Ontario Provincial Park User Fees for 2012

In a post earlier this year, I was lamenting the fact it cost $660 for two people to go camping in Ontario Provicial Parks for a week and started looking into the costs in Ontario vs. elsewhere.  The Parks increased their user fees a huge amount in 2010 but eased off, having no increase in 2011.  In any case it is an interest of mine to monitor the costs of Ontario park fees.
The 2012 user fees are now published, but the data is separated from 2011 to 2012 so I figured I'd take the opportunity to do some analysis of the fee increases for the year, especially in light of the province's survey this past summer that they were hinting of increasing fees even more.
While it is unfortunate the province is still raising fees, at least it is not a drastic increase. Car camping and reservation fees have increased, and the rest of the fees have remained the same without cost increases.
Car camping user fees have increased about 2-3% and reservation fees have increased 20% for call center reservations and 15% for internet reservations. I still feel the reservation fees are rather steep - after all the reservations are completely automated for car camping, and really I don't see why the system can't handle backcountry reservations too without having to call in somewhere, talk to people and have to make instant changes of plans if the area you were planning on going to was already reserved.

Anyways, here's the link to the spreadheet I used to analyze the user fee data, also shown embedded below:

Objective, Exhaustive, Thorough Reviews and Product Design

Different people have different ideas of what a review is.  There’s lots of review sites floating around the web, but a huge number of them only offer an off-the-cuff glancing idea of someone’s impression of an item, usually being far from objective or thorough.  This is all just fluff and doesn’t benefit anyone except for the writer’s ego, and maybe their bank account.  What I like to do is be very objective, focus intensely, and thoroughly examine every aspect of an item to give my opinion and possibly recommendations of a design in the end.  If this sounds like I am an engineer - well,  that’s because that’s what I am. 

I am both a product designer and engineering manager by profession.  I design machines.  It’s my job to take the parameters that our customers are asking for, translated through our sales and marketing department and design a new product, the outcome of which is hopefully the result of the best of the thousand or ten thousand choices you have made over the course of a design.  I don’t know why, but it seems everyone wants to be a designer, and everyone also seems to think it’s an easy and simple thing to design something, but it’s quite the opposite in reality.  Perhaps the illusion that supports this is a good design is very simple, yet how you got to that design is a very complex process.  You have to be thinking of an enormous number of things at the same time, in order to come up with the best design solution for a product.  Some of the many things you may need to focus on while designing a product are:  performance, manufacturability, product cost, form factor/size, product lifecycle, durability, ergonomics, failure modes and their effects.  You have to be analytical and objective, have a sense of practicality, a great knowledge of materials, manufacturing methods and a good understanding on how people would like to use a product. Those who are the best at design have vision.  To be conscious of all of these things at the same time is sometimes almost incomprehensible – mind boggling and a very tough thing to do, especially when you have to design complex systems of subsystems.  When you design something complex, it quickly becomes apparent that there are always balances and tradeoffs with everything, as there often is in life.  The best design is something that takes all these areas, and based on their relative importances, and choices you have, finds the optimum balance of all of these areas.  It takes much practice for this design process and I will forever be learning more -  always a student, never a master, similar to photography.

So, I am saying that, because of the way I think day to day, I’m good at doing writeups(if you prefer, over the term ‘review’),  on products to examine every aspect of their design and function, with respect to maybe not by what they are intended for, but how I personally use them – these things may be different.  I like to do this because I find it satisfying to pull those thoughts out of my head and onto a page/document.  Some people call it ‘learning what we already know’.  Bottom line, it makes me think of the root causes of why I like something or why I don’t and how something could potentially be improved, the strengths and weaknesses of something, not unlike what I do everyday in my job, but it's good to apply it to my personal passions and hobbies, this blog focusing on outdoor gears and adventures and outdoor photography.  The other challenge I like is trying to write in an entertaining style, unlike this rant, which is kind of dry :) 

In any case, my plan is to be posting some reviews of the outdoor and photography gear I use regularly, so I can learn what I know about the gear I use, and hopefully anyone else reading this can possibly get little tidbits of insight as well.

