Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Review When Not Staying
RV Park Reviews Campground Discussion Forum > RV Park and Campground Discussions > RV Park Discussions
Lindsay Richards
We attempted to stay at 2 "RV Parks" in New Orleans today and upon arrival, they were located in bad sections and had lots of FEMA trailers there. My wife declined to stay (she makes all major decisions) so we went on to campground in LaPlace, LA. Both were in Trailer Life and sounded OK when we talked via telephone. Should I write up or not as we didn't really stay there, but I would like to present my case to help others.
FosterImposters
Well, I for one, would sure like to know your impressions. cool.gif
Why not note in your review why you had to pass on that particular park.

Curious what our Moderator thinks.
Forgive me. Have a large 'hot button' on excessive or just plain false marketing...past life in the medical world.

Thinking more about this: I remember at least one other set of reviews where the reviewer was upfront about a park not meeting expectations and moving onto another in the area.
Jerry S.
What constitutes a "bad section" and why FEMA trailers are a negative?
DXSMac
QUOTE(FosterImposters @ Feb 24 2008, 06:24 PM) *


Thinking more about this: I remember at least one other set of reviews where the reviewer was upfront about a park not meeting expectations and moving onto another in the area.


I think, in that case, the reviewer stayed at least ONE night, then moved on.

I think there was a thread or maybe a part of a thread, where people wanted to know if they could review even if they DIDN'T stay..... I remember something about....it is preferred that you actually STAYED at the park for your review, but beats me!

I would like the webmaster to weigh in on this, too!

JJ
John Blue
Number of very bad RV places in downtown N/O and one Class A only park that is great. N/O is a good place to get killed now, I think it is the number one spot in USA for murder. Look at other reviews and you will see numbers of people have not been happy over this place. We will not return if this goes on in future.

On the other hand across the river at Westwege "Bayou Segnette SP" was a great place to camp before the storm took it out. Park is back in service now, less the trees.

We all need information on campgrounds. If someone drives in and it is raining park is a 1 and you drive off. This is not right. You need to spend a night in park to rate it. On the other hand if place looks like hell I would also drive off. If I write it up I would note that I did not spend time in park. I see this all the time on reviews.

FEMA trailers are all over this part of LA.
Big Ben
Some of you make "FEMA Trailers" sound like some kind of plague. There are FEMA trailers in all the Gulf States. They were put there by the government and I'm sure the people that live in them don't want to be there.
You might try talking to some of them and learn from them. There but for the grace of God go you and I.
Texasrvers
My $.02 is if a place looks so bad that someone does not stay there, I would like to know. The reviewer could state that he/she did not stay and explain why. While this kind of review would not give us all the usual information about the place, it would certainly tell us something worth knowing. If the reviewer's first impressions are not accurate there will probably be other reviews to set the record straight.

I cannot think of a time that we have actually left a park after seeing it, but we have driven in our car through several parks that we would never stay at. I did not write reviews for any them, but if I had it might have saved someone else some time and trouble. I'm not going to stay at a dump even one night just so I can write a review; and if we aren't allowed to post a review unless we actually stay there how else are we going to get out the word about bad places?

Butch

The subject of reviewing, a less than desirable park/location, the question "why" would be foremost in the readers mind. The fact that they did not stay there should be noted, in the beginning of the review, and then the reason(s) as to why they chose not to stay. With these facts.........information the reader can make their own decision as to wether to use this business. At least they would be enlightened, and put on notice to investigate before coming to their conclusion as to stay or not.
DXSMac
QUOTE(Butch @ Feb 25 2008, 06:17 AM) *

The subject of reviewing, a less than desirable park/location, the question "why" would be foremost in the readers mind. The fact that they did not stay there should be noted, in the beginning of the review, and then the reason(s) as to why they chose not to stay. With these facts.........information the reader can make their own decision as to wether to use this business. At least they would be enlightened, and put on notice to investigate before coming to their conclusion as to stay or not.


