My Public Comments regarding the State Parks

 I recently became aware that the state of Oregon is looking to improve financial outcomes within the Oregon Parks and Recreation Commission thanks to an Oregonlive Article from Jamie Hale. While I'm not opposed to some of the proposals put forth by the state (the people who book a campsite six months out and then just no-show are the bane of my existence as someone who plans their state park camping trips more than six months ahead of time to make sure I get the spots I want), the dynamic pricing mechanism is something that I feel is not the right answer to the state's budget problems. As such, I composed the following to the public comments e-mail. 

To Whom It May Concern,

My name is Andrew Laine, a lifelong Oregonian and proud annual parks pass holder. In the past five years, my family and I have become devoted users of the Oregon State Parks camping system. I am writing to strongly oppose the proposal for dynamic pricing, which I believe would undermine the very mission of our parks: to provide equitable access to nature for all Oregonians.

Like many families during COVID, we turned to camping as a safe and affordable way to reconnect with each other and with the outdoors. Our first trip to LL Stub Stewart State Park sparked a love that has since taken us across Oregon—from spring breaks at Nehalem Bay and Beverly Beach, to summer adventures at Detroit Lake and the Cove Palisades, to crisp autumn nights at Silver Falls. Year after year, our favorite destination has been Fort Stevens State Park, where history and natural beauty combine to create unforgettable experiences.

The key factor that has made these trips possible is affordability. As a family of five, hotels are out of reach, and private campgrounds often cost two to three times more than state parks. Oregon’s public camping system has been the only way for us—and countless other families—to enjoy the richness of our state without financial strain.

Dynamic pricing threatens this accessibility. Raising costs during peak seasons would exclude families of modest means, turning public parks into a luxury reserved for those who can afford them. Worse, it risks driving away higher-income campers as well, who may choose private campgrounds with more amenities at similar prices. Why should families pay premium rates at state parks when they lack features like pools or mini-golf that private campgrounds provide?

I understand the need for revenue, but pricing based on demand is not the solution. Oregon State Parks are not a business—they are a public trust. They exist to serve all Oregonians equally, regardless of income. Dynamic pricing would erode that trust, creating inequity where there should be inclusion.

I urge you to reject this proposal. Keep Oregon’s parks affordable, accessible, and welcoming to every family who seeks the joy of camping under our skies.

Respectfully,
Andrew Laine
Instagram: @nativeoregoniansguide