Frontenac Park

Frontenac Park is like the little sibling of the go-to Ontario wilderness areas that everyone flocks to - namely Algonquin Park and Killarney.  As such, many people don’t even know about it.  It has a good network of hiking trails, 48 backcountry campsites and is closer than the others.

I normally take a long(er) trip somewhere in the Autumn – late September or early October.  I love the outdoors in the fall…  the colors, the sights, the smells, not to mention the lack of bugs and cooler weather is great for hiking.  So, this year since I had not been to Frontenac before, I decided check the place out with 4 days of backpacking (see trip report here).  There’s some quite good paddling available there as well, but I decided to hoof it this time.

The park boasts 160kms of trails on their website…  I think that is a little on the generous side, whoever came up with that number.  I hiked an obvious majority of the park, and did a bunch of bushwhacking looking for points of interest as well as backtracking in some areas to get to another area of the park, and I ended up with 75kms according to my GPS, which is less than half of the official statement of 160kms.  I think the true number is probably in the low 100s, even with portages counted as hiking trails.

The terrain in the area is quite unique.  Even though there is nothing in the area that could remotely be called a mountain, the landscape is quite hilly with steep granite ridges and valleys.  It seems the beavers have moved into the area somewhat recently (within 100-200 years ago), as almost all of the depressions have been dammed up and are lakes or bogs, there are dead tree stumps sticking up out of the water, showing the relative recentness of the dams.  There are no rivers or large creeks in the area, only small streams and brooks.  The forests are almost entirely hardwood forests, with only the odd conifer.  The west side of the park has a little acidic area with conifers - pine and tamarack trees.  The majority of the park is former land used by homesteaders scratching out a hard living, mica/feldspar mines, and hardwood logging camps, the abandoned remains of all which can be seen.  There’s even ‘Old Thor’, an abandoned truck used for roadmaking in the area, off to the side of one of the trails, and a large old boiler for one of the mines, Tetts Mines can be found in the woods.  The official park map has many points of interest such as these and most can be found if you do a little off-trail exploring to look for them.  The trails in the northern part of the park are mainly the old roads from the former inhabitants.  The area around Slide Lake in the south East is the most scenic and rugged – I would recommend visiting that area if you are only there for a short period.

The campsites are arranged in ‘clusters’ , with one cluster usually being four campsites.  There’s 13 different clusters, making 48 total reservable backcountry sites in the park.  There’s no car camping available.  And by calling these backcountry sites, I’d have to classify these as deluxe backcountry sites.  Each site has a leveled tent pad (complete with permit holder for some reason), a set eating/fire area complete with a picnic table, a steel fire pit with grill (the standard issue provincial park type), and either one or usually two well made semi-permanent benches made from split logs.  Not only that, there’s either one or two shared outhouses/privies for the cluster, made from fiberglass….  and the kicker, they’re stocked with toilet paper, too!  To go beyond that, some sites even have set up bear rope/pack hanging areas with some chain/wire/tube/pipe contraptions between trees at a designated spot near each campsite.  These amenities do make the camping more comfortable but at the same time gives me the feeling that I am almost car camping.  I could personally do without the extras, but I don’t mind them.  Some sites are very close together and would be a bit annoying at busy times, where others are spaced apart.  Two of the three nights I was the only one in the cluster I was in.

Another cool aspect of the park is it’s open year round and offers many courses to teach outdoor/wilderness skills.

As far as the quality of backpacking goes, I would even go so far as to say Frontenac trails are more scenic than Algonquin backpacking trails, a lot more variety to look at, although it doesn’t feel quit as remote, as you will encounter more day trippers since any part of the park can be reached as a day trip.  In any case, I’d certainly recommend a trip here for a few days, there’s lots to see!

Links:

Everytrail trip report

Frontenac Provincial Park Wikipedia

Friends of Frontenac Park

2011 Map of the park

Garmin GPSMAP 62S Review

Garmin GPSMAP 62S Review

Well, I’ve now been using the GPSMAP 62s for a full season.. I thought I would post a follow up review to my First Impressions Review, with the good points and point I feel could be improved upon with this device. 

