The Future of Van Life

[lenny flank]

Is it possible instead that there is such a thing as a fair allotment?  

We call those "regulations". Like I said, I got no gripe with "regulations".

 

[lenny flank]

That's a great thing, and I hope it can continue.

Not only because for some it is a choice, but at least as importantly -- for some people it is not, and it appears to me likely that, as jobs become ever fewer and pay ever less, with fewer benefits or health & safety regulations, the number of those people is likely to increase.

What I foresee in the future is a society in which "jobs" barely exist, and we will all be forced to decouple "consumption" from "income". In a society where virtually nobody still has a job (having been replaced by automation, robotics, and AI), it will no longer be viable to have people use job income to buy their necessaries of life. So as a society we then have a choice--we let people live in the woods and fend for themselves as best they can, or we provide people with their necessaries of life whether they have a job income to pay for it or not. It would, in either case, completely remake the entire political, economic and social structure of our society.

One of those options would be socially sustainable. The other would not.

 

[lenny flank]

It is the homeless camps with garbage piles that upset the non dwellers. This group doesn’t usually have gas money and little respect for public lands. If you move as required, keep a clean camp, leave no trace, I don’t think anyone is concerned about that behavior.

Double-plus "yes" to this.

 

[slynne]

I think it depends on a lot of unknowable things. Mostly though, I suspect that if things go as lenny is predicting (and there are good reasons to think it might!), we may have a lot of people vandwelling more out of necessity than anything else. Even looking at current trends, I know that I bought a house because I was told that it was a good investment and a hedge against inflation in terms of housing costs. It has been those things for me. However, s&bs may be less of a good investment these days and sure aren't the same hedge against inflation that living in a van would be. There are also trends with younger people choosing experiences over material things and if that continues, I expect we will see more vandweller nomads.

Like others here, I don't think the true nomads will have too much trouble. They simply are not in one place long enough. What might change is the availability of free boondocking. There will always be campgrounds one can pay for. From what I understand this is more or less the situation in many places in the East of our country. Even in places like the town where I live, where sleeping in a vehicles is prohibited, the enforcement is lax. Anyone who moves on quickly will be ok. I recently got exited because some van dwellers parked in front of my house. I watched them get ready for bed and then they moved on, presumably to park someplace else. I suspect that they were not hassled. I wonder though how that might be different if there were hundreds of people doing this every night in my town? I imagine that folks would not like it and there would be a call to increase enforcement. So for nomads, I guess it depends on the trends. Usually though, things like this go in cycles. From a political point of view, what I would do to help would be to help young people and poor people find the housing they would prefer and just count on a lot of people finding S&Bs to be their preference.

The people who may have the most trouble are people who need to stay in one place for various reasons. I brought this up with my city council person since the ordinance is that there is no sleeping in vehicles and I want to sleep in mine in the backyard. His answer was to just do it but to remember that if anyone reports me I could be asked to stop. The point is to do it in a way that doesnt bother the neighbors and I am cool with that. Again, a lot depends on trends. What can be acceptable to a community when one or two people are doing it can quickly become unacceptable when many are. This is especially so when the people who are doing it are too poor to do it in a way that keeps them out of sight.

At any rate, it is the kind of thing which can be killed by popularity although as was also mentioned, if enough people are doing it, they can organize and work to make it more acceptable and mainstream

 

[Moxadox]

"

But advocating to help the more-truly homeless, fighting for dignified housing, just as with food & education,

as a fundamental right of citizenship,

will help address the underlying causes of the problem and prevent it escalating.
[/quote]

Bravo, well said, John. I notice too much "us vs them" regarding the truly homeless. They are citizens in need of aid, not vermin to be despised.

I met a man stranded on an onramp who had been sitting there in his broken down van, which was obviously fitted out for off-grid living, for two weeks.

Two. Weeks.

He was desperate, he needed a tow to a mechanic, he had run out of food for himself and his dogs and had no water. I gave him a bag full of biscuit sandwiches I had just bought, along with two gallons of water and $20. He burst into tears. I wish I could have given him a tow as well, but I'm not set up for that. This was a guy who had been living OK until the breakdown put him over the edge. In hindsight, I wish I had simply called a tow truck and paid for it. I still wonder how he made out. LE was actually treating him well, but not giving him what he needed, which was a tow and whatever repairs he needed.


