how does wild camping with permission take away the " wild " part of it ?
For me it takes away the "wild" part of it because with "true" wild camping as I see it I pack my kit, choose an area I'd like to see and just pitch my camp where I decide to at the end of my day (not in someone's back garden obviously -but on land that is supposedly managed for the "leisure needs of the public").
With permission I need to commit to where I'm going to be before I get there. For me that's a massive difference, and wouldn't feel any more "wild" than booking a holiday.
But the most important difference is that to me "wild camping" offers the chance to pitch up in a different place every night along a trail chosen by me, at a pitch site chosen in "real time" by me, and that can be altered daily by me - wild camping to my mind is a bit like an on-foot version of the freedom of the open road.
For example, walking along the trail I might ask "Shall I go right or left at this point where the path crosses?". If I were truly wild camping I would have the pleasure that comes from the freedom of deciding for myself right there and then "on the trail". With what you are advocating as an alternative I would have no choice because the arrangement I'd made with the landowner would leave me with no choice but to take whichever path I had pre-arranged in order to get to his land, and there I'd stay until I could string together enough different compliant landowners to go somewhere else, or maybe I wouldn't get any further on my journey at all if I couldn't find a compliant landowner within a day's walking distance, so then I'd just have to spend my entire "trip" in that one field.
A different experience entirely.
I accept that this is just how it is in our country (the "free world"
) and that if I really want the freedom of the "open trail" I would have to travel to one of the ex-dictatorship countries, like Romania or Yugoslavia (ironic isn't it), but even though I do have to accept it (as we all do) it still isn't wild camping, whatever anyone says, at least not in my book, and as for "bushcraft" - making natural shelters from local materials, trapping animals etc, etc - where does THAT happen legally outside of a training course or demonstration day?
As I've said several times, I'm not getting at anyone here. I would have thought that many of you must feel the same way about this in reality. We've been shafted by our own govt. so many times on this issue....
The Forestry Commission - pre-Thatcher that was all "public land" and the FC was a publicly owned body; yes, owned by us the people. Then Thatcher sold it to SOME of us (despite the fact that we already ALL owned it anyway) in the form of shares. Then having sold to some of us what all of us already owned, that made it a private company and they chucked us all off (apart from developing those areas where they can cream in big profits from expensive "organised" activities).
I probably sound like a commy. I'm not at all. Communism doesn't work, but we've all been shafted - no question, and this "wild camping/bushcraft" thing is just another example of something that you can no longer do properly. Just another once-upon-a-time day-to-day activity that's now been criminalised on "public" land.