I generally use a GPS for their basic functions, seeing where I am on a map or how to get to a place or waypoint, either by road or straight line.. I also collect the tracks from my trips for geotagging photos and keep records on my trips, and I use the GPS to look for nearby points of interest such as gas stations and restaurants on occasion.  Other than that, I don’t use (or need ) a bunch of the bells and whistles that come with the unit.  So instead of many paragraphs, here’s a quick list of my opinion of the good points and ones that can use improvement

Garmin GPSMAP 62s Good Points
- Profile configurations, can easily switch between automotive and recreational
- Ability to load and store different types of maps
- 'recalculate on road’ feature is very useful when tracking to a waypoint, to switch from straight line to rout along roadways
- Beeps are good for signaling turns when in automotive mode, although it would be good for it to be a bit louder
- The ability to attach the GPS to a variety of mounts is great
- Good shape for holding in hand
- Battery saving mode is great, so is battery life in general
- Screen modes highly configurable to display data you want in each view or mode
- 3 axis compass is very accurate and better than previous generations
- Slot for hand strap/lanyard is great (lost my previous Colorado 300 because it didn't have this)

- 

Garmin GPSMAP 62s Could Use Improvement
- Could be lighter, slimmer
- Processor is very slow, painful to do spell searches, and building the maps when zooming out is sometimes extremely slow
- Could use a waypoint management system to separate into folders.  Scrolling through many waypoints to find the one you want and spell searching are both painful
- Has many features that are not necessary and can be trimmed from the device – the share wirelessly, and GPS antenna connector features, among many software features are unnecessary in my opinion. 
- Mini USB connector should be switched to micro USB..  all phones have switched to micro now, so I wouldn’t need two car adapters
- Screen resolution very low, it would be nice for it to be significantly larger and higher resolution
- Instead of a rubber stopper type of water seal for the connectors at the back can be a more proper waterproof door, similar to newer waterproof cameras
- Plastic screen scratches somewhat easily
- Operating system layout is very complicated and needs a while to get used to remembering what you have to do to get what you want from the device
- I loathe Mapsource desktop software for loading maps, managing waypoints, tracks etc.  It feels like an outdated early 90s software.  The interface can be much more intuitive, slick and  much easier to use as well as more functional.  The search function is downright horrendous – you much exact match what you are looking for, or else you won’t find it
- Switch from AA to Lithium Ion battery source?  That is a tradeoff that would have pros and cons.

A note on screen protectors

The screen is lexan or some type of plastic, which can get scratched easily rubbing on branches, lying in the bottom of a canoe, or dropped while bike riding…   yeah I scratched the screen a bit by these things.  So I ordered a Protech screen protector.  The application is very simple, jut wet in soapy water, apply and squeegee off the excess water with the card provided – if you mess up you can peel it back off and reapply.  It is ultra clear and I don’t notice it’s on there at all – no bubbles, no fingerprints from the application.  It even hides some old scratches that are on there before application.  I would recommend these for sure.

This is much better than most screen protectors that once you begin to stick it on, you are at the point of no return and are more likely to have bubbles, fingerprints on them.  Some screen protectors affect the quality of viewing the screen, but the Protech is invisible.

Summary
All these things said, the GPSMAP 62s does what I need it to satisfactorily, like I said I only use certain basic functions.  I would recommend it, but it would be good to improve some things on it. 
In the end, I just want a  simple GPS unit that does basic functions, but does them very efficiently and well.  For my use, I just want a stripped down, lightweight GPS unit that has a fast processor, excellent battery life and large high resolution non-touch screen.  It would be nice if a company can make a unit like that, instead of spending effort adding functions such as cameras, sharing wirelessly, antenna jacks, touch screen and other things and other BS 'value added' things that just add weight and cost for features I don't want or need.
 If anyone can recommend a better unit than this that does these things I want, let me know!

Edible BEAR'S HEAD TOOTH (a.k.a. Hericium Americanum) MUSHROOM!