Sometimes I chose not to stay at a park due to a "gut feeling." It didn't really LOOK like a dump, but I drove in, got this HORRIBLE feeling, and got the **** out of there. Found out later the park is full of drug dealers and "entreprenerial women."

How could I post a review based on a "gut feeling?" People would laugh!

JJ
Texasrvers
Butch, I agree with you that any information about a park will help the reader make up his/her own mind. That is what this site is all about. We don't always agree on whether a place is a "good" park or not, but just the fact that someone saw and reported undesirable elements will give me information that I can use to make a decision about staying there.

JJ, we have all had "feelings" about places. This is good and probably keeps us out of danger. In your case it sounds like your feeling was based on instinct not on things that were actually observed--unless the drug dealers and "ladies" were standing on the corner peddling their wares. Even so something sent up a red flag for you, and you made a good decision by leaving. If it were me I think this would be a tough call as to whether to write a review or not. On one hand your "feeling" indicates something about the atmosphere of the park, but it would be hard to justify if there was no tangible evidence. In Lindsey's case it sounds like they actually saw undesirable conditions that caused them to leave. This would make his review more credible. Bottom line for me is I would try to have actual observed evidence on which to base my review, although it would never be wrong to warn others about places that are truly dangerous.
DXSMac
QUOTE(Texasrvers @ Feb 25 2008, 10:32 AM) *

JJ, we have all had "feelings" about places. This is good and probably keeps us out of danger. In your case it sounds like your feeling was based on instinct not on things that were actually observed--unless the drug dealers and "ladies" were standing on the corner peddling their wares. Even so something sent up a red flag for you, and you made a good decision by leaving. If it were me I think this would be a tough call as to whether to write a review or not. On one hand your "feeling" indicates something about the atmosphere of the park, but it would be hard to justify if there was no tangible evidence. In Lindsey's case it sounds like they actually saw undesirable conditions that caused them to leave. This would make his review more credible. Bottom line for me is I would try to have actual observed evidence on which to base my review, although it would never be wrong to warn others about places that are truly dangerous.


The park where I got the HORRIBLE feeling...... There are no reviews posted on it anywhere. None here, and none at the "other" two review sites. (This park was in Spokane, WA.)

But just because there is no review posted, doesn't mean you shouldn't stay there. Just check it out, and trust your gut.

JJ
Jerry S.
JJ,

I am again curious. How do you manage to find these "hooker" parks? This is the second time (the other was a southern CA park) that you have mentioned "finding out" that a park had this problem. Was the Spokane park really an RV park, a mobile home park with some RV sites, or an RV park with a lot of permanent residents? I checked Woodall's Spokane listings and found no parks with hookers or drug dealers under Recreation facilities. You could at least tell us what park it was. That way your second hand hearsay can either be a boon to their business or ruin their reputation.

I guess you will never stay in Nevada.

I am still waiting for the original poster to tell me why the area the park was in was a "bad section" and explain why FEMA trailers in the park are such a negative.
RLM
There has been a previous forum post of this topic. I spent a few minutes looking but wasnít able to find it. If memory serves, the Webmaster did make a comment that it would be preferable if an individual made a rating bases on an actual stay at a campground.

Couple of basic issues here: One is that like Lindsay we all submit reviews to help our fellow RVers make an educated choice for an acceptable campground. His was a valid question so why are you ďkilling the messengerĒ with subsequent remarks about FEMA trailers that supposes he has a prejudice? Two, I donít think anyone using this, or any other like website, actually places their entire faith on the campground reviews listed here. A review is just one tool to help us pick a campground that might be acceptable if we have not been there before.

Obviously, the validity and accuracy of a review is greater if one did actually stay at the C/G. But if a campground has not ever been rated on this website, then some measure of a review might actually be useful. By some measure, I absolutely do not mean a drive-by, first impression. If you canít take the time to drive IN to the C/G and check out at least the basics, then donít publish a review. If you make that extra effort, then I figure that you are actually trying to help me find a decent campground.




