Bryce Canyon Campground Information

QUOTE(Nancy Wardlow @ Mar 31 2008, 11:55 AM) [snapback]10986[/snapback]

Have many of you found campgrounds that have a "10 year rule"? This is about RV parks who will not take a reservation if your rig is more than 10 years old unless you send them pictures first.

Nancy



Have found quite a few parks that have that rule in the fine print, but have never had it used against us. If your rig is clean and in good repair, you shouldn't either. Our is a '97, and looks fabulous, so if anyone asks, its a '98, and next year, it will be a '99.

 

I realize we've gotton 'off topic' here...
Routinely asked the 10-year question when making longer term (monthly) reservations at southern California RV parks: Sunland Resorts, Outdoor Resorts.
Rule gives the owners a legal foothold to keep their parks from becoming (or just looking like): a RV/trailer park junkyard. Who'd pay $40 - $70 bucks/night if the next door neighbor LOOKS like a broken-down eyesore.
Relax: we've enjoyed neighbors with good, great, to absolutely magnificent looking RVs which are MUCH older than 10 years in ALL above mentioned parks. B)

 

QUOTE(Nancy Wardlow @ Mar 31 2008, 01:55 PM) [snapback]10986[/snapback]

Have many of you found campgrounds that have a "10 year rule"? This is about RV parks who will not take a reservation if your rig is more than 10 years old unless you send them pictures first.

Nancy



I'll be glad to tell you what it is, or at least what started it. It's class warfare at it's finest.
Many times discrimination is hidden in a rule.

Least you think I jest, I have seen more that one instance of people moving from town to a new rural suburb. Lets say that across the road, is old farmer Browns place. Mr. Brown has lived there since 1946.

Now Mr Brown happens to have some old tractors and pickups around his barn. Not a trashy barnyard, but the equipment is there. For some reason the people at the new suburb have a problem with this. But they don't have the nerve (a common thing these days) to have the common decienty to let Mr. Brown know that they have a problem.

So next thing you know, The county sends Mr. Brown a letter demanding them to move them. Never mind the fact they have been there for thirty years.

Nor do any of these people make an attempt to be a good neighbor to Mr. Brown. Besides, he's far too “hillbilly” of a fellow and quite beneath them. Conversely, Mr. Brown is a man who would help anyone who needed it.

I am my RV travels, I meet all types of people. I also loath anyone who looks down on someone with an old rig. In some cases, that tired old RV may be the only thing keeping them from being homeless.

In a dead end job, RV life can actually help you achieve middle-class. By giving up some things,(room being the most) They can pocked money instead of giving it to a landlord.

I am NOT talking about troublemakers, drunks or druggies who have no intention if bettering themselves. Those people should be excluded or incarcerated. However, calling someone riff-raft based solely on rig appearance is by far short-sighted. Some of these people are the most friendly-out going people I have ever met. So what if they use their RV for work? At least they are trying, and not resorting to living off of welfare.

Why can't people live and let live??

Let me tell you a story about so-called -Riff-raft

IMHO, some of these people deserve to be helped, not excluded. I once parked next to a 1967 Ford Econoline motor home. That thing was a wreck. The campground wanted to kick them out because of the ugly blue tarp on the roof. The young couple had a newborn baby, and they were new to town. The husband had a new job, barely hanging on, but they had least had their foot in the door.

My farm was 250 miles away. On that farm, I had a 1976 Dodge Shasta Motor home in fairly good shape I could not find a buyer for. I called my brother, and asked him to start the old unit up, and drive it down here. I gave them that old motor home. It was junk to me, but vital to their survival in that town.They were shocked to say the least. It was a good feeling. But this is not the end of the story.

Three years later, I woke up and went outside to find a familiar shape in my driveway. There was my old Shasta! No worse for the wear, clean as a pin, new tires, the title in the front seat, and a envelope with a $500 check, and a thank you card. Seems these people had managed to save enough and were buying a house.Great! They didn't have to give that unit back, but they did!


