The increasing loss of free camps

[Cuppa]

WARNING: This will be a very long post, but I assume that many who love 4wd's also love to camp, be it with a tent, camper trailer or caravan & thus it will be of interest.

On another forum I have posted what is below. First a little background. It is a forum largely inhabited by members of the Campervan & Motorhome Club of Australia (CMCA), an organisation which among others is lobbying local authorities who are fed up with the mess caused by over use of free camp spots & would prefer to simply close them down. The CMCA is encouraging all of it's members to make their vehicles fully self contained (if not already so) with black & grey water tanks & rubbish containment. They promote a 'Leave No Trace' scheme (LNT), which on the face of it is a good thing, encouraging folk to care for their environment & show consideration to other campers/travellers.

However there is another agenda, that of establishing camp spots for self contained RV's only, at the cost of allowing traditional long established camp spots to close to the rest of the travelling/camping public, and they are already having some success.

Here is what I posted........ I would be interested in a) if anyone gives a stuff & b) what you think, given that fitting grey & black water tanks to the average touring 4wd is unlikely to be feasible.


Anyone would think from many of the discussions which occur on this topic right across the various RV forums that many RV owners consider that free camps are just for them!

It then follows that if they also believe that most RV's are equipped with grey & black water holding tanks that making the free camps for self contained vehicles only is a logical step to take.

I often wonder if such thinking reflects arrogance, ignorance or just self interest.

By all means push for new, private, low cost self contained vehicle only camps.
By all means encourage responsible LNT behaviours at ALL camps.
By all means encourage local authorities to provide rubbish & toilet facilities at free camps.

BUT do not restrict free camps to the relatively affluent & exclude the folks without RV's, self contained or otherwise.

And do not accept, let alone encourage the opening of any 'self contained only' free camps IF there is any possibility that such opening is likely to result in subsequent closure of another free camp.

Cuppa
Ps.
How about making regulated self containment mandatory for all motorhomes & caravans, & restricting them to only self contained camps, whilst banning them from all the existing free camps!
This would reduce the pressure on many of the 'traditional' free camps brought about by the expansion of the RV market & the emergence of publications like ’Camps' in recent years & allow those traditional free camps to continue to be used by others in the manner that they have been for decades.

Cuppa <tongue in cheek>




Cuppa I hear what you are saying but the shoe is on the other foot also with responsibility being taken by the camper. A few night ago I was at Hughenden which has a caravan park (which was well patronized) and a strictly self contained RV park which you had to register for at the Information Centre before setting up at $6 per night. There was a big sign saying if you were no self contained the only other permitted camping was at the CP. Everybody doing the right thing and the town doing quite well out of both sites obviously. Went for a walk with the dog at dawn and found one sole caravan obviously trying to hide itself behind the showgrounds for the night and doing the wrong thing grey water wise. The town is obviously doing the right thing by RVers as they see it and we should all abide by their rules while on their patch. I'm all for freedom of choice but instances like this ruin it for everybody.




What is your point A?
That folks in RV's shouldn't do the wrong thing & break the rules established for RV usage? If so I agree.

But where does that leave all the other folk, many of whom cannot afford CP fees?

I know we've had this debate before & I doubt that views will be changed by any repeat, but I'm sorry I just think it is arse about when someone who has spent their money on an RV gets a place to stay for $6 a night whilst a family who scrape together enough money for an old station wagon & a tent in order to be able to travel are expected to pay 10 times that. It's wrong.

And before any RV owners cry poor, "we are travelling on a budget/pension" etc, you were able to raise the cash somehow for your self contained vehicle ...... You may not have a great deal to live on, but you made your choice when you decided to buy your vehicle. The real point is that some folk don't ever have that choice, but still have a right and/or a need to travel & the lobbying for free & low cost camps to replace existing 'traditional' free camps is excluding them. In A's example one has to wonder how many folk have no choice but to avoid staying in Hughenden?

Lets not turn this into another discussion about how everyone can manage to camp without leaving a trace, carrying fluid containers & poo bags etc. that is not the point. What is the point is that current lobbying is pushing for self contained RV use only in traditional free camping areas as a solution to the problems caused by their over use, problems that result directly from the boom in RV ownership & use!
Granted the family with the tent & the old station wagon could (& should) practice LNT behaviour but no matter how careful & considerate of the environment & others they were, they would still be excluded from the variety of proposed 'self contained RV only sites'.

If for a moment we ignore the problems of policing rules, (which we all know get broken by folks with & without self contained RV's) the notion of expecting leave no trace behaviour as a general rule for all camp sites is quite reasonable ... But this is VERY different to the notion of examples like Hughenden which as A displays in his post is acceptable & desirable for some, whilst for others it is an example of elitism & exclusivity.