DXSMac
QUOTE(Jerry S. @ Feb 25 2008, 09:31 PM) *

JJ,

I am again curious. How do you manage to find these "hooker" parks? This is the second time (the other was a southern CA park) that you have mentioned "finding out" that a park had this problem. Was the Spokane park really an RV park, a mobile home park with some RV sites, or an RV park with a lot of permanent residents? I checked Woodall's Spokane listings and found no parks with hookers or drug dealers under Recreation facilities. You could at least tell us what park it was. That way your second hand hearsay can either be a boon to their business or ruin their reputation.

I guess you will never stay in Nevada.



The California h&dd park, I did not drive in that one. I found that one.... somewhere, I forgot where I found it, but my friend that lived in the town that park was in told me it was a "drug dealers and entreprenerial women" park. As for the park in Spokane, WA, it was MAPLE TREE RV Park, it was on East Sprague. I drove in that one, got a HORRIBLE gut feeling, and left. My brother in law was the one who later told me "hookers and drug dealers." The one I did end up staying at in Spokane (and I have the ONLY review posted for it) is Park Lane, which is a mile down the street (also on East Sprague) from Maple Tree.

Yeah, right! I could just see GOOD SAM or WOODALL putting "hookers and drug dealers" under "recreation facilities....."

Um, one time I was in Long Beach, WA (not CA, WA also has a LONG BEACH), and I saw a sign that said, "ADULT RV Park." I think..... the sign was trying to convey that one needed to be 55+ to stay there, but the way the sign read, well, I couldn't help but wonder...... I didn't drive in that park......

JJ

QUOTE(RLM @ Feb 25 2008, 10:43 PM) *

There has been a previous forum post of this topic. I spent a few minutes looking but wasnít able to find it. If memory serves, the Webmaster did make a comment that it would be preferable if an individual made a rating bases on an actual stay at a campground.

{snip}

Obviously, the validity and accuracy of a review is greater if one did actually stay at the C/G. But if a campground has not ever been rated on this website, then some measure of a review might actually be useful. By some measure, I absolutely do not mean a drive-by, first impression. If you canít take the time to drive IN to the C/G and check out at least the basics, then donít publish a review. If you make that extra effort, then I figure that you are actually trying to help me find a decent campground.


I agree with the intent of what you are trying to say (that one should at least spend 1 night there....), but what actually constitutes a "stay?" 1 minute? 5 minutes? Just checking.......

Also, as for my famous "hooker and drug dealer" park in Spokane, well, at one of the "other" review sites (there are two others that I know of....), I actually did attempt to post my "gut feeling experience" for that park on that review site. The moderator never did post it, it's been over a year. So, I assumed it would be in bad taste to send that same post to this site.......

JJ
FosterImposters
JJ...what are the other websites you use to find/post RV park reviews?
rolleyes.gif

Lindsay R...saw your reviews. Well said! Thanks!
Texasrvers
Awhile back (maybe before you joined, JJ) someone told a story about pulling into an adult park (somewhere in Florida, I think) which they assumed was a 55+ park. Turned out it was a clothing optional park. The person told the story much funnier, but I guess it just goes to show you better do your homework and not assume anything. (I think that story was on this site, but I couldn't find it. Maybe it was in one of the RV magazines.)
Lindsay Richards
QUOTE
What constitutes a "bad section" and why FEMA trailers are a negative?


