chubbyhubs

Just returned from a shake down ride for an coming trip. I've never really been into using the State facilities at parks since they attract the people I need a rest from. Well I decided to change that and rode the thirty miles to Champeog State Park. While 30 miles from Portland the park is located along the Willamette river and nestled amongst the fields. Just a one night trip to shake out the final kinks of my tour kit. The park facilities where amazing and even over shadowed the strawberry ice cone I'd had at the last fruit stand.

The hiker biker sites also had a shelter area for which could be used for a cooking gathering space. This shelter also came with a 4 lockers (you supply the pad lock) and each locker had it's own outlet. While the outlets only had one socket, it also had two USB ports for charging. In the end, I actually felt like an equal customer with the campers arriving with RV, and half the house. This experience demonstrated that the world can accommodate multi-modes of travel, but it requires citizen buy in to sustain the growth.

Bike with full tour kit. Felt good when I thought back and realized in one night I'd actually used everything, but a small shovel used for the business in less refined camp sites.


Camp site


Hiking Trail


A bunny before I spooked it


Me the next morning

Roody

Carfree camping is great! It's nice that some of the states are starting to include facilities for us.

cooker

This hearkens back to some of the ideas discussed in tandempower's previous threads on integrating biking and bike travel into daily life. The more wired we get, and the more facilities available to cyclists, the more it will be possible to work and travel by bike at the same time, even over larger distances than a daily commute.

I-Like-To-Bike

Yes it does.

chubbyhubs

The digital market place has also outdated the need to work and live in proximity to each other, for those who wish too. I was just surprised since i'd not seen it before.

I enjoyed working on my tablet at the picnic table. I will go again and will look at the resource for writing purposes.

Roody

I know you said they had recharge ports. Did they also have wi-fi?

chubbyhubs

no WiFi, my phone had WiFi. Additionally WiFi is nice to have but not always required just to get something accomplished. While it is nice for transporting information, on the other hand I have a cam ranger which allows me to create my own network between phone, tablet, and dslr. This network allows me to have a digital work flow that is able to process the data on sight. So I could see that camp site as an office.

Roody

I really don't want all that at a campsite. When I go camping, my dream is to get away from it all. But it's nice to include the luxuries in some campgrounds for those who do want it.

chubbyhubs

I found the facilities nice since they reflected what other sites had developed. On the other hand there is nothing better then walking in the wilderness without burden of modern tools. While maybe not an eagle scout. I did advance the knowledge of wilderness survival as a star scout. Which means I can make a knife, fire, and shelter without tools. All these skills go unused in developed camp grounds so I may as well enjoy the opportunity to charge my devices.

I just wanted to share since there're are discussions about other shared facilities between those who drive and those who don't. Speaking of which when talking to a couple about cycling the subject of road taxes came up. Taxes are fun to discuss since as a childless adult who owns a home and therefore pay lots for crap I don't use. The best part was watching how the dad of several children seemed to understand the point being made. Developments like this will further support people in learning that they don't have to rely on one mode for transportation. imo

MikeRides

When I camp, solo or with my kid, I tend to stay away from state parks. They're usually overpriced, overcrowded party grounds for city folks. That's not the crowd I'm interested in being among, besides most state campgrounds I've been to don't offer special biker/hiker rates, so I'm stuck paying the same price as Joe Six Pack who comes in with their house in-tow when all need is a patch of grass to pitch a tent on.

Occasionally I'll make an exception, but the last time we stayed at a state campground, I paid $40/night for a rocky campsite on top of our neighbor with 2 SUVs and 3 cabin size tents. After pedaling 50 miles we would have better off camped next to an active railroad line or on the side of the interstate, as our neighbors were up until 3-4am partying despite the 10pm curfew that the night watchman refused to enforce.

Walter S

That's why I usually prefer zero amenities. The likelihood of a quiet peaceful setting where you can relax in privacy thru the night is far greater. The expense is much less as well.

cooker

I agree with Roody that if one is on holiday in the wild, it is great to forget about work and electronics.

On the other hand, there's a long tradition of people bringing books they want to read on holidays, and most of us don't feel that this interferes with appreciating nature, so I don't really see how browsing the web is any different. Other vacationers, or long-distance travelers keep a diary or write letters home, or maybe engage in nature photography, and have sometimes ended up publishing the results to great public interest, so emailing/blogging/photo blogging/instagramming/tweeting as you go isn't really much different than that, except that it's more immediate. I don't object to some other wilderness camper carrying a book or a camera, and a tablet or a cellphone are really no different, especially if I can't see or hear them being used. So for those who want to stay "wired" while they're on the road or in the wilderness, I think access to (solar powered) electricity for recharging, and to a signal from a tower or satellite, is great, and it shouldn't interfere with the rest of us using or ignoring those services as we see fit.

cooker

I think it's also possible, as tandempower has discussed, and I think chubbyhubs may also be implying, that there's nothing stopping people with a bit of wanderlust from engaging in a kind of "e-hoboeing", ie. working here and there electronically, wherever you happen to be, as you wander about on a low-budget tour, or slowly make your way to some distant destination.

gerv 

If you work in the "e" business as I do, I can tell you there is nothing better than getting completely away from it all.

Although an eBook on a cell phone would be nice... pretty light... great as long as you can recharge.

Machka 

I'm glad you were able to experience all that. I've often mentioned to others in threads here that these things do exist, and you've got to get out and explore and find out.

We have had similar experiences in campgrounds in Canada, Australia, various places in Europe, and Japan.

