Caravan Club and wild camping.

[Roy]

I agree with most of the comments on this thread. We decided to stop with the CC, if only for its CL network which also seems to be changing. The better facilities, which a lot of us don't want, mean increased prices! Before long CL's will be just small camp sites. Surely there is a case for the 'oldstyle' CL's to become motor caravan 'aires', which in my opinion will be about the best we can hope for in the foreseeable future.

If the CC won't publish 'anti' letters in their magazine, I reckon that MMM would.

Roy.

[mom]

robin - 2006-12-06 1:12 PM 3, there are a few sites (e.g. Hayfield) that don't allow caravans at all *-)

Interestingly I turned up to a CCC site a few months back.  I was nearly turned away because I failed to mention that I had a VW campervan and the warden only allows VW owners on site with prior permission.  As I was picking myself up off the floor, he added that he has a very low opinion of anyone who owns one.  We left quickly.

[david lloyd]

mom - 2006-12-06 2:29 PM

robin - 2006-12-06 1:12 PM 3, there are a few sites (e.g. Hayfield) that don't allow caravans at all *-)

Interestingly I turned up to a CCC site a few months back.  I was nearly turned away because I failed to mention that I had a VW campervan and the warden only allows VW owners on site with prior permission.  As I was picking myself up off the floor, he added that he has a very low opinion of anyone who owns one.  We left quickly.

What a varied range of experiences we all have between us.Seems the club sites aren't 'all the same' after all.Regards, David

[peedee]

As someone has already remarked, it is an interesting thread. I too have been a member for some time and I think it is fair to say that over the years I have used most of what the club has to offer. I have not been to an AGM but I have been to a couple of Regional meetings where club officials have been in attendance to address the assembled members and answer questions.

It is the clubs way of trying to improve communication with all members and not just those that belong and join in with local centres. These meetings are well advertised in the club magazine and are an ideal opportunity for members to put their points of view forward and to learn more about what is going on in the club. From my experience they are not well attended. Local centres are also not well supported either. In my view, both of these facts speak volumes! Most like what the “business” is offering but not the club?

 

Going back to Brian’s original message, the magazine is c*****. It is, most definitely, not communicating effectively to its membership. Brian has singled out a complaint often repeated on the forums. The magazine is all very one sided and is nothing more than a glossy piece of promotional bumpf with the occasional incomplete snippets of information about issues that really matter to caravan and motorhome owners alike. I still have to open the last couple of month’s magazines but do we know what the clubs views are on road pricing? I doubt it. Do we know what progress is being made with harmonisation of the European traffic law which might affect our hobby, a little, but mainly after the event. Have they even looked at providing “stop overs” or aires for motorhomes? If so what did they look at and what was the outcome? I am sure many of you could add other things.

 

The Club in my view is missing a golden opportunity to respond to members complaints and provide informative reading and who knows perhaps some may not have given up membership as a result.

 

peedee

 

[livewire]

mom - 2006-12-06 2:29 PM

robin - 2006-12-06 1:12 PM 3, there are a few sites (e.g. Hayfield) that don't allow caravans at all *-)

Interestingly I turned up to a CCC site a few months back.  I was nearly turned away because I failed to mention that I had a VW campervan and the warden only allows VW owners on site with prior permission.  As I was picking myself up off the floor, he added that he has a very low opinion of anyone who owns one.  We left quickly.

I am absolutely astounded by that. If he had said that to me, i think I would have shoved the site CC&C flag pole where the sun doesn't shine, sideways.I was told by a CC warden that M/Hs are an inconvenience to him because they often turn up without booking. Makes you wonder for who's benefit the club is run.I refuse to give an arrival time when I do book (as long as I intend to arrive in office hours). The whole attraction about m/h's is if you are touring on route to somewhere, you stop when and if you want.

[Dave Newell]

I've only encountered one less than pleasant warden on a CC site and that was a few years ago at Uttoxeter racecourse. We were on our way up to Lincoln for the Midsummer show but had to wait till after work to go on the Wednesday evening. Got to Uttoxeter about 7.45 ish and thought we'd stop over and travel the rest of the way in the morning. Pulled in to the racecourse and found the warden in her caravan to be greeted with a tirade about late arrivals in motorhomes who hadn't got the decency to book in advance. I let her finish her rant then calmly told her where to park her un-occupied pitches as I wouldn't stay there if she paid me. We drove to Lincoln that night and stayed in a pull in near the entrance gates to the showground.

 

D.