The Dire Wolfess

 

[Smitty716]

Welcome to the forum
All I can say about it is that if Bob Wells has anything to do with it we will all have a solar powered van . And personally I think its great. As I have said in other post I have a class c . But I think next year I’ll be in a van. Who don’t love the look of a van with solar panels and good gas mileage. Anyway good luck and hope to cya at RTR

 

[Dingfelder]

Yep. Many of them are teens who think they are being rebelliousy and edgy. Others have stars in their eyes and envision a free and easy life of chocolate fountains and unicorns.

The blunt reality is that vanlife is mostly boring. We have to do the same dull day-to-day drudgery of everyday life that everyone else has to do--we have to make a living, we have to do laundry, we have to cook dinner, we have to wash up, but we have to do all that in a space that is smaller than the average prison cell. "Glamorous" is not the word I would use for it.

This strikes me as relating to life in general.  We are always looking for solutions, something that will solve everything perhaps, something that will finally make us happy.  All the time.

impossible.

I regularly deal with widows who want life to make them happy again.  Or me.  Or their kids.  Can't be done.  Lord knows I can't do it.  

As per Buckaroo Bonzai:  Wherever you go, there you are.

 

[Jack Grit]

"Department of Housing and Urban Development's Annual Homeless Assessment Report, as of 2017 there were around 554,000 homeless people in the United States"

"The number of homeless people grew in the 1980s, as housing and social service cuts increased and the economy deteriorated. The United States government determined that somewhere between 200,000 and 500,000 Americans were then homeless."

If in fact homelessness was close to 500,000 in the 1980's the figures are not much higher then they are at present. I had a VW bus in the '80s. I slept in it many-a-time. In California it was not uncommon to see or know of someone sleeping in a rig. I wonder what the stat's are comparing vehicle dwelling now vs the 80's? The internet wasn't around back then. Is it possible that YouTube and other sources simply make it appear much more prevalent than it really is? I'm sure it is more prevalent but maybe not by as much as people think. Things ebb and flow. The pendulum swings back and forth. The world is changing at warp speed. There are a lot of things to factor in. I wouldn't doubt that this "movement" will fade a bit in the not so distant future (5-10 years from now?).
For many vehicle dwellers, I think it is likely simply a fad.

 

[Dingfelder]

I sincerely doubt that.

In the 80's Reagan emptied out the mental institutions by defunding them. I was there right at the critical point, and saw the mentally incapacitated suddenly swarming the streets in Los Angeles. It was extremely dramatic, basically like moving from a kind of tough first-world country to a definite third-world country. Mental hospitals basically emptied themselves onto the streets, with no realistic provision to do anything about it.

Going on 40 years later ... yeah ... it's not a "fad" that society's bargain with its citizens has permanently changed.

"Fad"?

If I could choose a fad it would be, like .. ripped jeans or something idiotic like that? Not like permanent poverty for the underclasses and the permanent export of jobs creating economic ghost towns throughout America.

 

[Minivanmotoman]

Just like society, there are many facets to full time RV /van dwelling in the present. Take out your crystal ball to determine the future and place your bets. Spin that wheel!

Let's look at the present and we see that it depends on many variables.

1. Current local laws, which are widespread, making sleeping in your vehicle illegal. Knock knock. Doesn't bode well for the future for Urban camping.

2. Geographic and population realities. In the heavily populated and regulated Eastern US, with limited  accessible public domain land, will it get easier with heavier demand? Out west with lots of BLM/USF, how will that hold up with increased usage?

3. Tendency to regulate and it's limitations. Going to get more restrictive as it gets more widespread.

4. Difference between travelers and stationary.
Those who move along, in essence, have the highest chance of success, today and tomorrow. Those with economic limitations and need to reside, will be targeted. And it isn't, won't be supportive. NIMBY.

5. Van/ RV dwelling a fad? The appeal and benefits plus economics are too great IMHO. Young and old, are flocking to this for good reason. More users, more stress on the environment. Likely outcome, more regulations, control, limitations. To what extent, that's the million dollar question. The greatest chance of success, is the remote and rugged West, for now. But who is to say for how much longer? I could see a movement by society to deem that those who full-time overuse and abuse pristine nature and eventuality ban/ control it.
How? The government solution to all things, regulate. Required fee based permitting. Simple license plate tracking database.
Once initiated, get placed on it, you're done my friend. Or probably limited to access. Databases are cheap, easy and the data is permanent. Change plates frequently? Still the same name. Other creative adjustments?

