UKC

OPINION: Free Access Versus Conservation - A Delicate Balance

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Arrive late, depart early, leave no trace, and try to avoid over-used areas. We should all strive to do this.

With an onslaught of 'dirty campers', camper van convoys, and litter, familiar issues have come to a head in the Scottish Highlands this summer, while facilities to cope with the influx have been largely inadequate. As a result, calls have mounted for extreme measures such as regulated access and fees. Emily Donoho asks: are the ideals of public enjoyment of the outdoors at odds with the needs of conservation; and how might we steer towards a healthier, more equitable balance?



Read more
 facet 09 Sep 2020
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

It is interesting that you have brought this stuff together. 

I reckon 99.9% of folk who read this on UKC know what the current issues are - so you probably aren't reaching anyone new.  Of course everyone has different ideas on how to help the situation but no-one on UKC will be trashing the place which is happening at present (exaggerated but pretty much the case). So how is this article helping? No idea.

But I guess my question is how can we (well me, and all of us) instigate some positive change apart from the 'crazy'/wilder petitions you mention. 

Just a personal small example that many of us may recognise -

3 separate work colleagues of mine who usually holiday abroad and spend their weekends either in pubs or shopping (pre-covid) all decided (at separate times) to wild camp in the Highlands (river side and beach). I initially tried to dissuade them as knowing them knew it would be a car crash, but as they were very set on the idea I them switched to giving advice to ensure that it was as sustainable and non trashy as possible. The folk had mixed results and didn't really listen, mainly about not having fires.

Person 1 + partner who camped on a beach pooped on (in) said beach, had a fire tearing down small tree's despite me saying that this is bad! Had a terrible night, no torch, no midge net, but did carry out all waste. Threw away tent on return. She said she would never do this again, it was hellish (for them).

Person 2 Enjoyed river side camp with a 100 other folk along same river. The party urinated lots by/in river along with a 100 other folk, had a fire, left fire pit. Carried out all rubbish and other rubbish found from previous people on their pitch. Enjoyed it but said on reflection once she can fly to Dubai/Spain/etc again she would do that instead. She said the police patrolling the road all night checking cars weren't blocking the road was a little annoying. 

Person 3  Said it was okay, got drunk, can't remember much about it, took home own rubbish, hopes foreign holidays are allowed again. May 'wild' camp again if flights restricted.

Me - of course it is still possible to get away from folk by travelling away from the road and honey spots. But I feel given everything (everyone) else have decided to not go wild camping at present as although I feel I can do it responsibly I would feel I am adding to the issue at present.

I look forward to reading the article again to digest more! Thanks

 David Wynne 10 Sep 2020
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Free Access Versus Conservation - A Delicate Balance

 There are enough laws to deal with this kind of behaviour. The object is to implement and hold to account the abusers.

Also, a public campaign (something which never seems to happen very much in recent times) on camping etiquette would bring high value.

Dave

 climbercool 10 Sep 2020
In reply to facet:

> Person 2 Enjoyed river side camp with a 100 other folk along same river. The party urinated lots by/in river along with a 100 other folk,

Is this a problem though? Urine can lead to eutrophication but I think this is when you are putting farm/town sized quantities of urine into the river everyday?  By asking people to not pee near the river you might just be causing a huge amount of inconveniance  while having a negligible benefit to the environment.  There is only so much people are willing to do and maybe there efforts to be greener are better spent on something other than finding a public toilet to pee in.

I actually no nothing about this so am happy to be told if im totally wrong.

Post edited at 06:54
 climbercool 10 Sep 2020
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

I thought it was a good article that considered many different opinions on the issue, thanks.  This paragraph upset me however. 

Everyone arguing on the internet at least agrees that the hiker who backpacks into the wilderness shouldn't be barred from doing so. But that limits access to people who have traditionally had it – that stereotypical middle-class, able-bodied, white male, who has been able to acquire the gear and experience to backpack into the hills

I feel like you are shoehorning in an anti white middle class male agenda.   It is nonsense to suggest that only males can hike away from the roadside to camp, woman are just as capable of this.  It is nonsense to suggest only the middle class can do this, hiking is one of the most affordable activities i can think of, you dont need expensive gear to walk a few km from the road. As for the race issue it is true that BAME people are underrepresented in the outdoor community and maybe this needs addressing, but as for the BAME people who do go into national parks i cant see why they are less capable of walking away from their cars before camping than anyone else.