[robin]

mom - 2006-12-06 2:29 PM

robin - 2006-12-06 1:12 PM 3, there are a few sites (e.g. Hayfield) that don't allow caravans at all *-)

Interestingly I turned up to a CCC site a few months back.  I was nearly turned away because I failed to mention that I had a VW campervan and the warden only allows VW owners on site with prior permission.  As I was picking myself up off the floor, he added that he has a very low opinion of anyone who owns one.  We left quickly.

Astounding - how do such people keep their jobs!I have heard about 'van conversion without windows being turned away as well

[Brian Kirby]

spartan3956 - 2006-12-06 12:35 PM  I have wild camped while visiting friends and i dont think any nanny state should make rules to affect my human rights i dont leave rubbish i dont stay weeks on end. So basically leave me alone. Dont support them, dont join. Pete

But Pete

The question of controlling wild camping activities would not arise if one individual's desire to exercise what you call his/her "human rights" (but if you read the declaration of human rights, you'll see that wild camping in a motorhome is just a bit beyond their scope!) didn't come into conflict with what other individuals see as theirs.

When the camper spoils the view, or blocks the light, or ruts the verge, or hogs the space, that some other souls value, there will be an outcry, and a demand for control.

It just seems to me this is inevitable.  There are more and more motorhomes entering circulation on Europe's roads each year.  Many motorhomers cherish the idea that they can come, and go, and stop, as they please.  The problem is that so many of them want to come, and go, and stop, but all in the same places, and at the same times!

Much of the South of France is now out of bounds, and much of Brittany is either restricted or about to become so.  Portugal is implementing controls on "wild camping" and so are parts of Spain.  As the numbers of vehicles increase, so will the conflicts, and with them the demands from the more static population to protect their cherished corner of paradise from the onslaught.  It isn't the work of some nanny state, it is just the rest of humanity saying enough is enough.  In short, it is normal democracy working.  And, if you look at some of the more popular motorhome stopovers, you can surely see why!

[Bill Ord]

Hi Brian,

We went to Croatia this year in September, it was four years since our first visit and even then the Croatia web-site as now warns that you must stay on campsites. On our first visit we thought that the rather rundown state of a lot of the camp sites was a concequence of the recent war so we gave it another try. Things have not improved much and prices are pretty much the same as Italy which is at the top end of my financial tolerance. We turned round at Split very disapointed and decided to head to a site near Porec that we'd stayed at on our previous visit. When we arrived it had been raining and the place was a quagmire; the site is called Bi-village, I refused to stay and at 3.30 pm left Croatis and went straight back to Lake Garda rather than stay, a four hour drive by motorway. If I'd been able to park up somewhere for the night I might have changed my mind. Whenever you are prevented from 'wild camping' it seems that sites take advantage and hike prices and don't really need to try with standards on sites. Needles to say we won't be going back to Croatia; it's not that I have a hang up about wild/free camping but it's obvious from my two visits that as long as there are no aires and off site camping is banned things will stay expensive and poor quality, and the roads are something else.

[empress]

I do so agree with you Livewire, about that "Everyone Loves Your Dog". It makes me so annoyed.

 

Have just had a little spat with the CC about their infuriating habit of closing off part of the toilet blocks when a site is full. This happened at Brighton recently. They even put up a false wall - so no chance of opening up a few more showers. The warden said they had "too much to do".

 

I wrote to the powers that be and received a half apology from the head of sites operations - the explanation was this happened because of having to accomodate "Working Time Regulations". I can not really believe that cleaning a few more showers etc. can use up many more minutes, as the lovely Chatsworth warden said to mewhe I thanked her for having everything open. I am probably being petty minded about Brighton.

 

Empress

[livewire]

empress - 2006-12-06 5:39 PM

 

I do so agree with you Livewire, about that "Everyone Loves Your Dog". It makes me so annoyed.

 

Have just had a little spat with the CC about their infuriating habit of closing off part of the toilet blocks when a site is full. This happened at Brighton recently. They even put up a false wall - so no chance of opening up a few more showers. The warden said they had "too much to do".

 

I wrote to the powers that be and received a half apology from the head of sites operations - the explanation was this happened because of having to accomodate "Working Time Regulations". I can not really believe that cleaning a few more showers etc. can use up many more minutes, as the lovely Chatsworth warden said to mewhe I thanked her for having everything open. I am probably being petty minded about Brighton.

