Author Topic: The right to Roam  (Read 22056 times)

Erin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
The right to Roam
« on: 17:43:16, 05/08/13 »
Just thought I would ask if people think that Hikers are being squeezed out by the right to Roam. In general Hikers who love the outdoors and the idea of rough camping are getting fewer and fewer chances to do this as many see Hikers as being the main cause of littering the countryside. I always take a rubbish bag with me and always take any rubbish away with me and deposit it at the nearest bin once I get the chance to. However, it would seem rough camping is now becoming a dying art and frowned upon by the establishment. What say you?   
Where dips the rocky highland
Of Sleuth Wood in the lake
There lies a leafy island Where flapping herons wake

Ridge

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9691
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #1 on: 17:54:23, 05/08/13 »
I think walkers are the cause of most litter in the countryside. I know it is never any of us but I'm sure we've all see rubbish that can only have been left by other walkers.
 
As for wild camping there are places where there are always tents, if I know where they are then I'm sure that the establishment (whoever they are) must also know and are turning a blind eye.

joester

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5076
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #2 on: 17:55:38, 05/08/13 »
On the contrary, I'd say wild camping is readily tolerated in all of our National Parks, and is gaining in popularity alongside the UK population's increasing interest in 'The Outdoors'.
 
From what experience/evidence do you base your opinions?
 
 
solvitur ambulando

Peter

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3689
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #3 on: 18:14:58, 05/08/13 »
The thread might be in the wrong part of the forum... but anyway..
I'm unaware of anyone being squeezed out because of litter. Wild camping isn't really allowed, I gather its a matter of blind eyes being turned.
I also think I see some who I wouldn't class as 'walkers', demolished walls aren't something walkers would do. I do see groups of 'campers' who show disregard for everything, I think those are just lads buying tents and having a laugh.. which sometimes isn't very funny.
They're not the norm.
 
Peter
sometimes I fall off the learning curve....
Join: Yorkshire Dales Walking Buddies
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1783012625307

C2C09 Shaun

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #4 on: 18:36:44, 05/08/13 »
I would disagree to a point re walkers being responsible for all the litter left behind along the routes that we like to walk. I would be very surprised if anyone on this forum would be responsible for littering our countryside, as TRUE walkers / hikers dedicated to our hobby / sport I would like to think that we all respect and abide by the "Country Code".
 
When I say I disagree to a point.....what I mean is, its not regular walkers that leave their litter behind, its the people that we all see on the routes we walk, that by the way they dress in totally unsuitable clothing and footwear are obviously not used to walking in the countryside and are more than likely unaware of the "Country Code" or if they are aware, don't really care anyway. I remember challenging a group of four young adults, a couple of years ago in the Peak District on Mam Tor, just finishing their break and started to walk off leaving their litter behind, a few polite words of advice and they picked their rubbish up and took it with them.
 
Can't really comment on Wild Camping
www.catchlights-photography.com

Everything in Life happens for a reason

llandudnoboy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 705
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #5 on: 19:22:22, 05/08/13 »
Walk up the Llanberis Path and you could easily fill a bin bag full of discarded litter.
A good friend of ours who owns a farm in South Wales has had to legally shoot several dogs out of control amongst his livestock in the past ten years.
Numerous cases of totally selfish 4 x4 owners illegally trespassing on bridle ways causing untold damage,this has become a continuing problem on the ancient Ridgeway path in Wiltshire.
Damage to drystone walls in the PeakDistrict National Park which in 2008 cost the National Park £11,000 to put right.

All those are acts of vandalism in their own way,carried out by a small minority of people who want to spoil it for the rest of us.

I follow the country code to the letter,and every time I go for a walk or run in the hills I leave only footprints to say I've passed that way.

Occasionally I pick up plastic and glass bottles when I go up Snowdon,but recently I would have had to spend several hours searching the mountainside for discarded litter.

The Right to Roam Act is a very important safeguard for our freedom to walk the hills and paths in This beautiful island of ours,but with that right comes a responsibility.

If unruly members of the public want to spoil it for the majority,do not be surprised when a particular farmer or landowner wants to denie us access to their land.

They may have a significant justification to take such drastic measures.

archaeoroutes

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1601
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #6 on: 21:16:04, 05/08/13 »
Wild camping isn't really allowed, I gather its a matter of blind eyes being turned.
There are places where wild camping is officially allowed.


I can think of plenty of times I've come to a lovely remote spot and found the remains of fires, food, toilets etc. The appalled reaction amongst the group is gratifying, hopefully none of them will ever make the same mistake. Luckily more often than not I find a nice clean area.
Walking routes visiting ancient sites in Britain's uplands: http://www.archaeoroutes.co.uk

glovepuppet

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2638
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #7 on: 21:38:42, 05/08/13 »
The term "Right To Roam" IMHO is a bad one.  :(


And there is no such thing as a right to roam - at least in England & Wales.  ???