So you see, for some people, RV'ing is not only for recreation. Campgrounds also know this, and some of them try to stop them. They know that struggling people cannot buy a less than 10 year old Rig. They fear that these people may have trouble with the rent, so they cater more to people who “have it together”

I'd rather boodock the rest of my life than cater to a CG who would exclude the common working person. I'd rather be camped next to the Clampetts any day than the jerk in the diesel pusher who does nothing but sit in his captains chair and looks down on the rest of us like it was a royal throne. Besides, The hillbillys would help me if someone tried to rob me. All the guy in the Diesel pusher would do is call the office and complain about the noise!!!

So instead of complaining about that old unsightly rig next to you, if you REALLY want to improve the situation, why don't you give them your old one and help your fellow man? Old rigs have very little value, and it would be more appreciated by a needy person than the dealer, who will most likely scrap it anyway.

Andrew Taylor

 

QUOTE(dsaalease @ Apr 2 2008, 02:50 AM) [snapback]11011[/snapback]

We will stay at seperate campgrounds for Zion & Bryce, not one for both parks.

An addition to my last post. A couple years ago we stayed at Coulter Bay campground at Grand Teton NP. The roads are paved, sites are gravel, generally level, and not much grass. The conditions sound much like Ruby's, and we had a great time. If I were to go back, I would stay there again without doubt. The campground was well run as you could expect from a national park.

On a vacation before the Tetons, we stayed at a campground at Lake Rudolph campground in Santa Claus IN. The physical attributes were the same as Ruby's or Coulter Bay, however we couldn't get out of this campground soon enough. There were golf carts racing around the park, our daughter almost got ran over by a golf cart while walking to the playground. Below is a post from June 07 about the campground:

"I was disappointed in this campground. It seemed unkept to me, and very over-crowded. There were golf carts buzzing around the campground at all hours of the night and someone actually flipped one over close to our site. Too big and too busy for us to consider this a relaxing getaway. We camped here in a Motorhome. "

The difference between the two parks was management and how they disciplined their customers. Generally speaking, a campgrond such as Zion River Resort will accomodate their customers by setting rules to provide a positive atmosphere. I don't have anything against a campground that isn't antiseptic such as Zion River, and have stayed in many that are similar to Ruby's without problem. Just would rather not get into another bad situation such as Lake Rudolph. After reading some of the posts, I'm hoping that Ruby's management sets rules for the people with ATV's that are fair to all party's.




We too are planning an April/May 2009 trip to Arizona and Utah with stops at the Grand Canyon, Zion, Bryce, Canyonlands, Glen Canyon Dam/Lake Powell and Arches. We will also stay at Zion River Resort. We much prefer a pristine setting to a rough and tumble camping experience. Call us spoiled city folk but my reasoning is, why leave the comforts and security of my home to go stay in an area that is unappealing and doesn't feel safe and secure.

 

QUOTE(T Lynn @ Jul 3 2008, 04:14 PM) [snapback]12163[/snapback]

We too are planning an April/May 2009 trip to Arizona and Utah with stops at the Grand Canyon, Zion, Bryce, Canyonlands, Glen Canyon Dam/Lake Powell and Arches. We will also stay at Zion River Resort. We much prefer a pristine setting to a rough and tumble camping experience. Call us spoiled city folk but my reasoning is, why leave the comforts and security of my home to go stay in an area that is unappealing and doesn't feel safe and secure.




While I respect the 'to each his own' factor, I don't agree with the fact that just because Ruby's is a campground and not an RV Park that it isn't safe and secure.

The nicest park we've ever stayed at is a pristine ownership-type resort. I picked up one of the Association's Newsletters and they had a spot in there regarding their "police blotter" type report and it was a mile long with break-ins and thefts from sites.

Just because there's a gate at the front doesn't mean that criminals have to use them. There's nothing unsafe about Ruby's.

 

T Lynn, we are at Panguitch KOA now and wish I had stayed at Ruby's while visiting Bryce NP. I drove through Ruby's today, I decided not to stay at Ruby's for our vacation after reading some of the reviews. It's not perfect or a resort, but compared to others in the area, it would have been a better choice. I'm very disappointed in the KOA I'm at.

