadog,
This is the f*cked part- The fee schedule for all BC parks and trails campsites are calculated on a "cost recovery" basis meaning they are not for profit. Ditidaht has taken the contract on the grounds that they want to profit. It's a conflict of interest. If you read the fee schedule, including the assumptions they estimate 4000 and some users for the season which is based on single occupancy of sites. Assuming they collected from EVERYONE, at the end of the season they should break even under their numbers. We know the estimates in user numbers is way off because of double, triple, quadruple occupancy of sites, plus people beach camping, parking/camping on roads, etc. However, the ministry of FLNR still supports and enforces the following policy- Collecting from each party and not per site. One party is defined as one vehicle with up to 6 people. You can have a towed vehicle (such as a boat or RV trailer) or a commuter vehicle (a vehicle that accompanies an RV for commuting so you don't have to move the RV to get groceries, etc) at no extra charge.
So my advice if you so choose- For a party of 4 with 3 vehicles- Park 2 vehicles along the road outside the campsite boundary, pay for one vehicle so your site is $15 instead of $45. It becomes complicated if everyone is sleeping in their vehicles but simple if tenting.
I can't put much more time or effort into this as it's cutting in to work and is far from relaxing so someone else would have to take the reins but if everyone as a core group truly feels that we're being ripped off, we can draft a petition, get hundreds of signatures over a few days and get it to the minister in Victoria (I have his contact info). They will have to act on it. The whole point would be that the fee schedule is based on cost recovery of operation of the campsite (including amortization of past improvements, management fees, labour fees, etc) as per BC parks and Rec policy. The fact that they're charging per party and not per site means that if they collect from everyone their revenues would easily be double or triple the estimated amount, which on a cost recovery basis should cut the fees in half or a third. The old $10 fee with even semi-diligent collections and good compliance by campers would be more than fair for all sides. As stated before, the conflict of interest is that the fee schedule is calculated by single occupancy of sites, yet the policy is to collect per party which is a much higher number.
I say we let it settle out for a few weeks to see how it goes. If collections are lax, then it all kind of works out. If not, we can take it forward.
Once the treaty passes, the Ditidaht will set the fees and regulations at whatever they like and again, it will be up to us as the core group of users to give them feedback. If the fees are too high for the services, it will result in non compliance with fees and people just not camping at Nitinaht. We all know there are already a huge group of old schoolers that never come since it's been "ruined". Hopefully after the treaty passes the Ditidaht don't get greedy and shoot themselves in the foot as there is a definite opportunity for all parties involved to be happy.
This is the f*cked part- The fee schedule for all BC parks and trails campsites are calculated on a "cost recovery" basis meaning they are not for profit. Ditidaht has taken the contract on the grounds that they want to profit. It's a conflict of interest. If you read the fee schedule, including the assumptions they estimate 4000 and some users for the season which is based on single occupancy of sites. Assuming they collected from EVERYONE, at the end of the season they should break even under their numbers. We know the estimates in user numbers is way off because of double, triple, quadruple occupancy of sites, plus people beach camping, parking/camping on roads, etc. However, the ministry of FLNR still supports and enforces the following policy- Collecting from each party and not per site. One party is defined as one vehicle with up to 6 people. You can have a towed vehicle (such as a boat or RV trailer) or a commuter vehicle (a vehicle that accompanies an RV for commuting so you don't have to move the RV to get groceries, etc) at no extra charge.
So my advice if you so choose- For a party of 4 with 3 vehicles- Park 2 vehicles along the road outside the campsite boundary, pay for one vehicle so your site is $15 instead of $45. It becomes complicated if everyone is sleeping in their vehicles but simple if tenting.