4
 profitofdoom 10 Sep 2020
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

The title of the article makes me sad. I don't see any "delicate balance" at all. Remembering Ogwen and Pen y Pass and Scotland recently makes me see a bursting point coming sooner than we think, for traffic, rubbish, parking, and strain on beautiful places 

Thanks for the article 

1
 Michael Hood 10 Sep 2020
In reply to profitofdoom:

I was in Ogwen yesterday, I arrived just after midday (weather was clearing up 😁) and managed to park in one of the laybys under Tryfan.  Although the laybys and little car parks (didn't see the Idwal Cottage one) were full, there were still possibly 1 or 2 spaces left where a car could squeeze in carefully without obstructing the pavement. (IMO if there's enough room for a wheelchair and/or double buggy to get past without going into the road then you're not obstructing the pavement)

Plenty of vans about, but when arriving, and when leaving at about 6pm, I only passed 1 or 2 vehicles where I thought "is that parked ok", none where I could definitely say "that is parked badly enough to deserve a ticket/towing away".

Plenty of traffic cones and "towing away" signs, they seem to have done their job.

Obviously, we've left summer, it was mid-week and the schools are back so there would be less people about. So for now, I think the problems (in Snowdonia at least) either have or will subside. The real issue is going to be next year. Will it get as bad as this summer? What can be done beforehand to stop the problems developing? Can we avoid measures that are too draconian?

 facet 10 Sep 2020
In reply to profitofdoom:

I totally agree with you! I was trying to be more positive than I felt even if my post doesn't come across that way!

I moved to the Highlands 5 years ago. Even 2 years ago it was amazing related to the balance of people vs space and attitude. 

Until this year I didn't think that I was 'a problem', now even though I work up here so contribute both within my role, and also paying tax etc am I part of the problem?

It terrifies me how many people I encounter, at work or out of work who 'are moving to the Highlands', mainly retired English folk, or holiday homers/AIRBNB. I have no right to grumble about this really as I moved up from England, but it really worries me as even though it's much bigger than the Lake District, you can see it heading that way with a property boom, house prices going up out pricing locals. 

Maybe I have gone off topic... 

1
 peterp 10 Sep 2020
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

I thought this was a really good piece pulling together lots of the issues in a coherent and informative way in one place. It still reaches the same conclusion as other similar pieces (and most comments) we have had on the subject already, on UKC and other platforms - i.e. more carrot / nudge (education) with continued use of existing stick albeit with more funding for 'boots on the ground' (rangers, police issuing parking fines etc), who can hopefully fulfil the education role as well.

2
 neilh 10 Sep 2020
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Let hope they sort out Covid soon as I am sure most of the issues will vanish when people can travel overseas easily agian.

 ScraggyGoat 10 Sep 2020
In reply to climbercool:

Yep the author doesn't appear to have much grasp of recent history:

But that limits access to people who have traditionally had it

In the case of Glen Etive and elsewhere lower income Central Belt inhabitants have traditionally taken access for decades (some responsibly, some not).  A wide spectrum of Central belt and particularly Glasgow demographics have accessed the hills again for decades, and commonly with Glaswegian friendliness chat to everyone, and you notice often their hill parties are far more diverse in composition.

There is also the implication that being shouted at for being somewhere even when acting responsibly is something new....its not!

It also infers that proposed restrictions are a new assault on access, when they are just a continuation of it.   Perthshire land-owners and residents in particular (but also elsewhere) have been quietly gating off and locking them, putting up fencing, bouldering verges, closing off possible parking and putting up discouraging signs again for decades, they only briefly paused when the Land Reform Act came out.  Now they have realised the Scottish Government is not going to do anything, including the SNP, and the Councils access forums are weak, the Councils are broke (courtesy of the SNP centralisation of power mania) and won't mount legal challenges its full-steam ahead.  I can think of many Perthshire Glens (and elsewhere) where land-owners have correctly realised that the key to keeping people 'off thier land', is to prevent them parking.  But its also getting more brazen I know couple of locations where there are now even are signs saying access is private, to public roads (but carefully worded; commonly along the lines of 'Private Farm', yes the farm is private but the road is not).

