And from the Cumbria police we have ....

[BigdummySteve]

Hopefully they will get more powers to eradicate the recent influx of knobheads and we can get back to enjoying these beautiful places like we used

Be careful what you wish for, don’t forget this is a Tory government, while the powers granted during lockdown were absolutely needed they are/were the the most draconian curtailment of civil liberties ever seen in this country making even the most basic freedoms potentially illegal.
The criminal justice bill was brought In to deal with the illegal rave scene and travelers.
Quite rightly people protested strongly against it, they saw the writing on the wall.
That particular piece of legislation was rushed through to deal with a particular situation, technically it could be used against a group on winter Bivvy, illegal gathering/convoy should cover it if someone with influence complains.
Once we go down that route Bikepacking in many places could become an arrestable offence.

[boxelder]

The Cumbria Police announcement carefully excludes proper wild camping in the hills, when you read through the links to National Park Authority etc. They are after the nuggets blocking narrow roads with camper vans and forming tent villages in NT woodland. The chap in charge in Cumbria is a fell runner, mountain biker and totally understands the current situation.

[Cheddar Man]

Hopefully they will get more powers to eradicate the recent influx of knobheads and we can get back to enjoying these beautiful places like we used

Be careful what you wish for, don’t forget this is a Tory government, while the powers granted during lockdown were absolutely needed they are/were the the most draconian curtailment of civil liberties ever seen in this country making even the most basic freedoms potentially illegal.
The criminal justice bill was brought In to deal with the illegal rave scene and travelers.
Quite rightly people protested strongly against it, they saw the writing on the wall.
That particular piece of legislation was rushed through to deal with a particular situation, technically it could be used against a group on winter Bivvy, illegal gathering/convoy should cover it if someone with influence complains.
Once we go down that route Bikepacking in many places could become an arrestable offence.

Er, seriously, so what?

[RIP]

Er, "Who Owns England?"

Don't be so mesmerised by the ant that you can't see the elephant. Beware the magician's clever misdirection.

And obviously I hate a discarded sweet wrapper as much as the next discreet LNT bivvyer.

[Lazarus]

Er, seriously, so what?

I think they may be making the point that the tory government, in a dispute between plebs and landowners, are very likely to take the side of the landowner
I cannot see them giving us Scotland type access can you ?

The second part is that legislation designed for one purpose could be misued for another

[Bearbonesnorm]

I cannot see them giving us Scotland type access can you ?

Yep, I mean no. I think we can safely wave goodbye to the proposed increased access rights for Wales.

[Cheddar Man]

Er, seriously, so what?

I think they may be making the point that the tory government, in a dispute between plebs and landowners, are very likely to take the side of the landowner
I cannot see them giving us Scotland type access can you ?

The second part is that legislation designed for one purpose could be misued for another

Maybe we could quickly discuss under which political party, with a proper shout at being in power, it would be any different? It won't take long, your choices are Conservative or Labour, and neither of them will act any different.

As for legislation creep, again, which of those two parties wouldn't do that?

[sean_iow]

They have already proposed legislation to make trespass a criminal offense, the land owners want the plebs out of the countryside.

This was my point about what has happened with vehicular access on the Island. There were existing powers to deal with the problems of people driving off the lanes/damaging gates etc. but instead they chose to close to lanes and take away the rights of the responsible and law abiding users. The land owners here influenced the decisions to remove the rights of the law abiding.

If the law is changed regarding trespass it would potentially stop me biving outside of Scotland. In my work I visit sites where a CRB check is required and you cannot work at the site with any convictions, regardless of what for. Would I risk being charged with trespass and the issues it would cause? I'm only a consultant so I could just not go to those sites but if you worked there would you risk loosing your job for a bivi?

[BigdummySteve]

the land owners want the plebs out of the countryside.

Exactly my point. Consider a cabinet office of millionaires from Eton, when you own the land in question AND have the power shape access laws we should be worried. More so if that group of people have a history of passing laws in a knee jerk reaction which curtail basic civil liberties.
I recently rode down a remote double track, which is designated a footpath, as it stands it’s a matter between me and the landowner. Once it became a criminal offence it’s a whole different matter. Legally you could only Bivvy on Dartmoor* unless you had permission, the criminality would also extend to riding anywhere not on bridle path or boat. The repercussions of allowing legislation creep WIlL affect you no matter on your political affliction, we should be fighting for more access rights not advocating restrictive laws.

Vast areas of this country are ‘owned’ by people whose ancestors either provided support or violence to the winning side in Britain’s early squabbling. The passage of time may have made this ownership legitimate in law, but many of these laws are passed by their heirs.

* Scotland did a fine job of sticking two fingers up at these privileged few with access laws, we would do well to consider our own history in regard to land ownership and access.

[jameso]

^ 'hear hear'

(which will be my only political comment today )

[Lazarus]

It won't take long

No it wont take long and I assume we both end up at the same point

Its a 100% certainty for all time that the tories will NEVER give this - Labour might.

[Bearbonesnorm]

That's right, land ownership in the UK (not your back garden but something bigger) is generally a direct result of incredible violence and an immense appetite for power.

[AndyTheBikeGuy]

That's right, land ownership in the UK (not your back garden but something bigger) is generally a direct result of incredible violence and an immense appetite for power.

Now if that isn’t the opening like to a 21st century remake of Civilisation with Kenneth Clark then I don’t know what is.