I find mushrooms fascinating.  Even with the strange variety of life of this planet, fungi and mushroom seem to be even stranger to me, like they are from a different planet.   Walking through the forests, especially during early autumn the ground is covered with many varieties of mushrooms.  The first time I happened upon this strange mushroom (or rather, at least the first time I remember seeing it) was last year near Goderich on the Maitland Trail.  This one is certainly different than all other types of mushrooms I have seen, a sort of cascade of icicles or tooth-like formations, coming out of a log.  Apparently they are relatively common in North American hardwood forests.  Looking through my Mushrooms of Ontario and Eastern Canada field guide, I identified it as Bear’s Head Tooth mushroom, or Hericium americanum.  Researching online, I found that they are quite edible and delicious.  The good thing about these is that no other mushroom out there really looks like them, so identification is quite easy.  There are a few varieties but they are all edible.  Usually found in late summer/early fall growing from dead hardwood tree trunks lying on the ground, they sometimes can grow from living damaged hardwood trees as well.

On my hike this past weekend, about 500m where I started on the trail, I came across a patch of these growing from some downed logs.  I returned after I finished my hiking loop to collect them and eat ‘em to see how they tasted.  Word on the internet is they taste similar to lobster, and some places they even cultivate them commercially in sawdust, although I don’t think that’s anywhere near where I live, since I’ve certainly never seen or heard of it.  I gathered about 5 clumps of them from the one log they were growing from in the dark with my headlamp.    Some of the clumps were quite large, and others were a bit smaller but fresher looking.

The next day I wanted to cook ‘em up..  so I took one of the smaller clumps and attempted to clean them from the pine needles and miscellaneous forest dirt that was between the ‘teeth’.  I suppose one of the downsides of these, dirt is kind of hard to get out of them.  I cut off some of the outer bits, and the inner portions were relatively clean. 
 

The insides are a nice white color, and don’t discolor much after slicing.  It is quite strange looking – to me it’s not unappealing, but certainly doesn't look like something tasty.  The look of it reminds me of tripe...  which I will eat on occasion.

I then fried it up in butter with half a clove of garlic, salt and pepper.  It darkens a little and turns slightly red.  Tasting it, it certainly tastes mild and mushroomy.  I’m not so sure about the lobster taste, but it certainly is edible.  It is slightly tough on some of the bits, possibly because I slightly overcooked it.  It would be pretty good in a wild mushroom soup- I think I'll make this out of the remaining mushrooms I scored.

A few more links: 
Bear's Head Tooth Mushroom
Mushroomexpert.com  

American Mushrooms

Maha MH-C9000 WizardOne Charger-Analyzer Review

Powerex Maha MH-C9000 WizardOne Charger-Analyzer Review

So many devices use AA and AAA batteries nowadays.  If you are using rechargeables for your home remote control, thermostat, or whatever, you can throw in any old ones and when the batteries are low, just recharge them.  But, when camping or roaming the backcountry, I want to know that I have good batteries.  I'm sure most people have put a set of freshly charged batteries in a device, only to have it crap out in an hour or so of use...  one of the batteries are bad and can't hold much of a charge anymore, and usually you can't tell which one is bad and which one is good.

There's quite a few things that would decrease a battery's capacity - overheating, quick charging, too many charges, getting damp, natural variation, age, among them.   Well then, how do you tell good batteries that have lots of capacity from bad ones?  I probably have 50+ batteries for all my random devices, and want to use the best ones that I know are good for my GPS and other devices, especially when a charger isn't exactly close at hand.  For the last couple years, I have been using the Powerex Maha MH-C9000 WizardOne Charger-Analyzer..  whew, that's a long name.  But this thing is the best charger period for AA and AAA.  It holds and charges up to 4 AA or 4AAA at a time on independent circuits and is larger than most 4AA chargers due to the LCD screen readout below the slots and is much more than your run of the mill charger with the light goes on when charging and off when it's finished charging.  It can analyze the power capacity of each battery, and the charging rate is variable.  It has five mode choice selections when you pop a new battery in - CHARGE, REFRESH/ANALYZE, BREAK IN, DISCHARGEand CYCLE.  

By default it's CHARGE, if you don't select a different one within a couple seconds, it starts charging automatically at a default charge rate of 1000ma.  If you select charge before the couple seconds are up, you can then change the charging current.  The lower the charge current, the longer it takes, but it is gentler on the battery, and will also charge to a higher capacity.  1000ma charge is the default and that is a standard charge rate, able to charge high capacity NiMH AAs in 2.5 hours from fully drained.  It keeps track of each battery slot and will tell you the amount (in maH) it charged the battery when you popped in has finished charging.  This is good info. but it won't tell you if a battery is bad, since the battery is likely to have had a partial charge when you popped it in so you won't know the full capacity...  REFRESH/ANALYZE is what you want for telling the capacity of the battery.

