# "No Overnight Parking" for or against



## 106916 (Sep 8, 2007)

Unless these marked sites are pretty visible and public we ignore such signs. But we do not want to cause any future restrictions on van parking due to our overnighting.

In quiet private places we will disregard these restrictions, as we see them as purely beuracartic and pointless, restrictive and killjoy.

Are we irresponsible bad motorhomers?

Or are we justified in just trying to get the best out of life as and where we can, without I feel, doing any real harm?

Your thoughts please.
Vidura


----------



## 98316 (Mar 25, 2006)

Many moons ago when I was much younger, we parked in such a place in our VW. It was a forestry commission car park, near a river. We figured it was so remote we would be fine and no one would find out.

During the night it rained, a lot. At 7 am the next morning we were awoken by a forest warden who when we opened the curtains was stood in two foot of water, the nearby stream had turned into a raging torrent of water (it was at least 50 feet away), this in turn had flooded the car park where we were.

We've never got dressed so fast in our lives, and had to rely on the warden to tow us out with his vehicle. Naturally we got told off and he pointed out the signs were there for a reason. 

Nowadays though we don't overnight in places such as wild camping spots or car parks purely from a safety point of view. Whilst we miss the days when we could just pull up anywhere and spend the night, particularly in areas such as the New Forest, we feel that with Motorhomes being such a desirable commodity and given the price we paid for it, we would rather pay to stay on a site where there is hopefully at least some peace of mind to be had.

As for everyone else, I think all you can do is try. I think the signs have been put up to prevent so called 'travellers' pulling up, I know in a nearby town the car park didn't have the signs and the pulled in and took over, it took about 2 weeks for the council to remove them as they claimed they were allowed to stay there as there were no signs preventing them from doing so. Legally they were probably right. I think that is why nearly everywhere has the signs now.


----------



## teemyob (Nov 22, 2005)

*Against*

Hello,

Very much Against.

If anything I ignore them, if anyone asks, I was overdaying and overslept.

Trev.


----------



## annetony (May 1, 2005)

It depends on where it is, we have overnighted on a car park/picnic area in the New Forest twice, 

when we were settling down to sleep about 4 or 5 boy racers came on and as we were there turned round and drove straight off,

later on we heard the warden come on checking but he didn't disturb us, he probably thought we were doing less damage than the boy racers, 

and before we went we also picked up a bagful of rubbish that other people had left. 

So I would say in certain places yes we would ignore the signs and stay, and think of suitable excuse if challenged.



Anne


----------



## mangothemadmonk (Aug 6, 2006)

We have parked in forestry commission No Goes but alway get there late and leave early and never leave rubbish and usually do what Anne and Tony do and pick up a bit as a thankyou.

Have never been moved on and only once been confronted by an official, After stating my case and not looking like a "traveler" (as that is whet they are frightened of moving in) he went off.

I do try NOT to park where I shouldn't though, just so as not to get a bad name but sometimes it just can't be helped.

Johnny F


----------



## 88781 (May 9, 2005)

Difficult one..
Those who park on land where no parking overnight is signed, will have to face any penalty imposed for doing so, just because they think their personal judgement is better than the law, doesn't make it right? 

If you think that's not so, then petition to have that restriction removed and listen to the arguments for and against some objections are probably from local residents and neighbouring farmers.
Parking without permission may have an adverse affect on other motorhomers, the commission owns over 66000 hectares in Scotland alone, it would be nice to be able to use the car parks for overnighting, if some sort of legislation could be agreed upon.

Regards Dave


----------



## davesport (Nov 12, 2006)

I generally dont stop in places with these signs. Why, well not because of the restriction but because it's generally not the kind of place I want the kids running about. 
There are exceptions & I've been approached by a council employee asking why I was there. The explanation was simple. I'd driven to a very remote area & there was nowhere & I mean nowhere to camp legally. The council employee hat then came off & she explained that I was more than welcome to stay provided there was no trace of me being there when I left. As a local living within sight of the car park she told me that the small local population have no problem with people staying for short periods of time. The reason the signs were erected was to help prevent a repeat of the car parks inundation by travelers. It had taken six weeks to get them shifted & cost thousands of pounds to clean up the mess that they left. Which BTW required the use of low grade bio-hazard protection for the operatives cleaning up the filth.. But she was carefull to explain that they had to be seen to be even handed in thier approach. If it was OK for MH'ers to stay then the travellers might come back.

