'Right to Roam'

[Rivenink]

A court case has decided that Wild Camping is lawful on Dartmoor, after a landowner couple attempted to revoke permissions for wild camping on their 4000 acres of land.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-663...

Consequently, Dartmoor is now the only area in England that Wild Camping is allowed. It's legal pretty much anywhere in Scotland, I believe.

One of the principles Wild Camping operates under is "leave no trace". That is, there should be no evidence that one had camped, and generally it is for people who are hiking or backpacking and not for a long holiday (given the lack of any facilities).

Should this principle be extended to other national parks?

[sugerbear]

yes

[deckster]

The issue with the UK "National Parks" is that generally speaking they are all privately owned and often actively used as farmland, as opposed to being actually public land and wilderness. Plus most of the time in England you aren't really remote enough to require wild camping (pretty much nowhere in the Peak District or Dales, for example) and they're also too busy to actually get a wild camping experience. This relative accessibility in particular means that unchecked wild camping quickly becomes Kev and his mates carrying a few tinnies up the hill and leaving a mess for somebody else to clear up. Yes I'm generalising and being an outdoor snob but that doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Practically speaking it's tolerated in the Lakes, so long as you are up high and well away from anybody else https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/visit/lake-distri...

[Biker 1]

Can you imagine the mess & litter that would be created in a place like the South Downs national park? Wouldn't be long until the dregs of Brighton's alternative 'culture' turned up to do a rave or similar....

[Beati Dogu]

It'd be litter everywhere, like Glastonbury.

[sugerbear]

Beati Dogu said:

It'd be litter everywhere, like Glastonbury.

or the side of most motorways and roads. (just to give some balance).

[TonyRPH]

No.

We were in Scotland a couple of years back (Loch Lomond) and walked along some of the trails. Everywhere we looked, there were discarded disposable BBQ's, various tins etc. and other associated paraphernalia.

Whilst this may be regarded as a sweeping generalisation, I can only imagine how quickly other areas of natural beauty will be left looking the same.

Bad decision on the part of the court IMHO.

[hyperblue]

TonyRPH said:

Bad decision on the part of the court IMHO.

Why? Wild camping has been allowed on Dartmoor for decades, until the ruling this year. This ruling is just reversing that decision.

[Diderot]

Biker 1 said:

Can you imagine the mess & litter that would be created in a place like the South Downs national park? Wouldn't be long until the dregs of Brighton's alternative 'culture' turned up to do a rave or similar....

Exactly right; living on the South Coast the national park is only 5 miles away from us to the north. This is a huge mistake IMO. The constant littering and general attitude of the unwashed to helping protect the countryside is shameful.

This gives carte blanche to soap dodger dogs-on-ropes lentilists to build campfires and worship Gaia, as well as other communities who may interpret the concept of wild camping as a rather picturesque spot to park a group of towed metal domestic structures with wheels (mind you good luck to both groups in the winter near Hay Tor). Or as Biker 1 says, illegal Raves etc. Witness what happened after the first lockdown.

[sjabrown]

It would be fine if wild campers did leave no trace. Sadly many (most?) leave faeces, litter, burn marks and sometimes complete tents and bags of rubbish up here near the roads in Scotland.

[Silvanus]

I've wild camped all over the world, plenty of times on Dartmoor. I've found British people have some of the worst respect for the countryside and wild places of any place I've been. I'm all for the right to roam and wild camping here, but there is a real lack of understanding and a huge level of entitlement here, some of the worst examples are from the middle class, certainly not from alternative folk.

In England we have some of the worse access rights anywhere in Europe, river and waterway access is even worse. If there were more accessible places there would be less pressure as it would be more spread out. We need more education in schools about the countryside.

As for disposable BBQs, they are one thing that needs banning.

[silentbrown]

Rivenink said:

A court case has decided that Wild Camping is lawful on Dartmoor, after a landowner couple attempted to revoke permissions for wild camping on their 4000 acres of land.

Let's be clear: It's lawful on the Dartmoor Commons. not the entire moor, and certainly not the entire national park.

The neds that leave their sh*t and disposable barbecues around Loch Lomond don't care if it's legal or not. (it isn't : Loch Lomond has specific byelaws to restrict camping, unique to that area AFAIK)

Plenty of people regularly wild camp (in the true sense) and leave no trace. I'm delighted that the NPA appeal has succeeded.

[Diderot]

silentbrown said:

Rivenink said:

A court case has decided that Wild Camping is lawful on Dartmoor, after a landowner couple attempted to revoke permissions for wild camping on their 4000 acres of land.

Let's be clear: It's lawful on the Dartmoor Commons. not the entire moor, and certainly not the entire national park.

The neds that leave their sh*t and disposable barbecues around Loch Lomond don't care if it's legal or not. (it isn't : Loch Lomond has specific byelaws to restrict camping, unique to that area AFAIK)

Plenty of people regularly wild camp (in the true sense) and leave no trace. I'm delighted that the NPA appeal has succeeded.

