Homesteading

Is this Homesteading or not? 10 sites in the Mil. CG are like this or better. Some even have vegetable gardens.

Homesteading? If they're conforming to the campground's regulations as to length of stay and cleanliness/neatness of their site, what difference does it make? If they aren't, the camp host needs to bring it to their attention.
We've stayed at military campgrounds several times for the maximum number of days allowed. We don't go to the extent pictured in your post, but I personally don't see anything wrong with the sites pictured.

I am with you billb 1959 looks neat and tidy to me and I would not be upset staying next to these folks. Many military campgrounds allow someone to stay for 3 and 4 months from first made reservation so why not make it homey. More and more folks are living in their RV's full time so they take plants, figurines, outdoor lights etc. with them so it feels like their home to them.

We are not full timers but extended travellers and do not like the regulations of folks being able to stay numerous months at one time but we do understand it and accept it. If we cannot get in to the military campground we prefer we go to a private campground closeby.

Both pictured have been on the spots more then 2 years others in another camp ground have been better then 3+ years. Sure they look nice,but you know just as well as me you are not carrying those planters and other equipment in your MH... One was even digging a trench and driving post for the Sat TV when I took the pics you see

Now that you mention how long they have been there we all would agree this is homesteading. I have seen folks carry planters like this as these are planters that have a lid in the top that you only need a couple inches of soil to plant anything or you sit little pots in them. We have seen some of the most unusual things you can even imagine come out of cars, pickups and RV's that must add weight and take up valuable space but for the full-timers they do what they have to for their stuff. Would you mind disclosing the location of this homesteader campground? We know several that allow this and try and avoid them whenever possible as they think they own the place and disregard all campground rules. The digging the trench for Sat TV really indicates there is lack of management or somebody knows somebody.

If they've been there that long, Renegade, then I do agree with you.....it's homesteading! I didn't realize there were military CGs that allowed that long a stay. We've never stayed at one. The longest we've stayed at a military CG is 30 days (Pt. Mugu).
I agree with Larry......over a year is homesteading. It doesn't seem right to be turned away due to lack of sites because they're populated by homesteaders. We've been full-timers for about 8 years and would never consider staying anywhere that long. A few months throughout the summer as CG hosts is long enough!!

Totally agree with you homesteaders normally stay way beyond the limit because they are in tight with the host. It burns my backside when a park has no vacancy because contractor people have all the sites sewed up year after year/

While we are on this subject....How do you all feel about Senior Active Duty making the military campground their "Almost retiring home" for a year or more before retirement and other active duty doing the same with kids for the length of their assignment to the military post/base?? This is happening more and more instead of them getting "base Housing" or local apts. or houses?...Regulations state campgrounds/RV parks are for Recreation....not HOUSING!! The priority for "Recreation" is active duty, but this is not "recreation"....This situation leaves limited spots for others (i.e.other AD who just want to camp for the weekend and retired military)..to use & enjoy the campground....

Have been Full-timers for over 8 yrs, may stay up to 6 months when Camp Hosting, which is long enough,(and we don't show Favorites, but stick to the rules..)... usually only stay a month when traveling at the most...

Some guys abuse it, and use it for housing while still drawing BAQ ... that's should be against regulations - don't know if it is.

But, staying long periods, and renewing, and staying longer is overstepping the boundary that recreation campgrounds were designed to meet. This is a recreation area for everyone of us ...

Nothing rocks me more that to see a little fence and lawn around a Camp-spot when We would like to spend a week or two in an area, and some campers have been there six months, and renewing ... which means one family is 'stealing' from our benefits.
We have no trouble with most of what we see in some areas, as the sites are not full - and if not full, by all means, renew away and keep the MCG funds coming into those under-used MCGs.

But, when an MCG is in a popular area and fills up most of the time, that's when MWR should pull the plug on over-stays. Seems to me two weeks or a month should be long enough. IF no one is waiting, absolutely, stay another week or so - but if a rig is sitting in the parking lot, move the site free and let him in it ... for his space of time. We should ALL share these benefits, as we're losing some of them and parts of them every time congress has a meeting ... or the price goes up and nearly meets private CG prices. That's not much of a benefit, unless you consider the people you camp with have got your back all the time ... which is better than a private CG anytime.

We are a active duty family, on the waiting list for housing and we are told we have limited time to stay at the campground.

There should be a exception, for people who are staying (In the campground) because they have no where else to go, are kids go to school on post. We are not homesteading, we just don't have a home to move into yet!!!

Im not saying there Is not a big issue with homesteading In the campgrounds!!!

Don't have issues for those waiting for housing....just the ones who want to make the campground "housing" for 3-4 years.....or longer...

I don't think you will find very many on here who would consider you a "Homesteader" BigRed. You should be in a different category with an exception until your housing is ready. (As long as there's not a 2 year wait for housing!

As Grammy said, years in the campground for friends of the staff and hosts is a bit much. I'd add "Contractors" who are working on post to these. Most of these contractors are working for private companies and are paid a housing and living allowance. If they want to live in their camper, go to a private CG that will be very happy to have you....don't take up the limited space in a military CG that you haven't earned the right to use!

BigRedTruck -- if you stayed in the MCG, would you be willing to give up the difference between your BHA and what the campgrounds cost?

Because, some of the campers staying in the MCG are drawing a housing allowance and then putting the difference in pockets ... that's money we pay (as taxpayers) into the DOD ... and is an allowance for family housing when not on base housing. It is not a 'pay raise' ...

