Rog Tallbloke
Thru Hiker
Supposing this hypothetical infringement took place on National Trust land, I'd adopt the "This land is my land" approach. And then negotiate down to "Well, 10 yards of it for 1 night a year is."
Right to Roam, England 2023
- Thread starter old-skool-lite
- Start date
TinTin
Thru Hiker
You are clearly in the 95% who don't understand how the law works. Your opinion does not matter only the facts that can be proved if the appropriate legal action is taken.
Quixoticgeek
Section Hiker
I like the whole write to Rome campaign idea. I sent my handwritten postcard, but as yet, which ever resident of Rome got the card, has not replied.
I put so much effort in too. Dyslexia makes writing so slow ...
J
(Sorry)
I put so much effort in too. Dyslexia makes writing so slow ...
J
(Sorry)
TinTin
Thru Hiker
I'm not a lawyer but it doesn't take a massive brain to actually read the law. This is what I know, do with it what you will, it is not legal advice but might help you fell a bit better about considerate wild camping on your own or with another to enjoy wild places or to have somewhere to rest while doing a multi-day hike.
The reason that the Scottish access rights were so important is because in Scotland "Trespass" is the act of passing over someones property.
In England and Wales in order to be "Guilty" of trespass the land owner must assert that you have caused them some damage by being on or doing something on their land. They have to show that they have acted reasonably for example asked you to leave and they have to give you fair warning that they will take legal action if you do not desist. If a person wanders onto another's land from a public footpath intentionally or otherwise, (and camps) they may be sued for the hypothetical value of the benefit received by the person trespassing. This is a civil wrong there is no guilt involved. The judge finds for or against the plaintiff and may order a payment to be made. Costs can be awarded. IMO the hypothetical value of camping on a place with no facilities in a small tent is about £10 maximum. So they would need to take action against you to recover £10.
There is a criminal law Trespass and Nuisance on Land: The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 which makes it an offence to reside on (private) land and >>having a vehicle<< on the land owned by someone else; or intending to do so. This is punishable by up to 3 months jail and a fine. They must have a vehicle and may only be ordered to leave in these circumstances.
The order to leave can only be made by a senior police officer present at the scene and they must reasonably believe the following:
There is guidance to the Police here on where they should get involved and the bar is very high and remember a vehicle has to be involved:
In England we have no right to camp on someone else's land without permission. If we do and the landowner asks us to leave and this is a reasonable request and we fail to do so, and they know who we are, then they can write to us and give us warning that if we do it again they will take legal action to recover the value of the damage that we have caused them ,or the value you have gained, about £10, by using their land without permission. If they do sue us there is a clear defence of "reasonable excuse". For example if you are benighted and have to make shelter then you have a reasonable excuse for being there and it would be unreasonable for a landowner or their agent to ask you to leave.
So basically the status quo is what those of us who are considerate wild campers do and we have a proper excuse for doing it in the circumstances in which, I for one, wild camp. I've never been asked to move on but if I was I'd explain that I'm walking from one place to another and had to make shelter and that I would leave at first light and they wouldn't know that I've been there.
The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 gives the Police in England and Wales the powers to stop scrotes in groups camping out of the back of their care but I've not seen any reports of the powers being used. It looks like the law was written to stop "travelers" making a camp where ever they want. I guess that one or two high profile actions have acted as a deterrent on this.
So I think we should leave things as they are and ask pillocks who make YouTube videos to stop promoting wild camping in order to make a few pennies.
The reason that the Scottish access rights were so important is because in Scotland "Trespass" is the act of passing over someones property.
In England and Wales in order to be "Guilty" of trespass the land owner must assert that you have caused them some damage by being on or doing something on their land. They have to show that they have acted reasonably for example asked you to leave and they have to give you fair warning that they will take legal action if you do not desist. If a person wanders onto another's land from a public footpath intentionally or otherwise, (and camps) they may be sued for the hypothetical value of the benefit received by the person trespassing. This is a civil wrong there is no guilt involved. The judge finds for or against the plaintiff and may order a payment to be made. Costs can be awarded. IMO the hypothetical value of camping on a place with no facilities in a small tent is about £10 maximum. So they would need to take action against you to recover £10.