REFRESH/ANALYZE charges the battery from whatever state it was in until it is full, drains it completely, then charges it until full.  This way you can tell after the battery has completed cylcling,  the exact capacity of each battery.  It takes a while for this cycle to complete, but it's worth it to find out the exact capacity of the battery sometimes. You can also alter the default charge and drain rates from the default as well, to customize it for each battery.  I do this with my batteries a couple times a year and sort them by capacities.  I mainly use Duracell high capacity 2650maH AA batteries at the moment, so I sort them in three piles - anything over 2400 is great and I use them in my GPS and other backwoods and high drain devices(such as a camera flash).  2000-2400 are OK batteries and I save them for around the house use.  Lower capacities than that I usually recycle them.  I mark the batteries with different sharpie pen colors so I can tell which battery is which capacity, last I analyzed them.

BREAK IN mode is for brand new batteries.  Gives them a few full cycles to 'season' the battery and get it charged to it's maximum capacity before first use.  This one takes quite a while to complete.

DISCHARGE mode drains the battery - I don't use this one much.

CYCLE I use someties to try to revive batteries that are borderline.  I'll cycle them 5 times or so to see if the capacity increases.

Anyways, this is a great charger and a good tool to have, one of only a few that can tell you the exact capacity of each battery and will break new ones in to get the most out of your battery.  If you are going to have a charger, might as well have one that can tell you how good your batteries are, right?

Maha also offers other chargers - some will do up to 8 batteries, and some simpler car adapter travel chargers  don't have an LCD screen in addition.

Oh, and by the way, some more battery info - standard NiMH batteries such as the Duracell ones I am using self drain pretty quickly after charging so you have to charge them right before using them, which isn't always easy or quick to do.  There are new ones out recently that have low self-discharging rates, these will hold a 75% of their charge after a year.  I just ordered a pack of Sanyo Eneloop XX batteries.  These just came out a year ago and are the first high capacity low self-discharge batteries.  Quite expensive right now (about $20 for 4AA), but if I like them, I may start switching over to them...  I'll do a review on those when I use them a bit .  Another FYI - there's three different types of Eneloops - Eneloop lite (low capacity), regular Eneloops (medium capacity), and Eneloop XX (high capacity).

The NeoAir Balloon

 

Therm-a-Rest NeoAir Review

When I first started backpacking, I remember lugging around an enormous egg crate foam mattress with a green plastic sheet backer about a third the size of me, when I was a wee one.  It was huge and not super comfortable, to boot, not to mention other issues with it, but things have changed.
A couple Boeing engineers happened came up with the original Thermarest self-inflating mattress sometime in the 70s - two nylon sheets sealed, with a piece of foam between them.  These started becoming very popular in the 80s and 90s.  They were great, much smaller than the eggcrate style foamy, but a bit heavy.  I found them a bit of a pain to pack, kneeling on them and squeezing out the air.
So, when Therm-a-rest came out with their next generation pad - the NeoAir, I was excited.  They branded this thing as a new style air mattress.  It has no foam in it, and as a result, can fold up to a size about 2/3 of a pint glass.  This is so small, I have lost it in the stern of my kayak because it had gone all the way to the tip and got lodged way back there due to it's small size. Sweet, not to mention it is super light.  After getting my first NeoAir a couple years ago I was excited, it seemed to be everything I wanted in a mattress - small, lightweight, comfortable.  It even has a silver rubberized side to prevent it from sliding around in the tent, and was a warm three season mattress to boot, thanks to the reflective liner.  It is expensive though, coming in at about $140CAD at MEC.  It is kind of a ripoff that they make you buy a stuffsack for it separately for another $12.50CAD for a small nylon sack, instead of including it with the mattress.  This brings it up to a hefty 152.50 for just a small air mattress.  Some comments I read online say it is a little noisy, but I only found that is the case when it isn't blown up very firm.  These are more difficult to inflate than the standard old school thermarest, since you have to blow it entirely up, but on the other hand it is much easier to pack and deflate.  I can roll it up just holding it in my hands - no need for kneeling on it any more.
I was completely happy with this mattress, except for when I was in Massasauga a year and a half ago, during the middle of the night, I heard some loud popping sounds coming from my mattress only to find out the internal baffles had blown in the mattress. The baffles inside the mattress that keeps it's shape seem to separate from the sidewalls if you blow it up a bit too much and parts of it start turning into a balloon while you are lying on it, rendering the mattress useless from the rather uncomfortable odd shape it now is.  Once one baffle starts going, others go quickly, leaving you with this weird shaped inflatable that can't be used for sleeping on.  This certainly can be a pain if you are in the backcountry and have many days left to go on your trip.  So, when I got back I sent it back and got a new one through warranty, no questions asked.

