Never legal to wildcamp on Dartmoor?

[jameso]

From STW, post by jam-bo,

from righttoroam: https://www.instagram.com/right.2roam/

Our response to the supposed ‘deal’ between Dartmoor National Park Authority and (as yet undisclosed) major landowners RE: Wild Camping.

Tl;dr: It’s a stitch up.

The proposed deal replaces long held rights with ‘permissive access’, which can be withdrawn at any time, entirely at the whims of the landowners.

We have also been told that ‘permission’ to wild camp will also involve some form of public payment to major landowners.

Many of these landowners already receive hundreds of thousands of pounds from the public via subsidies.

Right to Roam will not accept any agreement based on permissive rights. We have to end the hold this patronising, feudal system has over our access nature.

We will not accept our rights being stripped away in exchange for a pat on the head.

We will respond in further detail as more information is available.

[RIP]

Yes the public payments thing is another outrage on top of the original outrage.

On a lighter note (gawd knows it needs one), "We have also been told that ‘permission’ to wild camp will also involve some form of public payment to major landowners" - I guess that would rule out any Bivvy-A-Month attempts on Dartmoor from now on because paying, whoever makes the payment, infringes BaM Rule #5

[sean_iow]

Very well spotted and to the 'letter of the rules' that's correct as it's tax payers money. But, if the BAM entrant doesn't pay any tax in the UK* then they're still allowed to count a bivi on Dartmoor as they've not paid.

If only the NPA had you representing them they'd never have lost the case.

*Not sure how many members of the government are attempting a BAM this year?

[Bearlegged]

^ posting from the Independent People's Republic of Vectis

[riderdown]

There may be additional rules that escalate that into a criminal offence, such as breach of S193 Law of Property Act or local authority/National Park Authority byelaws, punishable by fine. Examples of this are MOD land, National Trust Land and access land in the Peak District and Lake District National Parks

As illustrated here part of the issue is the fragmented nature of restrictions and complexity of the relevant legislation

It's a shame we can't go for a LNT policy which gives some responsible limits (one night, not in someone's back garden, etc etc) law, it's the fear of the people who will take the p, and the concentration of power in large landowners (new money or connected to 1066) which as always means we can't have nice things

[ledburner]

....and the concentration of power in large landowners (new money or connected to 1066) which as always means we can't have nice things

That was only 957 years ago, so much progress has been made..

[Bearbonesnorm]

That was only 957 years ago, so much progress has been made..

I do wonder on a fairly regular basis how things would be now if the Norman invasion had never taken place - after all, Norman law / customs / brutality changed society a great deal. I tend to think our 'class' structure would likely be a little different?

[Lazarus]

Big fan of the french approach to aristocracy

[Ray Young]

Big fan of the french approach to aristocracy

[RIP]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england ... 418161

"Alexander Darwall and his wife Diana, who brought the case, said it was "very regrettable that this has caused unnecessary worry"."

Well that's all ok then .

"Mr Darwall, a hedge fund manager, and his wife, who have owned 4,000 acres (16 sq km) on southern Dartmoor since 2013, said in a statement: "The truth is that there is no threat to access or true wild camping".

""We expect the final agreement to be finalised very soon so that organised camping like Ten Tors and Duke of Edinburgh's awards, and individual wild campers can continue," said the Darwalls."

The saga continues....

[Bearbonesnorm]

Obviously don't want to get political but ...

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... GwxjgfqaFU

You know, I'm wondering whether this whole thing might actually turn out to do some good and finally help the population at large to understand the difference between 'true' wildcamping and the other tw@ts who've spent the last few years trying to knacker the job.

[Cheeky Monkey]

... and NP planning to appeal judgement:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ion-appeal

Looks like this could run and run.

[sean_iow]

I was looking at the details of the permissive right that's the interim arrangement and it specifically says that camping is allowed provided you arrive on foot and carry your stuff in a rucksack.

So as the law is all about the wording, bikepacking isn't permitted Oversight? or do the NP and land owners not like bikes?

[Swede]

Have any of you watched this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmPIg7wY0Uk

Not that I expect it to make any difference but here's the link to the petition;

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/631241/

[ledburner]

I was looking at the details of the permissive right that's the interim arrangement and it specifically says that camping is allowed provided you arrive on foot and carry your stuff in a rucksack.

So as the law is all about the wording, bikepacking isn't permitted Oversight? or do the NP and land owners not like bikes?

Take it on the shoulder!

[Bearbonesnorm]

So as the law is all about the wording, bikepacking isn't permitted Oversight? or do the NP and land owners not like bikes?

Wasn't cycling access very limited on Dartmoor anyway?

[godivatrailrider]

So as the law is all about the wording, bikepacking isn't permitted Oversight? or do the NP and land owners not like bikes?

Wasn't cycling access very limited on Dartmoor anyway?

I thought it wasn't too bad on Dartmoor but terrible in the New Forest

[lune ranger]

DNP have leave to appeal the High Court verdict, they just need your money to do it….

https://www.justgiving.com/campaign/Bac ... quRKtYel3c

[RIP]

https://wildjustice.org.uk/gamebird-r ... r-woods/

[Lazarus]

“In my judgment, on its true construction, section 10(1) of the Dartmoor Commons Act 1985 confers on members of the public the right to rest or sleep on the Dartmoor commons, whether by day or night and whether in a tent or otherwise”.

Unanimous court ruling in favour of wild camping on Dartmoor

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... urt-appeal

[drain]

Result!

[RIP]

Well spotted Laz. Wow. Rest of England now please...

[thenorthwind]

Great news!

From the BBC News article:

Timothy Morshead KC acting for the Darwalls, had argued that sleep cannot be considered to be "recreation" as you are not conscious.

Our Timothy's clearly never used a bivvy bag in Britain then has he?

[Lazarus]

I did genuinely laugh at your comment

Recreation is literally just something done for fun, sleep itself could be recreation.

Good that the courts have agreed with the commoner over the landowner

[Cheeky Monkey]

Is there another potential level of appeal after this and if so has a right been granted to do so? Might not be over yet though I'm very pleased to see the latest outcome (also lead article on Guardian's website).