There is a criminal law Trespass and Nuisance on Land: The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 which makes it an offence to reside on (private) land and >>having a vehicle<< on the land owned by someone else; or intending to do so. This is punishable by up to 3 months jail and a fine. They must have a vehicle and may only be ordered to leave in these circumstances.
The order to leave can only be made by a senior police officer present at the scene and they must reasonably believe the following:
- that there are two or more trespassers;
- they have a common purpose of residing on the land;
- the occupier has taken reasonable steps to ask them to leave; and
- either the trespassers have caused damage to the land or property on it or have used insulting words or behaviour to the occupier or their family/employees/agents;
- or they have more than six vehicles between them on the land.
There is guidance to the Police here on where they should get involved and the bar is very high and remember a vehicle has to be involved:
In England we have no right to camp on someone else's land without permission. If we do and the landowner asks us to leave and this is a reasonable request and we fail to do so, and they know who we are, then they can write to us and give us warning that if we do it again they will take legal action to recover the value of the damage that we have caused them ,or the value you have gained, about £10, by using their land without permission. If they do sue us there is a clear defence of "reasonable excuse". For example if you are benighted and have to make shelter then you have a reasonable excuse for being there and it would be unreasonable for a landowner or their agent to ask you to leave.
So basically the status quo is what those of us who are considerate wild campers do and we have a proper excuse for doing it in the circumstances in which, I for one, wild camp. I've never been asked to move on but if I was I'd explain that I'm walking from one place to another and had to make shelter and that I would leave at first light and they wouldn't know that I've been there.
The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 gives the Police in England and Wales the powers to stop scrotes in groups camping out of the back of their care but I've not seen any reports of the powers being used. It looks like the law was written to stop "travelers" making a camp where ever they want. I guess that one or two high profile actions have acted as a deterrent on this.
So I think we should leave things as they are and ask pillocks who make YouTube videos to stop promoting wild camping in order to make a few pennies.
BogTrotter
Section Hiker
My opinion on you stating you were camping somewhere you shouldn’t have been seems more like you plainly made an admittance of guilt.
And I never said you were guilty, only described your admitted situation.
Your legal extracts are very interesting and is interesting to note that the 28th June update is in addition to the existing. The addition being that a new criminal offence ‘being residing on land with a vehicle without consent.’ Not very welcome to motor homes, vanlifers or campervans, I expect.
dovidola
Thru Hiker
@TinTin 's resume of (some of) the applicable law is broadly correct, and a welcome dose of the facts among all the shouting. There are several other forms of Criminal Trespass (other than CJPO 1994), but in the main they can be deduced by common sense.
I'd take issue with his estimate of 95% not understanding the law around this - I'd put it at higher than that.
Totally, totally agree.
I'd take issue with his estimate of 95% not understanding the law around this - I'd put it at higher than that.
Totally, totally agree.
Quixoticgeek
Section Hiker
@TinTin
If that's the case, the entire "right to roam" movement in England makes no sense at all.
If I can relate the situation in Italy, it is basically the same. First, you always have the right to walk in every trail which is signed on the IGM maps. In those, free walk cannot be denied, even if they are in a private property.
Second and as a general rule, you always have the right to bivouac for the night, unless some specific norms apply.
The only cases I know of not being able to camp are:
a) private property, and this is extremely questionable if it is along a trail; Even if the property is fenced, it there is a trail crossing it you have the right to get in, so there is never the question of "trespassing", only of the proprietor to ask for money, which generally goes from €3 to €10 per night or so depending on zones or periods.
b) reserves, parks, conservation areas where a specific norm prevents bivouacs. Not all of them prevent bivouacs. E.g. the PNALM forbids bivouacs, but the Parco Regionale dell'Adamello, or the Riserva Naturale Navegna e Cervia, explicitly allow bivouacs.
c) Region Valle d'Aosta prohibits bivouacs below 2.500m of altitude (!);
d) Region Piemonte prohibits bivouacs blow 800m of altitude.
