Back in mid-January, British hikers were outraged when a landowner named Alexander Darwall filed a lawsuit, effectively ending the long-accepted British practice of ‘wild camping’. I was.

Darwall owns approximately 1,620 hectares of land within Dartmoor National Park. And when he argued in court that it was never permissible to pitch a tent overnight on private property without first obtaining permission, the court listened.

According to the Sierra Club, Dartmoor was the last place in the country to still allow wild camping, a traditional practice so appreciated by British hikers. A handshake agreement between the person and the recreational user was essential. As The Sierra Club pointed out, “the right to roam freely on common land — often privately owned but retaining historical and legal access for non-owners or ‘common people'” is the It occupies only 8% of the zone.

Liability issues in America

On the other side of the Atlantic, meanwhile, structurally similar land access disputes played out.Colorado Judiciary Commission Beaten Changes to State Recreational Use Laws That way, landowners would have been better protected from liability for anyone injured while using their property. became the owner of two 14,000-foot peaks. banned his land indefinitely.

John Lieber owns the summits of two prominent mountains along the Declibron Loop: Mount Democrat and Mount Lincoln.

But my lawyer advised me that the Colorado Recreational Use Ordinance (CRUS) is so lax that I should mark my property “no trespassing” to protect myself from lawsuits. In fact, the insurance agent working for Reiber was unable to persuade the insurance company to compensate for the damage caused to his property. Liability under the law is too high.

private vs public

The details of the two cases are different and unrelated, but they share one peculiar binding element. Both landowners want better control over what people can and cannot do on their land.

According to The Sierra Club, Darwall, a “self-made billionaire”, explained in a statement obtained by the BBC.

“The truth is that there are no threats to access or true wild camping. We want to keep Dartmoor pristine in principle,” the statement read.

Darwall and his wife, who have owned the lot since 2013, take their “legal and environmental responsibility” to their property seriously. A few people ruin it,” he called it.

Legislative issue

ExplorersWeb interviewed Reiber on March 7th. Reiber first made it clear that he has a strong desire to keep the land open for those who use it responsibly.

“I have done everything I can to help people enjoy the land and have kept it open for many years. , has spent nearly 20 years.

From a legal standpoint, “recreation” covers almost everything under CRUS. Reiber has provided free access to his land in the past. He became concerned about firearm use (many signs near the summit are full of bullet holes) and liability with campfires.Danger of wildfires rising in western US well documented.

A recent legislative challenge to this law, Senate Bill 103, would have given Colorado landowners like him the power to permit and prohibit activities on their lands.

“Most people there are nice and trying to do the right thing. They want to hike, they want to take pictures, and I’m totally fine with all that,” Reiber said. “But there’s a lot of data that people are ruining his 14ers, and I’ve seen that in the Democrats and Lincoln. The tundra there is pretty sensitive. And some people don’t realize it.” increase.”

It is not difficult to find examples that illustrate Reiber and Darwall’s concerns.

raves and wildfires

Illegal Raves in 2021 Attracted an estimated 2,000 people to the national park in Sussex, England. In short, chaos ensued and authorities intervened.

“Participants may think they had the best time, but it is causing real damage and suffering to the people who live and farm here,” said James Wright, a local farmer. .

Detective Superintendent Juliet Parker said visitors “demonstrated complete disregard for the community, local heritage and existing COVID-19 regulations.

By 2022, the authorities will convicted camper Wildfires in northern Arizona were among the largest in the state that year.Called a pipeline fire, the eventual flame Extends over 105 square kilometersMatthew Reiser, 57, started it when he burned toilet paper in the Coconino National Forest. Despite official fire limit warnings from the United States Forest Service (USFS) appearing on “roads, ranger stations, local news media, and the USFS website,” according to the court.

This is not the only time humans have caused wildfires in the western United States. In 2016, two Alabama men He was convicted of a felony after starting a wildfire in Boulder County, Colorado.

In England, the court’s January ruling on Darwall’s allegations sparked protests. Thousands of hikers flocked to his property in the weeks that followed, demonstrating on a scale “not seen since the 1930s,” the Sierra Club said.

appeal

It also prompted a possible appeal by Dartmoor National Park. The Guardian reported Late January. Lawyers representing the parks said the ruling may be flawed because they rely on a “narrow” definition of recreation that only allows “outdoor” activities such as walking, horseback riding and picnicking, according to the outlet. claims. Guardian It also noted the “historical understanding” of wild camping, which “thousands of people, including park officials,” interpreted as a right to camp and leave no trace.

Reiber and many other groups in the United States that sponsored the CRUS challenge are set to begin working again in Congress next year. in the meantime, Petition on Change.org It’s patrolling.

Meanwhile, both cases result in the loss of public access to private property. Let’s hear from someone who has lived in Texas for over ten years. Continuous privatization of land is not a good model for outdoor sports and recreation. You need to aim for a balance between “intruders will be shot immediately” and overly perforated rules. Both extremes can lead to harm.

As long as it was possible to own the land, there was some form of agreement between landowners and land users. The ability to agree to terms of respect, either explicitly or implicitly, is essential for us to enjoy the great outdoors. If our collective ability to commit to that mutual respect and build compromises to maintain it is corroded, it could be damaging to the entire future of outdoor recreation.