Cuppa




All of this debate just supports the argument that the focus should be on behaviour and not on equipment.





Precisely, but this is increasingly becoming forgotten or ignored.
The CMCA is having successes at turning free camp provision by local authorities into exclusive little enclaves for Rv'ers at the expense of others. This is wrong & unjust.

In addition the so called 'Freedom of Choice' movement is failing to see past the end of it's own nose. The solutions they are supporting only give them the freedom of choice not to stay in caravan parks at the expense of forcing others into them.

Cuppa






I for one don't consider us elite members because we travel in a self contained vehicle that is nonsense.
I see Cuppa's point but when you visit an established free camp with no toilets & crap & paper behind every tree, I also see why councils say self contained vehicles only.

Not all councils have the finances to establish & provide a free o'night camp with toilets for the traveling folk, so are you saying if they can't provide the toilets then don't have a self contained area, have nothing???






No S, that is not what I am saying.

At the risk of repeating myself, my beef is about the loss of free camps, many of which have been available to the travelling public for generations, as a direct result of a) overuse & b) lobbying by the very folks who are responsible for the overuse wanting to restrict them to use by folks with self contained vehicles so they can continue to use them...... & bugger everybody else. I think that’s pretty rich!

I also believe that all local authorities have a responsibility to provide overnight camping areas free of charge to the travelling public, just as they have a responsibility to provide public toilets, parking areas etc. This is the concept of the village green, public land for public use. The cost to provide a piece of land that has always been available for such use is zero. To service this land with toilets and rubbish disposal facilities, whether those facilities be on that land or close by makes far more sense than allowing the land to be degraded by soiling & littering.

Lets not bother having the discussion about 'grubs', they exist regardless, & to bring them into the discussion would only be an unnecessary distraction.

There are costs associated with servicing the basic needs of travellers, my rates pay for them in my shire, & I consider it reasonable that other shires reciprocate.
I also see no reason why the more heavily populated (& richer) local authorities should not subsidise the smaller & less financially able authorities, especially as, by definition the majority of travellers come from those more heavily populated areas.

Instead of the CMCA & other groups lobbying to exclude folk from camping lands that have traditionally been available to all of the travelling public by insisting upon quite specific vehicle regulations which many cannot afford, they could instead lobby for local authorities to accept their responsibilities to the travelling public, & for a system which ensured that this was affordable to all local authorities.

What we are seeing though is a relatively small sector of our society, the Rv'ers, suggesting to local authorities an easy, & on the face of it, desirable solution to current over use problems. If this lobbying is successful, and it appears to be headed that way, in time we will see a different set of problems arise. The non RV travelling public will still need somewhere to camp, many of whom will not be able to afford & may not wish to patronise caravan parks & so we will see a rise in what no doubt will be referred to as illegal camping.

The lucky self contained rv'ers will then be able to happily join with the local authorities & maybe even the caravan parks, in pointing the fingers of blame for the disgraceful mess.

The only way I would ever consider supporting the establishment of camp spots for self contained RV's only would be if they were in addition to an existing free camp, with provisos that ensured that such establishment were not a mean's of closing an existing free camp by 'stealth'.

The choice of 'self contained or nothing' is one that we the rv'ers have offered to local authorities as a solution. It offers them an easy way out, a means of abdicating their responsibility, whilst we sit pretty. This is selfish behaviour on our part. Some might argue it is ok for us to lobby for ourselves, but I argue this is not so when the others affected have no voice.

In New Zealand, where a condition of membership of their equivalent of the CMCA is that a member's vehicle meet minimum self containment standards I understand their members enjoy access to many self contained only RV camp spots. I imagine that this is the sort of model in the minds of many who advocate something similar here.
I wonder what is the state of free camping for the rest of the travelling public in NZ?
Do they have plenty of choice, or is free camping for them very limited. If the former, how has this been achieved, & if the latter why would we want that here?

Cuppa

[firm351]

Cuppa,

I agree with you 100%, I would'nt be able to put into as well, well said mate. I reckon most if not all caravaners and rv'ers started out travelling in a car or station wagon, with a tent and not much else staying at free camps where ever they could, so it makes me wonder why it is that a lot of them now want to restrict the options of people (like them once apon a time) that dont have the luxury of a self contained caravan or motor home. It really winds me up when i here the excuse "we are travelling on a budget/pension" while sitting in the comfort of a 100K + caravan.

[BigRAWesty]

Cuppa.. you need to apply at the top of the post, please charge your glasses and grab a fresh bottle..

I got half way threw.. be back in a sec..