A bad section is one where we felt very unsafe and my wife refused to stay. A FEMA trailer, trashed out does not make a good neighbor. I can agree that many people needed to have a FEMA trailer to have a roof over their head and I myself was in that place in 1960 after Hurricane Donna. I do think that anybody who is still leaving in a FEMA trailer nearly 2 Ĺ years after the hurricane shows little sense to be the kind of person I want as a neighbor. We did spend about Ĺ day looking at the damage around the 9th ward and was shocked to see what we saw. That would be hundreds of able bodied men lounging around on porches drinking and doing nothing to better their situation and apparently waiting for the government to rebuild them a project to live in. I believe these are the same ones who waited for the buses to take them to safety. I am going to review the two parks making it clear that we didnít stay, but making sure that we state the problems we saw. We ended up have problems turning around at both places (had the toad hooked up).
Jerry S.
Linday Richards,

Thank you for your clarification of what consitutes a "bad section" (men....drinking) and why Fema trailers (trashed out) are a negative. I would have accepted your rationale if you had not then editorialized about what kind of people these men and trailer occupants might be. Your assumptions about "....little sense..." and "...doing nothing..." and so on could possibly have some truth to them, but you don't know the stories behind any of these men or trailer residents. I have been in LA and MS three time (10/06, 5/07, and 10/07) for a total of over 2 months since Katrina and Rita. I have seen many stories by LA TV and newspapers about the people and their situations. In addition to the horrific loss of life, hundreds of thousands lost , homes, jobs, schools, vehicles - everything! While some left and were able to start anew elsewhere and others left with hopes of returning, not all who stayed have been have been able to return to a normal life with a job to go to and a home. In addition to all the homes that were destroyed, many small businesses (where many of these people worked) disappeared and have not come back. The broad brush with which you painted this scene, while colorful, seems inappropriate, at best.
Joe-n-Doe
Though not in New Orleans, I have posted a review on a 2 parks in which we did not stay. They are local parks. One operated by the City of Jacksonville and the other a Florida State Park. My rational for the postings was to alert folks that 1) the city park had no hook-ups of any kind, just boon docking sites and 2) the State Park had size restrictions, would have some serious drainage problems following a rain, that there was a heavy and low canopy of trees, and was probably best suited for rigs less than 30 feet. Both campground had not been reviewed and are off the beaten path. In other words anyone going there would probably be going out of their way to get there. Better for them to know about the short falls before actually driving there.
Lindsay Richards
Having been in the eye of a hurricane myself and knowing what can happen I think that 2 Ĺ years is more than enough for people to get going again. I know of a church i Florida tht took in over 200 families after Katrina and to a person they got back on their feet and became a credit to the community. It is my understanding from a friend who lives there, that there is a shortage of willing people to work now as there was before. Sorry, you think I used a broad brush, but thatís what I saw and what I reported. I would not have allowed ourselves to be put into a dangerous situation at either of these parks. I suspect that a large number of RVíers would agree with me. This is my last on the subject. People can make their own decisions.
Big Ben
Lindsay, I too have been a couple hurricans. How in the world do you have the adasity to say 2 1/2 years is enought to get Katrina's damage fixed up. How many people were kill in the hurrican you were in? The flooding alone was catostfic. It was one the most devastating stoms of our time and you have the nerve to pass judgement. Get a life.
leftyf
QUOTE(Big Ben @ Mar 3 2008, 12:28 AM) *

Lindsay, I too have been a couple hurricans. How in the world do you have the adasity to say 2 1/2 years is enought to get Katrina's damage fixed up. How many people were kill in the hurrican you were in? The flooding alone was catostfic. It was one the most devastating stoms of our time and you have the nerve to pass judgement. Get a life.


Having been part of the mass exodus, 2.5 years is plenty of time to get back on your feet after a catastrophe such as Katrina. 2.5 years may not be enough time to get it all fixed...but, it sure oughta be enough to get started. Lots of other places have been hit much harder and recovered much quicker. Just about everywhere the people of New Orleans were sent to the crime rate rocketed.

I've seen the same thing Lindsay was saying. The majority are sitting around waiting for a hand-out. Those that want to work can and do. I am still getting calls about contract work in N.O. and the surrounding area. Some are paying in excess of $100 per hour. The rates are high because there is no place to live there for outsiders coming in to work.

