Comments on: Wild Camping Petition; Next Steps

By: Andy Say

Andy Say — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:05:12 +0000

My issue with the response is the dramatic misinterpretation of the current legislation suggesting that it ‘prohibits’ camping. It does no such thing; camping is an activity which the CRoW act does not permit on access land but no-where does it suhggest that the ‘Schedule 2 activities’ are prohibited by this legislation.

By: andy

andy — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:39:06 +0000

John,

We need a chat on the phone or something.

By: Paul Webster

Paul Webster — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 13:59:15 +0000

Excellent post and top advice. I thought exactly the same thing when I got my copy of the response – it was as positive as you could expect at this stage – I think anyone with any experience of politics would say the same. I’d echo that the Ramblers or BMC need to be involved as the next step – if the bodies representing walkers don’t back this then the government certainly won’t. Then we need to try to get MPs to back it publically.

By: Paul Webster

Paul Webster — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 13:59:15 +0000

By: john hee

john hee — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 13:43:54 +0000

Andy, another insightful piece – count me in.

Like yourself I don’t see #10′s response as a snub, but a recognition that they’ve the Marine Bill to concentrate at present. My concern is whether there’s enough life reamining in the current period of office to actually see this one through alongside the economic woes dragging them deeper into the mire each day.
But I’m thinking along your lines – organise, influence and play the long game getting the right ‘influencers’ on board.

By: andy

andy — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 13:27:03 +0000

As they’re saying in Switzerland at the moment, “there’s all to play for …”

Almost gave you a ring over the weekend to see if you fancied morning coffee in Aviemore …

… not a place to arrive in early in the morning

By: Chris Townsend

Chris Townsend — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 13:21:33 +0000

Excellent post Andy. It’s good to see some positive thinking. I’ve read through many of the blog/forum responses and most seem negative with some people inclined to bash the government as useless in general. Like you I felt the response was actually quite encouraging and not just the short dismissal I feared it might be.

By: BG!

BG! — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 12:14:08 +0000

Sorry, the first of those 2 comments needs deleting.

By: BG!

BG! — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 12:12:33 +0000

If “wildcamping” was defined in law, ACPO could then discern the difference between wildcampers and NATs etc. It’s been discussed before, have a look at http://beardedgit.com/?p=353
Stef

By: BG!

BG! — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 12:11:42 +0000

If the definition of “wildcamping” was defined in law, ACPO could then discern the difference between wildcampers and NATs etc. It’s been discussed before, have a look at http://beardedgit.com/?p=353
Stef