This is definitely a case of common sense having gone out the window. There will be those who draw the conclusion that if the rules are broken then there will be anarchy. Well, I for one dont agree. I've been wild camping in one shape or form for close to 30 years & have never been asked to leave. 


Can't remember who said it, but it goes something like: Rules are made for the interpretation of wise men & the blind obedience of fools.

Dave.


----------



## EJB (Aug 25, 2007)

First point:- Someone owns the land....Why should you be allowed to park on my drive?
Second point:- Signs are only put up for a reason. This could be that the last Gipsy entourage left mountains of waste or other vehicles simply cut up and made an eyesore of a pleasent grassy area.
Third point:-In my part of the country every field and reasonable 'pull off' spot is blocked due to the above 'couldn't care less idiots'.

Finally:- It baffles me why so many so called responsible MH'ers would want to turn every 'Beauty Spot' into a camp site.


----------



## hilldweller (Mar 8, 2008)

Be warned, under new parking regulations they need only take a picture of you and the fine drops through the letterbox.

Or you could be visited by one of those terribly nice clamper people.


----------



## davesport (Nov 12, 2006)

EJB who's the idiot ? I suggest perhaps it's you. Before you go loosing of a few rounds you should have all the fact at your disposal.



> Someone owns the land....Why should you be allowed to park on my drive?


I was about to be a fare paying passenger on a Cal Mac ferry & using their land.

What's your beef with that ? What are you legitimately meant to do. If you've driven forty miles on a single track road & missed the last ferry. Err let me think about that for a minute :lol:

Not every field or pull-off spot where I live is blocked off.  There's loads, & if used with consideration will remain so.

I suggest in future you moderate the tone of your posts. Lets stick to the facts & not get carried away.

Dave.


----------



## 98316 (Mar 25, 2006)

Having read all the above posts, it has occured to me that the Forestry Commission own a huge amount of land, with lots of car parks. 

Now wouldn't it be nice if we could come up with some membership system whereby we make a contribution to their Forestry Fund each year in return for 'car park passes' that allow us to reside over night in their car parks. They could apply rules such as maximum of 48 hours stay, so that would possibly overcome the problems of travellers. They wouldn't have to 'do' anything, but they could make quite a bit of money from it, which they could then use to develop more forestry.

Perhaps we as a community of MH's could approach them with some sort of well thought out proposal. Is just a thought, it would certainly give us plenty of choices.


----------



## EJB (Aug 25, 2007)

I think that you will find my post very factual.

If you are legally visiting my house you may park in my drive as you may park on Cal Mac land.
Perhaps common sense will show itself in those very few instances but that doesn't make it a way of life.


----------



## vmeldrew (May 3, 2007)

TravelBug said:


> Having read all the above posts, it has occured to me that the Forestry Commission own a huge amount of land, with lots of car parks.
> 
> Now wouldn't it be nice if we could come up with some membership system whereby we make a contribution to their Forestry Fund each year in return for 'car park passes' that allow us to reside over night in their car parks. They could apply rules such as maximum of 48 hours stay, so that would possibly overcome the problems of travellers. They wouldn't have to 'do' anything, but they could make quite a bit of money from it, which they could then use to develop more forestry.
> 
> Perhaps we as a community of MH's could approach them with some sort of well thought out proposal. Is just a thought, it would certainly give us plenty of choices.


As in Northern Ireland;

http://www.forestserviceni.gov.uk/index/activities/touring-caravans-(touring-in-the-trees).htm


----------



## drcotts (Feb 23, 2006)

Hi
We always have a rule never to park where there is any clear restrctions stated. Not only do we feel a little unsafe if we did ignore them but it does give the MH fraternity a bad name when others see you blatenty ignoring signs etc. The local chap passing by walking his dog will moan like buggery in the pub at night saying all sorts about us to hos mates and spreading the "dustbins on wheels" attitude.

Sorry but thats the way we see it.

Phill


----------



## WSandME (May 16, 2007)

We generally wild camp, but after much research both here and elsewhere before we started motorhoming, we came up with a few rules-of-thumb:

# Never park anywhere that is not obviously council or common land (i.e. nowhere which is privately owned) This rule waived if a fee is payable or explicit permission has been granted to us.

# Never park where there are "Clamping" warnings - even if the warning allows, say 2 hours, I won't stop where there's a clamping sign.