I can't put much more time or effort into this as it's cutting in to work and is far from relaxing so someone else would have to take the reins but if everyone as a core group truly feels that we're being ripped off, we can draft a petition, get hundreds of signatures over a few days and get it to the minister in Victoria (I have his contact info). They will have to act on it. The whole point would be that the fee schedule is based on cost recovery of operation of the campsite (including amortization of past improvements, management fees, labour fees, etc) as per BC parks and Rec policy. The fact that they're charging per party and not per site means that if they collect from everyone their revenues would easily be double or triple the estimated amount, which on a cost recovery basis should cut the fees in half or a third. The old $10 fee with even semi-diligent collections and good compliance by campers would be more than fair for all sides. As stated before, the conflict of interest is that the fee schedule is calculated by single occupancy of sites, yet the policy is to collect per party which is a much higher number.
I say we let it settle out for a few weeks to see how it goes. If collections are lax, then it all kind of works out. If not, we can take it forward.
Once the treaty passes, the Ditidaht will set the fees and regulations at whatever they like and again, it will be up to us as the core group of users to give them feedback. If the fees are too high for the services, it will result in non compliance with fees and people just not camping at Nitinaht. We all know there are already a huge group of old schoolers that never come since it's been "ruined". Hopefully after the treaty passes the Ditidaht don't get greedy and shoot themselves in the foot as there is a definite opportunity for all parties involved to be happy.
Has anyone tried driving around to the south side of caycuse river... looks like a couple minutes on mainline carmanah, south rd, and rosander main would get you close to the south side of the river mouth... elevation is about 40m 
[from google earth] distance is about 0.6 km assuming you can park at the "low spot" in what looks like the last clear cut.
I didn't wade across to the south side, but there is some beautiful sand on the north side that would make a great (little) campsite... but getting to a launch area would be awkward from the north side.
Of course, you'd be giving up picnic tables, outhouses, and you probably wouldn't want to lug in your home barbeque... but you would have a (mostly) fresh water supply to rinse off your wetsuit so it might actually dry overnight. Going farther south on the shore would shorten the walk, but AFAIK there is a windshadow if you get much south of the river mouth.
Certainly not an ideal situation, but it seems more realistic than trying to get the bridge on the far shore rebuilt to access knob point... which AFAIK doesn't actually have a beach?
[from google earth] distance is about 0.6 km assuming you can park at the "low spot" in what looks like the last clear cut.I didn't wade across to the south side, but there is some beautiful sand on the north side that would make a great (little) campsite... but getting to a launch area would be awkward from the north side.
Of course, you'd be giving up picnic tables, outhouses, and you probably wouldn't want to lug in your home barbeque... but you would have a (mostly) fresh water supply to rinse off your wetsuit so it might actually dry overnight. Going farther south on the shore would shorten the walk, but AFAIK there is a windshadow if you get much south of the river mouth.
Certainly not an ideal situation, but it seems more realistic than trying to get the bridge on the far shore rebuilt to access knob point... which AFAIK doesn't actually have a beach?
-
JL
- Posts: 2610
- Joined: Thu May 22, 2003 8:57 am
- Location: Saanichton / Shirley (French Beach)
- Been thanked: 2 times
- Contact:
I drove in once in August 1986. The road went to knob point. https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/dsi/Road_Info ... mation.htm We got eaten alive by black flies & noseeums 
Man were we surprised to sail across the lake & find an empty campground !!! I think Bones (Tony) used to camp in his R.V. ~ the hatchery 
Man were we surprised to sail across the lake & find an empty campground !!! I think Bones (Tony) used to camp in his R.V. ~ the hatchery Thermals are good.
-
nitinaht girl
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:54 pm
- Location: Nitinaht Lake
Collecting
Just FYI, I collected Friday and Saturday until I had no campsite permits left. I did my absolute best taking care of the campsite this last weekend, I was just a fill in, not the regular worker... I do not recall charging 60.00 at one campsite and I have a pretty good memory so lets keep the facts truthful please. Thanks
Kim
Kim
Kim did a great job at the campground this weekend not only did she always have a smile on her face she had made friends with every one .
Awesome job at keeping the site serviced Kim over the weekend .
I hope we'd can have u there regularly .
I guess that info was from the weekend before and apologize Kim
For the misinformation .
Awesome job at keeping the site serviced Kim over the weekend .
I hope we'd can have u there regularly .