Kallen Westbrook
Owner of
Westy's Accessories (http://www.nissanpatrol.com.au/forums/showthread.php?15134-Westy-s-Accessories.-A-small-back-yard-builder.)

[TheLocksmith]

I'm planning on camping where these people can't go. That's why I brought a 4x4 so I don't have them camping next to me.

Any State Forest/Park you are allowed to camp anywhere, take your guns and fish. I try to avoid Nat Parks but do have a deer license and I can say I'm not going to be having a RV next to me where I will be camping

[NissanGQ4.2]

Get use to it guys and girls :(

National Park - next to know income for government

Couple of million town houses where national park use to be - $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

And anyone that thinks government can't and will not sell off NP, well I for one would put money on it....the day will come soon enough :(\

Edit: sorry Cuppa maybe a little we off topic from the point you are discussing.

[Cuppa]

I'm planning on camping where these people can't go. That's why I brought a 4x4 so I don't have them camping next to me

Yeah me too, but unfortunately those places are getting fewer & fewer. It wasn't long ago for example, that the Gibb River Road was a wild place, where 4wd'ers could experience real adventure, camping pretty much anywhere in the bush along it's entire 600km length that they wished. Today it is impossible to do this, no camping signs in plentiful supply, & camping only permitted in expensive camp sites & a couple of National Park campgrounds.

I haven't been up to the top of the Cape York yet, but have heard it described as a 'busy highway', no doubt camping spots are far less there than just a few years back.

These are just two examples, but there are many more, and of course we all have to travel to get to these places & need somewhere to stay on our way to our destination.

From my perspective I also think it reasonable to consider the needs of others, not just what suits me.

Cuppa

[Steveo_the_Devo]

I fear it will go down this road and more - as the baby boomers hit the road in record numbers not only will we find many previously free campsites closed or improved in exchange for fees, we will also find less and less off the beaten track stuff. I suspect I will live to see tarmac all the way down the Oonadatta track and all the way up to Cape York (heck, they have recently flagged building a bridge over the Jardine). Only a matter of time as councils figure out that it is more profitable to 'open up' the outback and provide easier access to the boomers cash cow.

[TheLocksmith]

From my perspective I also think it reasonable to consider the needs of others, not just what suits me.

Cuppa

Too true but learnt a long time ago just go about your own business and not let your living effect others around you.

Leave the fighting for the next person as I'm hoping to be out in the middle of nowhere and not found :)

[Cuppa]

Too true but learnt a long time ago just go about your own business and not let your living effect others around you.



I thank you for sharing your view.
I see the problem as other people's 'living' affecting others around them.
There is a principle at stake. Public land is for the public. ........ All of the public.
If we all leave the 'fighting' for the next person they get what they want & the rest of us get shafted.

Cuppa

[TheLocksmith]

Don't get me wrong, I'll sign the partition, drive up main st honking my horn etc. Someone needs to get the ball rolling, fill in the paperwork, do the photocopying, ring all the people, send out the email....................

[Stropp]

Totally agree cuppa, you can't sit idly by and watch things get taken away by people pushing their own agenda because once it done there's no changing it!

[macca]

Well Cuppa I have taken a while to read and digest your posts and those of our fellows.
I am not at all surprised by the attitude of the RV mob that are lobbying for their exclusivity.
We wanted to camp on the Calliope River in QLD a few years back, all the spots on the road by the river were taken by wheeled camps of all sorts, not a single tent.
And all of these ass wipes had black corrugated waste hoses running from their abode down the river bank toward the river, we were thoroughly disgusted by the ignorant so and so's.
What was incredible were the number of association stickers on the back of their vehicles.
I have a low tolerance for those type of people and they are probably all supporting the exclusive access you were talking about.
Yes we leave our waste water behind when camping, but put it round the base of a tree if possible, give a little back if I can....
And dig a hole for #2's burn the paper the back fill the hole when no WC is available.
NZ is getting tougher, Dad said the Department of Conservation over there is making it harder. I'm not sure of the time frame but have heard all NZ Wicked, Jucy type vans have to carry a porta pot.
Our neighbour has a RV, he can not understand why I go off road with such an expensive vehicle as the Patrol. He loves the heard aspect of their gathering / conventions, I love the isolation.......

[janderson]

came across this a wile back. Could be useful.

TAKE NOTICE
My vehicle/trailer is roadworthy and registered.
Its current location complies with road traffic rules and regulations. At present I am resting for personal reasons. I am not able to and do not wish to move or travel any further. I will proceed when I am able and it is safe to do so. Legal reasons and my insurance company require me to obtain the following information from you.
Title, Surname, Given name, Address, Phone No.