It's bad because it's misleading term for both landowners (who get the idea people will just wander indiscriminately across their land, regardless of where rights of way actually go) and the general public (who think they have a right to trample anywhere, regardless, no matter who owns the land) both of whom can be called upon to misconstrue the term given half a chance. This has provided the dog-walkers of the land the idea they can let their mutts loose anywhere they fancy, and has done more to sour walker/landowner relationships than almost anything else (if my village is anything to go by!).  :(


What there is is the Countryside and Rights Of Way Act 2000 (CRoW) which designated certain land (mostly that above 600m or above the last intake wall) as Access Land. This Access Land is what we have a right to walk on, as long as we follow the rules - basically the Country Code, so no damage, shut gates, mind livestock, no fires, respect the owner and the area, etc, etc. It is clearly defined, and is shown as such on newer OS maps.  O0

Erin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #8 on: 23:32:34, 08/08/13 »
On the contrary, I'd say wild camping is readily tolerated in all of our National Parks, and is gaining in popularity alongside the UK population's increasing interest in 'The Outdoors'.
 
From what experience/evidence do you base your opinions?
 
 
On the contrary, I'd say wild camping is readily tolerated in all of our National Parks, and is gaining in popularity alongside the UK population's increasing interest in 'The Outdoors'.
 
From what experience/evidence do you base your opinions?

I completed the South Downs Way a few years ago with friends and met a fellow Hiker who stated that he was threatened with a fine for wild camping in a field. He was let off as he stated that he was on a charity walk. However, every social interaction along the South Downs Way that I had was fantastic. Spoke to a farmers wife who kindly opened her farm shop up and made us a cup of tea after we showed her our guide book that stated that her farm shop had a mention for making fantastic Sausage Rolls alas none left for us. But did take some home grown sausages that were fantastic. All farmers and persons who looked after the South Downs Way stated they welcomed Hikers as long as they left no trace and always tried to seek permission for Rough Camping. I believe the gentleman camped along the path in a field so that he was easily seen. We have some Beautiful Countryside and we all need to respect it or we will I fear lose the right to walk freely.       
Where dips the rocky highland
Of Sleuth Wood in the lake
There lies a leafy island Where flapping herons wake

Erin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #9 on: 23:43:04, 08/08/13 »
On the contrary, I'd say wild camping is readily tolerated in all of our National Parks, and is gaining in popularity alongside the UK population's increasing interest in 'The Outdoors'.
 
From what experience/evidence do you base your opinions?
 
 
Just thought I would ask if people think that Hikers are being squeezed out by the right to Roam. In general Hikers who love the outdoors and the idea of rough camping are getting fewer and fewer chances to do this as many see Hikers as being the main cause of littering the countryside. I always take a rubbish bag with me and always take any rubbish away with me and deposit it at the nearest bin once I get the chance to. However, it would seem rough camping is now becoming a dying art and frowned upon by the establishment. What say you?
Yes, Your absolutely right this was posted in the wrong Forum. I had a Eureka moment and just wanted to get honest opinions about this subject. Must be getting old. I never read whats on the label, apologies
Where dips the rocky highland
Of Sleuth Wood in the lake
There lies a leafy island Where flapping herons wake

Erin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #10 on: 23:47:42, 08/08/13 »
The term "Right To Roam" IMHO is a bad one.  :(


And there is no such thing as a right to roam - at least in England & Wales.  ???


It's bad because it's misleading term for both landowners (who get the idea people will just wander indiscriminately across their land, regardless of where rights of way actually go) and the general public (who think they have a right to trample anywhere, regardless, no matter who owns the land) both of whom can be called upon to misconstrue the term given half a chance. This has provided the dog-walkers of the land the idea they can let their mutts loose anywhere they fancy, and has done more to sour walker/landowner relationships than almost anything else (if my village is anything to go by!).  :(


