I understand well the need to control anti-social behaviour on the East side of Loch Lomond. There have been many instances of groups causing huge problems, felling trees and leaving litter in this area.

What has not been mentioned in this article was that this was a well behaved and responsible group of local 6th year pupils on their high school graduation day. This was not one of the wilder groups that have caused so much damage. Call it a success if you like but I think the "potential for disorder and litter" was minimal with this particular group. They were all just having some harmless fun before going their own ways. I understand the rangers and police were polite and friendly and there was full co-operation from the youths.

The true test will come when the real problem groups return in the summer - will there be the same resolve to relieve them of their drink and move them on?

Poor regulation by recent governments has allowed the drinks industry to grow a huge market in under-age and antisocial drinkers. They have helped children develop a taste for alcoholic drinks at an earlier age through sweet-tasting alcopops and other clever marketing tricks. Heavy, harmful and nuisance drinking are now deeply ingrained in our culture and routinely glamourised through the media and advertising. The social cost of this industry is huge as urban neighbourhoods become increasingly undesirable places to live leading to an increase in commuting with its associated impacts on the environment and on family life and finances. The impact has extended to the countryside where at popular campsites a peaceful night can now be hard to find.
The agencies of the state seldom act against the interests of powerful business owners but whilst the decay they cause in urban neighbourhoods across the land gets only an ineffectual response, when wealthy country landowners start to get affected that is a different matter and the state is all too willing to respond to calls for restraint on individual freedoms and traditional rights in such circumstances. Before we too willingly accede to such demands we should think of who is really to blame for these problems and remember the importance of defending the freedoms of ordinary people, even if we do not habitually make use of them ourselves.

Thank god I stay up north!!!

To Mr Townsend- you may be right that this group of young people was not one of the typical antisocial groups that gather on the shores of Loch Lomond leaving burned rubbish, excrement and chopping down trees. I don't know I wasn't there. Its a shame that so many problems have occurred on the shores of Loch Lomond that the place has been spoiled for responsible campers whose access will now be restricted.

However, I can't imagine any circumstances when a group of 40 drinkers camped on the shore of a scottish loch is likely to cause no environmental damage or nusciance. It is not what I would call responsible camping. The access code is clear on the rights of "responsible access":
"Access rights extend to wild camping. This type of camping is lightweight, done in small numbers"

A more responsible way for the group to gather would be at a campsite, bunkhouse etc- ie somewhere where there would be facilities. There are plenty of campsites that have group fields for noisy groups.

The group in question were not camping - they came to Loch Lomond for a beach party during the day before attending their high school graduation ceremony in the evening.

As far as I am aware, they all conducted themselves responsibly, many bringing bin bags to ensure that no litter was left behind. Most of this group live locally and have grown up with Loch Lomond as a favourite place, not somewhere to be trashed. The toilet facilities in Balmaha were within easy walking distance, as was the car park, so the location for this gathering was ideal.

The tone of the press release and the police actions have effectively criminalised a harmless grouping of youths. This was very much a social gathering, not "antisocial behaviour". This would be without a doubt an easy target for the police but I don't think it is fair to give it this publicity with talk of "crackdown on rowdy behaviour" and that is why I am responding.

To L Gibbons- I agree with Mr. Townsend. I was one of the students on that beach that day, and I- like many of the others were not drinking. This article implies that we were loud and disruptive, when realistically just about every walker that passed us stopped for a friendly chat.
Saying that the police had to 'seize' the alcohol is quite laughable if you were there. Only two police officers approached us and both were joking with us- one even saying he'd be enjoying his next day off with the drinks confiscated. So it is quite hilarious that the article states that 'Police and rangers from the Loch Lomond and Trossachs national park swooped'.
I understand the need for the police to stop underage drinkers- that is perfectly reasonable. But what the article doesn't say is that many of the drinkers were 18 years of age, and totally entitled to have a cold one on the beach- they even checked this with a ranger first.
There was no anti-social behaviour by anyone on that beach on Monday, absolutely every scrap of rubbish was tidied up and removed before we left, and no damage was caused to the surrounding area.
The reason we gathered on that beach was not to get drunk and cause a riot, it is a tradition of our school that leavers, on their last day, visit the beach and enjoy each others company and the weather.
There was no 'rowdy behaviour' to crackdown on. The only issue was a select few who were drinking underage. Although I realise the seriousness of this offence, it is unreasonable to label the whole group as troublemakers, when this is simply not the case.

As another student who was there that day, I completely agree with the previous comment. The fact that a mature, responsible group of students graduating from High School are villified for enjoying a day on the beach is just another example to the majority being punished for the actions for the minority.

