How is it Illegal to Access Public Land? - UK.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 พ.ย. 2023
- Welcome to this weeks video where we discuss the rather curious way Land open to the Public can be completely inaccessible.
Wessex Ways Podcast: / @wessexways
All drone footage by: / @hedleythorne
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @pwhitewick
Other useful links:
www.righttoroam.org.uk/
www.gov.uk/right-of-way-open-...
www.ramblers.org.uk/
Credits (Public domain if not stated):
Filter: Snowman Digital and Beachfront B-Roll
Maps: Google Maps
Maps: National Library of Scotland
Maps: OS Maps. Media License.
Stock Footage: Storyblocks
Music: Storyblocks - บันเทิง
If you want to listen to Hedley and I waffle for hours at a time. Sign up here: youtube.com/@wessexways?si=rPaWeM6d8898HIX_
Yeehaw!
I have grazed sheep on 2 of the 3 pieces of land featured here and they are both accessible by footpaths---although 1 stile was in need of repair as i recall
Actually I believe it was down to the fact they came up with the idea set out the criteria if you owned it and didn't agree you had to appeal their decision but didn't actually think to check that the parcels had access to them.
Yes, it shouldn't. A gentleman complain when we were walking on the very edge of his field, near Tidcombe. He was in a big tractor that if we had been on the same road as him, could well have squashed us unless we stood on the edge of the field 🤣 I'll let everyone else discuss the legalities and I'll actually get out and walk it.
By the way, it was my first time up Martinsell Hill (apart from on my bike on the road) on Saturday. Took my brother. It was spectacular. Such a nice clear day.
listen to me not listen to I.
The CRoW Act did what it says on the tin. Mountain moor and heath (that is unimproved land) was designated Open Access Land irrespective of whether it was accessible or not. The inspection teams did a good job, they appear to have properly identified all of the relevant land and had it marked on the definitive map; good job, well done.
A separate part of CRoW asked that a Public Rights of Way Improvement Plan be produced. This was also started, I sat on one of the West Midlands bodies charged with that responsibility, but its "work in progress" and unfortunately no end in sight. It might have been a lot better if CRoW had set timetables, priorities and funding. But no such luck.
We could do with this in parts of Dartmoor…
Thanks for that information - it does explain something, hopefully it can be resolved in the future.
So, if large amounts of this "Open Access" land is effectively inaccessible - what is the purpose? Do the landowners get some sort of financial or similar benefit from declaring Open Access Land?
@@TheStan4th i think in theory the plan would/should have been to link them to current rights of way to allow access but thats far more complicated to achieve enforce
In Norway you can go almost anywhere you like out in the countryside.
The Norwegian Open Air Act gives us the right to free movement in the countryside as long as we pay attention. Allemannsretten is the basis for outdoor life in Norway, and is often used as a collective term for the rights we have to free use of nature. It gives, among other things, the right to free movement on foot and on skis in the countryside.
The most important rules on public access follow from the Open Air Act. Allemannsrecht applies regardless of who is the landowner.
The universal right applies to everyone
Those who travel on other people's property must be careful and pay attention, as heavy traffic can present challenges for the owner. This means, among other things, that those who are "guests" do not make noise or litter or destroy anything.
Way too many wealthy landowners here that believe it's their right to restrict our open use...
Ditto Scotland
Unfortunately if you did that hear you will get caravans off roaders raves etc and fly tipping to olympic levels (it what happens when you make people pay to dispose of rubbish)
not sure that happens in other countries
.... so its a brit issue
@@cedhome7945
I trespass in the UK regularly, in a good cause, and the main observation is that England is empty, a consequence of mechanisation of agriculture. You are unlikely to meet anyone and if you meet a landowner, just have a good excuse and he will probably be glad of someone to chat to.
I'm so thankful for the Scottish access laws. Situation down south is crazy!
Jealous
If I came up with some absurd invention to sell or hit the lottery tomorrow, I would absolutely be moving to Scotland just for that.
@@pwhitewickIt’s better, but still problematic in Scotland. Although legally we have access, we still have landowners that “accidentally“ plough or block paths, indeed with the hierarchy of paths you get on maps south of the border just not being on the OS maps north of the border it makes it much more difficult to argue that a route is being blocked when we don’t have a clear map indicating that it is a path.
The point to remember is that the Scottish access code doesn’t allow us to just go trampling over crops, or through active forestry sites for example, so I know of a bit of woodland that is fenced, and has “active site keep out” signs, but local mountain bikers keep cutting the fence and going in claiming it’s not an active site and hasn’t been for years. Similarly another long established path is regularly ploughed, in exactly the same way that happens down south, but there isn’t a definitive right of way map.
56 million people crammed into England; 5 million in great big Scotland. Not surprising its access laws are different...
@@RTPeat Even in Scotland access to arable land is full of caveats. Even livestock fields have restrictions. Fundamentally unrestricted roaming is incompatible with food production which is kind of important if you want to eat and the landowners have rights too aka be able use their land.
Trespass is a CIVIL crime. You can't ordinarily be arrested for it, but you can be sued for it, but few courts would care for a rambling person.
If the police are to attend a situation involving trespass usually you would be told to bugger off, politely of course, unless other actual crime is being committed (breach of peace/ theft/assault/ criminal damage etc) the police are unlikely to be involved.
That said, some land owners would love to force your hand to ensure police are involved by baiting you into coming an offence, the best thing would be to say you got lost and say you are sorry, and ask for directions/assistance, with a smile.
Correct!
I'm not entirely sure that is correct. One can be sued for criminal damage. Walking on grass is not criminal damage.
@@jeremyatkinson4976 you can be arrested for criminal damage, that doesn't mean you couldn't be sued as well, you can be sued for anything within reason (if the party in question was at a loss because of your actions, even the time taken to investigate your trespass, attend to the location). But at no point did I say walking on grass itself is criminal damage (but it could be sometimes precisely that if it was possible to prove you did indeed damage grass/track), but the act of access to land you have no right to access could cause damage to property.
One of the important factors for a criminal charge to stick would be intent, did you intend to break that fence when you climbed on the gate? Did you intend to be somewhere without consent? Did you intend on walking through crops? Or did you intend on scaring the farmers animals killing their young? (Also a criminal offence).