# Always park more than a vehicle's width from the carriageway - this eliminates most lay-bys.

# Prefer lay-bys which are screened from the carriageway.

# Avoid lay-bys which are overlooked by private properties. I'd not be too pleased if someone camped in front of my house - even though I have no legal recourse. Also be aware that if you're stopping somewhere, you're unlikely to be the only one, and the property owner may be subjected to a continual stream of people parking in front of his property - so don't be tempted to think "it's only for one night...".

# Always make sure that we never compromise any field entances on a lay-by - they are surprisingly common.

We've stopped in some remarkable places, and have never had the smallest problem - well except for one time in Germany when we just ran out of time to look for a suitable place, and stopped in the middle of a line of trucks on a lay-by on a busy road. It was also chucking it down, so the noise kept us from having a good sleep.

We have also stopped a couple of time in otherwise idyllic spots which were spoiled by the amount of rubbish deposited - everything from fast-food wrappers to used nappies. I despair of our society when people can do such things.


----------



## Greggy (Nov 13, 2007)

As a group of people sharing the same hobby we should be responsible at all times and where it says you can't overnight we shouldn't.

I don't think we should ever camp anywhere other than designated sites unless no sites are within a reasonable distance or there are none. So called wild camping gives us a reputation for being cheapskates among other things.

I didn't see anything offensive in your post Ted.

Cheers,

Greg.


----------



## Spacerunner (Mar 18, 2006)

TravelBug said:


> Having read all the above posts, it has occured to me that the Forestry Commission own a huge amount of land, with lots of car parks.
> 
> Now wouldn't it be nice if we could come up with some membership system whereby we make a contribution to their Forestry Fund each year in return for 'car park passes' that allow us to reside over night in their car parks. They could apply rules such as maximum of 48 hours stay, so that would possibly overcome the problems of travellers. They wouldn't have to 'do' anything, but they could make quite a bit of money from it, which they could then use to develop more forestry.
> 
> Perhaps we as a community of MH's could approach them with some sort of well thought out proposal. Is just a thought, it would certainly give us plenty of choices.


They already have, its called Forest Holidays, now run by the C&CC, but you have to pay!!
Every time I use their facilities its a different price, seems their booking system is so complicated none of the staff understands it. So, i just lie through my teeth, no dog, under sixteen, OAP, war veteran etc. They get so confused!! Some times I win, sometimes I lose!!..


----------



## 108526 (Nov 29, 2007)

I don't blame you for fibbing a little, £4 it cost me for my two little dogs for one night this past weekend and they couldn't even go out on the grass, I had to take them off site!


----------



## krull (Jul 22, 2006)

MandyandDave said:


> Difficult one..
> Those who park on land where no parking overnight is signed, will have to face any penalty imposed for doing so, Regards Dave


And exactly what penalty is that?

Private owners cannot issue fines like a local authority.

We use our common sense. Arrive late, leave early. Most no overnight signs are there because that is the easy option.

However I do not wish to convert anyone, as if we all did it, then the law would be changed.

If the law is a ass, ignore it is my motto.


----------



## 88781 (May 9, 2005)

> And exactly what penalty is that?


 Hi, The ones that usually have a fixed penalty notice attached to it?


----------



## tonyt (May 25, 2005)

Long, long ago, travelling late, we parked up in a layby on the hillside overlooking Dubrovnik. We were woken early the next morning by the sound of people chattering - they had formed an orderly queue around our van which just happened to be parked at the local bus stop.


----------



## babyrhino (Oct 19, 2006)

This weekend we were in Cornwall for a family party and wanted to park near to the venue to avoid taxi fares etc.

There was a very handy public car park which was clearly signed for no overnight camping with a potential £60 fine. A relative who has been a major force in local politics for a number of years told us that they were very keen on this in this area as they were concerned about people overstaying their welcome and causing problems so they felt that they needed the bye-laws to protect themselves.

At the time of the discussion we had parked on a wide public road, also near the venue with no parking restrictions so we asked whether we could stay there overnight. No problem!

Now please don't come back and tell me that parking there was potentially dangerous - possibly so but that is a personal preference. 

My point is that it does make you wonder why a bit of sensible discussion between local authorities and responsible motorhoming organisations cannot find a solution to the problem. They obviously are not bothered about having us in their towns but they are tied by worries about inappropriate use.

Brian


----------



## Boff (May 10, 2005)

Hi,

we honestly love wild camping. Not because of the money, we can afford to go on camp sites, but because of the fun: Fun to be away from it all, to spend the night at places where the only noises come from sheep or birds. Fun to be under a really dark night sky. And it goes without saying that we never leave any traces behind.

