Petition Dartmoor

[Paul N]

Often the term right right to roam is misused by people who don’t confine their activities to “unenclosed land.” I’ve had tourists wander across my paddocks and follow the path into my garden before now, only to become abusive declaring that they didn’t see any signs saying it was private and resent being asked to turn back (Though they must have passed at least two signs or climbed fences) There is often a wilful assumption that the right to roam applies to the entire countryside rather than land which is designated as open access by the shaded orange boundary on an OS map...that is without starting on the more furtive types like poachers and doggers that used to frequent the place before we bought it off the 72 year old man who owned it before us.
The thing is that I’m happy for people to enjoy the countryside, even on my land but I do expect them to respect the land, our rights to property as well as my and my partner’s right to privacy.

Very true, and the reason I put the term in inverted commas. As far as I know, and the Scottish cohort may confirm this, the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 is very specific about the right to roam applying to unenclosed land.

 

[Ystranc]

I feel a large part of the problem is that with rights there should also come responsibilities. The right to roam across privately owned land must come with taking sole responsibility for your actions and your own safety. Although a landowner only has a reasonable duty of care meaning that someone crossing that land without permission is responsible for their own injuries (up to a point.) If however there is any kind of negligence on the part of a landowner then they could be put in a position where they have to defend themselves in court. When you throw difficult terrain, deer stalking and driven shoots into the mix then risks become magnified.
Then there is also the statement on the Blachford website which states that Mr Darwall “doesn’t seek to prevent wild camping across the moor but instead wished to clarify the law.” (Does a bylaw supersede property law.) This court ruling could theoretically be used for the good of responsible campers by allowing landowners to evict those who have given wild campers such poor press over the last three years (the Ned’s with their festival tents) and maintain a more peaceful and attractive place for legitimate wild campers.
The fact is that we don’t yet know what the Blachford estates motives are or how they will implement this court ruling, talks with the Dartmoor National Park authorities are ongoing. There are lots of opinions and assumptions floating about on the web and in the press but real facts are a bit thin on the ground.

 

[Ark79]

It will be interesting to hear what our Scottish contingent have to say, where the 'right to roam, and 'wild camp' has been enshrined in the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003. Problems, advantages, disadvantages, abuses etc. @Ark79 @G1ZmO Are you laughing at us Sassanachs?

I fear it’s going the same direction as yous boys in the south…. National parks like the Trossachs are pay to camp with bylaws weaved into the fine print when purchasing that one agrees with to camp there….. I’ve had a run in with there rangers (not a nice experience) rude even to my son, intimidating tactics when I wasn’t compliant. However the landowners (private land) are very reasonable and polite as long as you respect there land and livestock (and rightly so )

 

[Paul N]

I fear it’s going the same direction as yous boys in the south…. National parks like the Trossachs are pay to camp with bylaws weaved into the fine print when purchasing that one agrees with to camp there….. I’ve had a run in with there rangers (not a nice experience) rude even to my son, intimidating tactics when I wasn’t compliant. However the landowners (private land) are very reasonable and polite as long as you respect there land and livestock (and rightly so )

My understanding is that special laws/by-laws were introduced for the Trossacks and Loch Lomond after the 2003 act came in because half the Neds of Glasgow were going there and turning the place into a huge tip. I'm more interested to hear more generally about the rest of Scotland and how the 'right to roam' and 'right to wild camp' is going.

 

[Ark79]

My understanding is that special laws/byelaws were introduced for the Trossacks and Loch Lomond after the 2003 act came in because half the Neds of Glasgow were going there and turning the place into a huge tip. I'm more interested to hear more generally about the rest of Scotland and how the 'right to roam' and 'right to wild camp' is going.

Bad eggs everywhere to be honest not just Glasgow, my point being Paul that the trossacks is only a stepping stone for the rest of Scotland. Just a theory of mine right enough.

The right to roam is still unaffected and freely used however the right to wild camp (my understanding of it anyway) if you have permission or payed to camp then it’s fine, if not ! It’s stealth camping as you will most likely be asked to move on as most places have been abused by numbnuts , and other places are being used for hunting so stealth camping is at one’s own risk I suppose….

 

[Big Red]

I will leave you with this bit of the petition. People should not be allowed to own land within a National Park.

Sorry, but what planet are these people on! Totally clueless.

What a ridiculous statement.

So imagine if you are a third or fourth generation Hill Farmer in the Peak District, Dartmoor, Yorkshire Dales or Exmoor, and some clueless idiot tells you that you should not be allowed to own the land you farm, and make a living from!………Clueless, ill informed, ignorant idiots.

 

[Big Red]

Right to Roam and camp in Scotland…….Didn’t last too long after they realised the carnage that could happen.

 

[Big Red]

Allow people to have the Right to Roam and camp wherever they want in our National Parks will lead to absolute carnage, and the destruction of this vital and diverse habitat. People do not know how to behave, besides us of course, and would just devastate the place, which, for a Dartmoor man like myself, would be absolutely heartbreaking.

Our National Parks should be protected and cared for, they are not just for people to use and often abuse. Wildlife and people live here, many depend on it for their livelihood, as I did, so visitors, hikers and campers should respect that fact and accept they come third in the pecking order, and not think they can do whatever they want.

I could tell you stories that would make you shake your heads, and even perhaps weep.

 

[Paul N]

Just posted online

 

[Ystranc]

I was just about to post a link, Agreement reached following wild camping discussions … it seems to have worked out ok and all the panic was for nought.

 

[Big Red]

Yes, all good as before, but I have just had to listen to that idiotic fool from The Right to Roam movement on the local news. I just wish they would disappear, it does not need them sticking their ill informed, ignorant noses into our lives on Dartmoor.