And as long as you don't camp during a public holiday ... campgrounds are often relatively empty.

chubbyhubs

Well wanderlust is one element which helped create the world. For my part I'm looking at some ways to generate income. the income doesn't need to be large. Just something to offset expenditures. Additionally sites like gofundme are nothing more than a new age way of hustling change. As a skills trainer I'm developing a process which will allow me to travel and teach computer literacy like an evangelist. Microsoft already uses the wording for their online training site. Either way l have the resources to travel for a year before having to worry about that aspect. And facilities like the ones I mentioned earlier will be nice when accessible.

Roody

I totally agree. This can also increase safety, if people can keep their phones charged in case of emergencies.

cooker

That's how I think as well, but it doesn't have to be like that for everybody. Some people may be happy to mix work and recreation more than we have done in the traditional "at work" vs "on vacation" model, and being able to work electronically actually helps them "get away" more.

tandempower

I wish governments would just make tax exemptions and liability-exemptions for land-owners who make spots available for hiker/biker camping. Parks, conservation lands, and empty parcels along bike routes could be fitted with cold water/shower facilities and composting toilets to make long distance hiking/biking more comfortable. Hiking/biking are hard enough by virtue of the effort involved without the added deterrent of worrying about where to stay and when you'll be able to get clean and refill water. There is prejudice against non-motorized travel and it is sad how many people aren't benefitting more from distance biking because sleeping and showering are inconvenient and expensive.

Machka 

Many of us manage just fine with what is already available.


Especially given that there are so many options already available.

Tony Marley

Oregon's hiker-biker sites are nice. I have really appreciated them through the years when touring.

Roody

There is the conservancy movement and the land bank movement. Do these fit the bill?

tandempower

Machka, this sums up your response to practically any suggestion for something new. It's like you found a clever way of just telling people 'no' to things they want because you like denying people's wishes for things. The negativity always brings me down a little and I wish you would just keep it to yourself if you don't have some logical argument for your position beyond just saying what's already available is sufficient.

Rails-to-Trails conservancy is the only conservancy I know of. I don't really understand all the politics of bike roads, etc., but I'm happy when they are built and maintained and I just try to keep my mind and mouth open toward the purpose of supporting their continuing expansion and improvement. The main challenges I see currently is to get more shade on paths where the sun can be very hot for cyclists, and getting more convenience in terms of sleeping and staying clean (and cleaning clothes) on multiday trips. I would take a lot more multiday trips if I didn't have to think so much about where I was going to sleep, how much money it's worth, and getting clean before going into civilized venues. . . and of course if I could get more time off work.

I just googled the land bank movement and it sounds interesting. I don't think it has anything to do with making sleeping areas available to hiker/biker travelers, though. It seems to be more about revitalizing abandoned areas and bringing up property values. I don't really care about property values because they're a double-edged sword. They motivate people to take better care of property, yes, but they also deter people from having more free time because you have to make more money to afford more expensive property.

I'm more interested in laws and policies that would make it easier and more secure for land owners to allow hiker/biker camping on their land. Tax-exemption and liability-exemption are the key where private land-owners are concerned. As for public land, I think it would help to replace designated camping areas with leave-no-trace camping policies and then set up amenities like composting toilets and simple showers to attract users to certain areas over others.

In some places (and I won't mention any names), designated camping area policies, fees, and other laws and policies serve as deterrents for freely camping on multiday trips. It's as if they want to prohibit us from sleeping anywhere for free. It's an obligatory economic participation attitude. Land and private residents need to be protected from abuse, harassment, nuissance, etc. Leave-no-trace camping guidelines should achieve this, as well as providing composting toilets, water-sources, and showers along bike routes. I have also seen areas with lean-to shelters or other cleared camping spots that charge a small fee to cover the cost of improvements to the land and maintenance. Still, I think the line is crossed when policies go from providing facilities as an option to muscling people into using them by deterring them from free camping. In some areas, free camping may become a nuissance or an abuse to the land, even with leave-no-trace guidelines, but unless absolutely necessary, I don't think this freedom should be obstructed. Certainly not for the sake of obliging commerce.

Roody

OTOH, if you live next to a bike trail, you want some control exerted over who camps where. One thing that deters epople from granting easements for bike trails is that they're worried people will end up camping a few yards from their house, staying for months, barbecuing their small pets, and keeping them up all night with loud rap music. You have to ease their minds somehow.

tandempower

Leave-no-trace camping guidelines can include leaving no audible trace, such as music, no smellable trace, such as smoke from a campfire, barbecue, or other cooking. Obviously the main concern is enforcement. Guidelines can prescribe use and behavior but the question is what to do when people don't respect the guidelines and others. Enforcement is a hassle and preventative policies that prohibit camping altogether can avoid that hassle, but at the expense of those who would like to take multiday trips and camp/sleep freely along the way.

I live very close to a bike road and I completely understand apprehension toward offensive (ab)uses of the area. For a long time, homeless people free-camped in an area about a mile from where I live and, although I respected their right to use the land respectfully, I found that there was inadequate enforcement of various offenses from littering to noise to drug use and prostitution. Still, I lament the idea of prohibiting everyone from free camping because there are bad apples who ruin it for the rest.

I think ultimately the problem is a little like what gun rights supporters mean when they say that outlawing guns will result in only outlaws having guns. In the case of free camping, if it is illegal then the only people who camp will be criminals. If a culture of respectful and respectable free camping was allowed to grow, people might find that it is a benefit and asset to a community to have free camping areas, rather than a detriment or blight.

I have hiked/biked in areas with strict prohibitions and restrictions against even walking and cycling on certain (golf cart) paths and such highly controlled gated communities have an oppressive atmosphere. I much prefer more free areas where people are allowed to use public space how they please, for the most part, as long as they don't violate laws and create nuisance and harassment for others. Considering that oppressive laws and prohibitions themselves are a nuisance that allow police and locals to harass others, I think they should be repealed and replaced with fairer use policies such as leave-no-trace public areas guidelines.