What has changed is farther North and West where the community blame-all-bogeyman used to be the laird, its now tourists/motorhomers.  There is an insidious attitude creeping in that if you're not visibly contributing you should be discouraged from visiting, or paying gets preference...............which is very myopic as if it comes to cash is king, Highland residents will find they are out competed. For example Business will argue that if they can operate from a car-park they will provide more economic gain, and the car park will be lost to everyone (which has already happened in some parts of Scotland).

But the Outdoor industry has to take a huge share of the blame, authors, websites such as this, blogs, twitter feeds, shops, magazines, guides, holiday firms have all constantly promoted the Highlands without any consideration or introspective thought as to the consequences of engendering mass participation.

2
 facet 10 Sep 2020
In reply to ScraggyGoat:

Interesting comments - totally agree. Saddened to see some local carefully worded 'keep out' signs on the Black Isle since Covid has arrived.

Your last paragraph is so true, constant 'push' and promotion of look how amazing this is, you can all do this... is frankly helping create the perfect sh*t storm along with Covid

 Rob Parsons 10 Sep 2020
In reply to ScraggyGoat:

> But the Outdoor industry has to take a huge share of the blame, authors, websites such as this, blogs, twitter feeds, shops, magazines, guides, holiday firms have all constantly promoted the Highlands without any consideration or introspective thought as to the consequences of engendering mass participation.

Don't let the Highland Council, VisitScotland, etc., off the hook, for bullshit like the 'North Coast 500.' It's all part of the same issue.

 ScraggyGoat 10 Sep 2020
In reply to facet:

If you are Black Isle based, if you get the chance or know anyone whom might, I was up Mullardoch after lockdown, the estates have gated, chained and locked the public highway accessing the public car park at the South end of the dam at the Loch a Bhana bridge at NH 228 314.  I found no evidence for the road and car park being de-adopted on Highland Councils website.  I was/am going to report, but many weeks have now passed so it would be good confirm if that is still the case, and get other complaints registered.

 ScraggyGoat 10 Sep 2020
In reply to Rob Parsons:

agreed

 nathanheywood 10 Sep 2020
In reply to Rob Parsons:

100% agree. 

Although Scraggy Goat may have a, small, point that's relevant re: marketing to aspiration but it's true that only a small proportion features Scotland specifically; the 'outdoor industry' didn't think up Visit Scotland et al nor the NC500, neither did they relentlessly promote those 'come to Scotland and spend cash' messages on various media platforms.

Yes, we see a lobby of largely white, largely male, largely middle class landowning NIMBYs kicking off about how the oiks are spoiling 'their ciuntryside' but we hear little complaint from their neighbours that are members of the National Association of Now Very Much More Full Tearooms and B&Bs nor the Scottish Society of Motorhomes Rental Agents to name but two fictional entities that have benefited nicely from the 'onslaught'.

In every respect simple logic applies: if you entreat many people to come, more people come; if you close the car parks, visitors park elsewhere as they have no choice; if you close the loos, people toilet in the nearest least visible spot; if you meet 'wrongdoers' (in your opinion) with aggression and threat, you will receive the same in return, nobody will learn anything positive and future actions will remain largely unchanged.

Yes covid is a problem. Yes it has been difficult for everyone. And yes people should work together to enact positive solutions.

But complaining, banning stuff, and setting-up self-serving whining Facebook groups bitching about a common, faceless, enemy for your compatriots to further enjoin in your own virtue-signaling echo chamber, is not the way forward and serves nobody well. Least of all the mental health of the complainant.

2
 bbbben 10 Sep 2020
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

An important article and an important debate. Covid has probably only accelerated the need to get top of these issues with an ever growing and more mobile population.

I don't agree with monetizing the countryside or our freedoms - as long as we behave. 

Bad behaviour should have consequences, whether in the form of fines, encouragement to do the right thing or simply being moved on.

Bad behaviour is not new. It's just a lot more concentrated at the moment. It also needs defining. 

Bad behaviour may also not be obvious. Is it ok to stop at my favourite spot when I turn up and find it really busy here already? Probably not. I think this is one a lot of people are struggling with right now. eg I plan to do what I always do, but when I turn up it's way busier than ever before but I just carry on regardless. 