That’s all very well in theory, but show me the road/footpath/bridleway signs where it indicates that one is entering ‘commons’ land as opposed to ‘moorland’.

If it ever applied here in the South Downs or in the New Forest National Parks, gawd help us all.

I also agree with Silvanus who said that disposable BBQs should be banned.

[Randy Winkman]

I'd have thought that the PH view would be that people should be responsible for what they actually do, rather than what they might do?

[Silvanus]

Diderot said:

silentbrown said:

Rivenink said:

A court case has decided that Wild Camping is lawful on Dartmoor, after a landowner couple attempted to revoke permissions for wild camping on their 4000 acres of land.

Let's be clear: It's lawful on the Dartmoor Commons. not the entire moor, and certainly not the entire national park.

The neds that leave their sh*t and disposable barbecues around Loch Lomond don't care if it's legal or not. (it isn't : Loch Lomond has specific byelaws to restrict camping, unique to that area AFAIK)

Plenty of people regularly wild camp (in the true sense) and leave no trace. I'm delighted that the NPA appeal has succeeded.

That’s all very well in theory, but show me the road/footpath/bridleway signs where it indicates that one is entering ‘commons’ land as opposed to ‘moorland’.

If it ever applied here in the South Downs or in the New Forest National Parks, gawd help us all.

I also agree with Silvanus who said that disposable BBQs should be banned.

If people had more access to the countryside, then the impact on places like the New Forest would be reduced. We have a case of too many people trying to access a tiny amount of space.

[silentbrown]

Diderot said:

That’s all very well in theory, but show me the road/footpath/bridleway signs where it indicates that one is entering ‘commons’ land as opposed to ‘moorland’.

Clearly shown on the NPA's map. As is what constitutes "backpack camping".

https://www.dartmoor.gov.uk/about-us/about-us-maps...

Also the code of conduct. https://www.dartmoor.gov.uk/enjoy-dartmoor/outdoor...

( South Downs NPA is a wildly different scenario, as there's only a tiny proportion of access land in the park - and a lot of that is effectively inaccessible)

[skwdenyer]

deckster said:

The issue with the UK "National Parks" is that generally speaking they are all privately owned and often actively used as farmland, as opposed to being actually public land and wilderness. Plus most of the time in England you aren't really remote enough to require wild camping (pretty much nowhere in the Peak District or Dales, for example) and they're also too busy to actually get a wild camping experience. This relative accessibility in particular means that unchecked wild camping quickly becomes Kev and his mates carrying a few tinnies up the hill and leaving a mess for somebody else to clear up. Yes I'm generalising and being an outdoor snob but that doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Practically speaking it's tolerated in the Lakes, so long as you are up high and well away from anybody else https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/visit/lake-distri...

In the Lakes it isn’t “tolerated” - that link says (correctly) that it is legal above a certain elevation. Source: apart from that link, I grew up - and wild-camped - in the Lakes.

[pork911]

Are private gardens fair game too?

[Diderot]

silentbrown said:

Diderot said:

That’s all very well in theory, but show me the road/footpath/bridleway signs where it indicates that one is entering ‘commons’ land as opposed to ‘moorland’.

Clearly shown on the NPA's map. As is what constitutes "backpack camping".

https://www.dartmoor.gov.uk/about-us/about-us-maps...

Also the code of conduct. https://www.dartmoor.gov.uk/enjoy-dartmoor/outdoor...

( South Downs NPA is a wildly different scenario, as there's only a tiny proportion of access land in the park - and a lot of that is effectively inaccessible)

Thank you. But it’s not on the ground, with physical sign posts is it? You’re making an assumption that those types of people will have the slightest interest in observing codes or caring about the countryside when they always demonstrate that they don’t give a flying etc, and that they won’t just dump, in many senses of the word, on people’s private land.

[silentbrown]

skwdenyer said:

deckster said:

The issue with the UK "National Parks" is that generally speaking they are all privately owned and often actively used as farmland, as opposed to being actually public land and wilderness. Plus most of the time in England you aren't really remote enough to require wild camping (pretty much nowhere in the Peak District or Dales, for example) and they're also too busy to actually get a wild camping experience. This relative accessibility in particular means that unchecked wild camping quickly becomes Kev and his mates carrying a few tinnies up the hill and leaving a mess for somebody else to clear up. Yes I'm generalising and being an outdoor snob but that doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Practically speaking it's tolerated in the Lakes, so long as you are up high and well away from anybody else https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/visit/lake-distri...

In the Lakes it isn’t “tolerated” - that link says (correctly) that it is legal above a certain elevation. Source: apart from that link, I grew up - and wild-camped - in the Lakes.

The link does NOT say it's legal, cos it isn't! NT are a landowner who tolerate wild camping on some of their land. There is no right to wild camp in the lakes.
https://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/visiting/where-to-...