BWCA New pricing structure for Ontario parks Boundary Waters Quetico Forum
Chat Rooms (0 Chatting)  |  Search  |   Login/Join
* For the benefit of the community, commercial posting is not allowed.
Boundary Waters Quetico Forum
   Quetico Forum
      New pricing structure for Ontario parks     
 Forum Sponsor

Author

Text

OldTripper
distinguished member (214)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
 
08/31/2021 07:37PM  
I'm not sure if this has been posted before but I saw this on YouTube and thought I'd pass it along.

It seems they are in the process of restructuring the way they charge usage fees in Ontario parks.

Watch this video for more information.
If this is old news and already been discussed, apologies in advance.
OT
 
Reply    Reply with Quote    Print Top Bottom Previous Next
09/16/2021 06:23PM  
A bit long, but I totally agree the new fee structure makes no sense. It doesn't seem to be the best way to protect the resource since it promotes larger groups in each campsite that increases the pressure on the site. The previous fee structure was already pretty expensive. I don't see how this will increase revenues.
09/17/2021 08:27AM  
A few days after our recent return from Algonquin Provincial Park, I received an email requesting that I complete an online survey rating our visit. The survey was generic in that it applied to any visit to an Ontario park, but it asked which park we had recently visited and included many questions about fees, visitor counts, etc.

TZ
GeoFisher
distinguished member(1456)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
 
09/19/2021 04:49PM  
This will be DEADLY for QUETICO , IMHO.

Make it cheaper, which is a great idea if you want USAGE, and you will also get the problems of the BWCA.

Maybe that is a little selfish of me, but I'm telling you. Price it cheaper, and you will get cheaper visitors, and that will bring shitty results, IMHO.

Right now the price is per person and something like 21 or so a night, per person....so my regular 8 days in the park for 6 guys was something like 21 x 8 x 6 so $1008 bucks, for the trip.

Now, change that to 40 night percampsite, x 8......... $320 per night. split that 6 ways, and boom you're looking at something like $54 bucks a night.

Think of all the shoe string budget folks wanting the wilderness experience that will Paddle into Quetico versus BWCA. As those folks visit, they will demand fire pits, and shitters........

YEP........

IN one way, I think that will drive more usage and more dollars maybe, but in the other way I think it will drive more usage, and HORRIBLE outcomes.

AND I'm not even sure it will drive more dollars. My group of 6 would require 3x the numbers of groups of 6 to make the same money. THAT seems like a lot of extra usage, and not only that but if they don't get that usage, a loss of money.......

I don't know.

Oh well.

Later,

Geo

Argo
distinguished member (466)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
 
09/20/2021 06:56AM  
GeoFisher: "This will be DEADLY for QUETICO , IMHO.

Make it cheaper, which is a great idea if you want USAGE, and you will also get the problems of the BWCA.

Maybe that is a little selfish of me, but I'm telling you. Price it cheaper, and you will get cheaper visitors, and that will bring shitty results, IMHO.

Right now the price is per person and something like 21 or so a night, per person....so my regular 8 days in the park for 6 guys was something like 21 x 8 x 6 so $1008 bucks, for the trip.

Now, change that to 40 night percampsite, x 8......... $320 per night. split that 6 ways, and boom you're looking at something like $54 bucks a night.

Think of all the shoe string budget folks wanting the wilderness experience that will Paddle into Quetico versus BWCA. As those folks visit, they will demand fire pits, and shitters........

YEP........

IN one way, I think that will drive more usage and more dollars maybe, but in the other way I think it will drive more usage, and HORRIBLE outcomes.

AND I'm not even sure it will drive more dollars. My group of 6 would require 3x the numbers of groups of 6 to make the same money. THAT seems like a lot of extra usage, and not only that but if they don't get that usage, a loss of money.......

I don't know.

Oh well.

Later,

Geo"

I completely agree with your point about the value attributed to the resource and the potential consequences of this pricing strategy. But it's unlikely it will be applied to Quetico. The parks that will probably be targeted are ones with at or near capacity conditions already.

I am not sure where it was ever written in stone that a campsite should be priced based on the number of occupants. That is how the system evolved in Ontario but the down side is that it gives preferential treatment to smaller buyers which runs contrary any standard business practice. And the parks are businesses with revenues and costs.

