Do farmers look more kindly on tarps as opposed to tents?

[didicoy]

Working as a land manager and actively encouraging the public to access land under our control. We found it imperative that any user planning a activity, first contact us with their proposal. This helped with our management programming, more so than needing to know everybody's business. If operations like spraying where scheduled in that area, we would have a duty of care to the public and the contractors. If it was for reasons of conservation, ground nesting birds, reptiles, flora or fauna, we could make a decision to approve or deny permission. This approach works well in that management disruption was kept to a minimum and the public would not be so disappointed if an explanation was given.

 

[bowji john]

None of this is difficult

You , me, anyone who does not 'own or have right of access to the land' does not have a right to walk on it or camp on it whether you are in a marque, tent, under a tarp or handkerchief

You have a right to travel over footpaths etc. You do not have a right to camp (or remain) on them, picnic on them, or any other clever attempt to circumvent the law.

Absence of someone around to ask permission does not give you the right (moral or legal) to camp on it and move on when you have been caught.

if you want to go to a farm house to ask for permission, ring, or use the access road - don't walk over the fields to get there (if only because it reduces the likelihood of a positive response).

We would all like access to 'the wilds' but they do not really exist in England. Every single inch is owned by someone.

Scotland has far freer rights - which are wonderful - however they have more 'wild spaces' than England.

Clever misinterpretation of the spirit of the law serves no one and just makes it more difficult for everyone else who does seek permission and co-operation from land owners

Trying to argue with a land owner who has caught you and quote 'human rights' probably would result in an 'unfortunate reaction' from even the meekest.

 

[boatman]

You can camp, lightly, on many paths without causing a obstruction. And, who would you be obstructing on the majority footpaths.

 

[boatman]

Oh dear, the implied threats are here again, "Trying to argue with a land owner who has caught you and quote 'human rights' probably would result in an 'unfortunate reaction' from even the meekest." If challenged one would leave as the law required.

 

[Quixoticgeek]

Oh dear, the implied threats are here again, "Trying to argue with a land owner who has caught you and quote 'human rights' probably would result in an 'unfortunate reaction' from even the meekest." If challenged one would leave as the law required.

To walk across someone's field without asking is trespass, this is a CIVIL offence. To not leave when the owner asks, means it becomes aggravated trespass, and then it becomes a CRIMINAL offence. There is some debate as to whether you should leave by the shortest route, or by the route you came in by.

At least this is my understanding.

J

 

[Joonsy]

it’s noticeable how some members who condemn law-breakers seem happy to make make threats of breaking the law themselves, the law applies to everyone equally so in condemning campers without permission I would hope the forum is balanced in also condemning illegal actions of landowners too, the law applies to everyone and it is hypocritical to shout that someone is breaking the law if you are happy to break it yourself.

Perhaps it is appropriate to inform members of some actual facts about legalities instead of heated words:- camping without permission is trespass of land (there is also trespass of person & goods), trespass is a civil matter and not a criminal offence, any damage done to crops, trees, fences etc etc is a criminal offence, a landowner or someone appointed to represent him can ask the trespasser to leave by the shortest route, if the trespasser refuses the landowner can use no more than reasonable force (''reasonable'' being a very important word if it goes to court), I imagine most trespassers are happy to oblige and leave when asked, if they don’t a policeman can remove a trespasser by force but a landowner that assaults a trespasser is committing a criminal offence, and it may come as a shock to some to find that a landowner actually has a legal duty of care to a trespasser and can be prosecuted themselves if the trespasser is harmed. These are very important points if a case goes to court.

Links about trespass:-

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2007/jun/08/yourrights.legal

http://naturenet.net/law/common.html

 

[boatman]

Interesting Naturnet article except they are probably wrong that it is trespass to be on a river without the consent of the neighbouring landowner.

 

[sunndog]

Julia, of çourse its important for everyone to know their rights. Its the attitudes (not yours) on display in this thread i dont like
Lazy, sneaky, and with some sense of self entitlement that is just unnecessary if one were to put the effort in and seek permission

 

[sunndog]

Oh dear, the implied threats are here again, "Trying to argue with a land owner who has caught you and quote 'human rights' probably would result in an 'unfortunate reaction' from even the meekest." If challenged one would leave as the law required.

He could equally have meant even the meekest might call you a bad name

 

[petrochemicals]

To reverse the argument," your land is getting in the way of my journey?". If your primary interest was a settled camp is entirely different than a right of way. And whilst you can argue that on the one hand you have right to rest on the other does not the landowner have the right to resonable recompence, the going rate is about 5 pound a night for a basic pitch.