What I was getting at was the owner of land could bait you into committing an offence or admitting to an offence (and there are so many to choose from) if they know that the police are unlikely to attend a trespasser, but are fed up with their land being trespassed on illegally. Criminal damage is just one of those offences.
All civil actions are to redress loss. That is, the plaintiff has to show that the defendant cause them a financial loss. Theoretically walking on grass could produce a minuscule loss. However, there is a neat trick here- pay into court a sum as compensation before the trial. Say, a fiver. If the plaintiff continues with the case, and the compensation is less than that sum, they have to pay the costs of both. Big risk!
@@Tensquaremetreworkshop I love our Trespass laws. For the most part they work well enough for both the land-owner and anyone trying gain reasonable access from A to B to get on with it within the law. The police are unable to deal increasingly with significant crimes, so the last thing they want to be doing is looking for someone out in the wilderness who for 10 minutes walked across a bit of private land. I used to be a stock photographer and the library wanted pictures of brand new cars in rows in a marshalling yard waiting for import/export within 48 hrs. So ring/writing etc for permission wasn't going to work. So at 4.00 in the morning I went over the top and had shot 2 rolls of film before the security blokes caught up with me... "What's your game mate - you're trespassing - what are you doing"? Cameras around my neck. "Err... taking pictures maybe"? somewhat sarcastically. They then tried "We've called the coppers, they're going to be here in a minute", to which I replied "Yeah fine, I haven't done anything other than trespass". They led me out of the yard and followed me to my car still waffling about I had to wait for the police. As I opened my car - one the guards grabbed my car keys, "Ahh - now you're breaking the law if you don't return my keys and allow me to get on with my work". They refused and so I called the police to which the police laughed and said we've got a car on its way - don't worry, we'll get your keys and sort this out. He then said 'Normally we wouldn't bother but we've got to check your out because of your proximity to the QEII bridge and we need to just check to see if you're casing the joint in preparation for bombing the bridge'. (It was the late 80's and the IRA were active). They turned up got the keys and told the security blokes "We'll deal with this - don't worry". The coppers asked me a bunch of questions and asked for ID took some details down and said "Yeah you're good to go mate and stop winding the security guards up" with a laugh. There are some valid points on over-use and vandalism below when it comes to the countryside - especially where farmland butts up urban areas. I know a lot of national parks got a battering during Covid where the amount of people getting out into the countryside grew exponentially and a lot of damage was done to footpaths and the adjacent flora and fauna. So there has to be some give and take and access denied or restricted in some instances.
Growing up in a farming community my experience is just walking close to the hedgerow/fence on private farmland is fine. The local farmers get understandably upset when people drop litter, trample crops, leave gates open or have dogs or screaming kids that unnerve the livestock.
Once had a farmer challenge me with a raised shotgun, once he realised I wasn't some chav casing his farm we had a brief chat and he said I could walk across his land anytime but he would appreciate a phonecall beforehand as he had problems with nar-do-wells thieving and vandalising his farm equipment.
Just be pleasant and use common sense and most landowners wont bother you.
Maybe he had, but would he dare do that in a public place like a High Street, and expect to get away with it? Threatening with firearms - isn't that supposed to be a criminal offence?
so many prats about
@@JohnDavies-cn3ro Its perfectly legal to carry a shotgun around your own land as long as you have a licence so good luck proving he used it in a threatening manner.
Of course he wouldnt do that in a high street but neither would anyone be nicking his tractor or chasing his animals.
Living in the sticks is a different way of life, the police are miles away and probably wont help anyway. So what is he supposed to do to protect his farm from miscreants?
This happened years ago but the world is only getting nastier and people more desperate. If I was in his position I would do the same to be honest.
@@JohnDavies-cn3ro Yes it absolutely is….any weapon in fact, brandished not in self defence, or any act of unnecessary intimidation is illegal. A land owner can only ask you to leave. IF you cause damage that is another story…You can be detained (by anyone) for committing an indictable offence (such as criminal damage) until a police officer arrives to take over. Refusing to leave after being asked becomes aggravated trespass, for which police can be called. Always record confrontations no matter how nice at the time…in case you are sued later in civil court. Remember also land owners, or their agents, do not necessarily know your rights and might believe than can raise that shotgun to you whilst on their land…remind them politely of the law. Murder or wounding for treading on the grass is not a thing in UK (Or in the US come to that…You can’t murder people for trespass just because you feel like it).
yep thats my exprience, keep to the edge, close gates, dont leave litter and so on and most farms will ignor you. Start going near live stock, near farm buildings and you will be told to leave.
Thanks for raising this issue Paul/Hedley/Rebecca - I encountered this problem just last weekend at Watership Down. Maybe I was approaching it from the wrong direction but I couldn't figure out how to get into that bit of Open Access Land without climbing over a barbed wire fence. I am relatively fit and able and I could physically have climbed over that fence without getting injured (probably) but many people couldn't do that. Ironically it's really not very accessible, considering the name.
Take an old Barbour coat with you, not to wear, but to fold a couple of times and use as a thorn proof pad on top of the barbed wire so that you can push the wire down and get over without injury even if your inside leg measurement isn’t that large.
Thanks for highlighting this issue. Such a sad state of affairs in England.
One of a long list.
In my opinion, if a land owner doesn't provide access to the open access land, it's entirely moral to trespass to access it
Perhaps you may be trespassing over a neighbour's land that has nothing to do with the open access land.
Trespass is to do with criminal damage. Providing that one walks across land not causing damage then it’s not trespass. And if anyone threatens you whilst you do so then that’s seen as assault. One is legally entitled to defend oneself against assault and can’t be prosecuted for the outcome of that assault. It’s the “I did it in self defence rule”.
I trespass all the time, who give a shit 😂
When I see anything on an old map that interests me, I am going to see it every single time, crossed many farmers fields in my time and never once had anyone tell me otherwise.
@@adam.677 That's the spirit?
hello Paul Rebecca and Hedley , seems stupid that its like this in this country , well done and thank you all 😊😍
Excellent video which raises an important issue of public policy. The Government website on Open Access states: "You can access some land across England without having to use paths - this land is known as ‘open access land’ or ‘access land’." But, as your video so brilliantly demonstrates, how is it possible to access a designated piece of 'open access' land without using a path of some sort, particularly if said 'land' is enclosed by land over which there is no right of way! Over to the Topologists!
