For newcomers

At the bottom of each post there is the word "comments". If you click on it you will see comments made by followers, and if you follow the instructions you may also comment and I always welcome that. I have found many people overlook this part of the blog which is often more interesting than the original post!

****************************

Wednesday, 3 November 2010

CC versus C&CC


This post is  a response to BB's comment on my previous post.


The Caravan Club is almost part of the Establishment - see the patron and
 list of officers herewith.

The CC's sites are immaculate and run to almost anal standards by semi-voluntary wardens who are usually very conscientious, or at worst ultra zealous. Whilst this can sometimes be irritating, it is much better than the lackadaisical approach on other sites. Because of  this the CC have gained a reputation for being toffee nosed.
Seizing a marketing opportunity the Camping and Caravan Club now advertise themselves as “the friendly club”. Having said that, their standards are also high, and I think they are now coming close to the CC in that respect.


The CC allow camping on some sites only.  I think this is something to do with licensing. CLs (certificated locations) are small sites run by both organisations permitting no more than 5 caravans. The clubs have been given the authority (by act of Parliament, I think) to grant and monitor licences to private people who wish to have a site on their land. Minimum requirements for caravan CLs are a drinking water supply and a chemical toilet disposal point . With the CC, because their CLs cater mainly for caravaners, who have their own chemical toilet a wc is often absent, and for that reason campers are rarely allowed. The C&CC however cater equally for campers and caravaners, and their CLs usually have a wc and tents are permitted. 


The only way to pinpoint CLs is to join the club and look at their handbook and location system which is supported by an Ordnance Survey grid reference number.


CLs are a godsend to the backpacker being inexpensive, relatively secure and often located in places more likely to be close to a backpacker's route than  conventional campsites. In general CLs offer a higher degree of privacy and tranquility than commercial and club sites. Lack of facilities on CLs may be seen as a disadvantage by non-users and the converse by their devotees. They can often be set in idyllic surroundings, and if you know of a good one you keep that information to yourself.

4 comments:

Barrett Bonden said...

No more casually flippant questions for me.

Sir Hugh said...

BB - yes. I thought that was a reasonably comprehensive answer.

gimmer said...

i'm amazed - I thought most of these people were dead long ago

Sir Hugh said...

Gimmer - well! I thought you were more familiar with the aristocracy than that.