[tobasco]

That's right, land ownership in the UK (not your back garden but something bigger) is generally a direct result of incredible violence and an immense appetite for power.

To be fair much of our society is founded on a history of violence and thirst for power.

[Bearbonesnorm]

To be fair much of our society is founded on a history of violence and thirst for power.

True but the changes in land ownership, entitlement and access that came about after 1066 were quite remarkable and it still forms the basis of those things now.

[tobasco]

To be fair much of our society is founded on a history of violence and thirst for power.

True but the changes in land ownership, entitlement and access that came about after 1066 were quite remarkable and it still forms the basis of those things now.

We won’t get fooled again

[RIP]

To be fair much of our society is founded on a history of violence and thirst for power.

True but the changes in land ownership, entitlement and access that came about after 1066 were quite remarkable and it still forms the basis of those things now.

We won’t get fooled again

Hopefully not in such an all-encompassing way no, but I'm afraid we're still being fooled in major ways, eg:

[the Conservatives' ] attempt to flog off our forests
[the Conservatives' ] flogging off playing fields
[the Conservatives' ] flogging off 1300 hectares of NHS land
[the Conservatives' ] flogging off 12000+ public spaces since 2014
[the Conservatives' ] £100million of land flogged off to offshore companies
[the Conservatives' ] in fact 10% - TEN PERCENT - of our whole country transferred from public to private hands since 1979.
estimated (low?!) 10% of RoW blocked/unusable due to landowner [voting for which parties?] obstructions

From the other side of the fence, I can't find much yet but there must be something. Hmm, on face value they seem to offer something positive rather than negative for land access:
[Labour ] https://landforthemany.uk/

So I retract my earlier statement - we ARE being fooled again

I align with no political or religious establishments - I try to evaluate every instance on its own facts/merits. I would most likely favour the The Monster Raving Loony Party, and Paganism (mainly, to be honest, for the regular nude dancing in [publicly-owned] woods at midnight).

So unless I can find further facts to change the balance, the ones currently in front of me above point to the statement that "all parties are no different on this matter" as being, in the vernacular, complete bollocks.

On all my BaM's I attempt to gain permission from the landowner just before I stop. I frequently fail due to the landowner being the Queen, the Church, or someone appearing to reside in the Cayman Islands.

As I said earlier, a sweet wrapper and some burnt grass on a Lake District hillside isn't nice but it pales into insignificance compared to the, mainly English, corporate and governmental damage being wreaked on our land. Let's have some more laws to prevent that please.

[Lazarus]

Did you read the report you cited - no offence meant

https://landforthemany.uk/7-the-fortify ... ecreation/

Labour should:

Extend the CRoW Act 2000 to grant a Right to Roam across all uncultivated land and waterways, excluding gardens and other limited exceptions.

or as the summary says

We propose an urban and suburban right to roam, codifying a citizen’s right to come onto land for civic and cultural purposes (Chapter 7). We also propose a new Public Realm use class: defining public space that citizens have the right to use for civic and cultural purposes. Allowing Public Realm use would be a planning requirement in all new developments with open space.



If you can show me Tories saying the same* then I will retract my point but i think you just confirmed it rather than negated it

* it will be a cold day in hell accompanied by flying pigs when they do

[Bearbonesnorm]

Like Reg, I have no political leanings in any direction and my preferred deity is him downstairs but I feel that given the general sh1t show performed by some members of the public over the last few months, any political party will have a hard time extending access rights in the near future.

[Lazarus]

Agreed and we are back to the us and them and why we are different

I still maintain noone really cares about us and no one will try to police us as long as do it far enough away and with respect- i think al they could do is ask you to move and they know you will and then camp somewhere else

[RIP]

Ah, sorry Laz, I was meaning to show that report as potentially POSITIVE for access - my post layout wasn't very clear was it. I should have prefaced my list with something like: "a list of activities by the major parties to do with land access, either negative or positive". Ie. I could find quite a few "negative" ones by Conservatives, and one positive one by Labour.

I'm still searching for the Monster Raving Loony Party's viewpoint on land access. Although having met Lord once, if only for a short while, I feel I can guess the answer.....

(There Laz, I've reformatted my original post. It's probably still unintelligible but I'm doing my best here )

[RIP]

him

Are you sure? I believe the general consensus is that that entity is indeed of the male gender, but I fully expect another "ism" discussion to be along shortly .

[RIP]

him

Are you sure? I believe the general consensus is that that entity is indeed of the male gender, but I fully expect another "ism" discussion to be along shortly .

In fact I think I'm on fairly solid ground in saying that [the female, as far as I'm aware] Mrs Perrin frequently appears to me as The Devil Incarnate, but I'm open to debate on that one.

I'm off for a quick ride round the [Council-owned] woods up the road before the personification in question hoves nigh.... 'bye....

[RIP]

I'm still searching for the Monster Raving Loony Party's viewpoint on land access. Although having met Lord once, if only for a short while, I feel I can guess the answer.....

Oh. That's a little unfortunate. I can't find anything about land access, but as far as selling our public assets is concerned we have this:

"We will reduce the national debt by selling the castles back to the French. (Buyer dismantles)"

So sold AND offshored!

Still, given the condition attached, it seems unlikely to be enacted so our fortresses are probably OK for bivvy spots for a while yet.

[Bearbonesnorm]

I'm fairly sure it's 'him' Reg. I think any confusion was largely started by the popular singer, Elvis Presely.