All the rest of Italy is fair game as far as bivouacs are concerned, unless you are inside a reserve, in which case you must ask the reserve. Most likely, you notify the Reserve of your passage. If a certain number of hikers is surpassed, the Reserve will deny you the right to bivouac.
Basically the simple rule I have for Italy is "stay clear from Valle d'Aosta, check if it is a reserve, check the rules of that reserve". That's all.
Free camping on the other hand is always subject to authorizations, but that's another story.
If that's the case, the entire "right to roam" movement in England makes no sense at all.
If I can relate the situation in Italy, it is basically the same. First, you always have the right to walk in every trail which is signed on the IGM maps. In those, free walk cannot be denied, even if they are in a private property.
Second and as a general rule, you always have the right to bivouac for the night, unless some specific norms apply.
The only cases I know of not being able to camp are:
a) private property, and this is extremely questionable if it is along a trail; Even if the property is fenced, it there is a trail crossing it you have the right to get in, so there is never the question of "trespassing", only of the proprietor to ask for money, which generally goes from €3 to €10 per night or so depending on zones or periods.
b) reserves, parks, conservation areas where a specific norm prevents bivouacs. Not all of them prevent bivouacs. E.g. the PNALM forbids bivouacs, but the Parco Regionale dell'Adamello, or the Riserva Naturale Navegna e Cervia, explicitly allow bivouacs.
c) Region Valle d'Aosta prohibits bivouacs below 2.500m of altitude (!);
d) Region Piemonte prohibits bivouacs blow 800m of altitude.
All the rest of Italy is fair game as far as bivouacs are concerned, unless you are inside a reserve, in which case you must ask the reserve. Most likely, you notify the Reserve of your passage. If a certain number of hikers is surpassed, the Reserve will deny you the right to bivouac.
Basically the simple rule I have for Italy is "stay clear from Valle d'Aosta, check if it is a reserve, check the rules of that reserve". That's all.
Free camping on the other hand is always subject to authorizations, but that's another story.
echo8876
Thru Hiker
Unless you are in a very touristy place (like di sesto) no one going to bother your bivouac anywhere in europe, in practice. From what i understand in context of this thread, right to roam includes wild camping. And that's something you absolutely prohibited to do in most alps and even significant part of eastern europe.
TinTin
Thru Hiker
We don't have a right to bivouac in England and Wales. In fact the The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 specifically says that the right to use "Access Land" does not give you the right to do all sorts of things including camping. The point I was making is that there is actually no offence of wild camping and it isn't illegal. You are not breaking a criminal law if you camp on someone else's land but you may risk the landowner suing you for trespass. I've never heard of anyone even being asked to move on never mind having any other action taken against them.
Nigelp
Thru Hiker
Only if you tie in the right to increased access to the countryside with wild camping. I would like to see increased access to the countryside but for the reasons @TinTin and others have said not to include wild camping.
The legislation exists in the from of the CROW - all we need is more land that the currant 6% open to ‘roam’ on.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/open-access-land-management-rights-and-responsibilities
Nigelp
Thru Hiker
Not necessarily. I don’t think all or possibly any land designated a right to access should have a right to wild camp. It would be too unpalatable for land owners and decease the chances of more land being available under CROW.
Pipe Cleaner
Trail Blazer
Someone made a comment about camping above the intake wall in the lakes. Technically not allowed but mostly civil not criminal and permitted in at least part by the unwillingness of most farmers to head up to confront campers on their farm land in the evening or night. There's some places that are pretty much guaranteed to be populated by campers. Indeed I know of one spot that regularly gets trashed by the outward bounds organisation up there.
I've also been to Scotland quite a few times and apart from the well known Loch lomond area's issues there's quite a few places coming down off the Tyndrum to Glen coe Road. Plus many, many coastal spots where ppl have seasonal pitches of large frame/trailer tents or even caravans. Iirc Glenelg near the old Skye ferry is popular for this but allowed by the community that provides facilities 10 minutes walk away in the village hall for a donation. Still, it's a right mess there and many other roadside spots around Scotland. The NC500 route is terrible at times for van based camping. Imho that right to roam doesn't work well up the due to the Neds abusing it.