But we do respect "No overnight parking" signs. Unless we have the explicit permission of the owner to stay there nevertheless.

Over the years we have established some "golden rules" regarding finding wild spots: 

We never try to find a wild spot after sunset. If we have not found a place before it gets dark we go to an official site. (As we mainly travel in Germany or France there is practically always an "aire du camping-car" or a "stellplatz" nearby.)
If we are in a town that has an official "stellplatz" or "aire", then we use it.
We always inspect the place before settling down. No matter whether it is official or not. If something is dodgy about it, we move on.
If the place is private, or ownership status is not clear, or if there is an inhabited house nearby, we go and ask. On practically all occasions so far we were very welcome to stay. 
If there is a parking place sign, and/or a pay&display machine that allows us to pull a parking ticket for the night, we consider this as an invitation.

However: While we do accept regulations regarding how, where and how long to park our van, it is of no ones concern what we do *inside* it while it is (legally) parked. So we have ignored signs like "No cooking in vehicles", and will continue to do so.

Best Regards,
Gerhard


----------



## krull (Jul 22, 2006)

MandyandDave said:


> > And exactly what penalty is that?
> 
> 
> Hi, The ones that usually have a fixed penalty notice attached to it?


I thought I'd ask because I've wild camped when the mood takes for 20 years and never seen one.


----------



## 106916 (Sep 8, 2007)

EJB said:


> First point:- Someone owns the land....Why should you be allowed to park on my drive?
> Second point:- Signs are only put up for a reason. This could be that the last Gipsy entourage left mountains of waste or other vehicles simply cut up and made an eyesore of a pleasent grassy area.
> Third point:-In my part of the country every field and reasonable 'pull off' spot is blocked due to the above 'couldn't care less idiots'.
> 
> Finally:- It baffles me why so many so called responsible MH'ers would want to turn every 'Beauty Spot' into a camp site.


First point: my drive isn't 5000 (or million) acres of wilderness which I shouldn't own anyway.
Second point: I am not an irresponsible traveller and respect my environment.
Third point: as Dave above so aptly stated: "Rules are made for the interpretation of wise men & the blind obedience of fools" and I am talking west coast Scotland not the New Forest etc down where the grass is now grey!
Vidura


----------



## 106916 (Sep 8, 2007)

drcotts said:


> Hi
> We always have a rule never to park where there is any clear restrctions stated. Not only do we feel a little unsafe if we did ignore them but it does give the MH fraternity a bad name when others see you blatenty ignoring signs etc. The local chap passing by walking his dog will moan like buggery in the pub at night saying all sorts about us to hos mates and spreading the "dustbins on wheels" attitude.
> 
> Sorry but thats the way we see it.
> ...


Actually Phill, I think that is a bit paranoid although an understandable concern. Many people are a bit more subtle than that (many aren't of course) and those that are see the harmlessness of who we are and what we do and also understand why we do it - because we enjoy and appreciate the beauty of the surroundings and generallt are responsible people.
I think motor homers are appreciated (and perhaps envied) more than we realise!
Vidura


----------



## krull (Jul 22, 2006)

As usual this is the kind of thread that splits into two camps. Those that do and see no problem. And there are those that don't and think no-one else should. 

The same happens when talking about disposing of grey water on the road.

The key here is consideration and common sense. 

There are two plces I often visit, Scotland and Cornwall. 

I would (almost) never wild camp in Cornwall - too populated, too liable to hack peple off. 

I Scotland I mainly wild camp, even if it is forestry commission land or there is a no-overnight sign, provided the area is not populated. There is just not the population pressure to cause a problem. 

As for the forestry commission / private land situation. I consider forestry commission public land, despite what the last tory gov't did!


----------



## 106916 (Sep 8, 2007)

Greggy said:


> I don't think we should ever camp anywhere other than designated sites unless no sites are within a reasonable distance or there are none. So called wild camping gives us a reputation for being cheapskates among other things.
> Greg.


