HIE’s campervan park at Cairn Gorm – an abject business failure

October 27, 2021 Alan Brattey 31 comments

The campervan park within the Coire na Ciste car park on Cairn Gorm  (see here) and (here) will close for the season this coming weekend.

 

Commercial failure or success?

Data gathered from observations carried out each evening over two separate 1-week periods provides the evidence that the Ciste campervan park has been avoided by campervan users who now park elsewhere on Cairn Gorm.

The Ciste campervan park with just two users. That was the average number per evening over a period of 14 evenings.

Campervan users are avoiding the Ciste  facility and parking in the Coire Cas car park and on the down road instead:

Campervans in the Coire Cas carpark
Campervans parked adjacent to the ‘down’ road

The Statistical Evidence

During 2019 and 2020, studies were made to gain an insight into the usage of the Ciste and Cas car parks by campervans. Observations were made during the weeks ending 6 July and 27 August 2019 and also during the weeks ending 20th and 27th July 2020. It was found that the overwhelming majority of Campervan users chose at that time to park in the Coire na Ciste car park. A total of 376 campervans were observed to be parked up overnight in the Ciste car park over the weeks observed, while just 63 were in the Cas car park during the same time periods. That equated to 86% in the Ciste and 14% in the Cas.

Following the opening of the Ciste campervan park on 6 September, observations were made over 14 evenings during the weeks ending 16 September and 3 October 2021.  During that period a total of 28 campervans were recorded as parked up overnight in the Ciste campervan park, while 172 were parked up in the Cas car park and at the side of the down road. That equated to 14% in the Ciste campervan park and 86% in the Cas car park and down road.

Cairngorm Mountain Scotland Ltd [CMSL] made a belated attempt to increase usage by reducing the cost of an overnight stay from £15 to £10, Monday to Friday, and increasing the time period when campervanners could access the site (see here).  Further observations were made each evening from Monday 11th to Friday 15th October to determine the success or failure of this price reduction.

During this time period 36 campervans were observed to be parking in the Cas car park and at the side of the down road while there were just 7 in the Ciste car park. That equated to 84% and 16 % respectively. There was therefore a very slight increase in the proportion parking in the Ciste campervan park after the changes. However, that meant that just a single extra campervan, 7 as opposed to 6,  had chosen to park there by compared to before the price reduction. Those 6 would have paid £90 in total whereas the 7 who did park there would have paid in a total of just £70. The price reduction, therefore, has not turned the facility around. That alone ought to inform CMSL that their campervan park will not succeed unless it is radically improved and offers the sort of services that attract users.

The cost of developing this facility, such as it is, has recently been revealed by an FOI request to be £64,755.82, although that cost doesn’t include the materials and labour used to build the fence that goes all the way round it. That’s a bit more than the circa £60k that the interim CEO said it cost.

The capital used to develop the Ciste campervan park has achieved nothing other than an exact reversal of where campervan users now park up overnight. The use of the Ciste campervan park, in its present format, has been soundly rejected by users to the point that the residual car parking area has seen more use.

5 Campervans parked up in the free car parking area adjacent to the pay to stay Campervan Park

The 28 campervans observed to be parked up in the Ciste campervan park over 14 nights would have generated just £420 of income. At that rate of occupancy, averaging two per night, and with the campervan park open for about 6 months of the year, it will take over 12 years for the income to equal the Capital Expenditure HIE has incurred to develop it. Of course, there are other costs to consider such as the removal of the wastewater and the contents of the bins, not to mention the booking system which is already down for upgrading.

If this was a private commercial enterprise then it would already be in financial distress. However, and very regrettably, this is a publicly owned business that is heavily subsidised by public funds. The entire cost of this campervan park will have been met by Highlands and Islands Enterprise.

Improvements

Campervan users require to be incentivised into staying in the Ciste campervan park. It is abundantly clear that paying 10 or 15 quid for a toilet emptying facility and access to some bins and fresh water doesn’t provide any incentive to stay there.

When something fails as badly as this, a major rethink is necessary. Any normal business would ask campervan users what services they would expect to find in what is a new facility, but HIE and CMSL are not like that which is why a radical change in strategic direction is needed.

What needs to happen now

  1. An enquiry needs to be convened and HIE’s involvement on Cairn Gorm together with the significant sums of public money squandered should be transparently investigated.
  2. HIE needs to cease obsessing over the funicular railway and discard their blinkered view of the mountain business. Their strategy of focusing on the funicular, with all facets of the business designed to boost the numbers in Coire Cas and hence the numbers using the funicular, was a major failure prior to the funicular breakdown.  And it will fail again after over £20m of public funds has been squandered on the repair work (see here).
  3. A full redevelopment of the Ciste base station building to include toilets, showers and a café bar needs to be planned and implemented. The people who have the commitment as well as the knowledge and skills to bring this about opened a Community owned, seasonal Ice Rink in Aviemore on Saturday 9 October (see here). It has already proved to be an outstanding success in direct contrast to CMSL’s campervan park. The Aviemore and Glenmore Community Trust should be immediately invited to take over the Ciste side of the hill and provided with the funds to re-develop it. The same funding as has recently been provided by HIE to Nevis Range would be a good start: £800k
  4. Hook up points for campervans need to be provided.
  5. Lodge and Micro Lodge accommodation should be constructed to provide the scale necessary to make a Ciste based business commercially self-sustaining.
  6. Those responsible for this farcical debacle should consider their continued involvement in anything to do with Cairn Gorm.

31 Comments on “HIE’s campervan park at Cairn Gorm – an abject business failure

  1. Very interesting regarding the numbers. I did follow up with a final email when they changed the time slot booking (something I only found out because of the diligent postings here and NOT because CMSL contacted me to say so), pointing out that the message on their website still wasn’t clear enough and that some users may still try to gain access before 1pm. They have since rectified that too.
    One thing I would say regarding electric hook up points. Whilst they are convenient, they aren’t necessary really and not generally expected at motorhome stopovers. It’s something that the Campaign for real Aires (CAMPRA) is always at lengths to point out. Generally speaking folk are happy to pay £5-£10 for the waste and water facilities and extra for EHU only if they used it. There is a danger that folk would be reluctant to pay for something they don’t need. It’s a fine balance getting the pricing right. I have a solar panel on my campervan and the battery charges up whilst driving so I rarely have to hookup. There is more detail on the documents part of their website.
    But this article shows that they have completely displaced overnight parking to elsewhere. And there is nothing to stop vehicles parking outwith the Ciste and simply walking over with their toilet cassette to empty it.
    It would be interesting to know how much revenue they got from the honesty boxes for donations, though I have to say, the one at the Ciste was located way at the far end from the actual entrance, behind a stone dyke so probably a few well intended Campervanners gave up trying to find it (why not put it right at the entrance?).
    There are also donation boxes at the Cas at regular intervals though I imagine it won’t be long before the barriers installed there come into use. The whole thing is such a shambles.

  2. I cannot understand how these observations lead to the conclusion that what is needed is more facilities to justify the price!
    What is clearly wanted is access to basic water and waste services at a reasonable price when needed. Those who want and can afford a full facility campsite are already well catered for.
    There is an argument that these services should be free at point of use as the users have already paid for it in taxation at home; when on holiday they are not using the service at home and the same applies to the locals when they go on holiday. As substantial council funding comes from central government council services should not be restricted to people who actually live in the council area.

    1. As a campervan owner myself, I agree with the question about the need for more facilities. How many campers stay more than one night for an early hillwalking start? Is anyone really staying up there long enough for ehu or waste disposal. I’d far rather there was money spent on several easy access campervan servicing facilities elsewhere in the Strath where connections to less sensitive waste disposal and more reliable water could be provided than at a thousand feet up a mountain in a National Park.

    2. Basically you are saying (which the rest of us presume) that the majority of motor homers expect the rest of us to subsidise their holidays.

      1. No motorcaravan users do not expect anyone to subsidise their holidays. What we do want is safe places to park. The entry system for this car park was overly complicated and drove people away rather than encouraged them in. Contrast this with the aire at Findhorn which has a simple booking/entry system and has beem well used since it was set up.

      2. Happy to pay for waste disposal should private profitable provision be made at for example at filling stations and other accessible places. If local authorities make such provision, then I’d expect to pay much like everyone does with public toilets.

        1. Quite right Val, provide a service and they want cheaper otherwise they just empty cassettes by laybyes and shout how nice they are.

          1. So how many campervanners do you think empty cassettes in laybys? Why do you think people do this? And what do you think the solutions are? In my view the chemical waste disposal point at Cairn Gorm was a good idea, the right thing to do, and we need a network of such disposal point across Scotland. The Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park Authority installed one at Tarbet, a good thing, but unfortunately has produced no plans of how many are needed across the that National Park. But the going commercial rate for disposal – as at Glencoe ski centre for example – is about £5. Campervanners might just about accept £5 a night for a disposal point, which they possibly only need to use once a week, and a old water tap but £15 is clearly over the top and hasn’t worked. The issue at Cairn Gorm that HIE need to address is either they reduce the charges to a reasonable rate OR they provide facilities short of a full blown campsite so that people are prepared to spend more to stay the night (like at Glencoe where there is a cafe, shower etc). In my view we need both types of provision in the Highlands.

          2. I’ve only ever witnessed one motorhome emptying their toilet cassette in a lay-by. It was a rental one and I duly reported it to the rental company. But just because I witnessed this once, I do not assume that every motorhome owner does the same. Slobs like that are very much in the minority but tend to ruin it for everyone because social media and the press dramatise it for headlines.

      3. Not at all. I tried to gain access a few weeks ago and was willing to pay the £15. I just couldn’t get in because of the crazy slot time they had in place, which they have now rectified. However though I would have paid £15, many (as clearly displayed in this blog) decide to park up elsewhere. I pay because I’m overly fond of the area but it does stick in my craw when I see how badly managed the whole Ciste and Cas areas are. Comparisons have been made with Findhorn but it’s worth bearing in mind that it’s a more finite space there, used by many locals, visitors and tourists visiting the village and beach. They landscaped part of the dunes car park specifically for overnight stops and spent on decent registration plate recognition infrastructure with no time slots. The Ciste car park was a large, redundant space that up until September was little used by anyone other than campervanners and some hill walkers. Payment was by donation with the box being hidden away at the far end behind a dyke. They have added facilities fresh/grey/blackwater just like Findhorn but with little landscaping or thought. People are less likely to linger at the Ciste unless they are there to do something specific. People will linger at Findhorn as it has many more attractions other than the serious outdoor pursuits that Cairngorm has. So folk will see the Ciste as £15 for not much and know that it was once much easier to access and for a small donation. What would have been better and cheaper would have been to introduce parking meters (similar to the ones in the forestry car parks back down the hill) with daily fees and additional charges for overnight parking. There seemed to be plenty Rangers in the Cas Carpark taking note of numberplates so it could be assumed that if they have time to do this, they could check parking tickets too. The waste/water facilities should have been locked with access by code or coin, then anyone could pay for exactly what they need or want. As already mentioned in another comment, there is nothing to stop some brass necks just parking outwith the compound and emptying their toilet anyway.

    1. Sorry, fixed. There is a gremlin that turns new paragraphs into columns that I have never been able to work out how to change!

  3. I do think this is a bit of a bourach, but I would contend that you can’t really complain about HIE not asking end users what they want, then go on to tell everyone what is needed…unless of course the author has asked. No more ‘what this needs”. Ask the local people, the ski, hillwalking, campervan/motorhome market and the service providers what they want and how it can be provided? Then consider just what can be provided in a sensitive environment in the centre of a National Park with conservation at its heart.

    1. I think you will find the author has asked. HIE could have saved themselves the bother of consulting lots of people if they had consulted the Save the Ciste Group, who did a lot of work on alternatives for the Coire, or if they had gone to some of the campervanning organisations who have a pretty good idea of what people are looking for.

  4. Thanks Nick. Wasn’t intending to be snarky, there’s quite enough of that online. Where will I find where the author has asked? Is there any information from Save the Ciste other than on the odious Facebook? Which I refuse to use…for several reasons. The major rethink that the author recommends should, I suggest include consideration of the removal of the large car-park, which is only used by campers/motorhomes because ‘its there’ and the restoration of large part of this damaged area of sensitive environment. Not saying there shouldn’t be some middle-station type building to sevice winter and summer visitors but with staff only access and parking, for several reasons including not needing to evacuate hunnerds of skiers when the weather turns foul? Or is that too much of a Major Rethink and been considered before? (along with the impact of climate change) I appreciate this might be a distraction from the inital posting, forgive me if all of this has been tediously covered over the past years and decades, but my own view is in line with most, including yourself, that it all needs to be taken out of the hands of HIE who are painting lipstick on a pig, to use a phrase, and at his stage, tinkering about the edges of what campers and motorhomes might want is simply trying to improve the quality of the lipstick.

  5. In response to points made: I spoke to many campervan users during the times that observations were made. In addition, I also spoke to users parked up in Glenmore/Loch Morlich side and in the official Glenmore campsite. Users were asked what would encourage them to park up on the hill. There were other suggestions that I didn’t include in the blog post such as: A kids adventure playpark and an indoor games room. These were suggestions based on a Campervan park that wasn’t simply an overnight stopover. I take the point that hook up points are not required by all campervans but more than a few users suggested that they should be included and the overall impression is that it would be desirable to have them rather than have the lack of them act as a barrier to use, by some. Electricity is already cabled in to that location so the cost of provision shouldn’t be prohibitive. The numbers of users that were parking in the Ciste carpark shows that there are plenty of owners/users who do want to park up on a mountain. There were 439 observed to be parking up there during 28 days of observations. Regrettably, the imposition of what is clearly a prohibitive charge for many….has chased a lot of them away. The Cairn Gorm business is there to stay but the strategic decisions are not about to bring commercial viability. Even HIE concede that point…..by factoring in an annual subsidy to their business plan. Is that a necessary and sensible use of public funds?

    1. Thank you Alan, illuminating. I think what I’m saying is that this all is a response to what is currently happening with overnighting in the car park rather than a ‘step-back’ strategic consideration of what, if any, provision should be made on the mountain? I know there has been long debate about ‘recreation’ on Cairn Gorm of which the current mess, if I can politely call it that is the latest manifestation. I don’t hold out any hope of HIE getting any sort of grip.

    2. User surveys like this have to be carefully constructed. How many are in fact answering the question “Would you like / use a full service campsite at 10 quid a night?” which isn’t going to happen. If what they want is a full service campsite why don’t they go to one?
      There should be room for both full service chargeable and free – no or very basic facilities.
      There is a similar issue with the “clubs” and their 5 van exemption sites. It seems owners are complaining of not enough customers and rather than telling them that they can’t charge caravan site prices for a field the clubs are advising them to install more facilities and put their prices up.
      I agree with the poster who said that the logical thing to do is provide black water and waste facilities in less rural places where the infrastructure already exists at a reasonable price. Any sensible touring outfit should be able to last for at least 3 days “off grid”.

  6. I stayed there two weekends ago and there was only our van and other van on the site. I was horrified to see first thing in the morning two camper van emptying there waste and filling up there water without paying. We then when down to the loch to find 15 camper vans either parked at the side of the road or in the car park. Why don’t they introduce permits for parking overnight next to the loch. I also feel that something has to be done about the tents along the beach and in the woods, some of them leave such a mess (not all).

    1. Thank you for taking the care and being conscientious; I do despair at some people’s attitudes but you set the balance straight
      (A local without a motorhome(

  7. Whilst the improvements required to make the Ciste campervan facility a success can be debated it is definitely not the case that electric hook ups is part of it. The cost of installation and maintenance would be prohibitive. Neither are “toilets, showers and a café bar” part of a campervanner’s needs. That makes it a campsite!

  8. Prior to COVID lockdown, my wife and I were regular users of the Coire for Stopovers on our way up or down the A9. Many a happy night spent there in our Motorhome before moving on either to a proper site, an Aire such as Findhorn or even just another park up elsewhere, or, returning home. Very rarely would we need to empty waste, fill up with water or dump rubbish. Either our booked sites on a trip or hone would deal with those requirements.
    We’ve put many donations into the collection box. Even on trips where we’ve only stayed for a quick sleep during the day before heading on, or It’s gotten so windy we’ve had to move down the hill.
    The new site has changed everything. Needs booked in advance. Has removed the spontaneity of just turning up and seeing if there was a space (I can only recall one time we couldn’t get parked) or changing mind and heading off somewhere else, or just using it for the quick stop off, lunch, walk the dog etc.
    It’s pushed a lot of people down to Hayfield instead. Or the roadside. 10 vans overnight at Hayfield the last time we were up for a quick stop where previously it would have been empty.
    If I want a site with facilities in the area, I book into Glenmore. Lovely site, especially during Winter.
    £15 for facilities I don’t need is steep for publicly owned land that used to be fully open car park until some decided they knew best after many years, without real consultation.
    What people have always wanted there are toilets. Open 24 hours. Many a morning there my dogs and I had to have stern words with tenters headed to the old booking office intent on having a dump without any bags and only a toilet roll or pack of tissues in their hands. Used to be you could go up the mountain, but recent trip I found building work and diversions closed access to those so goodness knows what those with no onboard facilities had to do.

    My suggestion, charge £5. Let people come and go as they please, no arrival/exit times. After all, it’s not a campsite where toilets need cleaned or people need booked in etc. Get rid of the stupid gate. Put coded access on the facilities instead which changes regularly so that the people who pay the £5 get emailed the code of the day. Start a season pass system like the parking one down at Glenmore. £25 a year. I’d pay £50 if it included Glenmore parking as a regular as I’ve no issue paying that each year. Put some bins in at Hayfield and other popular points. Put some composting toilets in like all USA national parks have.

  9. The solution to better take up of campervan facility at Ciste can be debated but electric hook up is not a part of it. Its not needed by most campervans and the installation cost and maintenance would be very expensive, maybe more than the £60K+ already spent

  10. Quite obvious I would have thought… There’s free overnight parking elsewhere, so until that’s stopped I can’t imagine it being a success. Why pay if you don’t have to?

  11. Freeloaders will be freeloaders. The current policy on Wild Camping in Scotland ( intended for hiking and cycling ) is so poorly worded Everyone treats the countryside as a free holiday. Some will pay for a site for a night to fill up and empty out but only to head off for another free week.
    Its killing our countryside. This nonsense needs to stop. Camping , or as some like to call it ” overnight parking ” outwith designated areas should be banned and a fine per night that would exceed the cost of official camping.

    1. Stuart, what do you mean by killing the countryside? And are visits to the countryside only of value in your view if they can be measured in money? The Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park employed lots of rangers to try and stop both campervans and tents from stopping off by the lochs in the National Park, they had to abandon trying to enforce the camping byelaws against campervans because people have a right to stop off by the side of the road for safety reasons and they have wasted endless resources trying to force campers into a few small areas where problems have got worse, not better. All that is documented on this blog. Your idea to police that stopping off would cost far more than to provide the basic facilities that would address the issues. In the Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park they refuse to provide litter bins and then employ someone full time to go round checking camping permits. Nick

    2. There is room for both official campsites and more basic stopover sites. This is commonplace on the continent where just about every village or town in Germany and France have stellplatz and Aires that happily co-exist with the official campsites. For some reason the UK is so far behind the curve with this. A few years back there were more caravans than motorhomes/Campervan. They aren’t so easily manoeuvrable so tended to frequent the ‘official’ sites. In the last five years there are far more motorhomes and campervans on the road than there are caravans. Their popularity is clear from gazing at the forecourt of my local dealer. Their popularity has been compounded with COVID and Brexit with more people staying at home for holidays and looking for alternatives. Implementing bans isn’t going to make the problem just disappear. Instead of seeing the problem as too many motorhomes, see the problem as not enough stopping places. One farmer with foresight opened up a redundant space on her farm for overnight stops charging £10. On the CAMPRA Facebook page she summed up her year so far – over 1000 stays plus some stopping off to use waste facilities (£5). So she’s brought in over £10k to her business. Other local shops and restaurants will have benefitted too. We have some of the most progressive land access laws in Scotland, let’s not go into reverse by banning and fining.

