Farmer sprays cyclist wild camper.
- Thread starter Mesquite
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
When I was a teacher, one of the children took the view that Goldilocks should have been arrested by the police for breaking and entering, theft of porridge and criminal damage of a chair as well as tresspass. I often wonder what became of him: when he grew up: lawyer, policeman or career criminal high on the list of possibilities!So, you go on holiday and inadvertently leave a door open. I go in, use your bathroom, sleep in your bed, make sure there's no sign of my visit, and you're happy that occurred?
This argument/discussion has been going on for hundreds of years; we'll not solve it on this forum
But that’s what he does do. Leon pops round.So, you go on holiday and inadvertently leave a door open. I go in, use your bathroom, sleep in your bed, make sure there's no sign of my visit, and you're happy that occurred?
This argument/discussion has been going on for hundreds of years; we'll not solve it on this forum
But because you know that’s what he does and you still take your car to him it implies consent. Without that implied consent it is a different matter. I get the feeling that Leon is your friend rather than some random bloke abusing your trust/rights to property . That isn’t really what this thread was about so Leon probably isn’t the ideal example, can we leave him out of this?
What about Tom , Dick and Harry ? Do you know them?Sorry - it was a joke.
In the countries where right to roam is standard, including Scotland, there are clear differences between things like woodland, moorland, heath and agricultural land, and someone’s actual house or front garden. I’d hope that the distinction doesn’t need explaining to the people on this forum.
Bit of a disingenuous argument.
Bit of a disingenuous argument.
That's why I asked the question; when does a piece of land become big enough to allow you to feel you have the right to 'use' it without seeking permission?
My wood is part of my garden as far as I'm concerned. I spend a lot of time and money to manage it for conservation and biodiversity. If you ask nicely I may let you spend a night or two in it but it would be under my terms not yours. (the terms 'you' and 'yours' being the generic second person not you in particular
).
Personally I don't see it as so much having a 'right', in the sense that I think if someone is discretely wild camping and was asked by the land owner to leave, then they should do so.
However from a moral standpoint I don't see an issue with someone wild camping without permission if they do truly leave no trace. If someone is respectful of the environment itself, causes no damage and keeps out of the way then personally I think this would be OK. For those who leave litter, human waste and cause actual damage, I'd argue that they should be punished harshly. If someone camps in a quiet spot which respects the landowner's privacy (ie, not in their house or garden where people can reasonably expect privacy), leaves and the landowner is none the wiser then no wrong has been committed.
As you said, this is a disagreement which spans centuries. At its core, I think empathy for each other and being respectful of our the environment we exist in is the best way for us all to coexist. As with several other things in our bushcraft/outdoor sphere, it seems that we let the few irresponsible ones ruin it for the many.
However from a moral standpoint I don't see an issue with someone wild camping without permission if they do truly leave no trace. If someone is respectful of the environment itself, causes no damage and keeps out of the way then personally I think this would be OK. For those who leave litter, human waste and cause actual damage, I'd argue that they should be punished harshly. If someone camps in a quiet spot which respects the landowner's privacy (ie, not in their house or garden where people can reasonably expect privacy), leaves and the landowner is none the wiser then no wrong has been committed.
As you said, this is a disagreement which spans centuries. At its core, I think empathy for each other and being respectful of our the environment we exist in is the best way for us all to coexist. As with several other things in our bushcraft/outdoor sphere, it seems that we let the few irresponsible ones ruin it for the many.
But, it's down to the level of knowledge that one has of the environment whether one is leaving 'no trace'.
That green patch that the 'trespasser' lay down on was the only place that Sanicle is growing in the whole of the wood - a rare plant in this area. The Moschatel that was trodden on hosted a smut fungus so rare that it's only been recorded twice in Wales.
There's respect for the natural world, then there's a level of knowledge that ensures no harm is done
That green patch that the 'trespasser' lay down on was the only place that Sanicle is growing in the whole of the wood - a rare plant in this area. The Moschatel that was trodden on hosted a smut fungus so rare that it's only been recorded twice in Wales.
There's respect for the natural world, then there's a level of knowledge that ensures no harm is done
@TeeDee
Me too! I acknowledge the deliberate transgression as I commited it. I too took responsibility for my actions. You were unhindered in your speeding and knife crime because of the ignorance or indifference of the relevant authority.
@BrochSo, you go on holiday and inadvertently leave a door open. I go in, use your bathroom, sleep in your bed, make sure there's no sign of my visit, and you're happy that occurred?
This argument/discussion has been going on for hundreds of years; we'll not solve it on this forum
It may already have happened. How would I know? What have I to be concerned about?
(All I’m doing is reframing these analogies so that they match the case in point.)
I totally agree - take nothing, leave nothing: neither substance nor effect.
"Take only pictures, leave only foot prints."
Very little grows on a patch of ground in my parents' garden directly under the bird feeder. If you try to dig there, the ground is like concrete. Compacted by the passing feet of hundreds and thousands of fat wood pigeons.
Very little grows on a patch of ground in my parents' garden directly under the bird feeder. If you try to dig there, the ground is like concrete. Compacted by the passing feet of hundreds and thousands of fat wood pigeons.
Indeed, every contact leaves a trace.But, it's down to the level of knowledge that one has of the environment whether one is leaving 'no trace'.
That green patch that the 'trespasser' lay down on was the only place that Sanicle is growing in the whole of the wood - a rare plant in this area. The Moschatel that was trodden on hosted a smut fungus so rare that it's only been recorded twice in Wales.
There's respect for the natural world, then there's a level of knowledge that ensures no harm is done
We can try and minimise it only.
Most would consider urinating against a tree to be normal or acceptable, but if that’s the spot you hang your hammock or your children like to look for bugs you’d probably not agree.
Only trespass which is a civil matter. Strangely it has nothing to do with your respect or lack of respect for the land and its flora or fauna. It is the act of infringing the title holder’s rights regarding that parcel of land. Some of the other behaviours that you mention would be criminal offences but usually fall far below the threshold at which police would take action.
I'm confused - which of the things I've mentioned would be criminal offences?
There is a difference between a quick stop off at the edge of a field and camping out in somebodies conservation woodland, possibly a bit of a stretch to liken the two.
In terms of the response, pretty sure that would come under assault, or at least excessive force. Reasonable force is proportional to the threat, so in this case it would have been asking him to leave.
In terms of the response, pretty sure that would come under assault, or at least excessive force. Reasonable force is proportional to the threat, so in this case it would have been asking him to leave.