The problem is there often are no designated sites! The landowners have copped the lot! We as the general public are so marginalised from the planet which is our rightful home that we have lost all our inherent rights and freedoms to enjoy it - innocently and without doing any harm.
That is why I object to blanket prohibitions without the intelligent use of my own judgement as to what is appropriate and what is not.
If I thought it was an irresponsible and harmful thing to do to park up in any particular area/situation then I wouldn't do it. As it is there are so many wonderful spots to park up in that are needlessly restricted that the prohibitions lose the power of their own purpose.
We are always sensitive to the private needs of others and the consequences of repeated actions by such as ourselves but many restrictions do not encompass these concerns but are purely abstract!
Vidura


----------



## davesport (Nov 12, 2006)

I bought my van knowing that most of its use would be in Scotland. I've been wild camping for years & the MH was a further extension of this. If you take the line that


> Someone owns the land....Why should you be allowed to park on my drive?


 there would be no wild camping anywhere......ever. Nobody would be allowed to go backpacking in the remote areas of the highlands.

Never mind what the signs say, if you're on someone elses land, IE not on your own property there is nothing to stop them turfing you off. That's the difference. In all these years I've never been asked to leave, ever. It's not someone's garden you're parking in, have a reality check.

I would respectfully suggest, if you're not comfortable with wild camping, which for the purposes of this discussion is anywhere other than a campsite or your own property, quite simply, don't do it.

Dave.


----------



## 106916 (Sep 8, 2007)

davesport said:


> If you take the line that
> 
> 
> > Someone owns the land....Why should you be allowed to park on my drive?
> ...


Hi Dave It is great that we are saying the same thing - "don't carry innappropriate value judgements into fields where thay don't apply" as EJB is doing. We are talking millions of hectares of wilderness not someone's back garden - he might like the safety and moral security of a campsite but he can't transfer those values (?!) to wildcamping in Scotland or anywhere else outwith the urban and suburban. It is a whole different ball game. And hey isn't the wilderness just beautiful!
Vidura


----------



## EJB (Aug 25, 2007)

The thread was started with reference to places where a sign stating 'No Overnight Parking'. was displayed.
I think that many have not really noticed that!? :wink:


----------



## thieawin (Jun 7, 2006)

It can be difficult.

I am all for wild camping where it is reasonable and will not cause damage or endanger me and my van. It may be a cut off layby where a road has been straightened or a carpark it may be the promenade of a saeaside resort. It may be in a National Park or on Forestry Commission land, there may or may not be no overnight stay signs.

Each one will have its specific considerations, at what time am I arriving and leaving, is the restriction a national one enforceable by police or a local one enforceable by a local authority? If the latter is it likely that a jobsworth civil servant will be out and about to enforce whilst I am there.

I also consider what my effect will be on the environment, local housing, the view, access etc, I don't want to make a nuisnace of myself or drop fellow motorhomers in it by my bad example

So mainly I would avoid Forestry Conmmission, and National Trust and National Park facilities. There will be wardens, many will be volunteers and officious

many local authority car parks are a safe bet apart from the threat of the sign, No one is going to get up to chase you off, but do leave early

The ones I do perverse pleasure from the most are the seaside resorts who seem to have a total ban on motorhome parking, let alone overnight stays. I agree that a line of camper vans along the prom, spoling the view is not good, but a quick overnight, well, I will take the risk and be gone before the Town hall switchboard opens at 09.00

Until we get local and public authority aires why not?

The tyick is not to stay long, just enough for the sleep over and then off, have breakfast elsewhere and don't go back two nights running or stay all day

Unless you have consent

Whatever you do be clean and tidy


----------



## Boff (May 10, 2005)

EJB said:


> The thread was started with reference to places where a sign stating 'No Overnight Parking'. was displayed.
> I think that many have not really noticed that!? :wink:


Oh yes I have noticed that.

And I have said that we do respect these signs, unless we have the land owner's explicit permission to stay there nevertheless.

However: If a whole region is swamped with such signs (or other motorhome deterrents like height barriers), then it might happen that we get the feeling to be not welcome there, with the natural consequence that we move on and spend our money elsewhere...

Best Regards,
Gerhard


----------



## EJB (Aug 25, 2007)

Gerhard,
Quote:- "If a whole region is swamped with such signs (or other motorhome deterrents like height barriers),"

I do live in a region like that where, as already stated, every field and track is blocked with very large bales of hay or large rocks or, in the case of the forestry land, locked barriers.
Another case is a very picturesque seaside town where during the day MHs/Campervans line the front blocking site of the sea for all the visitors. But, the real problem was that those same vehicles then parked at night in the few narrow streets literally next to the small cottage bedroom windows. That practice has now been stopped!
Obviously the tiny minority of MH'ers who actually frequent this site are possibly very considerate etc but when some people are prepared to camp next to 'no overnight parking' signs I get rathor irritated.
I don't want the whole of Britain to be fortified against 'large vehicle visiters'. 
I have no problems with 'wild camping', I've slept in more fields, barns and ditches than most, but it is a very delicate balancing act.

I shall be in Utrecht a couple of times in June on my way to and from Germany, I hope it's easier in your part of the world.  :wink:


----------



## Greggy (Nov 13, 2007)

It seems with some, all rules are up for grabs, so you just make your own mind up whether or not you'll abide by them. 

It's the old story the few spoil it for the many. 

Cheers, 

Greg.


----------



## badger (May 9, 2005)

'Fraid I'm with the "don't do it's" on this one.

I'm a very "sitting on the fence" sort of chap, not wishing to cause upset. but I do wonder what makes some people think that they are above the law. Even if that law is "only made by the landowner"......as far as coastal resorts are concerned there are lots of local businesses who depend on travellers to use their facilities.

Sorry if I upset anyone, just my opinion.


----------



## krull (Jul 22, 2006)

badger said:


> 'Fraid I'm with the "don't do it's" on this one.
> 
> I'm a very "sitting on the fence" sort of chap, not wishing to cause upset. but I do wonder what makes some people think that they are above the law. Even if that law is "only made by the landowner"......as far as coastal resorts are concerned there are lots of local businesses who depend on travellers to use their facilities.
> 
> Sorry if I upset anyone, just my opinion.


I don't think it is a question of felling you are above the law. It's more a case of ignoring petty rules.

It always fascinates me why the british as a nation complain about petty beaurocracy, yet fall over themselves to comply with it. I suspect the avereage french m/h'er would consider it his birthright to stop overnight in such a situation.

If most disagree then fine. If it was an epidemic, then there would undoubtedly be a crackdown.


----------



## SpeedyDux (Jul 13, 2007)

I expect I will be shot down for this post.

My tuppence worth is that those who really want to wild camp unlawfully or without permission will do it anyway, so I fail to understand why they keep seeking support from threads like this to justify conduct that is essentially either tolerated trespass or flouting petty regulations - even if their intentions are to do no harm and leave no trace of their visit.

There will be a problem for everybody if unauthorised wild camping gets too concentrated in certain areas, i.e. areas of outstanding natural beauty or coastal resorts.

Even if only a relatively few motorhomes are involved, this could be perceived by the relevant authorities and landowners as a persistent nuisance. The result is more likely to be local car parks etc. being closed to motorhomes. The authorities won't draw distinctions between the Traveller community and bona fide motorcaravanners needing an overnight stop.

SD


----------



## pippin (Nov 15, 2007)

_The authorities *won't* draw distinctions between the Traveller community and bona fide motorcaravanners needing an overnight stop. _

Too right they won't - they already don't.

A blanket prohibition saves them the bother.

PS I have just noticed my unintended pun re _blanket_ and _overnight_.


----------



## davesport (Nov 12, 2006)

> so I fail to understand why they keep seeking support from threads like this to justify conduct that is essentially either tolerated trespass or flouting petty regulations - even if their intentions are to do no harm and leave no trace of their visit.


I'm not looking for support from anyone.

I'm delighted that the views of the majority dont support or participate in wild camping. It makes it easier for me to find or return to beautiful, remote & out of the way places without hinderance as I've been doing for decades. Without a single objection I hasten to add 

Not for me over zealous wardens, people with noisy generators, people who camp too close/spread themselves out too far, dogs with poorly trained owners, I could go on ad nauseum.

£0.02










Dave.


----------



## tonyt (May 25, 2005)

Lovely pic Dave - what are the GPS co ords?


----------



## oldun (Nov 10, 2005)

davesport said:


> EJB who's the idiot ? I suggest perhaps it's you. Before you go loosing of a few rounds you should have all the fact at your disposal.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I thought EJB's comments were well presented and very reasonable. Its strange how those in the wrong always get abusive about others criticising their position!


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

oldun said:


> Its strange how those in the wrong always get abusive about others criticising their position!


I'm not sure that most of the pro wild-campers here are "in the wrong" as such.

Just because some person in (questionable?) authority makes a rule does not necessarily make it either right or sensible. :roll:

The height barriers are a classic example. It cannot possibly be considered "wrong" for a motorhome to park on an authorised car park simply because it is a bit taller than the average car (_assuming it pays for all the spaces it uses of course_)!!!