 

Empress

 

My stay at Brighton caused me to resign my membership the first time. They really should prioritise their time. When I was in staying in the top field, they still emptied the bins twice a day and scrubbed the area (in the rain) despite only me (+wife) being in that field. I was continually acosted for not parking my car in the approved manner (empty field). The warden seemed to me to be grumpy and officious. The odd thing is, being Brighton, I though the wardens would be easy going and open minded.

 

One thing I would recommend is say what you think in the comments book, i would surprised if it is not audited.

 

Am I alone in getting annoyed at the mop/bucket in the Toilet Blocks. It is always left in your way as you enter as if to remind you to mop up afterwards. I sometimes put it outside. At the prices the CC charge, I have no intention of cleaning the toilets as well!

[Keith T]

Livewire - yes, asking for ETA on a CC site, is a bit like a red rag to a bull as far as I am concerned, and I have on more than one occasion, when doing a telephone booking, told the wardens 'I'll get there when I get there....it could be anywhere bewteen 12 and 6,' (or somehting similar). Only to be net with 'well the CC says we have to have a time so we organise enought staff'........

Anyone would think they are running an individual 'unit' of 400 staff! Usually ther's just 2, maybe on occasions 4 max.....should not be too difficult to cope with maybe 1 or 2 arrivals at any one time, I would think!

I now take the view that whatever time we say, we shall still get there when we are ready and not 'til then.

[docted]

Brian

Your position here seems to be I'll have a good whine but I'll not get involved in trying to remedy the problem that I percieve. The age old problem of moaning but not doing anything to improve the situation.

The letter to the editor of the magazine is not addressed to the correct person your letter should be addressed to the Chairman for him to reply.You could then post his reply on this forum.

Docted

[Keith T]

hi Docted, I don't totally disagree with your comments to Brian, but I think one neeeds to establish for what purpose a letter to the CC is written.

 

Is it for publication in ther mag (hopefully), or is it about something (could be a matter of policy or principal, or just for information you need) which shuld receive the attention of the hierarchy? If the latter, then yes address to the Chairman personally. I have done this on a number of occasions, and always received a response - usually from one of his minions!

As far as getting a letter published, then certainly write to the Editor of the Mag. But the likelhood of it ever seeing print is pretty remote. My experience show it's far easier to get a letter in MMM than in the CC Mag. I do agree that even if it's a contentious matter, they should publish, as long as the letter is sensibly worded and not defamatory, BUT I expect them to publish their response as well. This really is the best way to get members involved, and as far as I am aware they do not (Yet?) have a forum like this on theri website.

Now there's a thought for them......! Perhaps I should write to the Chairman and suggest it!

[Brian Kirby]

docted - 2006-12-06 6:22 PM Brian Your position here seems to be I'll have a good whine but I'll not get involved in trying to remedy the problem that I percieve. The age old problem of moaning but not doing anything to improve the situation. The letter to the editor of the magazine is not addressed to the correct person your letter should be addressed to the Chairman for him to reply.You could then post his reply on this forum. Docted

Well Eddie, a whining ne’er-do-well I may, or may not be, but I do think a bit of self-defence is now in order.

I wrote, I think, in measured, temperate terms to the Caravan Club magazine, because I was concerned that members were leaving on the strength of a perceived anti-motorhome attitude.  My purpose was no more and no less than to encourage the Club to publicise its stance, while possibly clarifying the comments that had given such offence.  I had then intended to draw attention to their response on this Forum; in the hope the damage could be repaired.  I had not necessarily expected them to publish my letter in full, so much as use it as a vehicle to reiterate the Club’s position.  Naïve perhaps.  If so, so be it.

Of course, I could have written to the Chairman, but it honestly never occurred to me to do so.  The Editor of the Magazine has access to whomsoever he needs to consult, and I assume he consulted accordingly.  The magazine is the Club’s means of communicating publicly with its members.  A “Letter to the Editor” therefore seemed the most obvious way to elicit a public response.  To me, therefore, the Editors decision is the Clubs: in effect, we do not wish to discuss this.  Unfortunately, I think I have now shot my bolt.  I do not think any further attempt by me to pursue this issue will be productive.

However, their response leaves me uneasy.  I do not understand their reaction, and I do not know why they are reluctant to report to members on the Italian meeting.  I am not comfortable with this withholding of information.  This is no matter of National Security, and I can see no good reason for what now begins to look like secrecy.  That is why I decided to publish my letter, and their response.  It was in the hope that some other Club members might take up the challenge, perhaps adopting a different tack, and press for clarification.