What constitutes good/ bad behaviour needs to be shared - education - and enforced.

It may need new ways to manage people visiting the countryside. How else do you simply stop an influx? The countryside is precious and it doesn't have an infinite capacity. As I type this I can see the link to the regulation row over Mont Blanc - but at least regulation is on the table there.

It's not just about visits to the countryside either - my local council is currently consulting on which parts of green belt may be ok to build on to cater for a growing population, which in turn puts even more pressure on the remaining green space. Unfortunately, "which parts of the countryside can be sacrificed" is higher up the agenda than "how do we protect what's left of it."

1
 Willem 10 Sep 2020
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Hopefully next year we won't have the lockdown madness and things will return to normal when this sort of thing is only seen on Bank Holidays.

Surely the solution is a simple one though, education through advertising (Like they did in Texas) funded by enforcement of parking fines and littering fines? Are the people who are lobbying for paid access also lobbying for increased numbers of rangers?  

If Scotland restricts access English and Welsh national parks will have to follow suit immediately or face being overrun, the Lake District especially.

Littering and anti-social behaviour is a national problem. I live on the South Coast of England and the beaches here were consistently left in a disgraceful way during those few weeks when lockdown eased.  Well before these COVID-19 related issued McDonalds and KFC wrappers have be found all around the land, throw out of car windows. If that's socially acceptable can we really be surprised that these same folk are leaving their rubbish behind at their campsites?

 Rad 10 Sep 2020

I volunteer in climbing access and stewardship work in the Pacific Northwest of the US. Balancing user access and impacts with natural resource conservation is a perennial topic of discussion, headaches, and education. 

Personally, I believe that if we want people to protect wild places with tax dollars, public policies, volunteering, or other modes then we need them to care about those wild places. The best way for people to care about them is for them to experience their beauty first hand. That comes with a cost, as the photos clearly illustrate, but I think those costs can be mitigated to a pretty high degree by clean up efforts, education campaigns, and intelligent design of resources (e.g. trails for every ability level). 

IMHO we need to keep the big picture in mind. I worry far less about some trash and urine from a few bad campers than about politicians bowing to business interests so they can cut down an entire forest for timber, open a new mine, pave wetlands for housing developments, dump industrial or agricultural waste into the environment, or otherwise destroy the environment.  And of course there is climate change. If we don't take care of the big things there won't be any wild places to protect.

Finally, I am thankful that in the US we have the Wilderness Act to protect a portion of public lands. The poetic definition of wilderness is actually written into the law: "A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain." - Howard Zahniser"

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Very good balanced article. The US has its own problems, but river access in Colorado is not one of them. 

"Last-minute, affordable climbing trips would become as logistically difficult as last-minute river trips in my home state of Colorado. There you can't run a river without obtaining a permit, months, if not years, in advance"

Strange statement, as there is only one section of river in the whole state of Colorado (In Dino NP) that requires permits. Otherwise river access is infinitely easier than in the UK.

Also, as you rightly say, a National Park day pass can be $25. However an annual pass for all 2000 parks is $80 and can have 2 users - so $40 basically for a family - less than one trip to Macdonalds.

 AukWalk 10 Sep 2020
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Article covers an interesting range of things, even if it does promote this  modern view that middle class white men are the only people who benefit from existing access arrangements. 

I liked the quote from Davie Black, very diplomatic! 

"I spoke to Davie Black, the access officer for Mountaineering Scotland, and he observed that restrictions on foreign travel and gyms being closed have brought many "new users" out to the countryside. "They may not know how to comport themselves in a rural environment," he said. "

However the article does focus a lot of the official / goverent response to things, but as ScraggyGoat touches on, a lot of the things I worry about changing might be on the very local level or private property level. If verges are blocked off, car parking areas closed, inconvenient fences erected, and threatening signs pit up (which could all happen at the very local level with only council and property owner's involvement) the effect could actually be a lot more significant overall than any legislative changes.

Locals and landowners unhappy with increased visitor volumes (and an increased proportion of visitors who don't care about established rules and guidelines on how to treat the outdoors) can make things very difficult / unpleasant for visitors if they want to.

I hope some of the positive actions suggested in the article are taken, but I do worry that especially with the negative media attention focussed in outdoor activities recently we might be heading in the direction of more restrictions. 