Only problem is, now this new one has done the same thing after about 15 sleeps - the baffles are blown and I just sent it back to Cascade Designs for warranty service.  While they send me a new one no questions asked, it still is a pain - I am out of a mattress for a few weeks and it cost me 15 bucks to send it back to the states.  Both seemed to happen after about 15 days of use.
 I suspect this happens with the baffles because I like mine firm and blow it up rather firm, even if only with my mouth. There certainly isn't any warning in the literature that says it can do this if blown up too much.  It is unfortunate that this happens, because I love this mattress until the baffles fall apart.  I wish they would spend the time to figure out how to make the internal construction stronger and it shouldn't self destruct like this, no matter how hard my lungs blow it up.  Even if I don't blow it up firm, I would suspect it would give out rather quickly as it seems to be designed a bit too close to the edge of structural integrity.
I can't really recommend this mattress because losing your mattress from a structural flaw just shouldn't happen, but this seems to do it consistently if you blow this up a bit too much.

High Costs of Camping in Ontario Provincial Parks

Camping used to be a low cost vacation option.   However, it is a bit of a sore point with me that it certainly isn’t anywhere near being cheap any more in Ontario, and it’s getting more expensive every year even inflation adjusted.   I will mention park fees were frozen from 2010-2011, but there was a rather hefty increase in 2010, and Ontario still stands head and shoulders above all other province/states in it's comparatively soaring user fees for camping.  As well, with the introduction of the HST instantly added 8% more to everyone's camping user fee bill.

Recently, for 8 days of a mix of backcountry camping and car camping in Algonquin Park,  it cost an exorbitant total of $660 dollars for camping user fees for two people, after reservation fees and HST were tacked on.  Extend that to a month’s length and you get an absurd cost of $2400 a month.  In any city (well, maybe not Toronto) for that amount you can rent a large house or very well appointed multi room luxury condo for a month…  and all I get for camping is the privilege to use a patch of dirt to pitch my tent,  sometimes water supplies and garbage disposal for a few items, possibly a shower.  I don’t know what others seem to think about this, but I think it’s somewhat of a travesty.    Ontario has one of, if not the highest user fees for camping in North America.

The Ministry of Natural Resources claims 80% is paid by the user and 20% is funded by the government.  I dunno, maybe there’s some serious management issues, since I seriously still don’t know why it costs so much to run these parks – maybe it’s time to look at the ledger books and trim some fat, or get the logging companies that exploit the parks to pay more.   I don’t see the need to build and fund mega-interpretive centers such as the new ones in Algonquin Park and the French River for the drive through tourists, or maybe the bus tourists who go to these centers should pay user fees to visit them.   I also would prefer to lower the base camping fee and charge people per use for the showers as is done at many parks outside the province.  Many times I am just using a park for a stopover for continuing driving all day or launching point for backcountry trip and I am only there overnight, 12 hours max., using no amenities except for the toilet.

Furthermore, it is the "'Friends of {insert park name here}" groups that produce the value-added  amenities that you pay for while purchasing documents: producing maps and interpretive guides for trails, not the Parks themselves.

After some research, I found that 80% of user fee recovery is much more than other provinces (some 20% or less).  Or perhaps Dalton McGuinty can spend some of the mega profits (a.k.a. taxes)  the province reaps from the LCBO for some park funding, huh?