6. Urban boondocking and stealth. This in essence is living off-grid in town. Not appreciated due to perception, whether right or wrong, agree or not. Everyone will be lumped together as one, outlawed and increased enforcement. Short term doable, as long as you keep moving on. The "resident" dwellers will not be popular and encouraged to move along or seek accepted permanent lodging because taxes are what support and maintain a community. Money. 
And perceived, public property users (abusers?) aren't seen positively and won't be accepted by local taxpayers. Human nature.

7. Support or acceptance? Political forces?
There isn't anywhere near enough money to get politic support or acceptance to get protection or laws enacted for full timer benefits/ rights. Political votes of retirees might have some weight, but only if a large enough, organized group. Big maybe.

So how do a couple/many million stay low key, out of trouble and legal? That is the real question and there might be many answers or ways dependent on area, location and individual.
Walmart won't always allow, or be allowed to, overnight parking/sleeping. 
Public domain land won't always be free and easy access.
When, where and how are the details to come.
Imho, all good things must come to an end.
Enjoy the benefit now.

 

[Jack]

I think any moves toward organizing to protect our "rights" before that point is counter productive, the less visible we are to mainstream S&B wage slaves the better.

I didn't state that we should organize.  In fact, it's the last thing I think people should do.  First, it does nothing but draw unwanted attention and second, because all it takes is one cockup, one idiot, to accomplish the exact opposite.

 

[Jack]

Thanks for all the responses, everyone.  Again, I'm not scared, worried, nervous, or fearful in any way.  I know what I'm going to be doing and how I'm going to be doing it.  

I just wanted to throw the topic out there for discussion since I've been seeing a lot more media attention on the subject; not just in the U.S. but in Canada, Australia and Europe too.  Also because of how I've seen other ways of life come under governmental attack that never were before.  Given how it takes one anonymous keyboard whiner to create a media maelstrom these days, I wondered how others felt about it - if anything at all.  

Personally, I think the best response was along the thought that, where there's a vacuum, it will eventually get filled.  If not now, then certainly later.  

As travelaround said, I'm a Christian.  My faith is, and never has been, in the government doing what's right or fair.  My faith, and the experience of that faith, is based in God and what He says.  That's why I'm not nervous.  Frankly, if it weren't for God, I'm 100% sure I'd be living in the mountains somewhere, privately, hoarding food and supplies and just wanting to be left alone.   :dodgy:

Thanks again, folks.

 

[Moxadox]

And there lies the rub. We survive by not drawing attention; but the burgeoning numbers of mobile dwellers is already drawing attention. Even now, it's difficult to find a dispersed forest camping spot in popular areas. Not to mention the numbers of car and van dwellers I run into in state, county, municipal campgrounds. The forests around Flagstaff are thronged with us. And then there's Quartzsite....not exactly an invisible population, and facing increasing pressures due to the numbers of folks finding that settled life is simply no longer affordable. So we are thrust out into the light.

The Dire Wolfess

 

[bigskybob]

I can see a time coming when the only camping allowed in the NF is in an established campground.I hate it,but I think it's coming.

 

[jonney38]

I'm a retired economics professor and see the economics of van dwelling overpowering any and all efforts to limit it by state and local governments. Local governments may be able to hassle a few people but with thousands of acres of asphalt to patrol and other things to do, police will not make much of a dent in urban boondocking.

As time has moved on, apartments have had to meet more fire and safety codes increasing rental rates. Competition for land raised rents. Electronic toys, phones, etc. have become necessities increasing the cost of just living. Wages have not gone up to cover the increase in costs.

While rent costs were rising, the opportunities for boondocking were increasing. Every new acre of asphalt was in invitation for overnight parking. In that way, the cost of van living went down while sticks and bricks went up.

I don't think it will do any good to lobby local governments to allow boondocking. Clever stealth will remain the answer.

 

[Jack Grit]

Going on 40 years later ... yeah ... it's not a "fad" that society's bargain with its citizens has permanently changed.

"Fad"?  

If I could choose a fad it would be, like .. ripped jeans or something idiotic like that?  Not like permanent poverty for the underclasses and the permanent export of jobs creating economic ghost towns throughout America.

 I provably should have used the word some instead of many. I think YouTube proves it is in fact a fad for some. The glamour of it all! The freedom (all lifestyles have there trade-offs). The click.
Of the people who do this solely because it looks cool or trendy, the numbers will decrease dramatically.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

I can see a time coming when the only camping allowed in the NF is in an established campground.I hate it,but I think it's coming.