Authorised by, Authority name, Authority address, Authority phone



I hereby declare that the above information supplied is true and correct and that I am ordering vehicle registration No. …………… make ………….
Model …………….. Trailer ……………………to move from its current location. In so doing I take personal responsibility for the safety of said vehicle, its occupants and other road users that may be affected by its further progress.

Signed ………………………………….. Date …………….. Time ……………..

[Cuppa]

Hi Macca,
To be fair, we shouldn't tar all rv'ers with the same brush ........ After all I am one!
There are folks who travel in RV's who do the right thing as well as those who don't.
There are the types who upon arrival in an almost empty 20 acre campground will come & set up just a few metres from our camp, as well as those like us who would find a spot as far away as possible.

There are places where digging & burning & watering trees worked well for decades, but are now subjected to such heavy use thanks to the boom in 'grey nomad'ing' & being 'advertised' in the likes of Camps Australia Wide & WikiCamps that the over use problem is a difficult one to deal with.
My view is that the solution should be a mixture of 'educating' people that 'traditional' practices in areas of very heavy usage are no longer sustainable, & lobbying for toilet & rubbish facilities to be provided, and to view 'over use' as evidence for the need for more camp spots, not for closures & restrictions to a few.

A striking example is the difference between the Stuart Highway & the Nullarbor. Both long remote lengths of bitumen. Drive across the Nullarbor & you will find plenty of places to pull off the highway for the night, all 'decorated' with the dunny streamers, people's piles & used nappies. As people have driven further & further off the highway to get away from others, & the mess, the mess has simply been extended. In contrast the Stuart Highway is relatively clean. The difference being that the Stuart is serviced. There are toilets & water tanks along the way. Crews in trucks go up & down the highway regularly to refill tanks & clean toilets. Yes maybe there could be more toilets & more crews, but in comparison to the Nullarbor where there are none the difference is quite noticeable.

There are unfortunately grubs from all walks of life. Having a self contained vehicle says nothing about the person who owns it. We arrived at the Big Horse Creek camp spot a bit off the highway at the Gregory National Park & were waiting patiently for a large Winnebago type motorhome who were packing up to vacate their spot so we could set up. They knew we were waiting, but we placed no pressure on them, instead we went for a walk along the river & enjoyed seeing an eagle catching a fish. They were just pulling out as we got back to our bus. The stench was overpowering, they had dumped the entire contents of their grey water tank just before leaving, days worth, gallons & gallons of it right where they had camped & knew we were going to camp. They waved as they drove off, the last dregs still dripping from their waste pipe.
I didn't notice, but it's quite possible they had a LNT scheme sticker in their window. There are plenty of folks who say one thing yet do another. These folks should be made to stay in'policed' self contained/LNT camps, but not at the expense of folks who do the right thing.

We don't have an onboard shower in our bus, & generate very little grey water as we are always in 'water conservation mode'. What some folks would use in 2 or 3 days lasts us for two weeks. If we fill a 9 litre bucket during an overnight stay we have been very extravagant. Like you we water a tree, (& use low phosphate washing up liquid). If we are in a heavily used area, this usually involves a long walk with the bucket to ensure we don't contribute to making a a boggy mess for the next person, & that the flora in the immediate vicinity isn't over watered. We do have a portapotti, but frequently use dig & burn where appropriate.
Our Patrol has similar water capacity, but no portapotti. Instead we have a dunny seat on a frame & a supply of compostable bags suitable for disposal in septic systems & long drops (or burying of course). One of Andy's tyre bags provides somewhere for short term storage. :)

Cuppa

[macca]

Hi Macca,
To be fair, we shouldn't tar all rv'ers with the same brush ........ After all I am one!
Cuppa

Too right mate, just that day they had a 100% waste contribution toward the river!!!!

[Cuppa]

Yes, I've seen that too. Just ignorant & thoughtless. Have never been to Calliope River, but it regularly gets a mention as a great spot which is abused by folks doing the wrong thing, including those who ignore the 48 hour time limit & stay for weeks at a time.

Cuppa

[oncedisturbed]

I understand not to tar with the same brush but simialr things are occurring here in WA regarding the "Exclusive RV'ers" - Dwellingup is a prime example as the current Baden Powell camp ground is being closed to camping and to be used as day use only, as DEC have just built a new, smaller Baden Powell campground mainly for RV's, nil campfires allowed etc.

I can't afford a camper at this stage so we are limited to tents and avoid CP's were possible as the whole nature of most RV'ers (not all) here is of utter contempt if you dont have an RV with 2 flatscreens, 6 burner stove and oven etc (exagerated a bit I know but the contempt part isn't) and spread out covering 3-4 bays.