To those who are not Caravan Club members I apologise.  I’m afraid it is a measure of the Club’s reluctance to debate in its own magazine, that I am driven to communicate with other Club members via this Forum.

However, Eddie and others have taken the trouble to respond to my post, so perhaps he or you would care to take up his suggestion and write to the Club Chairman.  If you do, and you can persuade the Club to go public, do let us know.  Me, I’m done!

[Keith T]

Hi Brian

I'm more than happy to write to the Chairman of CC on this matter, but do not have any original material to work from. DO you by any chance have a copy of, of the relevant pages from, the Mag showing this item. If perchance you have, or anyone else reading this thread has them, erhaps you could scan & e-mail them to me, and I would be more than happy to further this direct with our worthy Chairman.

At the same time I would suggest to him that the CC website opens up a forum for members discussion points - even they (ie the Club) might find it enlightening...!

[empress]

My letter complaining about closed off showers etc. at Brighton was sent to the Director General. I thought that was a good starting point. It was then passed on to the Head of Sites. His reply started encouragingly "At the time when I looked into the matter I felt with the number of staff on site I could see no reason why all the facilities could not be made available to members." Three paragraphs later I realised how foolish I was to expect all facilities to be in use in the light of "Working Time Regulations", not forgetting that during our stay "the toilets and modesty cubicles which were available exceeds current standards required." That makes it all right, then!

 

Empress

[Brian Kirby]

Keith T - 2006-12-06 11:02 PM Hi Brian I'm more than happy to write to the Chairman of CC on this matter, but do not have any original material to work from. DO you by any chance have a copy of, of the relevant pages from, the Mag showing this item. If perchance you have, or anyone else reading this thread has them, erhaps you could scan & e-mail them to me, and I would be more than happy to further this direct with our worthy Chairman. At the same time I would suggest to him that the CC website opens up a forum for members discussion points - even they (ie the Club) might find it enlightening...!

Keith

Let me have your e-mail and I'll send you a copy of the Mag item.

Send a PM if you wish.

Many thanks

[Vixter]

VoH using Vixters email- mine's down!

 

There seems to be a complete spectrum of views and opinions on this thread, which I find to be both informative and also a reflection of the true cross section of Forum Members. Long may it continue!!

 

I do wonder however, if what we are seeing in the various clubs' attitudes is no more than the rest of the country's drift into Nanny State Conditions. How often have you seen some "Jobs-worth", outside of motor homing circles, stating officiously that "you cannot do that because of health and safety" ?

 

All around us traditions are being eroded- conkers banned as being dangerous, There are more and more stupid instructions on goods and articles to prevent idiots sueing - I heard of a Kawasaki motor-cycle hand book stating that the machine "had no edible parts"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I have got through most of my life so far with all my digits and appendages intact and have lived and worked in various countries throughout the world in all manner of circumstances. The last thing I need, is to have to do a risk assessment each morning before I can decide if it safe to get out of bed.

 

Rules are for the guidance of the wise and the obedience of fools

 

 

I did read in one of the national papers that if you get a "Jobs-worth" attemping to prevent an innocuous event from happening, on the grounds of health and safety, you should ask for his supervisor to give you a written explanation why. Then forward on to the head of the HSE for his comments, apparently he is getting a little fed up with the situation as well!

 

VoH

 

 

[Guest Frank Wilkinson]

Vixter - 2006-12-10 3:09 PM VoH using Vixters email- mine's down! There seems to be a complete spectrum of views and opinions on this thread, which I find to be both informative and also a reflection of the true cross section of Forum Members. Long may it continue!! I do wonder however, if what we are seeing in the various clubs' attitudes is no more than the rest of the country's drift into Nanny State Conditions. How often have you seen some "Jobs-worth", outside of motor homing circles, stating officiously that "you cannot do that because of health and safety" ? All around us traditions are being eroded- conkers banned as being dangerous, There are more and more stupid instructions on goods and articles to prevent idiots sueing - I heard of a Kawasaki motor-cycle hand book stating that the machine "had no edible parts"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have got through most of my life so far with all my digits and appendages intact and have lived and worked in various countries throughout the world in all manner of circumstances. The last thing I need, is to have to do a risk assessment each morning before I can decide if it safe to get out of bed. Rules are for the guidance of the wise and the obedience of fools I did read in one of the national papers that if you get a "Jobs-worth" attemping to prevent an innocuous event from happening, on the grounds of health and safety, you should ask for his supervisor to give you a written explanation why. Then forward on to the head of the HSE for his comments, apparently he is getting a little fed up with the situation as well! VoH

I'm a businesman and no one is more fed up than I am with the many over-zealous jobsworths who seem incapable of seeing legislation in shades other than black or white. Having said that however I am totally against unrestricted wild camping.