Is an interesting time for reflection about 'promoting' the outdoors too, now we've seen what can happen when the number of visitors increases rapidly without an associated increase in capacity and without an associated increase in awareness of the countryside code etc. 

Post edited at 22:36
1
 george sewell 11 Sep 2020
In reply to AukWalk:

"Locals and landowners unhappy with increased visitor volumes (and an increased proportion of visitors who don't care about established rules and guidelines on how to treat the outdoors) can make things very difficult / unpleasant for visitors if they want to."

yes and also makes things verry dificalt / unplesent for other locals... as a local in the lakes  ( having grown up in Cumbria in both the dales and the lakes an not just a southerner who has moved here)  the actions of irrisposible tourists and especially van campers ignoring no overnight parking rules etc is leading to the closure and or pay and desplay-ification of previously free parking that we use to use for activities after work etc... including free parking for biking in whinlatter and grizedail to name a couple of places.... if tourists are going to come here the need more education , but allso possibly we need to look at ways to allow locals to enjoy their own local area without being priced our of everything from parking through to housing. passes for free parking for locals in NP car park

southerners buying second homes turning dales vilages in to ghost towns , people moving in to an area forcing up house prices but allso changinf the nature of rural comunities as they want to idealise them (e.g complaining that farms smell or that the local haulage firm that has parked its trucjk in the village for 30 years is now spoiling your veiw is mental its the country its a working environment) 

and then compounded by irresponsible visitors leading to loss of easy access to parking etc etc 

basically we need some large changes in the way people are educated , but allso changes in the ways local authorities and land owners cope with the new influxes of people. these are national parks not theme parks, they have people living in them , and if we visit (as i do to scotland etc) we must be sensitive to those communities as they have to live with consequences such as restrictions to their local crags for more that just the weekend that you are here .... 

2
In reply to george sewell:

Agreed. Here in Boulder County (outside of town) the car parks are free for residents. Tourists pay. Seems reasonable and uncontroversial. And of course, is very common in Switzerland, Italy etc.

Post edited at 15:56
 Chewie65 11 Sep 2020
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Following a trip to the Lakes in July and seeing the number of vans ‘wild camping’ in Devon and Cornwall over the summer, it saddens me (as a van owner) that we will all be tarred with the same brush. 
 

In Scotland the NC 500 hasn’t helped itself, and I for one will give it a miss. 

we can only hope that once Covid means people can go back to their foreign holiday it will reduce the issue. mentality of some people has just gone stupid with Covid - probably the Party animals that normally go to Ibiza (I’m stereotyping 🤣) 


however, campsite fees have been going through the roof across the U.K. other than the odd farmers field. But even they’ve been getting trashed in some places.

 AukWalk 11 Sep 2020
In reply to george sewell:

I see where you're coming from re incomers changing communities etc, and how measures designed to be unfriendly to visitors also impact locals but I have to disagree about preferential treatment of 'locals' (where vs that - 10 miles away? Within national park boundary? Same county?) vs 'tourists'. Why do you have any more right to enjoy the lakes than I do as a visitor?  Especially as exceptions for locals would probably remove any resistance to further making life difficult for visitors who want to enjoy the national park. 

The lakes is a wonderful place, that's why so many people want to live there and visit it. Just because someone can't afford to live there or it isn't practical to live there shouldn't mean they're less welcome or have to pay more.

If locals find restrictions or high car parking prices unacceptable, then maybe that's a sign that they shouldn't be accepted by visitors either.

Post edited at 18:46
2
 Tringa 12 Sep 2020
In reply to AukWalk:

An interesting article. In the long term I agree education is necessary(anyone remember the Keep Britain Tidy campaigns of the late 50s and early 60s) but this is going to take a long time.

Although I find it difficult to imagine you would need to tell anyone it isn't acceptable to shit in a lay-by. 

In the short term do those of us who stop overnight in lay-bys or otherwise 'camp' by the road side, but who do not

park overnight close to houses,

block field entrances,

camp on ancient monuments,

cut branches from trees for a fire,

leave litter, and

crap wherever we like

need to give up some of our freedoms to help to solve the littering problem, which I think and as mentioned in the article is the real issue.