I guess that info was from the weekend before and apologize Kim
For the misinformation .
-
abetanzo
- Posts: 423
- Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:35 pm
- Location: Vic
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 2 times
not too happy with the $15/vehicle instead of per site! this weekend we paid $60 for Fri/Sat, a party of 4 people with two vehicles /tents tucked into a tiny site with a table!
I hope I don't have to pay while volunteering for Windfest which will most likely pack the campground making some record profits!!! that ain't cost recovery!!!
I hope I don't have to pay while volunteering for Windfest which will most likely pack the campground making some record profits!!! that ain't cost recovery!!!
In Renfrew the cost is 20$ per tent, $25 per trailer. It would have cost you guys $80. (not a provincial campground though). Not sure how much in Tofino (GreenPoint?) or ChinaBeach or other provincial park?
I guess coming up with suggestion price would be good. There should be an "incentive" in sharing the same site like you guys did this w-e. Would have cost you same price if you had 1 car/1 tent in 2 campsite which doesnt promote sharing/making place for max amount of people.
Once there is a general consensus on what should be the ~price for 1 single person, 1 car / 1 tent / 1 site and let's say 4 people 1 car 1 tent, 1 site, simple math could be tried to find the best "rate discount" when sharing sites, tent, cars. IE: Fixe price for 1 car, 1 site, 1 tent. Then you add more per person, car, tent when they share same site, but at ??? % of original price. Discount is bigger as you share with more people.
If we do the math it was $7.5 per person per night in your weekend. I think its not bad at all, but I understand the fact that your party could have used a second site for the same amount but you didnt by being nice and leaving space for other people.
Maybe they should charge more if your party had taken another site. If I have time Ill call different prov park to see the rate this week, and figure the math, it will be easier to explain/demonstrate.
I still think that at $7.5 a night per person, you had a good deal. (it would have cost you $10 a night per person in Renfrew, taking 1 or 2 sites wouldnt have matter either over there.)
For a single car/person/site it was $15 per night, which is not bad.
I guess coming up with suggestion price would be good. There should be an "incentive" in sharing the same site like you guys did this w-e. Would have cost you same price if you had 1 car/1 tent in 2 campsite which doesnt promote sharing/making place for max amount of people.
Once there is a general consensus on what should be the ~price for 1 single person, 1 car / 1 tent / 1 site and let's say 4 people 1 car 1 tent, 1 site, simple math could be tried to find the best "rate discount" when sharing sites, tent, cars. IE: Fixe price for 1 car, 1 site, 1 tent. Then you add more per person, car, tent when they share same site, but at ??? % of original price. Discount is bigger as you share with more people.
If we do the math it was $7.5 per person per night in your weekend. I think its not bad at all, but I understand the fact that your party could have used a second site for the same amount but you didnt by being nice and leaving space for other people.
Maybe they should charge more if your party had taken another site. If I have time Ill call different prov park to see the rate this week, and figure the math, it will be easier to explain/demonstrate.
I still think that at $7.5 a night per person, you had a good deal. (it would have cost you $10 a night per person in Renfrew, taking 1 or 2 sites wouldnt have matter either over there.)
For a single car/person/site it was $15 per night, which is not bad.
-
abetanzo
- Posts: 423
- Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:35 pm
- Location: Vic
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 2 times
'A camping party may be allowed a 2nd motor vehicle not designed as an accommodation for camping on the campsite for an additional ½ of the camping fee (to a maximum of $12/night).'
typical charges elsewhere.. taken from the below webpage...
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/fees/
typical charges elsewhere.. taken from the below webpage...
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/fees/
They must post proper fees and sites at the front so no one has to question or dispute attendant . RV sites are $23 a night that's how it was stated in previous posts . Now it seems like all recreational vehicles are paying 23.
The lak of proper and inconsistant information is making it difficult for
Many people, everyone has an RV/camper/ trailer. Not many only have tents anymore .
The lak of proper and inconsistant information is making it difficult for
Many people, everyone has an RV/camper/ trailer. Not many only have tents anymore .