I don't think it will be in established campgrounds only but I do think that a permitting system(s) will evolve so the Forest Service has some way to keep too many campers from congregating in one area.  And the permits will probably cost to pay for enforcement.  In some popular areas you may be restricted in how many 14 day permits you can draw in a year.

. . . Local governments may be able to hassle a few people but with thousands of acres of asphalt to patrol and other things to do, police will not make much of a dent in urban boondocking.

 . . . Electronic toys, phones, etc. have become necessities  . . .

 . . . Clever stealth will remain the answer.

In my limited experience local governments won't hassle until there is a problem, then they overreact.

Electronic toys are never a necessity.  Phone while not a necessity are a valuable addition to life, you just don't need a large data plan.  My Verizon plan with unlimited talk and text and 2 GB data costs me less in 2018 dollars than my parents talk only, 3 party line on a phone nailed to the kitchen wall.

Unless you have a cloaking device stealth will increasingly not work.  Take my small city for example (pop. ~9,000): one a$$h0le caused a lot of expense and No Parking 2AM to 6AM signs to go up fast.  A larger neighboring city has parking by permit only on residential streets.  A lot of commercial streets have 2 hour parking restrictions.

 

[Jack]

And there lies the rub.  We survive by not drawing attention; but the burgeoning numbers of mobile dwellers is already drawing attention.  Even now, it's difficult to find a dispersed forest camping spot in popular areas.  Not to mention the numbers of car and van dwellers I run into in state, county, municipal campgrounds.  The forests around Flagstaff are thronged with us.  And then there's Quartzsite....not exactly an invisible population, and facing increasing pressures due to the numbers of folks finding that settled life is simply no longer affordable.  So we are thrust out into the light.

Well said.  This is why I questioned the future of van life.  Yes, of course I think it will always be around but it's growing and changing... evolving.  It's not the same as it was in the 60's and 70's.  Or even the 80's or 90's.  Being a vandweller for the last 50 years doesn't mean that it's not now, or soon going to be, changing.  Social media changes absolutely everything.  You only have to watch/read the mainstream media to that's a fact.  

Sometimes, when you've done something for a very long time, you get set in your ways and can become complacent in your thinking.  (How do you think I became a hermit?!)  It's easy to dismiss something and wave it off, but that doesn't change the facts.  "Old people" are known for dismissing the music that "younger kids" listen to, for example.  "That's not music.  These people don't know what real music when they hear it anymore."  But that's just opinion.  It doesn't change the fact that 'that music' is here is to stay and that multitudes are drawn to it.  Look how music, especially country music, has evolved with time as new generations take it over.  It's unrecognizable to me and I don't regard it as "real country music" anymore.  I like Randy Travis, *************, George Strait, Alan Jackson, etc.,  But how did they change country music from the era before them?  (George Jones, Johnny Cash, Hank Williams, Loretta Lynn, Tammy Wynette, etc.,)  

But there's also the flip side.  There's ignorance in not listening carefully to the long term folks who have decades of practical experience to learn from.  Sometimes the old ways are still the best ways, or at least they're the tried and true ways that still work.  

There's a balance (as with all of life) that each person must choose for themselves.  We're all responsible for the choices we make in life.  The thing is, all choices have consequences so we're responsible for those, too.

When I do start van life, I'll have to find that balance I'm comfortable with.  Old Van Life (my preference) vs. New Van Life will affect some of my decisions.  Not in a paranoid or fearful way because what kind of life is that?  I just see it as wise to recognize how van life is changing and plan accordingly.

 

[Sandhog]

Alas, the problem is that "shit" does not stay on someone's property. It goes down into the groundwater, which may extend for hundreds of miles, and effects everyone. Hence, the shit is regulated. I got no gripe with that.

Unless groundwater table is less than a foot, probability of fecal matter showing up by contaminating in groundwater is near zero. What about sandy ground? Even better. It will be filtrated before getting to the groundwater. Fecal matter start decomposing within a week in the ground. Much like composing toilet except much faster depending on soil condition. Human have shit on grounds since existence. Only thing is that TP is another matter and it shouldn't with your shit in the cathole.

 

[Dingfelder]

We have so many animals, both wild and domestic, in our neighborhood that the humans are only a small fraction of the waste -- and since we have septic systems, it overflows into the drainage fields regularly anyway.

What I worry about vastly vastly more is all the industrial chemicals. People around here use Round-Up and similar products like crazy. Our well water comes up foamy quite often and my dog won't even drink it when that happens.