Argyll and Bute’s access tax at Arrochar

July 31, 2018 Nick Kempe 15 comments

 

Argyll and Bute Council have just announced that they are going to increase daily car parking charges at the main Cobbler car park (Glenloin No 1) and the neighbouring car park at the head of Loch Long (Glen Loin No 2) from £1 to £9 a day from the end of August.  That’s a 900% increase and,just to make it harder for hillwalkers and climbers to avoid the charge (and to protect local residents), they are introducing parking restrictions in Succoth at the same time. 

Its not so long ago the car parking here was free.  Earlier this year Argyll and Bute increased charges at the car park in Luss to £1 an hour, which effectively penalised anyone wanting to walk over the Luss hills. They got away with that because walkers can still park for free in Glen Douglas but their proposals for Arrochar have already created a storm on social media (see here) and rightly so.

In return for paying these new charges visitors will get………..nothing.  The current £1 a day charge in return for the Council keeping the car park litter free is just about justifiable. Hence, why in my view this new charge is effectively a tax on access and poses a serious threat to our right to roam.

crap and paper by the Cobbler path

Toilets are sorely needed at the Cobbler car park.  Like everywhere else in the National Park, most people arrive after a drive and a proportion of them need to go…………..step into the woods alongside the main path up the Cobbler and you will find crap and paper everywhere.     Most walkers would not mind paying a few quid for some proper toilet facilities within reasonable distance but there are none.

Walkers might also be prepared to make a  financial contribution to the maintenance of the footpaths or even the clean-up of Loch Long, a notorious trap for marine litter (see here).   Argyll and Bute Council however don’t appear to have any proposals to improve visitor infrastructure in the area, instead they are charging because they can.

While I appreciate our Councils are close to financial collapse as a result of years of austerity, following the example of city financiers and extorting charges while offering little or nothing in return, is shortsighted in the extreme.  The consequences are predictable:

  • the Pay and Display machines get trashed by people angered at the charges and the Council then brings in surveillance cameras to stop this happening again
  • most people won’t use the car park because of the charges and will park at the nearest free or cheap place they can find, creating problems for other people which Argyll and Bute Council won’t have to pay to sort out
  • new routes will develop up the Cobbler and Beinn Narnain from whereever its possible to park cheaply or free.  That will create new paths and erosion undermining all the investment into the main Cobbler track which was made last year and creating new problems for the Forestry Commission – but why should Argyll and Bute care, its not their budget?
  • Argyll and Bute won’t raise nearly as much as they expect and the local economy will see a drop in tourism revenue

I understand that Argyll and Bute does not own either of these car parks, it leases them.  Perhaps its just trying to extract every penny it can before those leases run out?

What is needed is a coherent visitor management plan for the area which starts with what infrastructure is required and is developed on the basis that it is the duty of public authorities to make this happen.  The Public Authorities could then consult  visitors on what it might be reasonable to ask them to contribute to this (either through car park charges or maybe a bednight tax – those in place on the continent are a trifle, £1-2, compared to the charges Argyll and Bute Council want to extort here).

That infrastructure should include better public transport links:the 6 times daily Campbelltown bus does not even stop at the Cobbler car park and there is scope to run a minibus service connecting Tarbet bus and train stops with Arrochar making it much easier for people to access the Arrochar Alps by public transport.

Unfortunately, the Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park Authority has provided no lead on how to address the improvements in visitor infrastructure needed at Arrochar or elsewhere in the Park.  After Grant Moir, now Chief Executive of the Cairngorms National Park, had overseen the creation of visitor management plans for east Loch Lomond and the 5 Lochs Area (now abandoned by staff without consent from the Board) the LLTNPA should have developed a visitor management plan for west Loch Lomond and Loch Long. However, instead of trying to create an overarching framework for visitor infrastructure, to which the various councils and other public authorities would contributed the LLTNPA has led the Public Authority free for all, where all anyone cares about is budgets and if its possible to off-load costs and problems onto someone else, so much the better.   Parking charges is a good example with the LLTNPA trying to extract what it can from parking charges, just like Argyll and Bute, without any consultation or agreement on what services should be provided in return.

What needs to happen

Much as I have advocated for a more rational and strategic approach, I cannot see the LLTNPA delivering this (they have shown themselves so far to be totally incapable of even getting Argyll and Bute Council to install litter bins).  I think the solution at Arrochar therefore is for the local community to take matters in their own hands.

The local community have for some time been trying to tackle issues and improve infrastructure such as paths around the head of Loch Long with the support of the local MSP, Jackie Baillie, who chairs the local forum for this.   The development of the Arrochar Community hydro scheme, which has just opened, was in large part motivated by a wish to be able to finance local projects.    With new powers for local communities to take over and manage land recently coming into effect the community at Arrochar could now take over the ownership and/or manage both of the car parks at the head of Loch Long.

