Campground Owner Defends the Controversial 10-Year Rule, RVers Push Back

A campground owner stepped forward to explain why he enforces the so-called 10-year rule, a policy that limits older RVs from staying at his park. His explanation touched on safety, appearance, and the cost of dealing with abandoned campers.

Of course, RVers quickly pushed back, not just against the rule itself, but against the idea that age alone tells you anything meaningful about how an RV is cared for or how its owner behaves. Many pointed out that some of the worst problems they have seen came from newer units, while older ones, properly maintained, caused none at all.

So what does that mean for the 10-year rule itself? That is where things get tricky. The debate is no longer just about campground standards. It’s about fairness, assumptions, and whether there’s a better way.

Campground Owners Defend the Rule

In an article published by RVTravel.com, a campground owner explained why he enforces the 10-year rule at his park. In that piece, the owner said the policy is not about excluding people, but about limiting situations that can become difficult or costly for a campground to handle.

According to the campground owner quoted, the rule is intended to address several specific concerns:

• Abandoned RVs: One issue described was RV owners walking away from older units and leaving them behind. When this happens, the campground is left dealing with the RV’s removal and disposal. The article noted that abandoned RVs also occupy campsites that could otherwise be used by paying guests.
• Breakdowns during a stay: Mechanical and system failures were cited as another concern. When an RV breaks down and cannot be moved, it can remain on a site longer than planned, creating scheduling and other problems for the campground.
• Towing and recovery costs: The cost of towing RVs is another concern, which can range from a few hundred dollars to several thousand, depending on size and distance. In some cases, these costs may exceed what an RV owner is willing or able to pay, especially for an older unit.
• Safety concerns: Aging electrical systems, propane components, and structural issues were mentioned as potential risks. These issues can pose safety concerns not only for the RV owner but also for others staying nearby.
• Appearance and reputation: The condition of RVs was tied to how a campground is perceived. He stated that rundown or poorly maintained units can negatively affect the overall impression of a park, which may influence future bookings.
• Protecting the business investment: Running a campground comes with financial and operational risks. The 10-year rule is a way to maintain standards and reduce exposure to problems that could impact the long-term operation of the property.

From the owner’s perspective, the 10-year rule provides a clear and consistent policy that is easier to enforce than evaluating each RV on a case-by-case basis.

The reaction from RVers shows that many see the situation differently, and that contrast is where the discussion widens.

Where RVers Push Back

Reading through the comments of the article, a few common themes showed up.

Age Is Being Used Instead of Condition

A model year does not accurately show how an RV is cared for. Plenty of older RVs are clean, functional, and well-maintained, while some newer ones show obvious neglect. Using age as a filter treats very different RVs as if they are the same.

Newer Does Not Mean Safer

Tying safety to age raised doubts. Problems with electrical systems, plumbing, and components are not limited to older RVs. Newer RVs can and do have serious issues, which makes age a weak determination for safety.

Ten Years Feels Like a Random Line

Nothing meaningful changes when an RV turns ten. Build quality varies by manufacturer and era, and many RVs are financed over long periods. A fixed cutoff does not reflect how RVs are built, owned, or used.

Abandonment Is a Concern, but Age Misses the Target

Abandoned RVs do happen. The question raised was whether age actually predicts that outcome. Deposits, credit cards on file, written agreements, towing policies, and insurance were all raised as tools that address behavior directly.

Short Stays Are Not Long-Term Sites

Concerns about abandoned or immobile RVs make more sense for seasonal or monthly stays. For overnight or weekend stops, the risk is different, yet the same rule often applies.

The Rule Feels Personal

Beyond logistics, the rule carries a message. Being judged by age alone can feel like being screened out rather than evaluated.

Where Discretion Changes the Conversation

This is where the discussion starts to soften, but it still has a flaw.

Once photos or a quick visual check are part of the process, the 10-year rule feels a little more reasonable. A clean, well-kept RV tells you more in a minute than a model year ever will.

At the same time, discretion usually only kicks in after the age cutoff. Older RVs get examined more closely, while newer ones often pass through without any review at all. That creates an unfair system. Age determines who gets looked at, even though problems are not limited to older RVs.

If the condition is what actually matters, that raises a fair question. Should every RV be evaluated the same way, regardless of age? A brief visual check would catch issues on both ends and remove the assumption that newer automatically means better.

What Do You Think?

The 10-year rule is not going away anytime soon. Campground owners have real concerns to manage, and RVers have real reasons to push back when a single number decides access. Most of the friction seems to come from how the rule is applied, not from the idea that standards should exist at all.

That leaves the question – Should age ever be the deciding factor, or should condition, behavior, and length of stay carry more weight? If you’ve run into this rule, on either side of the reservation desk, your experience likely shapes how you see it.