[NP99]

Yes, I've seen that too. Just ignorant & thoughtless. Have never been to Calliope River, but it regularly gets a mention as a great spot which is abused by folks doing the wrong thing, including those who ignore the 48 hour time limit & stay for weeks at a time.

Cuppa

Why have a 48hr time limit if its not going to be enforced?

[macca]

Have a read of the OP here, not having a go at RV only it includes all of us who like to camp.
We are on here and talk about it, so many don't realise the result of their actions. They will drive past a place in years to come and wonder why that place they camped is now closed.

http://www.exploroz.com/Forum/Topic/97674/Free_Camping_Issues.aspx

[DX grunt]

Many people will go out of their way to get their own selfish way, with little or any thought of how their 'lifestyle' affects others.

I've been going to a free camping spot reasonably frequently and almost call it my holiday 'home'. I'm almost self sufficient, but there are drop dunnies and a couple of table and chairs under shelter, provided.

The problem is that it is becoming more popular, and because of its popularity, some inconsiderate people set up their campsites a week or so before they actually camp there, so no one else can take their spot. It's in an area where you're not supposed to cut down trees, collect firewood, etc, and camp fires are not permitted for about 5 months of the year. The problem last Christmas was that the trees that overhang the sandy track to this 'holiday destination' were cut back by vandals to allow caravans access. The people that did this disgust me.

I'm 54 years old in July (lol) and I've noticed that over the past few years, as I've grown older, that many people of various ages have become very set in their ways, and flexibility isn't part of their vocabulary and/or lifestyle, and demand a 'my way or the highway attitude'. The reason these people always have and always will get their own way is simple......they persevere until they wear you into submission.

My wife and I are considering getting a van in a few years and 'nomad' it until we meet our maker. We will also be keeping our annex for our troll, so we can camp.

There is enough land in Australia to accommodate RV's, motor homes and campers. There needs to be a balance. Many small country towns over in WA are promoting themselves as 'RV friendly' and provide the services to accommodate this lifestyle.

IMHO, all tourists town should also accommodate for the camping family. The survival of many of these smaller towns depend on the tourist dollar. Who's likely to spend more, a camping family of 4-5, or a couple in a van/RV? I don't know. That's why everybody should be accommodated.

In most cases, I'm not a fan of staying at caravan parks. For a non powered site, many charge the same for one person as they do for two. I don't mind paying a 'reasonable price' for a non powered site, but I hate being ripped off. To the credit of a lot of caravan park owners, they do cater for campers and the camp kitchen and other facilities are brilliant, and they charge 'reasonable' prices for a non powered site.

I've been known to pick up other peoples' rubbish, too. I find the best thing to use is BBQ tongs. It's not that hard to take your rubbish with you, is it?

I like my creature comforts too, but I can have a decent shower with 4-5 litres of water when I'm out camping. Using a 9 litre bucket, is a luxury, and probably over kill. Let's face it, if you go to the beach and go swimming, you don't need a 10 minute shower to get all that sand off you.

I hate the religious campers who get all huffy and puffy if somebody takes their camp spot. "But we camp in this spot every year". Get over it and toughen up. Find another spot!"

Kids need the outdoor experience. This is how they learn and gain some of life's skills. They need to learn that there is more to milk than coming out of a carton, and their woolen jumper wasn't made in the shop. So much can be learnt from the camping experience.

In summing up. They minority will always win if they persevere to the point of wearing you down into submission. It is easier to say "yes" rather than "no". Is this what you really want?

Australia is a very seasonal continent and there is enough room to accommodate everybody at different times of the year. Wake up Australia!!!!

Take care out there.

Rossco

[Cuppa]

Why have a 48hr time limit if its not going to be enforced?

I guess because a proportion (most?) do follow the time limit because they realise that it is the only way to share a limited resource so everyone gets a go. I believe that the more popular camps would be improved if local authorities installed a caretaker/camp host to oversee things as occurs in a number of places in WA.

[kevin07]

it seems this can be summed up quite quickly (the greed of some) wanting camps for the elite. and (the laziness of others) who leave their shit behind for the rest of us to view and the councils or more to the point the local people to pay for the clean up. ANSWER TO THIS PROBLEM change the attitude of the greedy and lazy which cannot be done. unfortunately. kev. PS CUPPA GREAT POST MORE PEOPLE WITH YOUR ATTITUDE AND WILLINGNESS COULD MAKE THIS HAPPEN.