It seems that wire cutters are required in order to exercise your rights.
that is just wrong.@@rogerphelps9939
"I'm not quite sure how we got here" 😄 Great idea for a Monty Python sketch!
Beam me up scotty.
Let me be cynical and guess, that these landowners got Tax Breaks or Taxpayer funded grants to open these unaccessible open acess lands?!
Land free to use for the surrounding land owners family and friends ;)
I was about to write the same re funding
@@nielsdebakker3283 Well there is a hint in the name Landowner. The individual owns the land. If you have a house I wouldn't walk into it uninvited,nor your garden.
@@philhawley1219 Why are you here?
Are landowners and occupiers compensated for having access on their land?
There is no general right to compensation.
Interesting issue, well described chaps. |in Wiltshire, I think you will find they are partridge rather than grouse. You need heather moorlands for them, broadly speaking.
My late mother, who was a life long member of the "East Dorset Rights of Way group" would be very pleased to know the next generations are still passionate about these matters. I think this can be a difficult issue.... I remember walking past Stonehenge in about 1972, we sat on the stones and ate our sandwiches. No litter, no graffiti, etc. I learned from a very young age how to behave in the countryside. I love the idea of a "right to roam" act in England but I do worry that there are enough people around who would not respect the countryside. (I'm not a landowner, just an average jo townie). You should see the huge amount of litter we get here on Bournemouth beach every summer!
Right to roam everywhere appears to work very well in Scotland. People who seek out these places are likely to be rather more conscientious about it than people who venture no further than Bournemouth beach.
My thoughts exactly. Too many people think their right means they can do what they like.
@@rogerphelps9939 I think that's likely true but England is just much more densely populated. May well be the same _percentage_ of irresponsible types but the _absolute number_ will be much higher.
There're also just less of "these places" in England, by land area. The areas in Scotland where they've had most trouble with right to roam being abused are near large population centres (like Loch Lomond, near Glasgow) and in England that applies to _many_ more places (there're just more large population centres, including of course the largest one in the UK by far, London). So I dunno. I'd love it to happen (i'm Scottish but actually live in England), i'm just not totally convinced it'd go as well.
those types of people could not be bothered with the effort of walking to get to these places, only people that love the countryside make that effort.
@@rogerphelps9939 Maybe?
Very informative video. At least for people living in the UK. 🤣
But the idea that there are strips of land, free to roam, but without any legal way to get there, is ridiculous.
What they don't mention is that in the UK the trespassing law is a civil matter, a dispute between the land owner and the trespasser. The police can be called to escort you off, for repeat offenders its up to the land owner to take it to court which hardly never happens.
Not at all.
We have many regions in the United States were national national parks that are not accessible. They’re there to protect Plants and animals. They purposely don’t want humans there.
I can’t understand the British. You don’t want to preserve any natural beauty. You wanna stomp all over it.
Also, in West Sussex, now they have made the south Downs a "national park"which means that now we have to pay for car parks that were always free, and you have to pay by an "app" via a mobile phone from an area that has no signal. Another way of restricting freedoms.
"Restricting freedoms" is a very subjective matter. You feel it does, as it affects you personally. I feel it doesn't, as it doesn't affect me personally.
Some farmers have designated 'permissive paths', as part of a Countryside Stewardship scheme, where the public are allowed to walk; but it is not establishing a Public Right of Way for all time. These routes will not be shown on an OS map, but usually there will be a sign saying access is permissible.
Thanks for highlighting this really important issue again Paul and Rebecca! As a trail runner I am often looking around at maps trying to plan my next route only to get stuck because parts of land are blocked off or inaccessible. I will share this video with some of my trail running buddies who live in the South of the UK so we can get the message out! Keep fighting the good fight!
Just run across the restricted land. If you are any good they won't be able to catch you!
@@rogerphelps9939 Walk . Its legal they can do NOTHING
Love having a drone that I can grab onto and fly with.
Especially with my weight 😅
THnak yuo for risking it to show us what we can't see for ourselves. Really important that you keep this in the public domain so that maybe.just maybe, access with become available! As always THANK YOU
I cycled cold kitchen hill and the area around just last week. You will have noticed areas of uncut maze which they have left as game bird cover. It’s full of partridge which were frequent on the tracks.. I saw them in that same valley a couple of years ago shooting.
Thank you for covering this very important issue Paul, Rebecca & Hedley. The English and Welsh set up for PROWs is bad and deteriorating in many areas - although not all County Councils are equal on the matter. I have found Worcestershire have been great in dealing with issues on footpaths and rights of access, Gloucestershire OK, but with room for improvement, but Powys & Shropshire are awful! Cheers! Take care, Paul.
Powys are dealing with a backlog of incompetence. The previous head of countryside services was eventually let go...
Interesting question about what the landowner gets out of it. Well illustrated with the 'see but not get to' examples. Throwing the drone up is a great way of seeing over the horizon and saves a fruitless walk.
Just an observation, just as..... Leo minster is Lemster...........Grouse is Pheasant. Grouse generally on the high moors in the North getting shot whereas Pheasants get shot pretty much everywhere in Britain. Just make sure Headleys drone does not get caught up in the aerial harvest that is classed by some as sport.
Leaving aside whether private land should be open to all or not, it seems only logical to me that if you declare some of your land as open access you automatically declare a de-facto right to access it through any reasonable means. Any law that allows land to be declared as open access without an accompanying right to access can only be meant to obfuscate some other intention. As with all UK law though (IMO), it seems that logic doesn't come into it and it will take someone taking a case to court to get some sort of ruling.
Landowners were not in control of the process. In Wales CCW built two mapping systems showing the proposed areas [Forestry Commission holdings, Commons and unimproved farmland]. On in English and one in Welsh. After several months not a single person had accessed the welsh language site.
@@jeremyatkinson4976 That's a good point - my post was poorly worded and could appear to put the blame on landowners "pulling a fast one". My intention was more that anyone involved in making, implementing or reviewing the law around this messed up badly - either through poor ability or due to ulterior motives. Regardless of why a piece of land is being considered to be open-access or not, a logical law would have to allow it to become listed as open-access if, and only if, access to the land is possible through reasonable means. I confess I haven't read it great detail, and maybe there are clauses that give a right to get to the land, but I haven't heard of or seen any.