Were the local community to commit to working with the outdoor community about improvements to visitor infrastructure and to consulting on what reasonable charges might be, Arrochar could end up with a decent plan from which both communities would benefit.

And if you want to object:

Meantime complaints about the charges can be made to Argyll and Bute Council (see here), the responsible department you want is “Development and Infastructure Services.”  It would be worthwhile copying your complaint or complaiining separately to the two Argyll and Bute Councillors who sit on the LLTNPA Board, Cllr Ellen Morton  ellen.morton@argyll-bute.gov.uk and Cllr Barbara Morgan barbara.morgan@argyll-bute.gov.uk  

15 Comments on “Argyll and Bute’s access tax at Arrochar

  1. This level of charging is far too high – it seems the council want to discourage visitors who will inevitably spend money in the area and thereby benefit all. The charge at this level is like a penalty against people who want healthy exercise in the Scottish hills. As a resident from Ayrshire it will not encourage me to visit the area.

  2. Park in Arrochar itself, which I’ve done previously because of ‘no overnight parking’ restrictions at the Cobbler car park. Failing that XXXXXXX (edited)
    I’m not paying £9 to park at the Cobbler, and I will not be going to the Cobbler.

  3. Nick, I wonder if there was a clearer explanation of how the higher parking charges were spent and the benefits for the local area (e.g. toilet facilities) were clear, would you be more in favour of charges in general? For example, the increase charges at Cairngorm Mountain just seem like a way to gouge visitors. In comparison, I have always felt FCS charges, even in the most popular areas, e.g. Glenmore, are quite reasonable. My wife and I parked in Glenridding last year to walk Helvellyn by the edges, and paid £8 for parking. I found this quite eye-watering by comparison to FCS charges, but couldn’t find any clear explanation of how the money is used other than ‘All car park charges go towards keeping the National Park special for the future’ (from the LDNP website). I agree that community ownership is an ideal model, for example at the Fairy Pools in Skye, where the scrub just to the north of the small car park has become a latrine owing to the lack of toilet facilities. Unfortunately, community ownership won’t be the silver bullet in every situation, so if a national park or local authority was to levy charges and provide ‘accounts’ for how the money is spent, do you think it would be more satisfactory to the public or is it the act of paying itself that is an obstacle people can’t overcome? I would be happier to put my hand in my pocket if it said ‘Paid for a composting toilet’, ‘Paid for a ranger to be employed’, ‘Repaired potholes’ etc.

    1. Hi Steve, I think the principle is there should be no charges without services and then there is the question of if there are services, such as toilets, what is a reasonable charge – how such charges are worked out should be transparent. You are right that FCS charges are generally far lower – and the £1 say at Glen Affric for car park with toilets is more than reasonable. In terms of community ownership, this has only become necessary because our public authorities are so bad. For the local community at Arrochar, say, to raise money for toilets, plan and install them etc etc will take a huge amount of voluntary effort. It would be much better and easier if the National Park had competent staff and a budget to do all this work (though it might then make better sense to devolved the management to the local community). The trouble is at present is the National Park and Public Authorities are not addressing and appear incapable of addressing the issues and indeed are making them worse and in these circumstances the only way to get out of the impasse is for local communities to take control.

      1. Thanks Nick. I think it is interesting how local authorities could use the legislation on community ownership to get themselves out of some difficult situations. In the Highland Council region we currently having something of a toilet crisis that has become even more high profile because of the North Coast 500 and the pressure that has placed on the most remote and rural communities. If local/park authorities claim that they cannot afford to run public toilets any longer, then they are effectively forcing the community to make the choice to attempt to take ownership (as you’ll be aware it’s not as simple as just saying ‘it belongs to us now’) or allow the closure. I don’t believe this was the intention of the legislation and as you point out failure of authorities to act as they were set up to and run public services is increasingly becoming the trigger for communities to take ownership, rather than it being a new and direct benefit to the community to take ownership.

  4. Steve, your final words “(the) failure of authorities to act as they were set up to and run public services is increasingly becoming the trigger for communities to take ownership, rather than it being a new and direct benefit to the community to take ownership.” should be quoted at every politician! I will try and find the opportunity!

  5. I put in the complaint about the charges ,but not upheld .I expected this will be the same with all complaints

    1. Nothing short of extortion and totally unjustified. An access tax and discourages people to get fitter an healthier. BTW the Luss car park charges are also just another tax, throughout the summer the car park was a disgrace. Often spotted the parking attendant waiting in his van for tickets to run out. This is nothing more than revenue raising by A&BC, a visitor and hill walker tax, Council should be ashamed

  6. Sadly. I will not be participating in the “Big Beach Clearup” at Arrochar this weekend, due to the absence of reasonably priced parking, and public toilets. Otherwise I would have made the drive up from Glasgow to take part, so I think that Arrochar loses out here…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *