Important re wild camping Peak District

Rog Tallbloke

Rog Tallbloke

Thru Hiker
Fee, fi, ho-hum, mutter.
I smell the blood of a guyline cutter

Be he live or be he dead,
I'll plait his sinews to make new braid.
 
Last edited:
dovidola

dovidola

Thru Hiker
Joking apart folks, it's only a matter of time until some moron in the woke community decides we're doing something to offend against some ill-informed lunacy or other, and that 'activism' is the way forward. It is to be hoped that they pick on @Rog Tallbloke (and his butchering/dissecting skills) first.
 
Enzo

Enzo

Thru Hiker
I did laugh when radio 4 had a middle class presenter doing a show asking 'what's the point of the national trust?'
They decided it was bad as it was just somewhere for middle class people to take their kids.
They never thought to explain what was bad about that, I guess they assumed we'd already know.
 
TinTin

TinTin

Thru Hiker
Oh no someone has been reading the Guardian again. If George Monbiot says it then it must be well researched and true - NOT!

It is unlawful to wild camp on access land now. under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. If this consultation becomes law the only difference will be if you refuse to move on then the landowner can get the Police involved. I honestly can't see the Police getting out of their car to walk 4 miles and climb 500m to ask someone sleeping in a bivy to "move on or we'll arrest you and if you can't pay the fine we have your gear confiscated anyway to pay it".
 
Balagan

Balagan

Thru Hiker
dovidola said:
Joking apart folks, it's only a matter of time until some moron in the woke community decides we're doing something to offend against some ill-informed lunacy or other, and that 'activism' is the way forward. It is to be hoped that they pick on @Rog Tallbloke (and his butchering/dissecting skills) first.
Click to expand...
I have sharpened my Victorinox Classic and stand ready to face the onslaught of Wokism with the Yorkshire Trained Bands. If you do not stand up for your right to roam freely (subject to your carrier and plan), this country will end up like... Sweden... oh... wait... ;)
 
WilliamC

WilliamC

Thru Hiker
dovidola said:
Joking apart folks, it's only a matter of time until some moron in the woke community decides we're doing something to offend against some ill-informed lunacy or other, and that 'activism' is the way forward.
Click to expand...
I have no problem with discussing the rights and wrongs of the decisions affecting hiking in the UK, the LD etc but are we now free to discuss politics/air our prejudices? If so, that's also fine by me but as someone who has been rebuked in the past for mentioning the EU's treatment of Greece I would like to know if the rules have changed.
 
Shewie

Shewie

Chief Slackpacker
Staff member
As long as it’s still related to hiking I’m happy for the thread to continue, if it gets silly I can move it to Off Topic

I’ve not really been following the thread if I’m honest
 
WilliamC

WilliamC

Thru Hiker
Shewie said:
As long as it’s still related to hiking I’m happy for the thread to continue, if it gets silly I can move it to Off Topic

I’ve not really been following the thread if I’m honest
Click to expand...
The thread is fine (IMO); it's some of the comments that don't follow the rules it seems to me.
 
Last edited:
Heltrekker

Heltrekker

Section Hiker
PhilHo said:
Oh no someone has been reading the Guardian again. If George Monbiot says it then it must be well researched and true - NOT!

I honestly can't see the Police getting out of their car to walk 4 miles and climb 500m to ask someone sleeping in a bivy to "move on or we'll arrest you ....".
Click to expand...

Hmmmmm, choice of being cooped up in a car or a 4 mile walk to somewhere worthy of a bivvie - I bleedin' would, mind you, I'd be joining them for a brew not arresting them;)
 
Padstowe

Padstowe

Thru Hiker
I had a copper a few years back move me on, he decided to give me a hand taking the tent down. I told him "I can do it myself or sit on-top of it & take more time, your choice", He smiled & replied "well I can always take you down to the station then", to which I asked him if I really looked like someone who cares if they get arrested, his smile left him, the council bloke who had gone to get him looked on in disbelief & the copper walked off muttering "well you'd better be gone by the time am back".
 
Last edited:
Enzo

Enzo

Thru Hiker
Have to say, if I got asked to move on, which has yet to happen, I would. Ultimately chances are I'm on some farmers land, ( or the Trust or forestry commission which is less clear cut for me). I don't have a right to camp there and consider it a bonus. I know others see things differently.
It's be great if we lived on an island big enough to have US style public lands and national parks, but I think even there they are starting to tighten things up in the parks.

Best let sleeping dogs lie.
 
Bmblbzzz

Bmblbzzz

Thru Hiker
We would like to consult on measures to criminalise the act of trespassing when setting up an unauthorised encampment in England and Wales.

We would also like to consult on what an alternative approach to this could be:

  • amending section 62A of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 to permit the police to direct trespassers to suitable authorised sites located in neighbouring local authority areas
  • amending sections 61 and 62A of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 to increase the period of time in which trespassers directed from land would be unable to return from 3 months to 12 months
  • amending section 61 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 to lower the number of vehicles needing to be involved in an unauthorised encampment before police powers can be exercised from six to two or more vehicles
  • amending section 61 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 to enable the police to remove trespassers from land that forms part of the highway
Click to expand...
https://www.gov.uk/government/consu...ice-powers-to-tackle-unauthorised-encampments
 
Bmblbzzz

Bmblbzzz

Thru Hiker
I haven't looked at that survey yet but it's been described on another forum as "full of leading questions" and
the penny dropped that questions of the form

"do you agree or disagree that [the action in question] should only be made a criminal offence if it is [subject to this criterion] ?" (my emphasis)

is designed with a built-in bias, such that any answer ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree" can be interpreted as the responder's implied agreement that [whatever-it-is] lies within the scope of a criminal offence at all.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Michael_x

Michael_x

Section Hiker
Balagan said:
A five minutes read confirms that this had absolutely nothing to do with hiking or wild camping whatsoever.

Time to move on methinks.
Click to expand...

OK, I read it - carefully. As has been remarked it seems designed to get a certain set of answers, perhaps the ones it's authors want, and contains many leading questions loaded with assumptions.

Just because it may have nothing to do with wild camping it does not mean the powers proposed could not be used against wild campers if legislated.
 
Balagan

Balagan

Thru Hiker
Michael_x said:
OK, I read it - carefully. As has been remarked it seems designed to get a certain set of answers, perhaps the ones it's authors want, and contains many leading questions loaded with assumptions.

Just because it may have nothing to do with wild camping it does not mean the powers proposed could not be used against wild campers if legislated.
Click to expand...
Well, such legislation already exists in the Republic of Ireland and Scotland. I don't think either of these are known as wild camping police states. And I don't think any of the TL readers plan on setting up "encampments" and bringing vehicles along.
 
Bmblbzzz

Bmblbzzz

Thru Hiker
It certainly seems to be working from the assumption that various acts of being on other people's land should be a crime. It's a bit like when you're asked to review a product and given options from "excellent" to "acceptable" without the possibility of "no good at all". The way I see it there are three questions we might have about it:
  • Is it aimed solely at 'travellers' or is it using them as a wedge to also remove trekkers and discrete wild campers?
  • Whatever its intentions, will it ever be used to prosecute trekkers and discrete wild campers?
  • Will irate farmers etc use it to threaten wild campers with the police etc?
To which my tentative answers would be:
  • I think it's probably aimed at groups of 'travellers', whether 'New Age', Romany, ravers, whatever.
  • Almost certainly. When it's possible for a law to be used in a particular way, it's bound to happen occasionally. But probably rarely and with what success, I'm not sure.
  • Probably, if they're irate. Whether the police would respond is another matter.
 
TinTin

TinTin

Thru Hiker
The only time I've been moved on was in the bois de Boulogne in Paris July 1977, 6am. Woke up by a policeman banging on my tent pole with his gun. We managed to get the tent down and packed up in record time.
 
Michael_x

Michael_x

Section Hiker
Balagan said:
Well, such legislation already exists in the Republic of Ireland and Scotland. I don't think either of these are known as wild camping police states. And I don't think any of the TL readers plan on setting up "encampments" and bringing vehicles along.
Click to expand...
After a gruelling session trying to make sense of rail timetables, ticketing, split ticketing, super off peak, and such, for a few days holiday, the idea of #vanlife and taking a camper van strongly appeals. I shall resist the urge and restrict my forthcoming overnight encampment this weekend to a low profile dark green tent.

Giving the police excessive and unnecessary powers, because, hey they are never going to use them, at least not against us, seems to me unwise.

paranoid.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top