@@flyball1788 I was involved in the process and my understanding at the time was that routes to such land were supposed to be made if none existed. But that was in Wales.
Having an area preserved for floor and fauna and not humans is a normal practice in the United States.
Evidently that advanced concept has not reach the UK.
Stomping on by un is not necessarily a good thing
None of those OAAs look like it would be a particularly bad idea to walk to, including climbing over a fence, in the context of doing a 10 mile walk on public footpaths and wanting to go to the top of the hill. I wouldn't drop any litter, play loud music etc. So if the landowners wanted to make a fuss, I would just apologise and then be very friendly and say wow what a beautiful landscape you have. And there is nothing any TH-cam comments can say that will change that.
Agree completely, but it shouldn't be like this. 2500 inaccessible islands.
@pwhitewick incidentally, the day that the guy complained to us, we had had to extend our walk by some miles because there was a shoot on and we were denied access to the public footpath in the interests of safety. I'm not complaining, it's just funny that the same thing happened to us as it did to you! That was the reason we took the shortcut on the edge of the field in the first place! Soaked and cold and late for a dinner 🙈
Of course the landowners don't want people rambling on what they consider to be 'their' land so they have carefully looked at the map(s) and worked out how to legally give access to the land but then made damned sure that no footpath or bridleway leads to it. I do not know if they have been paid by the state but I doubt the would have done it without money for the 'open access'. The whole thing stinks and should be abolished, and replaced with a similar scheme to that in Scotland. The filthy rich bastards have it all their own way as usual.
Stop following there bullshit rules then, go where you want
Landowners didn't declare the land Open Access, the government did that. If you own a mountain, moor, heath or down it is automatically declared Open Access Land. Public can't always get to it because it's surrounded by fields that aren't open access land.
Take a look at Sydmonton Est. I guarantee a certain estate owner will ensure you are followed very discreetly, he doesn't like people in general, let alone anyone who isn't rich enough to talk to him. Some of the land is legally accessible, but that doesn't stop his grounds people from being carefully obnoxious about it.
Henry are you happy to grant open acces to your vegetable plot to all and sundry?
@@gnosticbrian3980 Even in Scotland you don't have free and open access to arable land, because that "right" is in conflict with the ability to produce food which if you want to eat is pretty important.
I've been over Snowdon, I've slept upon Crowden
I've camped by the Wainstones as well
I've sunbathed on Kinder, been burned to a cinder
And many more things I can tell
My rucksack has oft been me pillow
The heather has oft been me bed
And sooner than part from the mountains
I think I would rather be dead
I'm a rambler, I'm a rambler from Manchester way
I get all me pleasure the hard moorland way
I may be a wage slave on Monday
But I am a free man on Sunday
The day was just ending and I was descending
Down Grindsbrook just by Upper Tor
When a voice cried "Hey you" in the way keepers do
He'd the worst face that ever I saw
The things that he said were unpleasant
In the teeth of his fury I said
"Sooner than part from the mountains
I think I would rather be dead"
He called me a louse and said "Think of the grouse"
Well I thought, but I still couldn't see
Why all Kinder Scout and the moors roundabout
Couldn't take both the poor grouse and me
He said "All this land is my master's"
At that I stood shaking my head
No man has the right to own mountains
Any more than the deep ocean bed
I once loved a maid, a spot welder by trade
She was fair as the rowan in bloom
And the bloom of her eye matched the blue moorland sky
I wooed her from April to June
On the day that we should have been married
I went for a ramble instead
For sooner than part from the mountains
I think I would rather be dead
So I'll walk where I will over mountain and hill
And I'll lie where the bracken is deep
I belong to the mountains, the clear running fountains
Where the grey rocks lie ragged and steep
I've seen the white hare in the gullies
And the curlew fly high overhead
And sooner than part from the mountains
I think I would rather be dead
Ewan MacColl 1932
Open Access sounds like the Agricultural Use loophole in the US. Many landowners in areas with high-value disused lots will "cultivate", harvest, and bale grass & weeds (that then is left to rot); as taxation of agricultural lands is steeply discounted or non-existent. This tactic is to entirely avoid paying real estate taxes and being subjected to the same codes & regulations that non-agricultural land would be subjected to. It's all just a tax dodge.
I've been wondering if that's the real reason.
What is the point of open access if it is difficult to access such land.Thank you Paul for a great video. As always,with greatest respect , your videos leave my mind full of questions of if ,what & maybe! That is just me!Thank you once again for another fascinating video. Take care.
It's always worth getting a look at local commoners rights, you'll be amazed at the owned land and woods you can legally access to gather firewood and graze livestock.
A "common" misunderstanding, to have common rights, you need to be a commoner. It's a sort of social status(ish), so to graze your sheep, collect wood etc, you need to have the "right of common", typically, but not always, not a peasant, but you could even be a lord. But it's not freely available to all, it needs to be granted to you personally.
So good luck with getting to be a commoner in the 21st century
You can only do these things on a Registered Common if you have commoners rights. These are usually associated with a house / farm nearby. It's not a free-for-all.
The government want to make trespass a criminal offence
In the future you could get a criminal offence for getting a bit lost and not walking on the public footpath or do a bit of responsible wild camping could turn you into a criminal.
We now the current government hate camping as it’s apparently a lifestyle choice as well 🙄🙄
It is OK. They will be out on their ear before very long.
Learn the law. Whilst it strictly speaking an offence to trespass it cannot be prosecuted unless there is an accompanying harm caused by the trespasser. Me I go anywhere. Very rarely am I challenged and if so I politely leave as requested - usually continuing in the direction that I was going anyway. There is one notable exception (not counting Military establishments). Each of our houses. I've stopped police using court warrants entering occupied property because I know the real law which actually is confirmed by the statute; The Criminal Law Act 1977 sect 6. The trouble is that even the police don't know the difference between legal and lawful. The old saying that an Englishman's home is his castle has a basis in law, Check out the case of Davis v Lisle if you don't believe me.