Many such rules are made for expediency only - it's the easy way out to punish the many for the sins of the few! 8O

Having said that however, there is a point worth pondering. Several posts have been careful to say they stay for only one night, arrive late and leave early so as to avoid upsetting the neighbours. Very laudable, BUT . . . .

THEY each stay only one night, but some body else does the same tomorrow, and another person the next day, and so on and so on!!! It's very easy to see how there could be a motorhome parked up every night for months on end, if not throughout the year, and to the locals it's just _"a bloody motorhome that's there EVERY flaming night_!!!!".

And what about arriving late and leaving early? If anyone lives nearby it's not very considerate to disturb their sleep at both ends of the night, and houses are not always obvious in the dark when they have tall hedges and no lights on.

Difficult to come down firmly on either side of the fence as so much depends on individual situations and circumstances. :? :? :?

Cheers


----------



## Lys520 (Mar 24, 2008)

SpeedyDux said:


> I expect I will be shot down for this post.
> 
> Even if only a relatively few motorhomes are involved, this could be perceived by the relevant authorities and landowners as a persistent nuisance. The result is more likely to be local car parks etc. being closed to motorhomes. The authorities won't draw distinctions between the Traveller community and bona fide motorcaravanners needing an overnight stop.
> 
> SD


I have never wild camped, unfortunately. I love the idea, but as yet, as a single woman with a young child I haven't plucked up the courage - one day eh?

With reference to the above quote: Can anyone explain to me what the term "nuisance" could mean, if we were arriving late and leaving early, with no trace of us ever having been there?

Lys


----------



## 107088 (Sep 18, 2007)

Wild Camper type A
Turns up quietly, doesnt leave a mess, having cleaned up after themselves, and others at times, drives off without fuss the net day. Not a sign of them when they've gone, and reasonable behaviour when they're there. A positive impact. Welcome to our bit of loveliness.

Wild camper type B.
Turns up at night with loudly revving engine, major issues parking up, puts themselves into a dangerous position, cookes the meal, dumps the oil from the pan outside, open bag of rubbish left at scene, empties the toilet into the bushes, and the broken toy, bike, tv ( delete any which dont apply). Not good, irresponsible, dirt and niusance, rude, aggressive and unpleasant.


Now, picture yourself as the resident/landowner or council bod. You dont mind type A, but cant tolerate type B, but you've never met the camper before, so, 

How do you know which is which? Well, obviously you dont, until after they leave. then its too late.
The easiest way to prevent type B is to put up a sign " No Overnight Parking" stuff a 60 £ fine on it for good measure, protects all the locals and other tourists from Type B.

the sit back and wait for the " petty rules and regulations should be guided by not rigid response, from, predominently Type A overnighters, So as I cant win, I'll just prohibit everyone, and keep the locals happy. Cos thats who pays the piper around here.

Now, I dont wild camp, not from any great aversion, but with my truck, I cant get to most places I'd want to camp anyway.


----------



## clodhopper2006 (Aug 13, 2006)

Goodness me! This thread has brought some 'holier than though' sentiments out. All this banging on about "nuicence wild campers", people being in the wrong etc. If we take nuicence factor to it's logical conclusion lets ban motorhomes full stop lest they offend someones visual amenity or delay a car driver who wishes to travel faster than the motorhome in front.
Personaly I will always wild camp as well as using sites and those who dont like it, well I feel sorry for them as they will never experience the joy of waking to the sound of solitude, the moorhen on the loch in the mountains. Or a sunrise on the Moray Firth silouetting the playing dolphins. Nor will they decend from a hard day in the mountains straight into there motorhome to enjoy a peaceful night without a drive home or to a site.
So all you who must, by all means gather at your manicured sites and believe in your hearts that there is no other way. For as long as you do this you wil be leaving the wild sites to motorhomers such as myself who know that there is an alternative and we will enjoy our peace wether or not we a fround upon by some of the posters on this and other threads. We will spread ourselves far and wide so as to be virtually insignificant, unlike the white cities so many sites are in our beautiful areas and the vast majority of us will leave no trace of our occupancy.

