Banned.

[mark61]

Can't talk for everyone of course, but I'd have a guess most here are very aware there is a real problem, while also open to the idea that some may have a vested interest.

 

[mariesnowgoose]

The trouble is, it’s easier to claim that those vested interests have been hidden and other councillors have been fooled, than admit that there sometimes is a real problem.

I don't think anybody here is denying there is a real problem with the big increase in the numbers of campers/mohos rocking up to these sort of honeypots the last 5+ years or so. Must be living a very sheltered life if they do deny it.

And I don't think the vested interests were hidden; that is to say, they might have been at the start of all the argy-bargy, but they were pretty much exposed and out in the open fairly quickly, certainly on forums like this one.

It's not an either/or situation, it's a case of finding solutions or compromises that work. The easy option (I prefer the term "cop out") always appears to be an all out ban. Costs very little money, but is short-sighted and unimaginative, and potentially economically damaging to other tourist-type businesses who are not campsites.

A lot of us prefer out-of-season trips. When the summer visitors have vanished. When, traditionally, for a lot of tourist-type businesses, it was always a big headache to keep the income coming in through the winter months.

 

[mariesnowgoose]

... and maybe all the businesses in Scarborough, Whitby and Cayton are doing just fine and detest the "invasion" of motorhomes .

Aren't these honeypot places mostly inhabited by second home owners/retirees nowadays?

 

[Rumour]

It’s not disengenious and it’s really naive to pretend that some newcomers aren’t responsible for many of the issues. Let’s put it this way…

Go back quite a bit before Covid. Generally this didn’t happen, despite what you claim. You hardly saw a campervan in a pub car park. On a public car park there was an occasional one tucked away in the corner. On a wild camping spot if you rocked up and it was busy you moved on. There was almost never the issues that some places are now experiencing. Look at Helmsley as an example; brilliant stopover, lost during Covid, never ever a problem before.

Scarborough, Sandsend, Whitby etc have all increased massively in the last 4 years. Ridiculously so. Those camping before didn’t want to be in a line of 100 vans for weeks on end, so moved on. They still don’t want that so find alternative places.

So yes, a lot of those causing these problems are newbies within the last few years. Covid campers; they were sold a ridiculous dream by greedy salesmen, and many come from a generation so entitled that they believed it.

Of course, as always we are whiter than white! This picture was on the 2018 article and shows the problem at Whitby! Before the influx of newbies. Explain that!

 

[Rolyan57]

I wasn't claiming anything I just thought it would be worth suggesting that maybe a vested interest should be declared. One of our local councillors was sacked for not officially declaring a vested interest in a property development scheme.

To be clear, I wasn’t referring to you directly, or in fact to anyone on this thread/website.

It was more a general comment, that whenever this happens, there are instant accusations of councillor fraud and corruption (which is what it would be) but no admitting that there are sometimes real problems.

 

[Rolyan57]

Of course, as always we are whiter than white! This picture was on the 2018 article and shows the problem at Whitby! Before the influx of newbies. Explain that!

I never said it didn’t happen. But there has been a noticeable increase in problems at the same time/rate as the huge increase in motorhome ownership. To deny that is disengenious and very misleading, and a case of denial that helps no one.

The attitude and entitlement of some newbies is staggering and is definitely causing problems.

 

[Rolyan57]

... and maybe all the businesses in Scarborough, Whitby and Cayton are doing just fine and detest the "invasion" of motorhomes .

Aren't these honeypot places mostly inhabited by second home owners/retirees nowadays?

I visit those areas often and have family there. They are not really second home locations, although they do have more retirees than some places, understandably so.

When I pass through I cringe at what I see and I’m not surprised the locals don’t like it. I also laugh at those crammed in on the front, saying how they hate campsites where they are crammed in .

I guess we’ve all got different opinions about how much income these campers put into the local economy.

But one thing I don’t believe is that these campers put loads into the local economy, never cause waste, or any problems, and are welcomed by the locals, but are banned due to councillors owning campsites.

That’s far too simplistic for me.

 

[mariesnowgoose]

Of course, as always we are whiter than white! This picture was on the 2018 article and shows the problem at Whitby! Before the influx of newbies. Explain that!