Not sure how davis v lisle teaches us anything we don't already know. It's well established that police can only access private dwellings either with a warrant, or if acting on the understanding that a person's in danger, or a fugitive is hiding. In what circumstances did you stop police who had a court warrant?
And yet the government want to make civil trespass a criminal offence. Don’t think that landowners won’t call the police if you even stray of the public footpath 1 metre. They will. Some landowners will harass walkers with the police just to make it unpleasant to walk on their land.
@@jonescrusher1 The first was when I helped my friend who had bailiffs at his door with a court warrant for arrest of my friend. I phoned 999 and asked for the police to attend and quoted the Criminal law act. I got the usual male bovine excreta but that did not matter because the call was recorded. I then served by email a legal notice on the chief constable stating the law. Six constables and a sergeant came to assist the bailiffs. They left after 4 hours saying they would be back. They never came. Tommy Robinson is in the news again pleading for money to pay for his barristers. He does not know that the barristers dare not advise him correctly because their first sworn duty is to the court not to him. He should have gone all the way to the Supreme Court challenging the unlawful gagging order. He should do the same for the unlawful arrest which tries to stop his common law right to freedom of speech.
@@johntimbrell the freedom of speech no longer allows for racism or bigotry, that was made illegal more recently, superseding those laws allowing freedom of speech, and this is why he was arrested. Also I am pretty sure there are conditions on him and his behaviour, meaning he probably broke those conditions.
Lets not sully the chat with right wing BS and support of a racist who doesn't know when to stop. The sooner he disappears the safer this country will be for everyone.
As for the comment about barristers not advising correctly? You really need to check the law morecarfully. Any barrister not acting in the interests of their client impartially and correctly, can lose their position, and licence to practice, and its a very embarrassing thing to happen, and a massive waste of so many years of study, exams and financial burden..
imagine going to so much enough because you feel entitled to other peoples property. people like you are the reason barbed wire and electric fences exist. ruining it for the rest of us.
It's not grouse shooting. It will be pheasant or partridge. There are no grouse in southern England.
It would be good if you could interview someone about this .
And as such a new craze was born. Adds a whole new element of adventure to rambling.
Great vid. Good one i had once was walking off piste on the lulworth ranges, i knew exactly where we were on OS and when the guy with foghorn blew i walked straight to him, calmly explained i couldnt really see the range walks markers (lying) and would leave, he advised to do so as firing was about to begin....
It is not illegal to trespass. What is illegal is not following a request to leave if asked. I would just cross over whatever land I had to in order to get to open access land. In the very unlikely event of being challenged I would explain what I was doing. More than likely I would be allowed to proceed.
What galls me is when someone gives some land 'to the nation' - for instance Stonehenge. And then some quango puts a fence around it TO PREVENT IT EVEN BEING SEEN from the footpath along the side of the road AND CHARGES ME ADMISSION to the thing I already own. I recognise the validity of charging an eyewatering fee to use the carpark that was built for the purpose, but not access to the monument I own. I also accept that foreign visitors aren't part of 'the nation' so aren't co-owners and can legitimately be asked for a fee to see the monument....but during my lifetime Stonehenge has gone from some stones in a field, to some stones that are roped off with a path around them (perfectly appropriate) and now it is a category A prison with a gatehouse controlling access to it.
I live in a small village in the Scottish Highlands. The view from my front door is a beautiful valley with an as it is now snow capped mountain. At 60yo and disabled that's about as far as I'm going with Scottish open access, but it's nice the younger ones get to walk about up here.
In UK the way in which, in particular private enterprise and wealthy individuals have leveraged their money to buy up vast tracts of land, specifically to prevent public access is disgusting and needs to be illegal. For many of these businesses, the land is not in use in any way which would preclude public access. It is simply owned, maybe as an investment or a cash sink etc. The owner, be it commercial or a person doesn’t visit the site or care about it in any meaningful sense….but they will make it illegal for you to go there. We need to undo this. A thing to keep in mind….you can only be summarily arrested for trespass on crown property, such as MoD land. If you trespass on other owned land you can only be asked to leave, technically no different to walking around in someone’s garden!…IF you argue, it becomes aggravated trespass and then the police can be called, but even then if you simply agree to move on the police are unlikely to take action. No matter how threatening a land owner may be…they cannot level a shotgun at you or set dogs on you…hurty words are their only legal recourse, unless you resist.
04:10 No.1. Would it be useful to approach the person who made this land public and ask how they expect one should access it?
So if you weren't Paul or Hedley doing any of that then it follows that it was Rebecca (er .... and Rebeccas twin sister 😅😅).
Arrest the Rebeccas, they will be found scaling the twin peaks of Kilimanjaro!!
Great hike up in the hills and some superb drone shots, I would imagine the key thing is to be respectful.
I'm off to waffleland now
Some lovely shots with the drone, great video
Thank you
Thanks for a reminder of one of our many reasons for moving to Scotland. Most sensible laws can be boiled back down to 'do as you would be done by', but this branch of law in England strains that past breaking point. My simple rule for walking up here is 'dinnae take the piss'. You do have to deal with OS maps with a complete lack of the usual footpath symbols, mind you!
Excellent box-office busting follow-up from our Wessex Ways heroes, as they continue their quest to identify and defeat the mysterious land-owning country wide NOAH* gang. Whatever the rights and wrongs, well done to the three of you for keeping this issue alive. (*No Open Access Here)
I lived in Florida USA for a number of years, the beaches are public land, but no access to get to the actual beach. This is a problem the world over. We need people to be nicer, the world is for all of us. Not a lucky few.
The beaches in Oregon are public land too: between the high & low tide marks. Governor Oswald West (one of our best governors) pushed thru a law back in the 1920s to establish them as public roadways, which was confirmed by legislation pushed thru bay Governor Tom McCall (another of our best). Since they are public roadways, they require public access & with Highway 101 running less than 100 yards/meters away that's easy to ensure.
There is one exception: Little Whale Cove. This required a court case -- which went to the state supreme court -- to establish, so it's doubtful much more beach land will be lost to private ownership.
I grew up on the East Coast of Canada where most nice beaches had access paths across private land that had been used for literally hundreds of years. In one case a new owner from some distant place decided he didn't like this and signed it no trespassing. The signs vanished. A fence appeared and "fell down". Things escalated to the point where a barn "caught fire" and the owner abandoned the struggle. At the time I had never heard about anything about established public right of ways and I wonder now what provincial laws applied.