I've no objection to Aires de Service or even stopping on a motorway aire when in transit but for motor-caravanners and towers alike to think that we should have the right to park our moveable accommodation wherever we want is selfish and ultimately self-defeating.

I do not want my view of a remote and beautiful coastline or lovely isolated rural idyll to be ruined by a few people trying to save a few pounds on site fees.

Wild campers should also consider the negative effect that their activities have on the rest of us who become tarred with the same brush and easy targets for the Jeremy Clarksons of this world.

[Brian Kirby]

Frank Wilkinson - 2006-12-10 6:20 PM

Wild campers should also consider the negative effect that their activities have on the rest of us who become tarred with the same brush and easy targets for the Jeremy Clarksons of this world.

Aw, c'mon Frank.  You're not frightened of that great self opinionated, wooly headed, overgrown toddler are you?  Shame on you!

[livewire]

Frank Wilkinson - 2006-12-10 6:20 PM

Vixter - 2006-12-10 3:09 PM VoH using Vixters email- mine's down! There seems to be a complete spectrum of views and opinions on this thread, which I find to be both informative and also a reflection of the true cross section of Forum Members. Long may it continue!! I do wonder however, if what we are seeing in the various clubs' attitudes is no more than the rest of the country's drift into Nanny State Conditions. How often have you seen some "Jobs-worth", outside of motor homing circles, stating officiously that "you cannot do that because of health and safety" ? All around us traditions are being eroded- conkers banned as being dangerous, There are more and more stupid instructions on goods and articles to prevent idiots sueing - I heard of a Kawasaki motor-cycle hand book stating that the machine "had no edible parts"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have got through most of my life so far with all my digits and appendages intact and have lived and worked in various countries throughout the world in all manner of circumstances. The last thing I need, is to have to do a risk assessment each morning before I can decide if it safe to get out of bed. Rules are for the guidance of the wise and the obedience of fools I did read in one of the national papers that if you get a "Jobs-worth" attemping to prevent an innocuous event from happening, on the grounds of health and safety, you should ask for his supervisor to give you a written explanation why. Then forward on to the head of the HSE for his comments, apparently he is getting a little fed up with the situation as well! VoH

I'm a businesman and no one is more fed up than I am with the many over-zealous jobsworths who seem incapable of seeing legislation in shades other than black or white. Having said that however I am totally against unrestricted wild camping.

I've no objection to Aires de Service or even stopping on a motorway aire when in transit but for motor-caravanners and towers alike to think that we should have the right to park our moveable accommodation wherever we want is selfish and ultimately self-defeating.

I do not want my view of a remote and beautiful coastline or lovely isolated rural idyll to be ruined by a few people trying to save a few pounds on site fees.

Wild campers should also consider the negative effect that their activities have on the rest of us who become tarred with the same brush and easy targets for the Jeremy Clarksons of this world.

Am I the only here who thinks that to wild camp in my own country is my birthright.I do get the feeling that some people have the attitude that just because they don't like to do something (or haven't the guts), then no one else should. Don't critisise other people for thinking in black and white without looking in the mirror first. If you don't like wild camping, fine, don't do it. Other than that keep your negative opinions to yourself, go out and get a life.

[Brian Kirby]

livewire - 2006-12-10 8:57 PM Am I the only here who thinks that to wild camp in my own country is my birthright. I do get the feeling that some people have the attitude that just because they don't like to do something (or haven't the guts), then no one else should. Don't critisise other people for thinking in black and white without looking in the mirror first. If you don't like wild camping, fine, don't do it. Other than that keep your negative opinions to yourself, go out and get a life.

I'm not sure that is what people are saying, Chris.  It's a bit like the beauty spot everyone wants to see, say a favourite part of the Lakeland fells.  When you get there you find everyone else there too.  Instead of remote, rugged beauty all you find is a crowd.  The crowd destroys what each one, individually, has gone to see.

You may well be be able to wild camp, on your own, without detriment to others.  However, what happens if more and more people join you?  Beauty spots become swamped, the beauty can no longer be seen, there are calls for control, complaints of "nuisance", and you loose your birthright. 

