Network Shrinkage

I think there are many factors for the closure,

May be to expensive to add extras that the modern caravanner expects like 16 amp, WiFi, and hard standing.

Price rise for utilities  and Insurance

Or finding the hard work for little return is not worth it,

Or simply have retired.

Don't think it was anything you said CY.

If my memory serves me correctly you started a very similar thread a few years back CY.

It sparked off a debate on members who preferred full facility CLs Vs those who chose basic ones.

My views remain the same we all have different needs and budgets and so there is room for all types of CL. It would be interesting to know which ones are closing, the basic ones or the ones with a shower/toilet.

CLs are my site of choice so any decline is a sad blow as far as I am concerned.

Maybe they need promoting more by the club? Perhaps a CL owner could give us an opinion?  

Difficult to figure. I joined in 1980. We used a lot of CLs up until around 1986 as well as other sites. After that date and a house move we used few CLs. 

If the number of CLs have dropped that much then the surprising thing is that the number of caravans, campervans and motorhomes seem to have greatly increased. On my road and the few hundred metres of road that I use leaving home there are around 7 or 8 caravans. Back in 1987 when I moved here mine was the only one. 

For me if I were to use a CL it would need to have EHU and, at least, a metaled access track

We are stuck with a 60 year old system (5 vans) and until we see  some flexibility to make investment worthwhile the trend will continue. Whilst Cls close, small scale (12/15) unit sites are increasing, many of course Cls  moving away from the club system. Planners look favourably at these smaller sites  application and most nodded through even in the Nat Park without recourse to a full planning meeting. That's life and nothing will change unless say CC takes up the issue of numbers.

It would be useful if we were told the reason for the closures, as we used to. Perhaps HO don't want us to know that some have now become small scale sites, as indicted above. Come on CL Maddie please give us the info, on here as well as in the magazine.

The nature of caravanning has altered greatly over the last 30 years. The youngsters of those days, like us, are now getting older and perhaps prefer/need things slightly easier than a field, a tap, a refuse bin, a CDP point. (Although we still love and use such sites).

Those a bit younger/new to touring will never have made do with such basics, so it is possibly a scary environment, not worth the effort, or they just prefer to roll in easily, hook up easily, log on easily, ablute away from the van, with minimum effort. It is after all, supposed to be leisure time! The number of members saying that they are going to try more CLs seems to bear this out, and it is probably only the rising Club Site prices that tip them into considering such a move.

There are of course lots of folks between the two extremes.

Neither type of touring is wrong, it's just personal preference, and there are probably a lot more now in the latter category than in the former. Trying to recoup expenditure on lots of extras provided will not be easy in some instances, especially if the CLs are not in highly popular tourist areas, with other reasons for people to visit the area. But I do hope the lovely little basic sites do survive and multiply.

They used to publish that information in the magazine. I assume something happened to change their mind? It's all very well saying a CL has closed because the owner retire but a completely different thing to say a site has closed because of implied irregularities! You just can't publish such things these days.

On the wider point of CL numbers. Clearly from the point that many users of CL's are looking for electricity and perhaps hardstandings with toilet/shower facilities a nice to have you do have to question whether the investment can be justified with only five units being able to use a CL as mentioned up thread. What might be interesting to know is what type of CL is closing. Is it the basic CL that might only attract custom in the summer months? To get a reasonable return on a CL with good facilities perhaps people have to accept the cost per night might well have to be £15/20 a night which brings them into direct competition with lower priced sites and people start voting with their feet?

David

I don't think toilet and washroom facilities are such a stumbling block - nor necessarily hard standings. But I believe that many, like me, will use a non facility site but do want at least a stoned track and EHU. This however might make it difficult if a CL were close to a CC non facility site