Lee.Van.Cleef
VIP Member
It sounds very much like a 'Tough on campervan and tough on the causes of campervans' which seems unreasonable provided the vehicle parks within the bay and doesn't overstay, but they obviously won't be moved.Portree still wants to discriminate based on vehicle use, not vehicle size, which is strange and unwelcoming. But I also see the pressure on the local people by tourism. Even if the local economy is doing well because of tourism, problems with traffic and too many people at once are quite real. I have lived in a small coastal village for a few years and know what it looks like.
I camped all my life in a small tent without chairs and tables and never lit campfires. I try to be as invisible as possible and leave almost no trace.
I try to 'wild camp' whenever possible—not because I don't want to spend money but because I love to be alone in the woods for those few weeks of travelling around. Being seen as part of the problem with over-tourism and overuse of nature does not feel great, to say the least.
Blaming Instagram and the tourist board does not help us, and I don't know what will.
I also live in a coastal area so sympathise with the problem of inconsiderate parking and traffic, but this seems like a poor response, especially given that 'light goods vehicles' are allowed. My guess is that one or more local councilors made an election pledge to 'do something about it' in response to vocal complainants with an axe to grind. It's very likely there are similar stories in the local press reinforcing the notion that 'something has been done'. A crude response, but that's how local politics works I'm afraid.
Don't blame the council officers, they have obviously been given instructions.