Of course summer in the lakes isn't summer without boozy camping groups up Walna Scar road. Plenty of vans and SUVs with their disgorged large family tents and crates of beer. Even those willing to make the effort to walk up sourmilk Gill to angletarn above Grasmere aren't certain to be much better. We took used nappies and several tins of baked beans down from what we assumed were the remnants of a family camp up there. We draw the line at used toilet paper though. Mind you nappies soak up a lot of water and don't completely hold it all. Not nice carry down.
My point is both scottish5 and English even Welsh have enough scumbags who care nothing for the land they walk and camp on. There is no difference between Scottish neds and their Welsh or English equivalents. That's not stopped Scotland having am excellent right to roam not should it stop England and Wales with similar conditions and restrictions such as camping away from sight, leave no trace, wild places only, etc. You can restrict as appropriate but opening up more land. Then act on problem areas quickly, quicker than Scotland did for sure.
I've also been to Scotland quite a few times and apart from the well known Loch lomond area's issues there's quite a few places coming down off the Tyndrum to Glen coe Road. Plus many, many coastal spots where ppl have seasonal pitches of large frame/trailer tents or even caravans. Iirc Glenelg near the old Skye ferry is popular for this but allowed by the community that provides facilities 10 minutes walk away in the village hall for a donation. Still, it's a right mess there and many other roadside spots around Scotland. The NC500 route is terrible at times for van based camping. Imho that right to roam doesn't work well up the due to the Neds abusing it.
Of course summer in the lakes isn't summer without boozy camping groups up Walna Scar road. Plenty of vans and SUVs with their disgorged large family tents and crates of beer. Even those willing to make the effort to walk up sourmilk Gill to angletarn above Grasmere aren't certain to be much better. We took used nappies and several tins of baked beans down from what we assumed were the remnants of a family camp up there. We draw the line at used toilet paper though. Mind you nappies soak up a lot of water and don't completely hold it all. Not nice carry down.
My point is both scottish5 and English even Welsh have enough scumbags who care nothing for the land they walk and camp on. There is no difference between Scottish neds and their Welsh or English equivalents. That's not stopped Scotland having am excellent right to roam not should it stop England and Wales with similar conditions and restrictions such as camping away from sight, leave no trace, wild places only, etc. You can restrict as appropriate but opening up more land. Then act on problem areas quickly, quicker than Scotland did for sure.
Last edited:
Baldy
Thru Hiker
Quixoticgeek
Section Hiker
Two new phenomenon i noticed in Scotland this last week are the number people living out of vans parked where it clearly says NO OVERNIGHT PARKING and people bagging their dogs poo in quite remote areas then leaving it by the side of the path
The dog poo thing is not new. They often hang it on a tree when available...
J
Diddi
Thru Hiker
Most neds I have come across with full framed tents and week long pitches at roadside and beaches where signs clearly say no camping, whilst in my campervan are almost always not from this Island.
TinTin
Thru Hiker
I think they leave it for people who don't have a dog to have a virtual experience.Two new phenomenon i noticed in Scotland this last week are the number people living out of vans parked where it clearly says NO OVERNIGHT PARKING and people bagging their dogs poo in quite remote areas then leaving it by the side of the path
Pipe Cleaner
Trail Blazer
Not in my experience, British and in Scotland except for the ones up walna Scar road who whilst also British they were not in Scotland obviously. Never said no camping signs, or at least never meant to because they weren't.
Pipe Cleaner
Trail Blazer
Oh I've got a story about that. Silverdale area in a path between two drystone walls so you're constrained to a narrow gap. Over the top there's overhanging tree branches with several branches about 2m up. I was walking with a group and turned around to say something to someone behind when I heard a warming shout something that as I thought about it did sound like "poo up a tree!". I turned back towards the shout direction and as I turned I didn't see anything but instinctively ducked for no obvious reason. Good job I did because as my head ducked past I got to see an old, decaying plastic poop bag with more holes than plastic and fully loaded. One touch and it's over you!