    3. Every 25+ pounds paid to a landowner for nothing more than the temporary use of a tiny patch of land is money not spent elsewhere in the rural economy. The charge for unwanted EHU goes straight to an energy company.
      The campsite lobby is vehemently opposed to the provision of chargeable service points because it destroys one of their key arguments. Some of the loudest shouters turn out to own campsites…
      I don’t believe it is true that campervanners don’t use local services but they would probably use them more if they weren’t faced with height bars, restricted car parks and shops with a minimal selection of basic foodstuffs and overpriced “local produce” outlets – special shoutout here to the one on Mull which wants to charge over £6 for two hamburgers!

  12. The site does not need frills like EHU – £5 is plenty for a basic overnight on tarmac. Most Campervans / motorhomes do not need EHU as they have solar panels. Water is always appreciated and paid for CDP as an option but £15 or even £10 is too much.. Personally I choose to visit places where I can park for £0 to £5 and spend money locally rather than pay £24+ on an official campsite that I just sleep at. I am not free loading and would happily buy a permit (perhaps pro rata to Council Tax) to spend time ‘off grid’ in any County. In Powys, my home County, ALL Council car parks are free to motorhomes from 6pm to 8am for 1 night in 7 – I have never heard of the motorhome / camper van owners being called free loaders by anyone local. Indeed I have used them myself as a local overnight to enjoy a meal in my nearest town Presteigne. Recently I stayed at Thaxted, again free for 2 nights and shopped locally spending about £60 – Thaxted actively encourages motorhomes! I appreciate Scotland has high tourist volumes but needs to wake up to fact what worked when most people had caravans is no longer the case when so many people have motorhomes. I also wonder if it is genuine Scots or those new to area who are so vociferous against tourists? I suspect the latter who perhaps do not benefit from the tourist £

  13. First, tent campers, campervanners and motorhomers are 3 quite different groups with different needs and desires. All 3 have spent considedable sums on their equipment and vans so any talk of not being able to afford to pay fees is clearly not the case. However, many do not want to pay, either because they do not see the charges as reasonable value for money, or because they can get it for free elsewhere. Choosing where to park involves many factors. Is there a view ? Is it level ? Is it off the roadside, to avoid noise and buffetting. Are you on your own ? Is it clean and tidy – litter free, not muddy and dry underfoot. Is there a bin and one that is not already stuffed full to overflowing. Is it likely to be midgey. Are there nice walks you can do right from your spot. Do you have to book in advance. Is there a troublesome arrival/check in process. Is it a “dark skies” spot – no light pollution from street lighting, local towns and cities, other vans with annoying outside lights or illuminated hookup points. We have a campervan, but with full onboard facilities. We prefer spots with a nice view where we are on our own, where we can walk directly from our spot and where there’s as little light pollution as possible so we can see the stars, weather permitting . Serried ranks of vans are not appealing. We sometimes pay, but expect to get something for our money. That can be an attractive pitch with a nice view, a hook up, but only for a stay of three nights or more without moving, bins and fresh water, on site activities or very nearby which you do not need to drive to, e.g. skiing in winter and walking, canoeing and swimming in summer. Tent campers and some campervans need toilets, water and bins, motorhomes are more likely to want hook ups, for their TVs, microwaves, kettles and hairdryers. Motorhomes are also more likely to want proper grey water disposal from time to time and chemical toilet disposal facilities. However, these aren’t really needed at your overnight spot, just somewhere you pass as you travel around and people would generally be happy to pay a small charge for that – up to £5 maybe. Many, however will simply empty their grey water into a roadside drain or onto the road itself. It’s just dirty dish, washing anx shower water after all and probably less harmful or noxious than road runoff. Chemical toilet waste is a different issue. People want a proper disposal point with a hose for cleaninv ouf the tank after emptying.

Leave a Reply

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