Interesting post.
We have a campgournd as a client. The following is my response ~ not theirs (and, quite frankly, I don't know what their response would be. They're good people, business owners with a social conscience. We've discussed some of this, but our client brought up so many ways of looking at things that I don't recall his stance so much as the wealth of the number of ways to look at the situation. Anyhow, the parenthesis here were to emphasize this is my opinion, not that of the owners at
www.DellsTimberLand.com).
Now, as a citizen, I love the fact that the state provides great resources for camping ~ Wisconsin in particular. I don't know whether they do so at a loss or a profit. Regardless, I assume that State Parks bring a lot of vacation dollars into our economy.
If you look at the most popular State Parks, Devils Lake, Peninsula, and Governor Dodge, it is clear that the State has a monopoly on the very best locations. That is, I believe, as it should be. These areas are jewels, and should be held in the public trust. It is right that they be available for shared use by us, the public.
On the flip side, put yourself in the shoes of the business owner, doing his or her best to provide a great camping experience for customers. The absolute best locations are taken by the State. The State ~ that's one heck of a competitor...a competitor that doesn't have to worry so much about gas prices, labor costs, taxes, etc.... Sure, they have budgets and such. It just isn't the same for a State Park manager as it is for a campground owner, though, who faces a 'compete or perish' situation.
State Parks can live on, virtually no matter how they are managed. The managers of State Parks aren't putting their own houses and credit on the line to finance improvements, like electric sites.
The state contracts out a lot of services. If they had a department for website building, though, and they decided to do something like our site, theBubbler.com, I'd be miffed, and part of me would say "It's about time" while another part of me would say, "You've got no business doing what I'm doing!" I guess if I were a campground owner and I could try to limit competition from the biggest imaginable competitor, I might do just that.
That said, if I shift to a consumer viewpoint (and I'm a bigger than average consumer of State Park services), I'd have to say that I trust that the State doesn't just simply roll over and automatically comply with the wishes of private campground owners. I trust that the State manages long term needs to accommodate their guests' needs
while balancing their interests with the interests of owners in private industry. That would be prudent, and would provide the best macroeconomic yields for the entire hospitality sector, which in turn tends toward the best long-term outcomes for both the public and private sectors.
I like that you read this somewhere and confirmed what you read in a conversation, then posted here. This would be a fascinating subject to explore in more depth. Perhaps one day, if I'm lucky, I'll have the opportunity to interview a number of people in the public and private sectors to provide the various viewpoints. In the end, of course, there is no single right answer. Their is simply, if we're all lucky, a tendency toward optimizing the resources available to all of us, whether delivered via public or private enterprises.
Thanks for the post, j10asen. Hope to hear more from you.
Regards,
Keith