Doesn't take too much explanation. Those North Yorks coastal places have always been tourist hotspots and no one on here is claiming that every single person driving around in a moho or camper is always whiter than white, whether they're new to the game or not.

Whitby is popular. Parking space I presume is physically limited there? (it's many decades since I last visited, and it wasn't in a camper!). This argument has rumbled on for several years now, long before the pandemic hit, so the 2018 photo you've produced is no surprise to those who've been travelling to those places in their vans for many years now.

Campervan and motorhome ownership has soared in the last few years, ergo the influx of even more campers, ergo the squeeze on parking.

It's up to local councils to decide how they deal with the problem. Let's just say that some councils can be more creative than the North Yorks bods.

I'm not that bothered about visiting the North Yorks coast in the camper. Yes, they're quite pretty places, but so what? If they don't want campers then we go somewhere else.

 

[Rolyan57]

Can't talk for everyone of course, but I'd have a guess most here are very aware there is a real problem, while also open to the idea that some may have a vested interest.

100% agree. But I feel if the genuine problems were less, and the claimed benefits were true, then the vested interests would have a lot less sway.

 

[mariesnowgoose]

100% agree. But I feel if the genuine problems were less, and the claimed benefits were true, then the vested interests would have a lot less sway.

Oh my! Seriously?! Can I just ask: have you ever been closely involved in any kind of "local politics" for any length of time?

You must be a very trusting soul is all

 

[Rolyan57]

Oh my! Seriously?! Can I just ask: have you ever been closely involved in any kind of "local politics" for any length of time?

You must be a very trusting soul is all

Yes, I’ve been involved in politics, local and national, for many decades. I’m definitely not a trusting soul.

As I say, if there weren’t genuine problems, and the benefits were as large as some claim, then the individuals with vested interests would have less sway. Not only is that borne out by my experience, it’s also common sense.

Obviously, if one goes into this thinking that the whole council team are fraudulent and corrupt, then my argument doesn’t stand. Personally, I don’t believe that. Others will differ.

But I put it to you that if you served on the local council, and a councillor who you knew had a stake in a campsite stated that the campervans overnighting on the front are a) not causing any social or environmental problems and b) are bringing in significant amounts to the local economy and c) are accepted by local home owners and businesses alike, but then said he wanted them banned, you would not support that.

Thats because you are not corrupt and would not be easily swayed without reason.

 

[mariesnowgoose]

Yes, I’ve been involved in politics, local and national, for many decades. I’m definitely not a trusting soul.

As I say, if there weren’t genuine problems, and the benefits were as large as some claim, then the individuals with vested interests would have less sway. Not only is that borne out by my experience, it’s also common sense.

Obviously, if one goes into this thinking that the whole council team are fraudulent and corrupt, then my argument doesn’t stand. Personally, I don’t believe that. Others will differ.

But I put it to you that if you served on the local council, and a councillor who you knew had a stake in a campsite stated that the campervans overnighting on the front are a) not causing any social or environmental problems and b) are bringing in significant amounts to the local economy and c) are accepted by local home owners and businesses alike, but then said he wanted them banned, you would not support that.

Thats because you are not corrupt and would not be easily swayed without reason.

Then perhaps, given your experience, you can say what specific problems you think mohos and campers appear to be currently causing and maybe suggest a few workable solutions that aren’t just a blanket ban on parking? (sic).

 

[trevexess]

Motorhomes in England face strict new ban and it will last 'for 18 months'

Motorhomes will be banned from overnight parking at certain locations in Scarborough, Whitby, and Cayton as part of a trial scheme which could be expanded.

www.birminghammail.co.uk

Not anti camper van my a---, why are these councils / residents so short sited, why are there not Aires provided in these locations by these morons, the campers are not going away and they are not going to stay in the hotels and B and B's.
Take a leaf out of the Franch book where all these survive side by side.

 

[Rolyan57]

Then perhaps, given your experience, you can say what specific problems you think mohos and campers appear to be currently causing and maybe suggest a few workable solutions that aren’t just a blanket ban on parking? (sic).