 

[Quixoticgeek]

To reverse the argument," your land is getting in the way of my journey?". If your primary interest was a settled camp is entirely different than a right of way. And whilst you can argue that on the one hand you have right to rest on the other does not the landowner have the right to resonable recompence, the going rate is about 5 pound a night for a basic pitch.

If there was a means by which I could easily pay a land owner a fiver to pitch my bivvi undisturbed in a quiet corner for the night, then I would be extremely glad to pay it. Alas, that is not entirely practical, and some might be insulted if you mention the coinage to early in the conversation...

J

 

[Joonsy]

Interesting Naturnet article except they are probably wrong that it is trespass to be on a river without the consent of the neighbouring landowner.

Hi Boatman, that's an interesting one, i believe a landowner owns the ''bed' of the river (and the land either side of it of course) but not the water running through it.

 

[Joonsy]

To keep things in perspective while some folks camp irresponsibly some landowners also behave in a diabolical way too, remember the notorious 'an unnamed person' footpath

https://campaignerkate.wordpress.com/the-framfield-footpath-story/

And there are others just as bad

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1343424/Couple-jailed-for-blocking-forest-footpath.html

 

[boatman]

This is the argument that is made in that rights of navigation were accepted and encouraged up to about the nineteenth century when a bad judgement was taken as the law on the case. As far as I know it has never been tested in court that one trespasses by canoeing on a river. I believe that even the Environmental Agency has ceased saying so.

 

[xylaria]

To keep things in perspective while some folks camp irresponsibly some landowners also behave in a diabolical way too, remember the notorious 'an unnamed person' footpath

https://campaignerkate.wordpress.com/the-framfield-footpath-story/

And there are others just as bad

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1343424/Couple-jailed-for-blocking-forest-footpath.html

Is that the scumbag 'an unnamed person' the money launderer that plowed money into the london housing market and is now propping up mugabe. Becuse he has left his large south of england manor house go delirelic. I dont think anyone would object to someone camping on his old lawn. Generally camping in someone property without permission isnt nice however this bloke is vile excuse for a human being.

 

[Joonsy]

Is that the scumbag 'an unnamed person' the money launderer that plowed money into the london housing market and is now propping up mugabe. Becuse he has left his large south of england manor house go delirelic. I dont think anyone would object to someone camping on his old lawn. Generally camping in someone property without permission isnt nice however this bloke is vile excuse for a human being.

yeah that’s the ars*ho*e, 'an unnamed person' one of the worlds worst parasites.

 

[Quixoticgeek]

To keep things in perspective while some folks camp irresponsibly some landowners also behave in a diabolical way too, remember the notorious 'an unnamed person' footpath

https://campaignerkate.wordpress.com/the-framfield-footpath-story/

And there are others just as bad

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1343424/Couple-jailed-for-blocking-forest-footpath.html

Look hard enough and you will find examples of disgraceful behaviour in any group.

Is that the scumbag 'an unnamed person' the money launderer that plowed money into the london housing market and is now propping up mugabe. Becuse he has left his large south of england manor house go delirelic. I dont think anyone would object to someone camping on his old lawn. Generally camping in someone property without permission isnt nice however this bloke is vile excuse for a human being.

Tho in some cases you don't have to look very hard...

I take it you don't like this guy?

J

 

[sandbender]

Please don't mention this chaps name again folks, I'll leave the links in Joonsy's post and people can follow them if they wish.

I can't say I'm much of a fan of the chap either but the rules are clear.

5 - Forum subject matter
Some subjects should be avoided on bushcraft uk. Firstly any subject that the moderators say is not appropriate should not be discussed. Particular problem subjects where moderator guidance should be followed are those such as politics, survivalism (often becomes extreme), legal systems, TV shows and criticism of people, religion - this list is not all inclusive and members are expected to follow guidance given by moderators and other members that know the ropes.

Thank you for your understanding.

 

[xylaria]

The mods we aren't commiting libel. Lord voldermort has left his sizable country pile to prop up Mugabe and there isnt a anyone in money laundering industry that has a good word to say about him.

http://m.theargus.co.uk/news/9973615.Sussex_Ramblers_take_on_Nicholas_Hoogstraten_once_more/
It does look one cool place to wild camp. Which begs the hypothetical question if land is derelict is it ok to camp?

 

[boatman]

Funny that much is made, erroneously, of what you cannot do on a footpath but these upholders of legality say nothing of the number of blocked foorpaths.