[Cuppa]

Have a read of the OP here, not having a go at RV only it includes all of us who like to camp.
We are on here and talk about it, so many don't realise the result of their actions. They will drive past a place in years to come and wonder why that place they camped is now closed.

http://www.exploroz.com/Forum/Topic/97674/Free_Camping_Issues.aspx

I know Lorraine, the person who was quoted in that OP. She is a straight shooter. She is also an advocate for the conversion of free camps to self contained only and/ or low cost camp spots as a partial solution to the problems she identifies. I take the view that her description of the problems identifying campers as their own worst enemy is correct, but that the problem won't go away by closing or restricting the use of camps. More camps would 'un-concentrate' the problems , & on site caretakers in the more heavily used camps, like Calliope River, would encourage campers to do the right thing.

I don't think pointing the finger at particular groups of campers achieves much. A lot of Rv'ers lover to point the finger at young backpackers in Wicked vans & similar, but I've met plenty of these young folk who could teach a lot of the oldies how to behave. Likewise it is clear I this thread that rv'ers aren't exactly held in high esteem. There are bad apples in every barrel who screw things up for the rest. Surely the solution, whatever it is has to deal with the behaviour of the bad apples, not the whole barrel, if it is to have any chance of success? Unless we all take responsibility, (including telling others to sharpen their game when we see them 'shitting in our nest') we will lose more & more of the camps we have always taken for granted. Either that, or as has already been suggested, have fees introduced. This is already happening too, the old 'user pays' trick. Low fees once introduced will only ever rise. Remember we are talking about public land & fees are not the only way of ensuring shared access regardless of what the bean counters would have us believe. Introduction of fees is the thin edge of the wedge & whatever they are will have the effect of excluding some, just as restricting use to folks who have grey & black water tanks installed in their vehicles will.


Cuppa

[Cuppa]

Unfortunately the term 'Leave No Trace' gets confused with 'Self Contained'. If the principles outlined in the following web site were adapted by everyone (ie. all campers) discussions like this would probably be unnecessary. http://lnt.org.au/

However as another friend wrote recently "We Need to change what people do (behaviour). Changing what people think (attitude) is harder and doesn't necessarily produce the desired behaviour change".

Which brings us back to the issue of 'policing' & the need for every single one of us to take the responsibility to encourage our fellow campers to do the right thing if we see them stuffing things up for us......politely! There will always be the few who cannot be reasoned with & who don,t care, but the majority will modify their behaviour if they think there is a chance they are being observed.

Cuppa

[DX grunt]

Which brings us back to the issue of 'policing' & the need for every single one of us to take the responsibility to encourage our fellow campers to do the right thing if we see them stuffing things up for us......politely!

I was going to mention this but didn't want to start 'Camp Rage' !!! Some people just don't want to listen. lolol

[NP99]

I was at Wivanhoe dam on the weekend having a BBQ lunch and fishing with all our family. Another family moved in over the top of us with their gear, fished for about an hour and left rubbish behind. We picked it up, because 100 metres to the bin was too much for them. If I seen them do it I would have given them the message straight!

This family was of xxxx decent, we beat them in ww2. I find they are big offenders for treating this dam as their tip!

[Cuppa]

I was going to mention this but didn't want to start 'Camp Rage' !!! Some people just don't want to listen. lolol

LOL. Yep, not all have ears they can use, & no point in getting into blues. If a polite comment has no apparent effect, don't assume that there will be no cumulative effect if they get 'polite comments' everywhere they go. You might not see the result, but the next camper might without realising it. Folks rarely like to acknowledge they have done the wrong thing when confronted.

On occasions I have made a 'show' of cleaning up someone else's rubbish rather than saying something directly to them.

Cuppa

[rusty_nail]

wow this thread has really got alot of interest, i for one agree whole heartedly with everything you say cuppa. it really hits a nerve for me the people who go camping and leave sh!t behind to ruin it for the next camper, and it would be sad to see free camping sites closed down to make way for "RV only sites".

recently (on the long weekend we just had) i went to a place called Bretti reserve to meet up with my old man who lives at the other end of NSW.

the spot is BEAUTIFUL, its along side a flowing river, on a MASSIVE grassy area low in the valley, framed by some magnificent mountains and untouched wilderness. if anyone is interested its right here: Bretti Reserve (https://maps.google.com.au/maps?q=-31.791567,151.917397&num=1&t=h&vpsrc=0&hl=en&ie=UTF8&z=16)

i arrived early on thursday night and setup my camp. there were probably about 10 or so campsites already setup. my old man arrived in the early hours of the morning and we hit the hay.

the following day more and more people arrived, there were a few people in RV's however the majority of people that arrived showed up in big caravans and 4wds. one guy came so prepared that when him and his crew arrived he picked a spot in the middle of the camp ground and pulled out his lawn mower and moved a spot for his crew(i thought that was pretty impressive).

my old man and i had a great weekend and were very relaxed the whole time.

a convoy of young kids arrived at one stage and to be courteous to everyone setup their camp site at the back of the grounds, as far away from everyone as possible, so they could play their loud music till 12am, when they turned it off. i was very impresed that they were so considerate.