Head over to Mississippi and check them out. They did not get 1/2 the publicity or 1/2 of the help NO did...and they are light years ahead of NO.
Lindsay Richards
What I said, was 2 1/2 years was too long to live in a FEMA trailer. I can not imagine subjecting my family to such and I believe that most of the people there who have any personal responsibility have not done so, Never said it was enough to get rebuild New Orleans. That's what you said, not me. I stand by this. Several years ago, in Winter Haven, FL, my daughter went thru 3 hurricane eyes in one year. I personally think that rebuilding any part of New Orleans that is below sea level is very dumb, but this certainly isn't the place to discuss it. As a teenager, I went through hurricane Dona and made a ton of money after it as most industrious kids did. A friend and myself got a tractor and stood up palm trees at $15 each at about 2 per hour. My other job paid 75 cents an hour, so this was big bucks for us in 1960. Once again, my intent was to let others know that these two parks were in areas we found to look unsafe and others should consider this before giving out credit card numbers which were asked for on the phone.
FosterImposters
Whew!!! ohmy.gif All that just to get a review of a couple shaky parks...
Thanks Lindsay for being the 'one' who allowed us all to blow off some steam.
Chilling and grilling. Anyone need a drink?
cool.gif
Butch
QUOTE(FosterImposters @ Mar 3 2008, 10:52 PM) *

Whew!!! ohmy.gif All that just to get a review of a couple shaky parks...
Thanks Lindsay for being the 'one' who allowed us all to blow off some steam.
Chilling and grilling. Anyone need a drink?
cool.gif


Think we should make it TWO.....
dbnck
QUOTE

I believe these are the same ones who waited for the buses to take them to safety.


I suspect it might be hard for an RVer to understand, but New Orleans is unique in that there are a lot of residents who have literally never left the city in their entire lives. They were born in New Orleans, their entire family is in New Orleans (and has been for generations), and they simply have never traveled outside the city.

Also, a lot of residents of New Orleans rely on public transportation.

Those factors, which would never occur to a lot of people and are completely outside any RVer's experience, complicated the evacuation effort immensely. It would be a piece of cake for me to hop in my car and get out of town. If I didn't have a friend or relative I could stay with, I would just drive around and find a hotel room, like I've done countless times before in my life, using a credit card with a high enough limit to cover any length of stay.

If I had an RV, it would be even easier, plus I would obviously be a veteran traveler and exceedingly familiar with getting away from home, and being away from home.

But what if I had never left the city before, I don't know anybody outside the city, I don't have a car, and I live paycheck to paycheck and don't have a credit card? How in the world would I evacuate?

And then the authorities who ordered the evacuation say there will be buses to get me out of town. I don't think it's unreasonable to wait for those buses, especially when you have no other choice.

To issue a harsh judgement against people who did is unfair and reveals an inability to put oneself in another's shoes. I would hope this inability was simply based on ignorance of the complex issues involved in this particular case, and not anything more sinister.
Big Ben
dbnck, You are a person who has learn from their travels. Congratulations. So many think that we all have had equal opportunities. It just not so in the real world. In many cases our government has created this monster. Many of those people can not read or right, much less drive.
Most of us have had a rather easy life and now live pretty well. How well would we have done if we were born into their situation?
denbroncs
QUOTE
How in the world do you have the adasity to say 2 1/2 years is enought to get Katrina's damage fixed up


If cities like Biloxi or Gulfport were currently in the same "boat" as New Orleans, you might have a point - but they aren't & you don't. The fact is, those cities have decided that instead of playing the political blame game & looking for assistance they have made the correct decision to help themselves. That is why they are light years ahead of New Orleans.

The amount of aid the New Orleans has received from the state, federal & local levels of government (not to mention the bevy of relief groups) is exponentially greater than the two cities listed above, yet they are both ahead of NO in terms of rebuilding and economy. Why do you think that is??