Beaches are a bit complicated in the UK _except_ for Scotland (where there's explicit Right to Roam on the land, including beaches). Elsewhere though (including England) there's no explicit legal right of access to beaches, some of which are publicly owned, some privately owned and most of the foreshore - the bit between the high and low tide lines - technically being owned by the Crown Estate (which _does_ grant broad access rights).
But there _is_ an explicit right to _fish_ on the foreshore, so if you're fishing you have more access, at least under the law, than if you're just going for a walk or swimming. And if it's Crown owned foreshore you have access but if it's privately owned you may not (again, unless fishing) but _probably_ do (unless you don't). It's a needlessly complicated mess basically and high time we cleaned it up and made access explicit IMO.
That is not true across the United States.
In North Carolina, we have public beach access. They are limited, but they should be because you don’t own the damn land.
Every beach is accessible. You just have to do the research.
Lazy
By the way, the beach is not Completely public. It’s up to the high tide line.
People misconstrue that as public.
I love your videos, thank you for helping me to bring back memories of my trip there as a child (Hello from Canada!). ☺
Fun fact - it is illegal to own waterways in Canada and some have taken this to also include ponds and lakes. Many have argued that they should be allowed to be in someones private pond due to these laws. lol
Ran into that at our old cottage. Complaints of drunk boaters etc on the lake but the police said they didn't have public access to the water. One owner wrote up a permanent letter or permission to use their private boat launch then the police were out then next weekend.
There is fine print. I think you may be referring to the federal Navigable Waterways Act, which covers any waterway that a small boat could use. Something about logs too? I don't think that national act covers ownership, but just forbids blocking passage. I think some provinces have given the government ownership of the beds of navigable waterways that aren't specifically federal (such as a river that divides Canada and the USA).
Pheasants or partridge not grouse they live in the northern moors .
You're right, and we realised when we got back to the car. One of those "in the moment" comments!
I had a former boss who once told me that you can go virtually anywhere once as long as you act lost and aren't a jerk! lol
True dat! ... 'Cept I don't have to act. XD
That works once.
And it does not work if you’re the 50th person doing it
It would be interesting to know what proportion of the 8% is accessible legally!
Apparently, there are 2500 open access plots that are inaccessible.
I’d guess that more than 99% is accessible. The inaccessible areas are mostly small fragments. The bulk of CROW access land is in upland areas where access is not usually an issue. It was very disappointing that the Labour Party seemed to backtrack on commitments to make more land accessible in lowland areas.
In Wales under the same legislation access routes were supposed to be created. Secondly access land wasn't just unimproved farmland but also Commons and Forestry Commission land. Prior to that, excepting local bylaws, Commons were only accessible within if one stayed on PROW and Council roads, not that folks paid much attention to that. Councils were fully aware during the consultation process of the impending areas to be deemed access land and thus had a duty to either alter the plans and/or plan access routes You could usefully ask Wiltshire why they have not carried out their duty to create the access routes to their [in]access[ible] land.
Really interesting thanks and I am now scouring the OS 125 maps for Lincolnshire.
A nice video today about the restrictive laws in the UK. Have the same problem, unless the state owns it. Usually then, it’s part of a state park. You to see you again, Paul. Cheers to your walking partner, and of course Rebecca. Enjoy the week, and see you on the next! ❤😊
Worth pointing out that despite _saying_ "UK" this is _actually_ only for England, Wales and Northern Ireland (I _think_ anyway - never been walking in NI :).
In Scotland however there's a Right to Roam which means open access to the land (with some fairly obvious caveats - you don't have a right to roam on land around dwellings for instance so you can't just wander into people's gardens). Not a perfect system (landowners don't always comply with the law etc.) but much better than England.
Join the Ramblers, they're the lead campaign organisation for land access.
Land owners seem to routinely block access, remove signs, erect temporary fences and generally obfuscate however they can to make access difficult. Or they graze aggressive livestock on open access land. It’s a joke.
Great video, thanks for this
Reckon parachuting in amd being legaly trapped is the kind of sillyness Max Fosh and Zac Allsop would be up for.
being from the north of england .. this is fun randomly discovering you channel 😁
Bravo for highlighting the absurdity of tax breaks using the public’s money where the public is unable to benefit.
So the landowners received tax-breaks for providing land/areas for public use yet were not required to provide access to them? Unfortunate this type of governmental virtue signaling is disgusting. But you can hardly blame the landowner for working within the rules set before them. They probably fought it until they read the codes and were ready to take advantage of any tax windfalls
This has nothing to do with tax breaks. It was national legislation.
@@jeremyatkinson4976 So they were forced to do it? Nice. That always goes over well with private property owners. However, I am ignorant of the situation; but will do a bit of reading to apprise myself of the matter. I'm obviously a land owner
@@intractablemaskvpmGyWell they didn't do it. It was done to them. So unpopular was it that in return the CLA asked for historical data to be no longer used to grant new PROW. They imagined a period of grace of perhaps a year. They got 25. Due to the law of unintended consequences this caused folks to research old routes. So much so that the 25 year rule was recently rescinded in England. Councils would have had to resource the vastly increased number of claims. The CLA had shot themselves in the foot. Typically the Welsh Assembly had never got around to ratifying the 25 year rule.... I served on the Welsh National Access Forum whilst this legislation was being thrashed out. It was driven by the Ramblers and traced it's evolution back to Kinder Scout.
The 'right to roam' is pretty clear. I thought that any land accessible from a public right of way that isn't a private residence or industrial plant can be walked on providing no damage is caused to crops. I shall do some research to satisfy myself whether I'm broadly right.
I'm sure there's a million things wrong with this idea but it seems the simplest fix would be for a law to be passed, which will never happen, saying that if you're within some suitable generous distance of open-access land and you have to trespass to access it, then that doesn't legally count as "trespass". My phrasing is legally vague, yes, because I'm not versed in the intricacies of relevant British law.
Never stopped me, walk down hedgerows and keep your eyes open. Got chased by a farmer once but that was over 50 years ago....
Centuries old acceptability of foot paths is one big thing that allows Britain to be 'Great.'
