Interesting petition
A new petition has been created urging the CAMC to look at alternative provision for motorhomes on the basis that they need less facilities than are provided by existing sites and located closer to towns.
It makes an interesting suggestion that existing sites might suffer if (towed) caravan sales decline as a result of lack of availability of suitable tow cars.
Assuming that it receives sufficient support, I would hope that the CAMC would provide a reasoned response (whether positive or negative), based on constructive thought, rather than simply ignoring it.
Comments
-
What an interesting link. It's exactly what many forward thinking people have been suggesting on this forum and others for some time now. Motorhomers and Camper van owners are mostly proper tourers and their requirements differ from those of tuggers. Camping organisations need to recognise this, or they will miss out on all that business that the surge in motor home ownership engenders.
K
5 -
What exactly are you asking the Club to do, buy up plots of land near towns and convert them to "Aires"...??
It's a lovely idea, but how much would it cost, I assume land within walking distance of anywhere attractive enough that I would want to visit that place will be expensive...??
Has this been costed out, is there a business case, will the returns justify the capital expenditure...?
If there is a business case, would other organisations be prepared to do it....?
2 -
When I suggested something similar, low facility sites, as modern caravans (of all sorts) carry there own facilities I was shouted down by a few on here for not being inclusive. The reason being that tenters and yurters need the facilities.
I responded by arguing we are a caravanning club and there are other organisations that may be more suitable for non-caravanning holidays, saving members money in site fees and facilities.
I now see both sides of the argument, but would ask are we a club that now provides all things to all comers?
Ken
1 -
I'm not asking anything, simply reporting that the petition exists - for no other reason than to promote constructive discussion.
I'm sure you are right that urban land would be expensive but if the industry does change as the petition promoter suggests then acquisition (which would probably be of smaller parcels of land than current sites occupy) might (at least in part) be funded by sale of existing underused sites.
Obviously a business case would have to be made but that is what I meant by constructive thought in my original post.
It may well be that other organisations would be interested but the petition promoter just happens to have chosen to approach the CAMC.
1 -
mhparking, what extra facilities do I need as a caravanner that Motorhomer’s don’t?
I don’t need a hard standing, I don’t need to be near town or a bus stop, but can see the desirability.
Just wondering, what else you need that I don’t
Ken
4 -
It depends on what you define as an individual I suppose. We will all have differences there (both within and between the caravanners and motorhomers). Personally I would never deny there are some caravanners who are just as self sufficient in their units as motorhomers.
Perhaps the biggest difference, taking both as a whole, is in water storage and disposal with proportionately more motorhomes having on board tanks.
The petition promoter, though, picks up on the point that, traditionally and in general, caravanners have tended to require more site facilities than motorhomers (which is why sites in the UK have developed as they have) but that the increasing use of motorhomes is tending to move away from that model.
Graham
2 -
Sorry but I think that idea is straight out of cloud cuckoo land.
Who is to foot the bill and where is the land to be found?
8 -
Thank you.
0 -
Nail on head, One.
Now, if a need for such areas was clearly demonstrated, space was available and 'normal' pitch use was declining, I wouldn’t object to the club converting some areas of already existing sites to such use but for someone to petition the club to go out and acquire land to set up and run these aire/car park places is totally unreasonable in my view.
5 -
It seems a shame to me that an individual member feels the only way they can get their voice heard in the Club is by starting a third party petition. But equally it is strange that if he is a member then why hasn't he been on here promoting his cause?
I expect those that enjoy that style of camping are not that regular customers of the Club. Obviously it would require some extra investment from the Club but it could pay for itself over time. When sites are being extended such pitches could be added. I have another suggestion, what about not having seasonal pitches on some sites but convert those to non bookable motorhome pitches?
David
1 -
Now 280 signatures. The thrust seems to be that now the club has re-branded it is not representing the needs of motorhomers.
What do they need that I as a caravanner don’t.
It seems to be wrapped up in the suggestion that we soon won’t be able to tow caravans, tow cars will die out, and motor homes are the future.
Ken
0 -
"What do they need that I as a caravanner don’t."
Absolutely nothing that I can think of, Ken. The MHSPs are useful, especially if/when they have proper grated drive over drains, but they’re not an essential. Many of us manage perfectly well on sites without them.
PS. 280 out of how many members? That assumes all 280 are members and not non-members who have picked up the petition from other forums
4 -
But David I think all caravanners should have the option to just turn up, I thought we did now, but not to reserve pitches just in case. All caravanners should at least have the opportunity if a pitch is available. We all end up paying the same.
Ken
0 -
Is the petition promoter a member? It doesn't say anything, one way or the other, in the petition text. For all I know he might not be at the moment but a potential member if the suggested changes were implemented.
The idea of converting seasonal pitches is interesting.
All being well this discussion will assist the Executive Committee in considering the petition
0 -
"All being well this discussion will assist the Executive Committee in considering the petition
"Yep, once they’ve finished rolling around the floor in laughter, they can consider which round filing cabinet to put it in.
2 -
Mmm, he could just be a front man....
Is it the weekend?😶
3 -
+ 1
0 -
If this is being presented to the club I would like to know a bit about Mike Bevan and who he is, whether he is a member, whether he represents other groups elsewhere etc.
No objections to someone starting a petition or to the OP presenting it here.
0 -
You miss the point I was making.
Motorhomes generally need to do fill with water and dispose of waste less frequently because of their on board tanks. Therefore, sites without water and dump facilities are easier for them to use than they are for caravanners who rely on external vessels.
1 -
Given the pressure on land - particularly that close to city/town centres - for much needed housing development - I think the chances of a local authority giving planning consent for such a proposal is zilch. There's more of a chance of existing sites being turned over to housing than the reverse.
2 -
Well I for one would like my membership money spent on improvements that would benefit both caravanners and motorhomers. If CAMC provided for one or the other it would do more to alienate the two groups than any thread on here could do.
Any expenditure has to be beneficial for all. You need to poll an impartial party such as the local councils.
6
could it be an alias Graham 