This is not about equal opportunity, or education. This is about getting off one's #$%#@ and helping others help you out. The demographics in Biloxi or Gulfport are not that different than New Orleans, yet they seem to be recovering rather nicely.
Butch
As to the subject..New Orleans... in my opinion the elected Officials, namely the Mayor on down through their government were unable, or unwilling to perform their duties to protect the citizens, for whatever their reason. They were also looking to someone else, State and the Federal governments to do for them what they could not do for themselves because they were unprepared to act. The inactivity caused finger pointing at everyone else by the cities' leaders who were unable to see the seriousness of what was unfolding before their eyes. The mayor's failure to respond in a timely manner caused many people to suffer an inhumane existence and yes, to some...death. Surely looks like the "handout" mentality starts with the very top leadership all the way to the person who is now living on the crime ridden streets. And yes this Mayor was voted into office again shortly after the destruction of the city. Power..glory..and money, but nothing for the common person, except more of the same as before... Truly a sad situation no matter how one looks at it.
Butch
denbroncs your posting was not there when I started my posting, but I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one that thinks the same.

Just a note, our local church and the Presbytery of Albany, of which we are part, have been sending rebuilders of homes and spirit to the Gulfport area two to three times a year since the beginning. The numbers of personnel vary as to availability, but the group is always appreciated. A job well done by all...

thanks
Beastdriver
Leftyf, Lindsay, and Denbroncs:

I could not agree with you more. Certainly, what hit New Orleans was catastrophic (not Catostfic as someone said), and our hearts and wallets went out to those folks who suffered so badly from this disaster. But enough is enough. Sure, some of these folks can't "read or right" as someone on this site said, but I know lots of folks who can't read or write but who have worked themselves out of poverty and dire circumstances. In my humble opinion, what we are seeing in New Orleans is a continuation of the "welfare syndrome" whereby people in major cities are on the dole and do nothing to improve their lot. Someone stated that these people don't have cars, and all their relatives live in New Orleans. Well, they've got feet and they can walk. With the millions of jobs (albeit low paying ones) in this country that are going begging, there is no excuse for many folks who continue to stay in New Orleans not to get out. It is easy to blame the government, the politicians, the lack of education and ability of people who live in New Orleans, and everybody else but the bottom line is summed up quite nicely in a modified old saying: All things come to he who waits.....and works like hell while he is waiting. I don't think Lindsay is displaying "adasity" (whatever the hell that means), by expressing his views on New Orleans nor is anyone else--pro or con. My mother taught my father how to read by using the newspaper as a teaching tool, and he always held menial, low paying jobs, yet he sired a family that produced one doctor, one lawyer, and one registered nurse. So don't give me tear-jerking stories about people who, going on almost three years after a disaster, still sit there on their butts asking for more handouts.
rodman
QUOTE(Beastdriver @ Mar 5 2008, 09:54 AM) *

Leftyf, Lindsay, and Denbroncs:

I could not agree with you more. Certainly, what hit New Orleans was catastrophic (not Catostfic as someone said), and our hearts and wallets went out to those folks who suffered so badly from this disaster. But enough is enough. Sure, some of these folks can't "read or right" as someone on this site said, but I know lots of folks who can't read or write but who have worked themselves out of poverty and dire circumstances. In my humble opinion, what we are seeing in New Orleans is a continuation of the "welfare syndrome" whereby people in major cities are on the dole and do nothing to improve their lot. Someone stated that these people don't have cars, and all their relatives live in New Orleans. Well, they've got feet and they can walk. With the millions of jobs (albeit low paying ones) in this country that are going begging, there is no excuse for many folks who continue to stay in New Orleans not to get out. It is easy to blame the government, the politicians, the lack of education and ability of people who live in New Orleans, and everybody else but the bottom line is summed up quite nicely in a modified old saying: All things come to he who waits.....and works like hell while he is waiting. I don't think Lindsay is displaying "adasity" (whatever the hell that means), by expressing his views on New Orleans nor is anyone else--pro or con. My mother taught my father how to read by using the newspaper as a teaching tool, and he always held menial, low paying jobs, yet he sired a family that produced one doctor, one lawyer, and one registered nurse. So don't give me tear-jerking stories about people who, going on almost three years after a disaster, still sit there on their butts asking for more handouts.