I don’t mind paying fair camping fees for the upkeep and staff, but in my humble opinion they are beyond fair right now.  I think people should pay no fees for backcountry as in Manitoba, not $10-$20(plus HST) each person per night, for something that requires essentially no upkeep.  I would gladly volunteer to construct a backcountry camp site, including building a thunderbox out of my own pocket in exchange for a lifetime free backcountry pass.

The reservation fees for Ontario Parks are out of hand, and they use these to unfairly pump up their revenue as well.  Even if you reserve sites for multiple places at the same time, they will charge a reservation fee for each time you move location, which is common in places such as Algonquin Park which have multiple locations.  We went from Achray-backcountry-Achray-Kearney Lake-backcountry-Mew Lake last trip in 8 days.  For the reservation, they thought it was fair to charge 5 x $8.50=42.50 (+HST) alone in reservation fees for this (they did us the favor of  waiving one out of 6 of the fees after complaining about multiple fees).

Another way to get gouged while camping is to get charged for parking fees when car camping or using put-ins for backcountry sites..  $13.50 per night for parking is charged at Chickanishing creek in Killarney to use the crown land backcountry sites on Georgian Bay (which they can’t charge site fees for, so they make up with elevated parking fees).  A second vehicle at any car camping campsite is good for an $8.00-$11.00/day gouging fee by the park.  Other places such as in French River, at the privately run Hartley Bay, the marina which is the only option in the area, takes advantage by charging $10.00/day vehicle parking fees plus another $10.00  ‘launch fee’ for each boat to use their dock to walk your canoe or kayak out and put it in the water.  I don't see how anyone can justify with dignity charging $8-$13.50/day so I can park my car on a 6 x 10 foot patch of dirt in the middle of nowhere.

In addition to this, the Ontario Parks charge $7.50 for a bag of firewood nowadays, most of the time substandard wood at that.  The majority of the time I buy wood at a Park now, it’s wet, if not totally soaked and doesn’t even light without some accelerant in one form or another.

The list is quite long for the user fees you get charged while camping in Ontario Parks, but each 8 or 12 dollar fee adds up quickly.  The fees charged are spread out like that so it's not such a sticker shock until you see the final bill.  Bottom line is we got charged $660 for 8 days of camping for two people with a tent, and that's even before the money I spent on ice and firewood at the park stores, and the canoe rental fees I spent in addition.   I guess camping is for the rich now.

These high fees leave me with a sour taste in mine and many other campers mouths and are pushing people away from camping and enjoying the outdoors and I find it unfortunate.  For me, it won’t stop me from my journeys as there is little alternative, other than using crown land for backcountry trips, but it is a thorn in my side to be felt like I am being taken advantage of each time I go camping. I am sure less and less people will chose to go camping for a vacation if the fees are raised any more than they already are, in this already depressed and fragile economy.

The unsettling thing is, despite the already high fees, Ontario Parks has been sending out surveys to people who have gone camping recently.  The survey starts out asking how you liked the service, but then starts asking your thoughts on potentially paying more for camping, trying to get a feel for what the response would be if they hiked fees even more than they currently are.  I'm sure most people will answer with a resounding NO.
Here's the survey:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/2011CampgroundSurveyEnglish

Here’s a quick comparative cost table I threw together:

Note:  Some areas there is a range of costs from park to park, and wherever possible a typical cost is used.  And please add HST to your Ontario bill.

Also Some Related Links:

Ontario provincial park userfees highest in North America

A comparison Between Ontario and British Columbia provincial parks management models 
Canoe camping in provincial parks with a large family is darn expensive!  
Countylive.ca - Price gouging in Ontario's provincial parks 
Kingston WhigStandard - Ontario Park Pass Too Expensive

If you have issues with the high costs of Ontario Provincial Park Fees as I do, I would encourage you to let these people know:  Minister of Natural Resource Linda Jeffrey, ljeffrey.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org,  Premier Dalton McGuinty, dmcguinty.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org, or your local MPP.


Updated Links to User Change Increases:

OutdoorJay – 2014 Ontario Provincial Parks User Fee Changes

OutdoorJay - 2012 Fee Increase

 

Ontario Parks website – 2014 Fees

Ontario Parks website – 2013 Fees

Ontario Parks – Poor Quality Firewood