What there is is the Countryside and Rights Of Way Act 2000 (CRoW) which designated certain land (mostly that above 600m or above the last intake wall) as Access Land. This Access Land is what we have a right to walk on, as long as we follow the rules - basically the Country Code, so no damage, shut gates, mind livestock, no fires, respect the owner and the area, etc, etc. It is clearly defined, and is shown as such on newer OS maps.  O0
Just thought I would ask if people think that Hikers are being squeezed out by the right to Roam. In general Hikers who love the outdoors and the idea of rough camping are getting fewer and fewer chances to do this as many see Hikers as being the main cause of littering the countryside. I always take a rubbish bag with me and always take any rubbish away with me and deposit it at the nearest bin once I get the chance to. However, it would seem rough camping is now becoming a dying art and frowned upon by the establishment. What say you?
Right to Roam is probably a bad term to use. But I must confess everyone seems to be using it. But agree Hikers need to maintain a good relations with Farm and Landowners to gain support to allow responsible walkers/Hikers on their Land. Very much appreciate your comments
Where dips the rocky highland
Of Sleuth Wood in the lake
There lies a leafy island Where flapping herons wake

phil1960

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2993
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #11 on: 08:01:05, 09/08/13 »
On the Grwyne river this week, just off the path to the reservoir, there were several bags of rubbish left by old campfires, perhaps by bagging their rubbish the people concerned thought they were doing their bit, how much harder would it be to actually take it with them! Slightly off topic but on the same walk, as we approached the reservoir, 8 trail bikes came up the path at speed, mud and stones being thrown up by their chunky off road tyres and loud engines shattering the peace. We could see their tyre marks all the way up to where it becomes open mountain side, now along with the litter, that's another trend I would not like to see too often  :(
Touching from a distance, further all the time.

Matt Hill

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 30
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #12 on: 10:44:47, 09/08/13 »
Litterbugs are generally ignorant people who due to laziness don't think about the consequences of their actions, you see plenty of them in the dales not just on the hill but chucking stuff out of their car in to the verges of the road, it a shame we get tared with the same brush.  The use and abuse of the Crow act comes down to ignorance as well, the open access moorland in the dales are farms in there own sense, just for game birds instead of livestock.  The shooting business round here generates trade not just directly (ie. Beaters, Gamekeepers) but to food and hospitality businesses as well helping them stay afloat in the lean winter months.  I think it will always be a tough job to educate both camps involved (Walkers and Landowners) but surly there must be a way for all lovers of the outdoors to use the space in harmony, I think it just comes down to respect. As for ignorant dog owners they really get my heckles up, letting them run off lead, poo every were, tell you "its a friendly dog" whilst its bearing its teeth at you and growling for no reason (their always the ones most likely to bite you!)
« Last Edit: 17:58:57, 20/09/13 by Chris »
"There is no such thing as bad weather, just inadequate clothing" A.W.
I own at least 10 jackets!

youradvocate

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2356
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #13 on: 11:09:04, 09/08/13 »
Yes litter is a real pain but as my old mum used to say, its not as bad as some of the eyesore permanent buildings that have been put up throughout the UK. Litter can be cleaned up but an eyesore tends to be permanent. I just carry a plastic bag with me and clear up bits and pieces of other people rubbish as I walk, not all of it of course, just the bits that really annoy me personally, usually cartons and food containers thrown out of car windows. As to roaming, I think there is a general intolerance building in society, whether it be about immigration, the underserving poor, people who choose or have to live in caravans, etc which I suspect is fueled by the times we live in, political opportunism to get votes from those who want to think this way anyway and I think generally led by intolerant newspapers like the Daily Mail and others like them. I remember the 60s, for me good times, good times!

barewirewalker

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4226
Re: The right to Roam
« Reply #14 on: 11:18:08, 10/08/13 »
The term "A right to roam" was coined by the No 10 propaganda machine, when Tony Blair was trying to milk the passage of the Open Access part of the
2000 CRoW act through parliament.


He was so busy trying to milk the notion that he was opening up our countryside as a great benefit to all, that he failed to take into account the danger of the House of Lords and the 94 hereditary peers still lurking there. Here the bill nearly stumbled, and to shoe-horn it through they gave away 2026 to the landowner interest of the large hereditary estates.


Trying to regain lost ways through the courts is probably a lost course, but in 2026 the landowners will be let off, once and for always from their responsibility for the Corruption of the Definitive Map. This will go by without any proper survey that evaluates those routes that will be lost, without allowing for the development new ways that could advance our access network into the 21st century.


To mistakenly ally bad behavior, ignorant ways, vandalism or criminal damage to the right of access is mistaken. This is a reason that landowners for centuries have used to keep people out of the countryside and bolster up the concept of private land.


Where ever there is a large area of 'Private Land' then the freedom of other people within that area is affected. Further the owner of 'Private Land' does not contribute to society in the same way that an owner of 'less Private Land'.


Many hereditary estates incorporate within their boundaries infrastructure, natural features and viewpoints that have been denied to the rest of society for centuries. To what extent these might contribute to our joint economy and well being we do not know nor may we ever know come 2026.
BWW
Their Land is in Our Country.

 

Terms of Use     Privacy Policy