I don't think the CP's are getting the message IMHO.

The travellers who want to purchase low cost/no frills or free camp sites are the people the CP's would likely never see anyway.

I think also from memory of reading that research the figures for the amount spent by "commercial" campers vs Low cost/free campers was flawed because there was a group they did not include in the low cost/free spending patterns. The true figures were the other way around IE the free/low cost campers actually spent more.

I note also that the CP's are in the minority as far as accommodation revenue at only 12%.

They may wake up one day

frank

If someone conducted a survey to determine how much car buyers spent at a Rolls Royce showroom compared to those at a bicycle shop the results would probably indicated that the Rolls Royce buyers had more money.

Sounds like a load of wombat cubes.

I reckon there is room for both but even then I would like to see an area, even down the back of a CVP with much cheaper rates i.e. $5-10 per night. Also a cheaper rate at CVP for the solo traveler, then just maybe the CVP owners wouldn't complain so much as the older traveler might use them more. Who knows, they might even have less vacant sites each night. My way of thinking is $10 is better than nothing. The PR wouldn't hurt either.

Dougwe wrote:

---

Sounds like a load of wombat cubes.

I reckon there is room for both but even then I would like to see an area, even down the back of a CVP with much cheaper rates i.e. $5-10 per night. Also a cheaper rate at CVP for the solo traveler, then just maybe the CVP owners wouldn't complain so much as the older traveler might use them more. Who knows, they might even have less vacant sites each night. My way of thinking is $10 is better than nothing. The PR wouldn't hurt either.

---

 Part quote: I would like to see an area, even down the back of a CVP with much cheaper rates i.e. $5-10 per night.

that would suit you, down the back with the wombat cubes  I hope you get what you want and I will supply the cubes free of charge 

The paid ad in the newspaper was a full page ad and included a large picture of a caravan on the road and the Caravan Industry Association of WA logo and their website, www.caravanwa.com.au which promotes travel in WA and the caravan park.

The focus of the ad to me seemed to be directed at shires and their ratepayers not to fund free or low cost camping sites.

I wonder how they survey came up with those figures?   As a hypothetical comparison, for every traveller comes to town and stays in a town caravan park for a number of days how many other don't but still spend their money during that time.   Yes, the town caravan park person will refuel and buy food (most for use in the van) but in the meantime during their stay how many of those staying in nearby free or low cost camps also go into town and refuel, buy food and other supplies and pay for attractions as well.

Add to those the many who are passing through and just stop for fuel and food or other supplies at the same time, how could the survey include them?

Just another attempt to force councils with pressure from their ratepayers to close free or low cost camping areas IMHO to force travellers into the town caravan parks.   

 

-- Edited by Vic41 on Monday 26th of May 2014 10:21:24 AM

Brenda and Alan wrote:

---

Reading para 3 would indicate that van parks pay 0.38 cents more into the community than they take in. If this was the case they would all be bankrupt. Very shonky reporting of a very shonky survey.
Alan

---

Gday...

What the article is trying to say is that for every $1 GROSSED through the books of a caravan park, the community's economy is $1.38 better off.

That is not that the van park spends $1.38 for every $1 the van park grosses, but rather that should $100,000 be the van park's 'turnover', the local economy reflects activity, to the value of $138,000, from those who have visited their community, stayed and spent on local attractions and businesses.

I do not find it difficult to accept that the majority of those who stay in van parks are quite probably 'still-working' and therefore have the ability to spend more and often stay longer. I would would also suggest it would be fairly indicative that those who make the most use of 'free' camping spots within or close to a town are the 'retired/semi-retired' folk - trying to contain their costs.

One thing is increasingly certain. The folk in many towns, on or near 'tourist' attractions, or 'attractive' sights (eg beaches, lakes etc), are becoming more intolerant of crowds of vans and back-packers crammed into their towns. Even if the rubbish is left in bins someone has to empty these bins and often these bins become overflowing due to the volume of campers. Additionally, even with a policy of "self-contained only", many still camp overnight and jest let it all 'run free' - OK in some circumstances, but often so many campers make the place almost unsanitary (and perhaps soggy). Councils are elected officers and will respond to their constituents' concerns.

Given the photos I see posted on the various forums of member's camps in their travels I do feel much sympathy for the communities that suffer the 'northern exodus' of old folk, and back-packers. This is particularly so in those beachside, lakeside areas close to built-up areas with dozens of vans etc in what are really only 'rest areas' or picnic areas for the locals.