Beastdriver,

I probably haven't agreed with you on many of your opinion's but I really have tried to respect your opinion. This is one though I couldn't agree more. I am so tired of hearing how it seems to always be someone else's fault. Let's not forget the people that did open their own little business. I think we saw allot of them on the news helping themselves to whatever they could STEAL from the hard working people. As far as the FEMA trailers I saw what people did to them as well. Yes I would hate to try and live in them with a family but that gives them no right to destroy them. Thanks, Beastdriver for putting it much more kind than I could have. I'll probably get pounded for this but I really don't care.

Just my opinion,
Lindsay Richards
I wish I'd never brought it up. Sorry. I thing that anybody going in that direction should not give out their crecit card info over the phone based on what they saw on the internet or in the "books". Drive by and look for yourself and decide. I we had some trouble turning around afterwards though and I did not want to go around the block on a side street We also went to Biloxi and Gulfport and Waveland and heartly agree that they have stepped up to the plate and are busy rebuilding their own homes themselves as we did in 1960 after hurricane Dona. I might add that you can stay overnight at the gambling casinos for free also.
rodman
The way this thread has taken off in different directions is exactly the reason a drive by review of a park is not a good idea. You should at least have stayed 1 night to post a review. You can see people's different opinion's of things like FEMA trailers that have nothing to do with the park influencing their review.

As always just my opinion,
denbroncs
QUOTE(rodman @ Mar 7 2008, 10:40 AM) *

The way this thread has taken off in different directions is exactly the reason a drive by review of a park is not a good idea. You should at least have stayed 1 night to post a review.


Generally I agree with that. I will add the caveat that it might be appropriate to review a park when you have a reservation, but arrive only to find out your site was "given away" or that you are given a space different than what you reserved. Let me point out that "request" and "reserve" do not mean the same thing. If one does not understand the difference, it is in everyones best interest that a review is not posted until one is clear on those terms.

We've also driven into a park with the intent to stay, but found the bathrooms or grounds so appallingly bad that we have left. I feel the freedom to review those parks as well.
Lindsay Richards
different opinion's of things like FEMA trailers that have nothing to do with the park influencing their review.

I said I was through with this thread, but I just wanted to point out that the FEMA trailers and unsavory people were in the park and inside the fence around the park there to keep out people. I wouldn't have stayed for free and we Wal-Mart a lot.
Silvana
Lindsey,

I understood your post. I also appreciate you letting the rest of us in on what you saw. I did not take your post the way some people read it. I would like to see reviews of campgrounds people decided not to stay in.

On a separate note I would also say I agree with the people who said 2 1/2 years is enough. I worked in down town Long Beach many years ago. The people I met only wanted hand outs. They did not want to do anything for themselves. One example: I was working in the local supermarket.( I was a manager transferred in, it appears the locals did not want to work at the market.) Nobody used coupons with their grocery shopping. We had buy one get one free coupons, and Double coupons. I asked many customers why they did not use the coupons. They said they did not have the time to be bothered with them. These customers were on welfare. huh.gif
hitchup
We usually try to check out a park before hand if possible. Since we stay 4 mos at a time, we need safety and security. The website may show pristeen grounds and sound good with great adjectives, but it's not always the reality.

RVPark Reviews is the absolute best guide for helping us decide where to go most of the time. So I appreciate it when someone has taken the time to write up, "We drove through the CG and decided not to stay". Especially if they can list a few reasons. smile.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.