VANCOUVER ISLAND WINDTALK

I wasn't trying to stir the pot when looking at the notice board... Kim kindly came over to offer the 'book' for me to read... I was reading it when everyone came by and Pat thought I was giving Kim grief... I wasn't and simply asked the question why the full charge for another vehicle when I thought it was different...

I apologize if people thought I was pissed off... I wasn't... just trying to follow the rules!!! even if there are grey areas!

We paid for our site before the weekend (not to Kym) and were camped in the middle row. For the record, we were two parties sharing one site even though there was still lots of space left. They tried to charge us both the "RV" fee - that would have been nearly $50/night for one site & one picnic table (shared between 6 people).

Our companion politely pointed out that we weren't in one of the designated RV Sites so in the end only paid the standard camp fee.

I don't mind paying camp fees, and have to admit - loved it when we could pre-pay at the store which avoided having to dig out a wallet when trying to feed my 3 year old dinner (or breakfast!). But 24/night is crazy for "RV" sites that have no amenities, are the farthest from the beach and end up with lots of parties camped in them.

I truly believe camp fee compliance is far more likely with fair and reasonable fees.

Thanks Kym for doing such a great job over the weekend!!

It clearly states on the big brown sign at the y section at the entrance to the campsite, "Maximum ONE vehicle allowed per party, unless its a commuter vehicle, all other vehicles will require an additional camp permit. I do not make the rules, nor do I know why the rules are made. I appreciate all the people who understand this and realize I am just doing my job. Thank you for all the compliments I have been given. I really enjoy the time I've had working at the campsite.
Kim

Great job Chris liaising with the Ministry and the Village. It seems like you are doing a great job voicing the opinions of the majority of users.

I don't know if I am in a majority or not, but I have one opinion to add. I have been coming to Nitinat for about 12 years and as everyone knows, fee collection has been all over the map. There have been instances of confirmed fraud and many more suspected. It seems that the individuals(s) in charge of collecting and managing the money change almost yearly. The only recourse and security we have is that the land is still owned by the government and subject to Ministry regulations.

My opinion to add is that I am extremely worried about the future if this treaty passes and the land fully transfers to the Band and they can make their own rules. I am all for treaty negotiations and am a strong supporter of self-governance, however in this situation I see a parcel of land which is 99.999% used by non-Band-members and yet will be transferred to them. (And yes, I go there in the off-season too for fishing and hunting, and nobody from the village is using the campsite then either.)

A gate has been mentioned. Cindy has mentioned that she feels $23 is "reasonable." These are the things which concern me...

I have no idea how far along the treaty process is. Can it be changed? If not, here is one idea: could we create a wind/kitesurf society and enter into a long-term lease with the Band to transfer control of fees/services back to the actual users of the land? Just an idea...

PS - Regarding Knob Point. If you have a beater 4x4, you might still be able to drive in via "Upper Hitchie" flattening small Alders where the road used to be. (Skid plates recommended.) I did this myself about 5 years ago successfully. About 3 years ago, I drove in the short way past the hatchery, and simply 4x4'd through the wash-out. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to be possible anymore with the rocks at the hatchery bridge. However, as previously mentioned, the camping on that side of the lake is extremely buggy and the sun is gone at about 3pm so it wasn't very enjoyable. And of course, there is no beach.

The tone of some of the comments is worrying. Although I have been going there since 1996, longer than some, shorter than others, the band has been there since settling. Once the treaty provisions are finalized the campsite will be under Ditidaht full control and people should recognize and appreciate that and the efforts being made by Kim currently.

The best thing to do is have constructive comments for best management of the site for the band to optimize revenue from it both now and in future, which does not mean the highest charges but a level that will keep us all wanting to come and enjoy their hospitality now and (hopefully) forever. The fee structure does suggest more people carpool together, since you know you'll be charged by vehicle, and this will help manage some of the parking/site issues. Good definition (posting) of RV sites will help. Eventually a system like in some of the WA state parks (different sites have different fees based on desirability and popularity even within same park) could aid, and a reasonable fee structure based on area occupied is one approach.