As far as Moab (Arches & Canyonlands), I'd recommend Canyonlands Campground (not associated with the NP) in Moab which is where we stayed. Riverside Oasis or Moab Vally campgrounds are the only others I would consider. However, Canyonlands Campground is in Moab, very little traffic noise, very close to restaurants and shops. The grounds were clean and facilities are nice. BTW, don't fall for the Portal RV Resort as a RESORT. Some years down the road it may be a nice place, but not in the next year. I'll let you know how Zion River Resort is, we are headed ther later this week.

 

QUOTE(gwbischoff @ Jul 8 2008, 04:24 PM) [snapback]12192[/snapback]

While I respect the 'to each his own' factor, I don't agree with the fact that just because Ruby's is a campground and not an RV Park that it isn't safe and secure.

The nicest park we've ever stayed at is a pristine ownership-type resort. I picked up one of the Association's Newsletters and they had a spot in there regarding their "police blotter" type report and it was a mile long with break-ins and thefts from sites.

Just because there's a gate at the front doesn't mean that criminals have to use them. There's nothing unsafe about Ruby's.




I'm sorry, I was not making any references to Ruby's, in fact I don't know anything about that campground. I was talking in general about what we prefer. In deed we have stayed at very nice camp resorts and been put off by a variety of things we didn't care for. We just want to feel that we are in a safe environment. For example, we stayed at the Bluewater RV Resort in the Florida Keys which is a very upscale RV Resort. While the park was extremly nice, our neighbors who had a million dollar motorhome left little to be desired!! So certainly, I was not putting down the smaller campground with very few amenities but rather looking for security and safety. If you are ever in the area of Luray, VA, please take time and try "The Country Waye Campground", this is simplicity at its' absolute best (and with no cable, lol). Happy RVing everyone!

 

What some on this forum do not understand , is that in many areas of our country there are no Resort Parks no matter what their names. Bryce and Zion are some of these areas. Don't misunderstand there are many perfectly adequate places to stay. The sites a dirt or gravel, very little grass. I don't think I have seen a park in that area that could be rated any more than an honest 5.

 

QUOTE(T Lynn @ Jul 19 2008, 03:09 PM) [snapback]12337[/snapback]

I'm sorry, I was not making any references to Ruby's, in fact I don't know anything about that campground. I was talking in general about what we prefer. In deed we have stayed at very nice camp resorts and been put off by a variety of things we didn't care for. We just want to feel that we are in a safe environment. For example, we stayed at the Bluewater RV Resort in the Florida Keys which is a very upscale RV Resort. While the park was extremly nice, our neighbors who had a million dollar motorhome left little to be desired!! So certainly, I was not putting down the smaller campground with very few amenities but rather looking for security and safety. If you are ever in the area of Luray, VA, please take time and try "The Country Waye Campground", this is simplicity at its' absolute best (and with no cable, lol). Happy RVing everyone!



After visiting both Bryce & Zion, I can report firsthand on both places. Zion River Resort is definitely a nice resort. It is designed & operated by RV'ers that know what we want. It is very clean, well laid out, strong wi-fi; a first class resort. There are some gravel sites, but those were raked by the staff on a daily basis. The sites that have concrete pads had sprinklers that came on nightly to water the grass as the place is in a dessert.

Ruby's looked like the best choice in the area. Some of the campgrounds in the area had some (but very little) grass, the rest was gravel, dirt and dust. Ruby's sites were all gravel, but the larger gravel and the faclility seemed dust free. We didn't stay at Ruby's, but I wish I would have. I wouldn't term Ruby's a resort, but it is as good as it could get. Keep in mind, since I didn't stay there, I can't report on the staff or the quality of the facilities. My observation was only a drive through!

An enterprising person would do well to open a resort in the Bryce area, they would have the only resort in the area. I agree with Big Ben, in most of Utah, it is difficult to grow grass as it is a dessert. The people at Zion River Resort got it figured out, but it takes a lot of work, and it shows that they care!