And the volume of 'old folk' travelling is not diminishing. 

I must admit I agree with Dougwe. A 'compromise' solution definitely could be that van parks provide an area "down the back" on a clear area at a nominal price (eg $5-$10) for an overnight or two to restock, shower, wash clobber, and visit a local attraction. One would think that would be a 'win-win' to all.

Cheers - John

The report is only one paragraph long as it continues to repeat itself all the way through. Still that aside I am wondering if we could come up with another name other than free camping. If we think about it, really there is no such thing, Ok we may not pay for site fees when in these spots, however in these towns that supposedly only benefit from CP dwellers, on the way to the camp spot, all travellers will stop for the fuel, food, clothing, camp supplies, etc, no not all at once but it is spread out. So once the money is spent on these things we choose to go where we feel like going, wether it be a CP or a camp site free or otherwise.

The last I heard we were still a free country and we had choice. The CP owners seemingly wish to take this away from those who travel. I think it would be a small group of vocal people getting all the publicity. The squeakiest wheel gets heard the loudest type of thing.
Those of us out there camping in a free camp or CP, are too busy having a good life and enjoying ourselves to be worried about this type of thing. These CP owners would probably do well to have a look in the mirror and if their grumpy ideals are showing on their faces and to their guests well that is why they have empty sites.

I have no idea what the answer is, except to continue to enjoy life while I can. I stay in both free camps and CPs but the price of some of the CPs are just ridiculous. I agree with Dougwe, a single price would be an advantage also, and something these grumps could look at, to attract a whole group of travellers that so often get overlooked.

Oh well that is life and my 2cents worth, now I will go and sit and watch the waves roll in, soak up the sun, not at a free camp, but at a well priced CP, in a little town where I have spent a number of $$$$ in the 2 weeks that I have been here.

I wish they would give the demographics of the users. Cant imagine many pensioner nomads being able to afford to stay and spend like that. Must be younger people - maybe with kids to be entertained????
I guess we would need to show our seniors card for the cheap discount 'down the back'. I was asked if I had one today at the Beaudesert CP - I forget to ask for discounts!

The figures quoted in this report are at best rubbery and I believe designed to mislead their local community.

Hi Vic In Denham at the moment, heading for Hamlin Pool then on to Perth, friends with us are going north when they leave us and we have the camps 6 book

Who in there right mind ever use a onsite cabin in a caravan park?

The caravan parks charge almost the same price or more then a motel, but they don't supply linen? not sure if you have to use your own pillows?

A motel charges a single rate a double rate and a family rate ,mostly displayed at the front on the motel so you got a bit of a idear how much its gong to cost overnight.

But a caravan park  charges app $10.00for each chld making it far more expensive then a motel?

Fancy having to carry your own sheets and blankets and pillows? are the caravan parks operating in the 1940's & charging 2014 rates?

A example below on what one caravan park charges at Chinderah south of Tweed heads.

http://www.haciendacv.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=90&Itemid=150

To stay over night in your own van

Van or Tent Site

Powered

$43.00

$45.00

$57.00

River Tent Site

Unpowered

$41.00

$43.00

$66.00

No wonder these caravan parks are crying poor, those prices be a 1/2 tank of petrol for me

-- Edited by graham (chickenman) on Tuesday 27th of May 2014 08:59:33 AM

HI Graham

We are evidently not in our right minds, as we have stayed in many onsite cabins in caravan parks, in Tassie and most of the mainland states. We find them cheaper than motels and all bedding and towels are provided for a couple also tea and coffee making facilities, they are way ahead of a motel room, there is separate room away from the bedrooms, cooking facilities are provided and a place to sit and eat your meals, in our travels so far the cost comes down to about the same as towing a van and staying on a powered site as there is a saving on fuel costs and if going to Tassie or WA it is far cheaper to fly and rent a small car and stay in cabins rather than tow a van long distances.

We have travelled all over Australia tenting, camper trailer, caravanning and in motorhomes and stayed in cabins and in every case there are pros and cons whichever way you travel, but all are great ways of getting around our great country.

So Graham why not try something different you just might find that you enjoy.

Cheers

David

_wombat_ wrote:

---

this information was conducted by THE industry, so no more.

---

 Yes, the BDO note at the foot of the document says very specifically,

Data taken from the Caravan, RV & Accommodation Industry of Australia..........

 Cheers

-- Edited by Oz Gypsy on Wednesday 28th of May 2014 01:43:10 PM