SO, it's a big deal when that happens - if temporarily someone needs a break, especially AD with family, I'd be the first to move off a site. But to draw BHA - AND - stay at MCG would be abusing the housing money each month.

I have to disagree with that. Many people are budgeting and living on less than the amount they receive and they aren't staying in their RV's. BAH is for a standard of living that someone in the government decided would be the minimum amount to do that. How they make their money streatch is up to them. It's not like they are filing a false claim.

Payday is payday - BHA is based on median rental housing costs in the area where that specific base is located. If a AD is not in housing - that's why it's called Basic Housing Allowance - and if a guy does not spend it on housing, then it doesn't belong in his pocket. If an AD standard of living is a campsite for him and his family, then pay the camp fees and draw the same amount for housing.

BHA is not a pay raise. And if an AD is not in housing, then he's taking a campsite from another AD recreation or Retired recreation.

Acception: IF he waiting for housing due to transfer, then it should be allowed. But if an AD takes a campsite for six month and puts the extra $500 or $600 or $1000 in the bank, that is not ethical or fair to those that want a campsite for recreation (MWR = recreation not housing)

Same thing with DoD, only worse as they get paid much more than AD or retired, and should never be allowed to stay in campsite instead of housing unless MCG is earned as a military retired benefit.

IF you're retired now, you look back at the pay you received when enlisted (Mine $87 a month, plus $50 submarine pay) Today, the base rate is about fifteen or twenty times that, and AD can afford to live on it ... compare basic pay and alloowances now vs. pay 20/30 years ago ... then look at cost of housing then and now. IT's NOT twenty times as much - more like 3-4 times the rent then.

If this continues to be a problem I can see Fam Camp fees increasing to the same rate as the housing allowance. So that will be another benefit that most of us can't afford. It will just disappear especially with all the emphasis being placed on the cost of the military benefits that congress is looking at.

So he get's BAH AND get's told how and where to spend it? That money is a compensation for not living in base housing and to take care of his dependents based on the market rate of the surrounding area. Yes, I was in the military too, I know how it's computed. They can also put newly PCS'd personnel awaiting housing on permissive TDY 90 days at a time in a hotel and put them on per diem also. Though it's a rarely exercised option, it's still a possibility.I seen that happen with an E-9. How expensive do you think that would be? It's a whole lot cheaper to give him BAH.
Asking him if he'd give up the difference when we know he'd much rather be set up in a house is a pretty unreasonable question. He didn't make the rules and he's not breaking any. Is it fair that there isn't enough base housing and he's put in this situation? And since when does the difference in pay become an issue between AD and retired? The risk involved with being retired is a whole lot less. Sure, it would be nice to be better compensated, but everyone knows that the pension is half of the base pay. Nobody said we'd get rich off our pensions.

That's why we have people driving over a 1.5 hours to work. There Is not housing at are duty station!!

Its my money and I want to spend It, as I see fit. We qualify for 3 diffident houses on Fort Meade, one Is a 70's ranch small no garage the next one has 300 square more feet with a garage then the newest one has 600 more feet and a garage. Now I have to give up my BAH for all three.

So, If they want to pro rate the housing on post, If you get the lowest grade house on your list. They should give the government back the differences. If that was the way It worked, I would give back what I'm saving every month.

I'm In a cabin that just has 2 bedrooms that's It for $40.00 a night flat rate, you do the math!!!

And will someone tell me what the haaaaail Is Homesteading!!! We have rules at Fort Meade, the most you can stay In peak season for active duty Is 120 days one time a season then your out for 5 days then Its 60 days with a five day out. Off season for active Is 180 days.

That's my two cents!!!!!

Second point, beyond putting cash in pocket.

When AD and Retired begin using MCG's for HOUSING, the MCG becomes a trailer park instead of recreation - and ultimately the traveling veterans cannot get a site even for a few days because others are using it for housing and stay months and months at a time ... and once it becomes 'housing' it will fill up with individuals "saving money" instead of finding regular housing.

At that point, our recreational camping benefit will disappear. It's already a hassle to get sites in the south even for a few days during winter in most of the MCG - in Florida for example. Of course, each of these "full MCGs" will allow us to "camp" in a parking lot for half-price, and then claim it's meeting the obligation it's designed for,

Our benefits we all earned should be shared, and not used to increase cash payouts to anyone on active duty. But, just so we know - any family where AD is in a war zone, then by all means - let's give up our sites.

But traditional military careers have changed significantly, and our "half pension pay" as you mentioned is quite a bit lower than AD's today ... AD today, if you count everything (housing, clothing, food, medical, day-care), compares to a civilian job in many cases. And civilians do not get subsidized housing ... civilians may get house-rent, but it's paid to the landlord and the employee does not get to "keep the extra" if he/she puts the family in a campground.

Housing allowance is to cover the cost of local housing - period. It is not designed to compensate a stateside AD as a pay-raise while he/she lives in a recreation area site - because, regardless of whether or not one has earned the right to stay at MCGs, over-staying is directly taking a spot that another AD or Retired has earned in the same manner.

We appreciate as much as anyone the sacrifice we've all made defending our freedom and our country (both AD today and Retired in the past) - but we need to share these benefits equally, just as we shared the risk, or the benefits will continue to erode and we'll lose this one too.