As an aside, the new basis/standard implemented in the US federal national forest camp-grounds is excellent, we saw it in Montana, Idaho, and Oregon - including the deign of the outhouses - worth it for future operators of site to investigate as it is easier to clean, much fewer fly and insect issues, and lower cost to maintain and pump-out. The Band may also want to look into a small pickup truck mounted pump-out system to minimize their future costs.

It might be in the best interest of the band to lease the site to a Wind Society for a fixed or a portion of the fees, thereby avoiding any headaches with operating the site all together yet still collecting roughly the same revenue. Seems like a win-win.

What is going on right now would be akin to FLNRO trying to manage the site and charge user fees at Squamish Spit...

Could be so Nanmoo, but an entity would have to form that can carry liability insurance, subcontract to Band, get D&O insurance, hire and pay staff to maintain site, take care of things when conditions out there are not good, operate in good wind and poor wind years, have finances and taxes, etc., manage expectations of colleagues and friends ... it's been done in past, but situation is quite different now with the schools and permanent season-long folks on site. Also need to consider non-windy season coverage in that case.

Something for the Band to consider if they wish. Squamish Spit situation may have some indication of how it could be done and what the revenues might be (I haven't been there since '87 so do not know how they run it.)

The setup at the spit is pretty refined; whole thing is carpeted or friendly gravel, rescue boats, webcam, anemometer, boardwalk, onsite payment via CC, on water pizza delivery when you're knackering after a long session but can't bring yourself to leave the water... Basically a mini version of the event site.

Am I the only one who finds it strange that there are now 2 threads on improvemnts to Nitnat (Sauna and Bike Loop) which will require volunteer help and resources, yet we seem to be paying the most we ever had for lake access.

Cann't take it anymore without saying

Who in this community has trouble coming up with 15$ or 23$?
Just pay the bill and enjoy the lake.
If you came from Victoria you probabley will spent 40-60 on gas then a bunch on food, then your beer...... plus major wear on your ride. The camp fees are the least of your bills , BUT ARE THE FOCUS OF YOUR TRAVELS.
Pay the rent and move on

Moderate Wind Mateo wrote:Cann't take it anymore without saying ...

yeah, same talk, different year: BWD said it well: "first world problem"

If you take that stance of indifference towards all aspects of your life that cost you money you'd find yourself broke and unsatisfied pretty soon. Next time you go to a restaurant and they forget half your meal but you still charge you for it I'd like to see you take that same position.

I think folks are simply pointing out that we are in fact paying for a service and would like to see value for what they are paying for. What is so wrong about that?

a) do you really fuss about leaving a tip at a restaurant? It is small change... if you can't keep the big ticket items and the small change items separate, you're going to be on information overload and never have a chance to plan/think ahead. (Perhaps that's a bad example, in theory a tip is a reward for good service... but "don't sweat the small stuff" is a well known axiom and certainly applies.)

b) it is "venting" (polite form). The community has been making the same complaints for decades. If it really was an issue people would be making and discussing plans to work around it. They'd camp elsewhere and day trip. They'd be looking at alternate sites. Instead we're making plans to rebuild the sauna and discussing trail upgrades.

You're welcome to keep on talking, personally, I'd rather "shut up and sail". I was just supporting someone who seemed to have similar thoughts. -Tom

I caught the tail end of the camp host Kim taking the brunt of someone's anger I was appalled and was on my way to give him a piece of my mind, he scooted out of there before I could. I will see him again and he will definitely hear from me.
this man owes Kim an apology she was shaking after her encounter with him.
I hope he is reading this post and I hope that he some kind of brain to approach Kim and make amends with her.

I could stoop to his level if I really wanted to be that small yet I won't

sorry Pat! you never really heard the discussion and I was polite throughout! I didn't think Kim thought I was angry I was simply looking at the information boards.. .and was talking calmly to her!! she came over and just said, "Want to look at the book?"... the boys showed up and thought I was pissed and I wasn't and never was angry to Kim just talking!!

I will apologize to Kim next time I see her to mend things cause I wasn't angry just talking with her when you and everyone else showed up!

If you'd like to give me a piece of your mind that's fine I was simply trying to be informed by looking at the board and trying to see where it says we get charged per vehicle! its not on the main board!!! but as Kim mentioned earlier it does clearly say it somewhere!!!