It wouldn't be spite on the part of others that caused your loss, but the pressure of numbers and, unless that birthright is used with great restraint I fear it it will be lost.  I don't think this has anything to do with attitudes, or liking or disliking, or having or not having courage, although I do think you may be trying to cling to a "golden age" of motorhoming in which greater freedom was possible because so few indulged.  Now motorhoming is becoming so popular, I'm afraid it will become more and more constrained, and the "old" freedoms will be lost.  Time was when all animals were wild and men could hunt at will.  Then other men enclosed the land, claimed the animals were theirs, and declared all hunters poachers.  Its the same process, it doesn't stop.

[Guest Frank Wilkinson]

livewire - 2006-12-10 8:57 PM

Frank Wilkinson - 2006-12-10 6:20 PM

Vixter - 2006-12-10 3:09 PM VoH using Vixters email- mine's down! There seems to be a complete spectrum of views and opinions on this thread, which I find to be both informative and also a reflection of the true cross section of Forum Members. Long may it continue!! I do wonder however, if what we are seeing in the various clubs' attitudes is no more than the rest of the country's drift into Nanny State Conditions. How often have you seen some "Jobs-worth", outside of motor homing circles, stating officiously that "you cannot do that because of health and safety" ? All around us traditions are being eroded- conkers banned as being dangerous, There are more and more stupid instructions on goods and articles to prevent idiots sueing - I heard of a Kawasaki motor-cycle hand book stating that the machine "had no edible parts"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have got through most of my life so far with all my digits and appendages intact and have lived and worked in various countries throughout the world in all manner of circumstances. The last thing I need, is to have to do a risk assessment each morning before I can decide if it safe to get out of bed. Rules are for the guidance of the wise and the obedience of fools I did read in one of the national papers that if you get a "Jobs-worth" attemping to prevent an innocuous event from happening, on the grounds of health and safety, you should ask for his supervisor to give you a written explanation why. Then forward on to the head of the HSE for his comments, apparently he is getting a little fed up with the situation as well! VoH

I'm a businesman and no one is more fed up than I am with the many over-zealous jobsworths who seem incapable of seeing legislation in shades other than black or white. Having said that however I am totally against unrestricted wild camping.

I've no objection to Aires de Service or even stopping on a motorway aire when in transit but for motor-caravanners and towers alike to think that we should have the right to park our moveable accommodation wherever we want is selfish and ultimately self-defeating.

I do not want my view of a remote and beautiful coastline or lovely isolated rural idyll to be ruined by a few people trying to save a few pounds on site fees.

Wild campers should also consider the negative effect that their activities have on the rest of us who become tarred with the same brush and easy targets for the Jeremy Clarksons of this world.

Am I the only here who thinks that to wild camp in my own country is my birthright. I do get the feeling that some people have the attitude that just because they don't like to do something (or haven't the guts), then no one else should. Don't critisise other people for thinking in black and white without looking in the mirror first. If you don't like wild camping, fine, don't do it. Other than that keep your negative opinions to yourself, go out and get a life.

What a selfish, self opinionated bully! You can have your opinions but if we disagree we are negative! As for me not having guts (what's brave by the way about sticking your motorhome in a lay-by somewhere?) would you like a little challenge about what we each do for travelling?

In the last two years I've tramped around Tibet at altitudes from 12,000 feet to 17,000, staying in inns where you smothered yourself in Deet before going to bed.

In August this year I took the Trans-Siberian railway from Moscow to Siberia and after a bit of walking by Lake Baikal transferred to the Trans-Mongolian for a few days living in a Mongolian tent on the steppes. Then it was back on the train through the Gobi Desert to Beijing for the luxury of an hotel and a warm shower.

 I won't bore you with some of the very exotic places that I've visited over the last thirty years of travelling, often with my wife, but some years ago health reasons precluded her flying long haul and she can't risk being far away from first-class medical facilities, so we started caravanning and now motorhoming in Europe.

Where have you 'wild camped' in your luxurious motorhome lately, you courageous litle soul!

Regrettably, you seem typical of a small (fortunately) percentage of the population who are so selfish and self important that they think that whatever they want to do is all that matters, and to hell with the rest of us!

But then again, you are one of the brave and stout hearted 'wild campers' who are ready to plonk their motorhome in the middle of beautiful countryside and take the huge risk that you may be savaged by a huge rabbit or even, God forbid, a fierce and savage wild pony!

Well done old boy - we're all in awe of your pioneering spirit and sheer foolhardy risk taking!

[mom]

Ouch!