I have never uttered as many foul oaths and curses to anyone else than I did to that stupid, ahole of a dog owner, whoever it was. How can someone be so ignorant and inconsiderate. It was hanging down such that you had to be 6''0" or so to hit it but we had a few I or group and this stupid hit me in the face since I'm tall. I don't understand that mentality, really don't!
Seòrsa
Section Hiker
You dont do much walking in Swaledale / Coverdale areas then.
Since You Tubers took it upon themselves to show the top end of Gunnerside Gill in all its glory as a great place to camp amongst the ruins, it now gets battered most weekends, I walked through it recently to find scorch marks, a frying pan & other rubbish dumped in the ruins
The ranger who covers Swinner Gill by Keld has made it his mission not to let Swinner Gill turn into the same fiasco, I've seen the ranger move on genuine folk who thought it was OK to pitch up there when they were completing the C2C, he moved them on & wont tolerate any camping in that part of the Dales outside of the campsites, Also heard from the farmer where I leave my car of Pennine way walkers being moved on from Stonesdale Beck just north of Keld so it is happening & it didn't used to be like that up there as I walk a lot in Swaledale & surrounding areas.
Coverdale has banned overnight parking for everyone this year after it too was shown as a great place to leave your car & wander off up onto Great Shunner Fell for overnighters & the gamekeeper has moved on 4 or 5 campers from the surrounding hills, last time I spoke to him which was about a month ago....
You tube as its been said previously said has a lot to answer for.. places where I once camped & never got bothered or seen a soul has now been found by Dales 30 Baggers & is becoming more popular, again down to social media and a few who advertise where they have camped etc.
old-skool-lite
Thru Hiker
You dont do much walking in Swaledale / Coverdale areas then.
Since You Tubers took it upon themselves to show the top end of Gunnerside Gill in all its glory as a great place to camp amongst the ruins, it now gets battered most weekends, I walked through it recently to find scorch marks, a frying pan & other rubbish dumped in the ruins
The ranger who covers Swinner Gill by Keld has made it his mission not to let Swinner Gill turn into the same fiasco, I've seen the ranger move on genuine folk who thought it was OK to pitch up there when they were completing the C2C, he moved them on & wont tolerate any camping in that part of the Dales outside of the campsites, Also heard from the farmer where I leave my car of Pennine way walkers being moved on from Stonesdale Beck just north of Keld so it is happening & it didn't used to be like that up there as I walk a lot in Swaledale & surrounding areas.
Coverdale has banned overnight parking for everyone this year after it too was shown as a great place to leave your car & wander off up onto Great Shunner Fell for overnighters & the gamekeeper has moved on 4 or 5 campers from the surrounding hills, last time I spoke to him which was about a month ago....
You tube as its been said previously said has a lot to answer for.. places where I once camped & never got bothered or seen a soul has now been found by Dales 30 Baggers & is becoming more popular, again down to social media and a few who advertise where they have camped etc.
It really is a damn shame! Think on youtubers - very few people actually give a toss about where you've been except those who are reluctant to think for themselves. If it's for yourself or family there are other private ways to share.
Seòrsa
Section Hiker
Its that for sure,
I purposely stay away from the Lakes as I prefer to walk solo & enjoy the peace & quiet, the lakes dont give me that but the Dales have been brilliant, not a single ridge or hill that I haven't done over the last 20 years, built up a good repore with a few walkers who have same feelings, local farmers & gamekeepers who look out for my car & allow me to park in yards, behind barns etc away from prying eyes. I repay them in kind with an occasional bottle or a helping hand, however over last 2 - 3 years its getting worse as more & more You Tubers are coming into the Dales and giving out camping locations on their vids etc, places where you would never see a soul or be bothered. I hate to say this but a few are so called ultra lighters who are now doing the Dales 30 & should know better but they dont care as they have bagged it and moved on to the next leaving the trail of idiots in their wake trying to follow suit & this is putting the local farmers, gamekeepers into defensive mode.I feel sorry for the genuine long distance walkers on the C2C, Pennine Way & other long distance trails going through the Dales who used to be able to crash along the trail and be left alone, to hear they are being moved on is not good as we have all been there ourselves.