I believe the reason this policy is being considered has to do with the spike in demand because of Covid. There has been a lot more back country camping demand but the supply is finite. So how do you accommodate the maximum number of people in this circumstance? When there's at or near 100% capacity utilization, small groups and solo paddlers are displacing larger groups who are turned away. This pricing strategy essentially addresses that by incentifying smaller groups to get bigger or pay a price for staying small. Fairness is a malleable concept. This policy won't be welcomed by smaller groups but is fairer to larger groups and will provide more people access to back country camping.

My last two camping trips were a party of two.
09/20/2021 11:26AM  
Nothing is yet set in stone; this is a pilot program in Massasauga and the Temagami cluster of parks. Make your voice heard; here is a link to an online petition that opposes the fee increase.

And here is a good read on what is happening.
mschi772
distinguished member(777)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
 
09/20/2021 04:34PM  
I have some thoughts, but I'm neither Ontarian nor am I even Canadian. Despite me living closer to Quetico than most of the population of Ontario, it is still next to none of my business and almost entirely their business to decide how they want to handle their wilderness areas. If they have some sort of tourism authority that wants to know what Americans think, then I suppose I'd share my thoughts, but otherwise I recognize that I have precisely zero rights regarding what Canadians do with Canadian stuff.
Argo
distinguished member (466)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
 
09/21/2021 10:07AM  
mschi772: "I have some thoughts, but I'm neither Ontarian nor am I even Canadian. Despite me living closer to Quetico than most of the population of Ontario, it is still next to none of my business and almost entirely their business to decide how they want to handle their wilderness areas. If they have some sort of tourism authority that wants to know what Americans think, then I suppose I'd share my thoughts, but otherwise I recognize that I have precisely zero rights regarding what Canadians do with Canadian stuff."

None of that should preclude your stating an opinion. I would like to hear it!
jdddl8
distinguished member (258)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
 
09/21/2021 06:35PM  
I agree. Without the usage of our recreational facilities by our friends from the south Northern Ontario would not be economically viable. And most of visitors especially those who paddle are definitely welcome. Q would be a totally different park without enough revenue to keep the portages manageable and the campsites clean.
tumblehome
distinguished member(2477)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
 
09/21/2021 09:24PM  
mschi772: "I have some thoughts, but I'm neither Ontarian nor am I even Canadian. Despite me living closer to Quetico than most of the population of Ontario, it is still next to none of my business and almost entirely their business to decide how they want to handle their wilderness areas. If they have some sort of tourism authority that wants to know what Americans think, then I suppose I'd share my thoughts, but otherwise I recognize that I have precisely zero rights regarding what Canadians do with Canadian stuff."
Not so!
Something like 70% of Quetico users are American.
There are countless policies enacted on one side of the border that are made with input from the other side.

I am quite certain that Ontario Parks benefits greatly from the American tourist, Quetico especially.
Tom
GeoFisher
distinguished member(1456)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
 
10/04/2021 05:50PM  
tumblehome: "mschi772: "I have some thoughts, but I'm neither Ontarian nor am I even Canadian. Despite me living closer to Quetico than most of the population of Ontario, it is still next to none of my business and almost entirely their business to decide how they want to handle their wilderness areas. If they have some sort of tourism authority that wants to know what Americans think, then I suppose I'd share my thoughts, but otherwise I recognize that I have precisely zero rights regarding what Canadians do with Canadian stuff."
Not so! Something like 70% of Quetico users are American. There are countless policies enacted on one side of the border that are made with input from the other side.

I am quite certain that Ontario Parks benefits greatly from the American tourist, Quetico especially.
Tom"

Yep, which is why I voiced my opinion.......... :)
It is pretty scary that Q might become A destination versus what it is today.

I believe it won't be the same place if everyone went there.
Just my opinion though......who am I?

Later,

Geo
dschult2
distinguished member (232)distinguished memberdistinguished memberdistinguished member
 
12/19/2021 06:29PM  
Just checked the prices for 2022. Looks like they all stayed the same accross the board for all parks and entry points.
 
Reply    Reply with Quote    Print Top Bottom Previous Next