Cynical me is wondering whether some benefit is provided to landowners from designating some of their land for public access; that providing land for public access but "oops" no right for anyone to reach it may in fact be what the landowners intended. A cursory look online didn't find anything for me but I may not have the right terms to search for.
Google “farmers weekly” and “Funding opportunities for public access on farmland outlined”. On the government website there’s information about Capital grants
Nope, the Labour Government (1998-2005) simply designated private lands in England, not under cultivation, a golf course, race course, sports pitch, ... as OPEN ACCESS, without compensation. The Civil Servants, and the stationers supplying the Orange Highlighters, made many a penny from their colouring exercise, the then landowners simply gained some public liabilities, from the Government.
Clearly not enough.@@AndrewRoberts11
Paul -- so is the grouse hunting a legal use of the open-access land? Or was that organized by the actual land owner?
That would be the land owner, and they have the right to register Open Access Land as inaccessible during shoots etc.
@@andyalder7910 Interesting. I looked at gov dot uk but didn't have sufficient brainpower to parse it entirely.
Thank you for doing this, You know I have been using OS maps for maybe 50 years, and have always "read the detail", but I did not really know about the "Orange bits of land are open access".
OS key for Access Land (England & Wales) is very vague, and I have never interpreted it satisfactorily, I knew there were colours mostly on the map White & Orange, which seemed to be separate, but I could not work out ever what exactly they meant?, no problem I always followed the red dots path.
Now I live in Oswestry (on the border) up Northish, and land to the East of us is white(I think) and to the land west of us is orange.
When I have gone west walking I have always followed the path, but if you look at the OS map, from what you are saying I could practically walked in any directions, yes there are a lot of red dot paths , but if you are correct (and I am sure you are) I could have started from a road gone through a gate and walked across a farmers field to go anywhere? because its in orange.
This OS map detail has NEVER arose before? nobody explained this except your vid, I have yet again gone back to OS map symbol explanation and it says "some land shown as access land may not have open access rights (?) always refer to local signage" .
But in my experience signage usually means a roundel with an arrow displayed, points the way with maybe some info?.
It would be wonderful if the govt would give a fuller detail explanation about the whole countryside and how we could use it, in detail, and make access points to all "public access places" everywhere.
I hope you do more of this type of stuff, it is so relevant when like yourself, you like to go walkies in the big green stuff, and you want to know important stuff, like you have informed us.
Ok. Let's take a deep breath and realize there are lots of political forces at work, some that are going to be decades in the making. From the offset, these open spaces are being provided for public use and access. This is a win for the land owner and public because it's a FUTURE benefit for everyone. Next is the access. Once again, just because it's now an open space, perhaps the end goal is to protect wildlife. To that end, you being able to access it is secondary to the primary goal. Lastly, just because these islands of land are closed off, does not mean the land owners and other groups are preventing access, but need to place those "chess pieces" in place to achieve their ends.
Are you sure it is 'public' land, and not crown property?
We in America seem to face the same problem with the Bureau of Land Management.
Grea video.
Not particularly relevant to UK, but US courts (currently being challenged on appeal) have ruled that private landowners can't use trespass to block access to public lands, for any purpose. If, e.g., the only way to graze stock on public land is to cross your private land, you can't block access.
Worth pointing out that while 'illegal' trespass isn't criminal, it's a civil matter, and those 'trespassers will be prosecuted' signs are mostly meaningless, as a private prosecution is an utter waste of time, and it's only a criminal matter if couples with another offence (burglary etc...) my channel is usually mostly trespassing 🤣
Exception - it is a criminal offence to trespass on railway land!
@@martinstephenson2226 well yes, there are exceptions on railway, MoD or Crown land but generally speaking that isn't most land,
@@martinstephenson2226And since 2012 it's been an offence to trespass in a residential building if you do it so much that it becomes your home.
@@martinstephenson2226 Don't forget criminal tresspass under the new Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 or the crime of Aggravated Tresspass under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. Both require you to do more than just be on the land, but they are worthy of note. Also remember that a land owner can use reasonable force to remove you from land after your refusal to leave and that is a defence to civil and criminal assault as long as the force is reasonable and proportionate.
You can AFIK 'legally do it'.
Walking across land to gain access isn't trespass if it is done without causing damage, carrying an offensive weapon, leaving litter etc.
I go out and look at castles (or fields as a friend calls them). Sadly a lot of them are on private land, I never trespass but wish you could get access to more of them.
It would be good to approach the landowners and ask what their understanding and position is on this.
Not having trawled through the act, I do wonder if there’s anything in there.
I guess I’m being a Resource Investigator here and tasking you to do the above!
That is not going to be very easy if it is somewhere where you are exploring for the first time and it is not obvious who owns the land in any case.
@@rogerphelps9939 absolutely. You’d have to research the Land Registry and then probably write a letter. Or turn up and ask. Would be interesting, though.
Hi paul and rebecca i am guessing the landowners found a loophole in the openaccess law i bet it state the landowner has to set any land for open acess land but it dosen t tell them it has to be on a public right of way so the landowners can just put any where the like but people cant tresspass on their if there no footpaths
The only solution to this madness is The Right to Roam - See Scotland …
The bonus of living in Scotland (also part of the UK...). I've lived and walked across the countryside all my life, and never run into any trouble at all from anyone. It's down to having respect for where you are.
There is one just over the border from Kelso which is an arable field. Were it in Scotland it would be inaccessible for part of the year as it has a standing crop on it. A curious reversal.
Pretty sure that's true of England too. Land that's being actively farmed doesn't have open access rights (even if it's marked as open access land). It's known as "excepted land".
(think the rule is something like planted _or_ ploughed with intent to plant within the last 12 months)
I have seen no-tices on moorland excepting that as well between certain dates - like Jan1 - Dec31.
Fyi, probably not grouse, more likely a pheasant and/or partridge shoot in that part of the country.....
What is the pole thing at 6:39? Is that where they stick the people who sneak across non-open-access land to get to open-access land????
Hahahahaha! Yes. Either that or a beacon.
Thankfully trespass is not a criminal offence.
