Name and shame

[pumbaa]

At the risk of upsetting people , It has come to my attention that there are a few members from BCUK are ruining chances for the rest of us ! I have heard of quite a few situations where people have lost , or not been alowed to use land for bushcraft purposes , purely on the basis of a minority who seem to think that illegaly camping on land is the way forward !!! Or because somebody has managed to get permissions to use a peice of land , that they too have an open invite (if this was land for shooting purposes , you would be guilty of armed trespass) .
I personaly gain a lot from BCUK and have met some amazing freindly people .
However , the fact that we are having opertunities taken on the basis of a few morons , makes me sick ! Tony and the moderaters do a lot of work to keep this a respectable place , and most of the members on here fit right in with the ethics that encourage RESPONSIBLE bushcrafting .
Mentioning BCUK when trying to get permission for wild camping , is starting to be the wrong thing to say ! This saddens me , and i am sure this is not the image that Tony is working hard to get for BCUK .
I think that it is about time that we as responsible members of BCUK do something ! Only i am not sure on the best method of sorting out this problem . So i put it to you peeps , what are we going to do about it ? I fear public hangings could be a no go ! Is a simple name and shame enough ?
Any ideas or suggestions ?
Appologies for starting a thread full of bad feeling , but i think this needs saying and sorting .
Pumbaa

 

[elma]

Hay pumbaa I can understand where you are comming from as i have similar experiences on shooting land, but tell me mate whats got you all fired up?

Ian

 

[running bare]

i agree with the idea of a name and shame policy,pumbaa. the only problem is that to shame the persons causing loss of rights etc. you need to know who they are, and positively I.D. them as the culprits.in theory i could say im pumbaa ( sorry for using your id, just for demo purposes) from bcuk and ive come to use the wood then leave it in c*** state, but guess who'll get wrongly named and shamed...or am i on the wrong track? do you mean that peeps are going out getting permission for a playground saying they represent bcuk and leaving in a c*** state..in which case they have given the landowner their real name. in which case no problem

 

[pumbaa]

Hay pumbaa I can understand where you are comming from as i have similar experiences on shooting land, but tell me mate whats got you all fired up?

Ian

Hi mate ,
Now theres a question . Basicly the accumulation of "lands lost" stories that i am hearing ! I enjoy BCUK (as i know a lot of you do) , its like a home from home in virtual reality . It just pains me that the minority are ruining it for the majority .
Pumbaa

 

[pumbaa]

I think what is happening is certain organisations have been trawling through our forums (and who can blame them , its a good forum) . I think its down to certain threads (although most are old threads and were delat with by the mods) containig opinions on illegally camping etc . No matter how quick the mods have been (and we have some cracking mods on this site) the damage was already done . Personaly i lost a chance to run a meet down here in dorset on a local scout campsite . I know others have lost land permision for similar reasons , guess i am just a tad miffed about it , and would like to rectifiy the situation .
Pumbaa

 

[Stuart]

I would suggest pumbaa that you privately present any evidence you have to the moderators so that they may decide what action if any needs to be taken on behalf of BCUK.

You cannot take the rules into your own hands and publicly 'name and shame' people on this forum, that’s not the way things are done here.

 

[Toddy]

Big deep breath Pumbaa, et al

If you have been specifically refused permission to use land *only* because you are associated with BCUK, please contact Tony & Admin with clear details.

Personally I have had no problems apart from the Health & Safety/ Risk Assessment/ Public Liabilty issues.


Cheers,
Toddy

 

[Shambling Shaman]

I have to agree - Im trying to arange a North Wales meet and have dun some leg work to find a good location with permistion with a view to a regular meet.
If someone was to pitch up off there own bat and upset people and lose us the right to go again I would be....non to happy to say the leased.....after blood would be more like it.

 

[pumbaa]

You cannot take the rules into your own hands and publicly 'name and shame' people on this forum, that’s not the way things are done here.

Firstly , this is not what i am doing . I am simply bringing to the attention of everyone , the damage that has/is being done .

I am not starting a one man crusade !

Even if i were to have contacted a moderator or tony on this matter , what can you do ? Ban said members ? When damage has allready been done .
This is something i feel we ALL need to be aware of .
Pumbaa

 

[pumbaa]

When finding land permissions there are 2 reasons that i would mention BCUK .

1 . Too show that we are a responsible group of people that belive in "leave no trace " wild camping , and that we care about the enviroments we enjoy .