We had brought bin bags, were polite and helpful to those passing and had nothing but respect for the police who, upon asking for alcohol that was in plain sight, were dutifully handed even unopened bottles from bags - which pupils obviously did not have to declare.

I feel it is important to recognise that we enjoyed our day, but did it respectfully of the beautiful national park, other people enjoying it and indeed the authorities.

I'm head boy of the school where these pupils came from. And am not happy with the constant labelling of teenagers with alcohol. This was a celebration of leaving high school, which many teenagers do across the country at this time of year. The continuing assumption that as teenagers we're obviously out to get really drunk, take drugs, and stab people is a source of great anger and only serves to patronise us and anger people our age further. I don't mind police and rangers taking action, if they have genuine proof that we're doing something wrong or innapropriate on these beaches. However the only accusation I've seen in this whole article is that it apparently undoubtadely stopped what could be further disruption in the day. It's great that rangers have the power to see into the future, and have prevented the vandalisation of loch lomond, but maby you'd like to give young people a chance before ruining everyones fun. I as there, I don't drink, many of us don't actually drink; yet this article wreaks of the assumption of that we were going to wreck the beach, get really drunk, and commit crimes later in the day. This asumption only serves to anger teenagers including myself, and whilst we went out there wit hthe best of intentions, with bags ready to clean up our mess, to enjoy our graduation day and enjopy the beautiful scenery of loch lomond, you wrecked it for everyone, and we are certainly discouraged at going back.

A point to note: the Lomond Park rangers visited the school the week prior to this "incident", to discuss the event planned and the pupils' responsibilities. The event was known about in advance and the rules were agreed between rangers and pupils. The alcohol was rightly confiscated according to these rules.

However the reporting of this event has been blown out of all proportion. These young adults adhered to all the other rules, and left the beach as they found it.

Typical .Always attack the easy targets.I hope they will be as eager when summer and the buckfast brigade arrive.

Agreed. Also, to L Gibbons - schooled!

Good. The place is bloody mess. I couldn't care less if people had bags and bins. It's a national park and it's now an embarrassment.

Besides, I don't care if people did have bins and bags. Nobody can tell me that 40 youths with alcohol are all going to tidy up after themselves. They won't. A few drinks and then it's 'Who cares'. It's also 40 people that will inevitably have to urinate/defecate outside.

I've organised and DJ'd enough parties, raves and outdoor gigs to know what goes on so don't try and tell me I don't know what I'm talking about.

Drinking should be banned on Lomond. End of.

this type of thing is killing such a stunning area of nature its sadly happening on lots of lochs and is not what decent ppl with families out for a nice day want to see why not go somewhere less public for *** sake

Andy Macfarlane; You obviously don't know what you're talking about. If you had read what the people who were there actually wrote you'll have seen that they did in fact tidy up after themselves and there was no mess whatsoever.

Just because people who come to your parties are like doesn't mean that everyone is like that. This was a group of responsible young adults who treated the area the same as anyone else would have. Try going down on a Summer's day when families are there with small children and you'll see more of a mess than was left after the BHS pupils were there.

Users intending to post comments should note paragraph 4 of grough's terms and conditions.

Bob Smith
Editor

Andy MacFarlane: I understand your concern and you are free to express your opinion. However, it would be a good idea not to be so ignorant.

I am the Head Girl of the school which the youths in question attend and I was there that day.
The alcohol being confiscated is entirely understandable- do not think I disagree with the action taken by police. But, as previously commented, may of us were not drinking.

This comment concerns the state the beach was left in.

Despite your clear refusal to believe it, the beach was left exactly as we found it.
I can assure you this IS the case, despite your willingness to believe otherwise. All rubbish was collected in bin bags and we drove every bag to the dump that evening.

I know that you have asked us not to tell you that you don't know what you are talking about, but if you want us to respect this you shouldn't make it so blindingly obvious that you don't have a clue.

The rangers actually contacted the school's rector after the event to applaud the way the students had behaved.

As far as your assumption that we defecated on the beach, I'm afraid you are again mistaken. There are public toilets a short distance from the beach we were on- and we used those. We may be teenagers- but we're not animals.

"Nobody can tell me that 40 youths with alcohol are all going to tidy up after themselves."- Well I've tried. Hopefully you now understand the facts of the situation.

To Andy McFarlane: Your totally wrong, and know nothing about the situation we were in. It's completely unfair to labler these teenagers, as Holly said, you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Your just another adult who has assumed the worst of teenagers, which encourages the type of labelling teenagers have had to suffer for from people like you for years. I don't mind you commenting if you actually knew what you were talking about. But you don't. You've completely misread the situation and misrepresented us.

Excellent to see some of the Daily Mail Brigade: Ramblers Division firmly put in their place by some eloquent writing from those involved. Nice one.