There is civil trespass AND criminal trespass in the UK, both in the form of aggravated trespass (Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994) and criminal trespass (under the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022) . In civil tresspass the landover can instruct you to leave and if you refuse they can use reasonable force to remove you. Using reasonable force on a trespasser is a defence to the crime or tort of assault. Offensive Conduct is criminal tresspass and if you refuse to leave and resist attempts to remove you it becomes aggravated trespass (criminal offence). It is a common misconception that trespass is only a civil offence, especially since the updated new criminal trespass laws which came into force in 2022.
I’d like to see the drone that flew Hedley in, was it by chance a chinook?
@pwhitewick Great video, shame the topic exists. It would be great to see a collaboration with @BlackBeltBarrister to look at the legal side of this as both a rambler and land owner. It could address some of the questions and assumtions made in the comment section.
I’d like to know who drew up the map, the level of consultation or input with landowners and rationale for what we have as a result. Seems some ‘estates’ have vast areas of private land that mirrors in nature, character and use, many scraps of land that appear to have been included.
At present the logic of inaccessible access land is as though the authors child took a highlighter to the map to colour in random shapes, while they were working from home.
@pwhitewick You post some very interesting and well-made videos, but I think it fair to ask if you want land to be nationalised, or simply for anyone to be permitted to go anywhere? I disagree with that, but it's an opinion which is fair enough to openly hold. I only write this because many of your videos come across as very resentful of those who do own land.
I'm so glad I live in Scotland :)
One of the reason I dont walk/camp anymore is because I just dont know where to do it legally and don't want the hassle of dealing with landowners weather they are in the right or not.
#3 looks like the landowner just expects you to use that path visible in the drone shots and doesn't think such fine detail needs to be legislated. _Many_ people in this country have that kind of attitude towards the law. In this case, it may work out fine until someone nasty buys the land, if that ever happens.
EDIT: I should update this with what many commenters have pointed out: Tresspass itself isn't actually illegal. You're in the clear unless asked to leave.
#1 definitely has something wrong with it, there's no dismissing electric fences!
#2 was just weird, so I looked at gov dot uk, _Common land guidance sheet 1b: works and processes that do not need Section 38 consent_. I'd better link that rather than try and make sense of it myself. I'll link it in a reply, in case it gets swallowed by a spam filter.
EDIT: I've heard the landowner has a right to hold a shooting event, but has to register it or something. I guess that's the Section 38 consent, but I've run out of brainpower now.
The page you find to reach _Common land guidance sheet 1b_ itself contains an interesting paragraph:
www.gov.uk/government/publications/common-land-guidance-sheet-1b-works-and-processes-that-do-not-need-section-38-consent
Here's _Common land guidance sheet 1b_ itself:
www.gov.uk/government/publications/common-land-guidance-sheet-1b-works-and-processes-that-do-not-need-section-38-consent/common-land-guidance-sheet-1b
This looks like a bit of law that allows landowners to put aside patches of unremunerative land for a grant etc? What the law didn’t provide was the access to these patches of land.
The open access areas near me are common land or large tracts of the downs owned by the national trust. (Except it includes Redhill football club, bizarrely!)
Trespass is not a criminal offence! So......... if you do it, and don't get caught........ that seems kinda OK! (So long as you do no damage, harm, etc) 😀
You can legally walk up a private owned path if you claim you are looking for the front door of the land owners home to ask permission 😉👍👍
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The rule of trespass is to do with criminal damage. I retain the right to walk across any land so long as I cause no damage. If anyone threatens me then, in line with the law, I am allowed to defend myself against any unlawful threat or restraint. Being ex military that means I can use ultimate force to stop someone detaining me or threatening me. And believe you me. I have the ways and means to exercise that force. So if anyone wants to challenge me when I’m walking on a public right of way, they had better be aware of the consequences. I will not be intimidated!
Trespass is a civil matter. If there is no signage or implied public access (no barriers or gates) then you can enter any land. The landowner can ask you to leave and use reasonable force if you do not leave. However, you can leave the private land via any way in a reasonable time.
Thank you for that which you do
You are very welcome
5 million square meters of open access land in Wiltshire sounds like a lot, but it's only 5 square kilometers (2 square miles). It seems the total area of Wiltshire is 3500 square kilometers, and 5 million square meters is less than 0.2% of that
Keep grumbling, this situation deserves more attention.
This is so tragic and appalling, from the public access perspective. And the main reason I could never live in England. btw, Bing seems to have dropped the OS maps layer from their maps.
I wonder if it is now only on desktop/laptops? You're right as I can't find it via smartphone now.
Just go to your mobile browser settings and change it from mobile site view to desktop site view and you'll get your OS layer back.
I'm pretty sure that the os layer will only work too for those with an ip address from within the UK too, anywhere else it won't work from, whether that includes if the person is using a VPN to create a UK ip address I don't know for sure.
OS have their own app in which you have to pay for maps. I use OSM Viewer (which uses OpenStreetMap data) instead, because I haven't been able to comfortably read OS maps since they changed them in the 90s. Actually, I use both OSM Viewer and Google Maps because the latter has cafes and I'm often hungry. :p But to get to the [other] important bits, OpenStreetMap doesn't mark rights of way, but I'm always meek and polite and I've never had any trouble. Actually, I've never even had to excersise my skills in meekness and politeness! Perhaps it's my constant befuddled look. :p Besides the app, OpenStreetMap has their own website for desktop use; worth a look if you want to preview it. You can even contribute to it.
I read somewhere that if a public footpath or a section of a public footpath you're using is blocked/obstructed, you have the legal right to use adjoining land to access the public footpath beyond the part that's blocked/obstructed or to access a different public footpath nearby. If approached by the owner of the land, who will no doubt suspect you of trespassing, tell them what I said. If you're brave, and they're not armed with a shotgun, you can remind them it's illegal to block or obstruct a public footpath which can lead to court orders requiring them to clear the public footpath and for them to be fined. 😁
No grouse shooting in Wiltshire (not enough heather moorland habitat) most probably partridge or pheasant.
Unfortunately up here in Scotland, the common good land(common land) has mostly been stolen by councils, or private land owners. And there is nothing we’ve been able to do about it! Local councils have stolen the land, built on it and the rents should go to the Common Good fund, which was set up by the country to help poor people. A fund that could help people but can’t coz they’ve stolen the land.