HOWEVER, as always there were SOME things that bothered me about some of the people that were around the grounds. a guy pulled up later on friday arvo near us and setup his caravan, he had a big jayco offroad canavan and a landcruiser. it was him, his wife and two young boys both in primary school.

he was a nice guy and we had a chat. during the conversation he asked where we(dad and i) had got our firewood from. i explained that we had gone up the mountain which was about a 10 minute drive away and cut up some already fallendown/cut down trees from the state forest and brought it back. he laughed and said that was too much effort.

the following day, i noticed him walking down to one of the closest trees with his son, a tie down strap and a chainsaw. the tree in his eyes was dead, I believed it was alive and kicking till he cut it down, just that it wasnt an ever green. it wasnt even a good tree for firewood, all the branches were thin and the wood would burn too quickly.

sorry for the long winded story, but my point is this, two things bothered me about what this guy did:
1 - he was cutting down a tree which was still alive from an area that is so well picked you would be lucky to find a stick on the ground just because he was too lazy to go for a 10 minute drive and didnt want to get the boot of his nice new toymota dirty with some decent logs and
2 - he was teaching his son, the future generation of campers, that this was OK!

as adults people like him should be setting an example for their children and showing them what is and isnt OK.

the guys on the other side of us did exactly the same thing and it really bothered me.

in so far as impact i am a low impact camper, i have my trailer, setup to be fully contained, i use little water, between dad, myself, some friends that showed up for one night and two dogs we only went through about 30 litres. i didnt shower everynight, but im not setup for that atm. when i did have a shower i went into gloucester which is about 20 mins away and used facilities in the town.

there were other things that bothered me but i wont go into them as this post is already long enough.

thanks for reading,

nic

[NP99]

If we employed more local rangers to patrol areas, this may have less impact!

[rusty_nail]

If we employed more local rangers to patrol areas, this may have less impact!

but who is gonna pay their wages? local or state government? getting money out of them for things like this would be like drawing blood from stone

[Sir Roofy]

i fear it will go down this road and more - as the baby boomers hit the road in record numbers not only will we find many previously free campsites closed or improved in exchange for fees, we will also find less and less off the beaten track stuff. I suspect i will live to see tarmac all the way down the oonadatta track and all the way up to cape york (heck, they have recently flagged building a bridge over the jardine). Only a matter of time as councils figure out that it is more profitable to 'open up' the outback and provide easier access to the boomers cash cow.

and the winner is ? Your right mate they are going to seal the road from cairns to the cape,why as you said they are cah strapped and need the dollars

[Sir Roofy]

cuppa,

i agree with you 100%, i would'nt be able to put into as well, well said mate. I reckon most if not all caravaners and rv'ers started out travelling in a car or station wagon, with a tent and not much else staying at free camps where ever they could, so it makes me wonder why it is that a lot of them now want to restrict the options of people (like them once apon a time) that dont have the luxury of a self contained caravan or motor home. It really winds me up when i here the excuse "we are travelling on a budget/pension" while sitting in the comfort of a 100k + caravan.

this has come about by these people who cant afford to travel over seas any more or have had there fill

[pearcey]

Great read Cuppa.
I have been camping for some 60 years of which most has been free. Started out with the old man when i was about 5 and have been doing it since.Alot of free camps have come and gone in those years,but I always seam to be able to find new ones,but alas in the last few years its getting a lot harder and when you do find some where in a popular area the word spreads and some one will stuff it up and soon it gets closed, due mainly to rubbish and noise or the old excuse Hoons.This problem is not going to get any better, as said it`s a lot easier to say yes than no and we all know how government and councils operate.The CAMH club have a large lobby group and some very egotistical people in power so this is not going to go way. To slow the process down we as free campers must be vigilant and not give these people any excuse to point the finger.It is sad, but as always a few make it hard for the majority. For myself i have been slowly building a network of private property's where I can camp and and not have to worry too much.

[mudnut]

There was a group of young families camped near us at Gunbower island last year on a long weekend. They had their motorbikes going till around ten at night, followed by their doof doof music until two am. 8am the motorbike started again and they roared through the forest for half an hour. The local cop had had enough because a local had been run over in town. He cracked it and told the mob to pull their heads in. After the cop took off, they made it quite clear that they blamed us for calling the bull. It wasn't us. But if the cop had looked down the river bank, he would have seen their bags of rubbish and nappies. We had a gutful any way, so we packed up and went fishing at Eppalock. Have since been told that the area had been fenced off, I don't know if it was temporary or not, or even if it is true.