2 . To promote BCUK , for the Top site that it is

This should open doors , not get them slamed in your face !!!

Or am i wrong and out of order ?
Pumbaa

 

[HuBBa]

No you are not out of order in your intent, but maybe in the means.

I am of course no expert in UK Law but in sweden any form of public name & shame scheme would be illegal.

However, what could be done is a very public stance and guidelines from BCUK stating what is allowed and what is not allowed from its members. And every member would then communicate that to each landowner added with the fact that if a landowner finds that a BCUK member misbehaves, he can file a complaint with BCUK. This would then result in an enquiry into what happened and possible expelling of a member (if found guilty)

Having said that, there is one problem with this. Manpower. Doing this type of enquiry and research takes a lot of effort and can be quite hard. The advantage is of course that BCUK can at all points say that their members follow the rules. If they do not, report them and it will be dealt with. The disadvantage is that its generally too much work for someone to do on his spare time so to speak

Just a few thoughts.

/Henrik

 

[Stuart]

I'm a little confused pumbaa

if you don’t intend to 'Name and Shame' people, why is your thread called "Name and Shame"?

Even if I were to have contacted a moderator or tony on this matter , what can you do ? Ban said members ? When damage has allready been done .

Well if you were to contact members of the BCUK administration and explain exactly what is going on and what evidence you have to prove this we could at least make a decision for our selves about whether there was anything that we could do about it.

I am simply bringing to the attention of everyone, the damage that has/is being done

What damage has been done? How? When? Bringing a subject to people’s attention is fine (within reason) but what is it exactly you are attempting to draw attention to?

At the moment you are being very vague about what the problem is.

 

[pumbaa]

My point is that We all need to be very aware that oppertunitys are being lost . Some before they have even been aquired ! These forums are watched by a quite a few oranisations ( Forestry comission , National trust , Scouting etc) .
These are exactly the kind of organiations that have lands that most of us would give both kidneys and an arm and a leg to be able to use sensibly and with respect for said oranisation and its property .
Ok name and shame was a bad title ! But its point still stands , in that weall need to do something to turn the negative image that BCUK is getting from some of these organisations around !
It is my opinion that BCUK is one of the best sites on the net , so it saddens and angers me that it is viewed in this light . Why , because of some thread contents on illegal camping . Ok the punishment may not be the harshest going for illeagal camping , but i feel strongly that this is not an image that BCUK should have . As i have said before the majority of BCUK members are good respectfull people , who given the chance would do their best to ensure that lands are used responsibly .
Also you have to remember that there are businesses and livlyhoods associated with BCUK , what if they go down the pan because of content on this site ?
What i am saying is what can we all do to improve this image ?
As this is my favorite website , by far . I am rather miffed at this image that is coming accross to the people we need on side most . Things like the Fullmembers meet that Wayland organised on National trust land can only help as from what i understand , a good impression was made .
So what can we do about it ?
Pumbaa

 

[Mantic]

I think that certain areas of the site should be blocked to newbies - even if that means myself . They can become unlocked after a reaonable time / posting history has been acculmulated.

This trusted area could be used for any threads discussing such issues as suitable camping areas, etc. Sure, it's friendly creating a list of all the campsites that allow open fires but do we really want everyone and his dogs getting their hands on our list? Not that the information is entirely secret (most is available on the web) but it's our efforts that should be protected. PMing has its place but I think that a restricted area could be a suitable alternative.

Just a thought.

I totally understand what Pumbaa is after. However, as per usual, any member who is failing to follow the principles of BCUK should be 'escorted from the premises' (with a full explanation) rather than 'publically humiliated'. I cannot stand sites that discard it's members without so much as a by your leave. If we've done wrong, we should at least be informed of our wrong doing.

Ultimately, a softly softly approach works out better for us all.

Saying all that, I'm surprised that we have a traitor in our midst

 

[Toddy]

Pumbaa I hear a lot of noise but no substance.
We *don't* all know that opportunities have been lost
We *don't* all have experience of being refused land use *because* of BCUK.

Generally access to land in England & Wales is private arrangement between individuals.

This thread isn't doing anything except raising a contentious point of view.
I'm going to close it just now, and ask that you take any valid concerns to Tony, admin, etc.
If there are issues that need to be addressed from BCUK I can assure you that they will be dealt with, but rumour and innuendo help no one.

Cheers,
Toddy