I think the problems are well documented, ranging from the litter, waste and disposal of grey/black, to being too close, taking up spaces that could be used by others, using tables/chairs/toilet tents inappropriately, anti social behaviour, campfires, all the way to the issues of it being unsightly, exceeding maximum numbers and exceeding maximum duration.

Obviously, not all of them all the time in all locations.

I think they could handle this by introducing marked bays with maximum numbers/duration, an easy booking/payment system and then monitoring it with fines for those who think they can ignore it. Whether all that is achieved by CAMpRA style Aires or the parking initiatives in Northumberland is dependent on the individual circumstances.

 

[Rolyan57]

Not anti camper van my a---, why are these councils / residents so short sited, why are there not Aires provided in these locations by these morons, the campers are not going away and they are not going to stay in the hotels and B and B's.
Take a leaf out of the Franch book where all these survive side by side.

To be fair there’s a chance that these Motorhome’s will eventually stop, and the morons as you call them will be happy.

Getting Aires is happening, albeit slowly. Bear in mind that it would never cater for the numbers in some places.

It’s going to be a long hard slog, and until then we’ll have to accept that the U.K. is not France, which people should have known before purchasing their Motorhome. Some would say that the owners are the morons for not knowing that before buying their van.

 

[guerdeval]

I think the problems are well documented, ranging from the litter, waste

This imho is a generational thing and not exclusive to Motorhomers, this week I have on 2 separate occasions filled carrier bags left behind at a local swimming hole despite the culprits carrying the full bags of food/pop down to the river but too lazy to carry the litter back to the carpark, banning Motorhomes will not cure littering it’s inherent in todays society.

 

[barryd]

I visit those areas often and have family there. They are not really second home locations, although they do have more retirees than some places, understandably so.

When I pass through I cringe at what I see and I’m not surprised the locals don’t like it. I also laugh at those crammed in on the front, saying how they hate campsites where they are crammed in .

I guess we’ve all got different opinions about how much income these campers put into the local economy.

But one thing I don’t believe is that these campers put loads into the local economy, never cause waste, or any problems, and are welcomed by the locals, but are banned due to councillors owning campsites.

That’s far too simplistic for me.

There was a proper spat on one of the Facebook MH groups recently over this. Handbags were drawn!

It's a combination of both what you say and certainly in the past vested interest and general anti motorhome attitude. Having ridden along the front a few times in the spring on the bike it was kind of ridiculous. Not my idea of "living the dream"

 

[Pudsey Bear]

I'll get shouted down probably, but a parking place is a parking place, use it or not, if not someone else will, most will be empty at night, so a few campers staying ONE night should never be a problem anywhere ever, leaving a mess etc is a different issue of course but no actual proof that it a camper/MoHo doing it.

 

[Rolyan57]

This imho is a generational thing and not exclusive to Motorhomers, this week I have on 2 separate occasions filled carrier bags left behind at a local swimming hole despite the culprits carrying the full bags of food/pop down to the river but too lazy to carry the litter back to the carpark, banning Motorhomes will not cure littering it’s inherent in todays society.

I agree it seems much more prevalent today than it was in the past.

Banning Motorhome’s won’t cure litter, but it will cure the litter left by Motorhomes.

 

[Rolyan57]

There was a proper spat on one of the Facebook MH groups recently over this. Handbags were drawn!

It's a combination of both what you say and certainly in the past vested interest and general anti motorhome attitude. Having ridden along the front a few times in the spring on the bike it was kind of ridiculous. Not my idea of "living the dream"

I must admit I drive past and laugh at them, like you it’s not my idea of living the dream. I can’t think of anything worse.

Re the councillors my opinion has always been the same. I believe that most go into it to genuinely do the right thing and benefit the community. If you decided to be a councillor I’m sure you would be the same. I doubt very much if you would support another councillor who you knew had vested interests and were putting them forward at the expense of the local community. It’s hard to think anyone on here would admit to doing that. So why do they assume that all councillors would.

Yes, there will always be vested interests. But it’s wrong for us to think that other councillors support this fraudulent and corrupt behaviour.