Bob


----------



## 107088 (Sep 18, 2007)

Bit of a quandry there tho' innit?
I do appreciate your thoughts Mr. Clodhopper, Sir, and envy you the vista awaiting you, but can I ask, if theres you, and 10 other vans overnighting in a wild manner.....that reads wrong but what I mean is, if theres 11 vans wild camping in one spot, doesnt that ruin the very solitude of your place?
If you turned up at your wild spot, saw a sign and ignored it, would you also have a problem about the wheel clamp and the fine plus release fee?
( if that was applicable obviously).
I dont care about wild camping, only 'cos my travels, dont put me in a position where I couold wild camp if I wanted to...actually unless the truck stop on the north end of the M3, which hardly qualifies as a place of natural beauty.


----------



## clodhopper2006 (Aug 13, 2006)

Being an inhabitant of Scotland I have never encountered the 10 van scenario in many years. Infact 99 times out of 100 it's just my van otherwise as you say, the solitude has gone.
I've also never encountered wheel clamp warning signs in the Scottish wildernes either I'm afraid.
Maybe us wild campers of Scotland have led sheltered lives as I'm afraid you speak with forked tounge


----------



## 107088 (Sep 18, 2007)

Give me a big, obvious clue, very unsublte, because, thus far, I have no idea when I have spoken on this thread, or others with a forked tongue.
Yes, perhaps your Scottish wilderness is a sheltered environment, but areas of great stunningness aren't exclusive to Scotland.

I still cant work out why I have apparently spoken with a forked tongue, and I have to say, I feel insulted that you should say so.
So, rather than carry on, I shall excercise my right to bugger off.


----------



## clodhopper2006 (Aug 13, 2006)

Oh come on Bandaid lighten up for heavens sake! Didn't you see my smillie? I was using a light hearted figure of speach simply meaning that I had no experience of what you descibed. Hey, I come on here for amusement not to insult anyone. My appologies though if you took it that way as it certainly wasnt meant.

Bob


----------



## EJB (Aug 25, 2007)

Well done Bob for apologising 

I've been waiting sometime for one re the following post but sadly it has never appeared :wink:



davesport said:


> EJB who's the idiot ? I suggest perhaps it's you. Before you go loosing of a few rounds you should have all the fact at your disposal.
> What's your beef with that ?
> I suggest in future you moderate the tone of your posts.
> Dave.


----------



## badger (May 9, 2005)

Ummm......... :roll: call me daft if you like............ :wink: 

but wasn't this thread started with discussion on whether you should overnight in a place where there IS A NOTICE DISPLAYED that says "no overnight camping" In other words, would you disregard the notice and camp anyway.

Don't recall that is was about wildcamping in general............or anywhere else for that matter... :lol: :lol:


----------



## Mandi (Jan 10, 2008)

bandaid said:


> would you also have a problem about the wheel clamp and the fine plus release fee?


I haven't read all of this thread so apologies if I am repeating anyone, but... clamping should never be a problem as it is illegal to clamp a vehicle which is carrying gas. My husband was advised by a traffic warden to get a sticker on his work van for this reason.


----------



## 107088 (Sep 18, 2007)

Actually Clods old lad, I didnt have a problem with your post, but did have to clear off before I could reply. Just beat my personnal record for hanging on the phone listening to some robot telling me how important my call is...................for 57 minutes: and counting. AND, would you believe I wanted to upgrade my tariff to double the amount....not now tho' just cancelled it instead.


----------



## Greggy (Nov 13, 2007)

Hello,

Good to see a healthy and mostly good natured debate still going on here with some setting out very fair examples - SD, Phill, Dave (Zebedee) and Bandaid illustrate the situation perfectly of why/why not.

Just to put the other side, I too can sit outside my van and watch the stars with no surrounding light or noise pollution whatsoever, I can wake in the morning to the sound of all manner of birds and watch a great variety of wildlife. I can even watch the dolphins in the Moray Firth although admittedly there, the vans are in rows, still, just to top it all, I know I'm not offending or upsetting any land-owner, locals, Council or other bodies because I'm on a campsite.

I remember some years back staying overnight in the wee site at John O' Groats, it had minimal facilities and never charged much, in fact the loo was the one for the community hall if I remember right. We went off for a wander to the cliffs to watch the sea birds, accessed down a track and I think there was more "wild campers" gathered there, than vans in the campsite.

Cheers,

Greg.


----------



## pippin (Nov 15, 2007)

Mandi, thank you for your post stating:

_*Clamping should never be a problem as it is illegal to clamp a vehicle which is carrying gas. *_

That is a new one on me.

Not wishing to brand you as an Old Wife but is this Tale correct?


----------