[P4trol]

Warning: a few people are stereotyped here. May be classified as a rant.

A topic I find relevent Cuppa. It's no secret I'm in the NT. As such, this time of the year, (dry season) is 'tourist open season'. Weather conditions are such that every man and his dog comes up here. The 'March of the grey nomad'. The time for locals to go somewhere else. As such I have seen more than my fair share of them. A lot of people make a lot of money from them. A lot more don't. GNs save a lot of money in their old age by driving slow and claiming their jewish and scottish heritage. And freecamping. It fairly abounds in the NT. Often the caravan parks are so full (or people forget to book) that they are forced to camp on the side of the road, literally in town. Their motto 'Leave late, pull up early.' If you haven't claimed 'YOUR SPOT' by 2.30pm, you probably won't get it. People are waiting to pull up before the old occupants have left. Often 'their spot' is marked out by flags or rocks either side of the van, so you aren't able to camp within 10m or so. Toilet paper is stolen from toilets and wound onto sticks. Escapades are wound into campfire stories and boasted about to all other 'vanners. (I saved $3 on the trip here! Yeah? I got an extra night at xxxx because I left before the bloke came around to collect the fees!)



A lot of GNs are nice people. Unfortunately these days most belong to that notional age group 'the baby boomers'. Now I'm not one for putting people in boxes, but for a general way to identify people, it's OK. As a group I have grown to despise the 'baby boomers' Much has been written about the baby boomer generations. Some can be characterised by stickers on the back of their vehicles 'Spending the grandkids inheritance'. Speak to them and you will find out: This is 'their time'. 'their retirement'. They worked hard, paid their taxes, and now it's their turn. It's their tour. Their trip. No rules! Don't you dare get in their way, critisize them! They are cruising the 'uncivilised top end'. Even the living, working should not get in their way. No-one really is living or working there anyway. They are entitled to this of course.

Then they get into town. Hours of driving at stupidly slow speeds has caught up with them. Unfamiliar surroundings and streets. Other shortsighted people. Unusually large caravans and streets that aren't designed for them. Pensioner road rage (caravan Vs caravan!) ensues. Mildly entertaining, I assume that's why the indigenous locals sit outside on the footpath. Low speed car/caravan wheel lock ups. Fists shaken in anger. Honestly, it's amusing if it isn't you they have nearly t-boned with 4WD and caravan.

On the other side of the fence are the backpackers. Also having no money, not even for reliable vehicles. They need it for the bottleo. (I'm not even going to go the backpacker topic).

Anyway, I digress.

I camped recently at an event with caravaners, tents, and backpackers. Let me tell you that never should the three be camped within visual sight of the other. I am a patient person (hence putting up with Cuppa etc etc...), but I realised that very first night why I own a 4WD and tent. Camping within (OK, real distances here) 3m of a caravan really annoyed the hell out of me - and I'm the one with the young children. The hippy van pulled up, nearly collided with the patrol while reversing, and was withing 4m. I belong at least 100m (preferably 3000m) from other campers I didn't specifically go out there to camp with.

I believe there should be RV only camps. They should be separate from the freecamping area. Both camps should have someone to 'move on' people that aren't following the 'no trace' code or are overstaying their welcome. Even better the people should make the call themselves.

I've been to the big horse creek camp grounds, and little horse creek, and policemans bend etc. caravaner' erected signs abound. 'No generators for health reasons'. etc. Drive through, and you would be forgiven for thinking you had disturbed a group of zombies - all they do is stare at you as you drive past 'Don't you dare camp next to me'! Never mind you were not towing a caravan and did not have a tent in your posession.

I suppose the point I am trying to make is 1) the prevailing attitude of the age group 2) "They are entitled to whatever way they do things" 3)They ain't going to change it for no-one

It is the very attitude that is desirable to change. If you involve the guv'ment, they will only ask for more money, and impose more rules/closures.


sorry for the anti baby boomer rant. If you are a baby boomer reading this, it's not targeted at you personally. My lawyers name and address are available on request...

[Cuppa]

Some great contributions to the topic, thanks folks.

Cuppa

[threedogs]

I've lived in Darwin and Alice and agree 100% with P4trol. There was a rally down here claiming 5 bus loads of Greenies were coming to "stack" the vote
on closing the Otways down Keeping the Murray camp site free as well. Little did they think that over 5000 4x4s would converge on Daylesford.
Free camping yeah but you'll need to keep it to yourself I fear.