The part of the NW Highlands I know well is stiff with campervans/motorhomes now but the numbers would not be major problem(assuming all understood how to drive on single track roads) if litter and human waste were not left behind when they leave.

Should overnight parking in lay-bys and other pull-ins be banned, even if temporary or for specific periods? I realise it this would be controversial and really I wouldn't like to see it happen, but would it, in the short term, help with the problem even though it would be difficult to enforce.

There are a few things in the article that I don't think are helpful. The caption under the photo of overflowing bins -

"If the bins aren't emptied often enough, is it any wonder they're overflowing?"

I think that encourages some to leave rubbish by the bin.  My view is if a bin is full then you don't put your bag of waste next to it, you take it with you until you find another bin that can take the rubbish.

I thought one of the comments from a spokesperson for Highland Council was interesting -

"We want to ensure that everyone coming to the Highlands has a positive and welcoming experience."

Does that include those who abuse the outdoors too? Along with the excellent rights anyone visiting Scotland has, come the responsibilities to treat the environment and its residents with consideration and I don't see why anyone who does not accept the responsibilities should have a positive experience.

I'm also not sure about the development of Aires. While I can see their usefulness - toilet and waste disposal facilities  - they would need to be sited very carefully. If you lived at the edge of a village would you want an aire over the back wall? However, anything would help needs to be looked at, though I think some would not want to pay anything for their stay and still pull up by the roadside.

However, its a good article that helps the discussion.

Dave

 facet 12 Sep 2020
In reply to Tringa:

They are planning an Aire near me, they have just pulled the planning application just now as it had zero consideration for the folk in the village such as myself who will be over looked by it! I think that they will tweak it and resubmit. I think it may be a good idea, and I'm not against it if it is screened from our village (noise and visually), which surely isn't too much to ask. I'm just not sure how many folk will use it. The planning application suggested quite a high price for a nights square of concrete next to a busy main road. It's just really clear that the Highland council have no idea what they are doing with it, and clearly there's no joined up thinking on a whole area approach. 

 payney1973 13 Sep 2020
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

This subject breaks me, litter has always broken me. However I do think the way this is being reported on recently would have one think that it is a relatively new phenomenon. Sure the scale has escalated but in completing the WHW in 2017 I was shocked at the levels of trash around Loch Lomond anywhere within a mile to vehicle access. 

Post edited at 19:26
 martianb 13 Sep 2020
In reply to David Wynne:

A public campaign would probably be a good start. My mate was involved in making this educational wild camping ettiquette video

youtube.com/watch?v=9Xs3BGk4NTU&

It's how to get it to the correct target audience to educate people as opposed to UKCers etc who already have some knowledge. 

 grectangle 06 Oct 2020
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

I've just returned from my yearly trip north to walk and climb, 4 weeks in the van and several multiday walks. I stopped going abroad 5 years ago and this is my time "away". Plus there is nowhere else I'd rather be, midges and rain included.

I noticed a huge increase in vans, motorhomes, caravans, supercars, etc, and the pressure on the roadside was apparent. I feel genuinely sorry for the people and communities who have to live with that. I'm from St Ives Cornwall, and while we live and breath tourism, it does come with annoyances. At almost every pull off the bins were overflowing and tissue and wet wipes were strewn around the undergrowth. There is an issue here to deal with, but I also think it will quiet down if/when things get back to normal.

The hills by contrast were neither more nor less crowded. I was out every single day and didn't notice a marked difference.

Given this, I do not think the right to roam should be called into question, or is the root of the problem. I think the opposite is true: access to nature is the only way for us to engage meaningfully with it. All of us on here value and respect the outdoors, the problem is a wider societal disconnect with nature and an understanding of how to comport oneself in a responsible, conscientious way. We all learned or were taught this at some point, and therefore so can others.

The roadside issues do need some thinking about. A campervan/motorhome/wild camping permit issued at a reasonable price £10 -£20 along with a Do's and Dont's brochure, could be a step forward. I'd happily pay it if I knew it was used to relieve the pressure on councils and educate people a bit.

The solution is definitely NOT to exclude people from the very thing to which we would like them to be more aware and respectful.

Anyway, after such a terrible year, being able to get out again in the hills amongst what is really real, was a huge boost to my mental well being, and everyone else I met out there seemed lifted up as well.

Post edited at 11:58

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...