Wild camping, such as this one in Coire Gabhail, Glen Coe, is permitted under Scots law. Photo: Bob Smith/grough
Organisers of a controversial scheme to monetise wild camping in two national parks have backtracked after widespread opposition from the outdoors community.
UK Wild Camp said it was suspending its service after it admitted it had ‘kicked over a hornet’s nest’.
The company running the scheme proposed charging campers £20 to ‘book’ a place in the countryside to pitch their tents, with half the fee going to the owner; a quarter to the national park and a quarter to UK Wild Camp.
The project had a high-profile launch at the Houses of Parliament last week, involving the Lake District and South Downs National Park Authorities. Lake District chief executive Richard Leafe figures large on photographs posted on the ukwildcamp.org Twitter page.
But the announcement caused an eruption of anger and concern among many in the outdoors world for whom wild camping – which involves pitching a tent usually on high ground for a short stay, away from valley facilities – is an integral part of their activities.
The South Downs authority said on social media its involvement went as far as identifying potential sites, but that the scheme was a private pilot scheme. It said it had pointed the company in the direction of five locations along the South Downs Way.
UK Wild Camp erroneously stated on its website that wild camping is illegal in the UK. The Land Reform Act (Scotland) 2003 gives the public the legal right to wild camp in accordance with the Scottish Outdoor Access Code. Wild camping is also legally allowed for up to two nights on access land in Dartmoor apart from 18 listed commons.
Wild camping is also tolerated, though strictly speaking unlawful, on upland parts of the Lake District owned by the National Trust and the national park authority.
Lake District boss Richard Leafe was at the scheme's launch. Photo: Bob Smith/grough
Wild camping is also tolerated in many mountain areas of England and Wales. For candidates undertaking the Mountain Leader Award, it is a necessity to have undertaken at least four wild camps before being assessed, and the assessment itself involves a two-night expedition.
On Monday, UK Wild Camp posted an announcement on its website. It said: “We have had more than 3,000 expressions of support from landowners and would-be campers, wanting to try a night in the wild.
“We believe there is a real demand for a service like ours, and we’d still love to launch a scheme that brings more people into the wild, without disrupting those that are there already.
“The £20 fee (per pitch, not per person) was intended to incentivise landowners to participate. Part of what we were trying to establish in the pilot was the correct price, but wherever we ended up, half it would go to the owner of the land, 25 per cent to the national parks and the rest to run the platform.
“Set against that support, and as one of you put it, we seem to have inadvertently kicked over a hornet’s nest among the existing wild camping community.
“We’re wild campers too and thought the idea of campaigning to remove the current restrictions would be welcome. We also thought that running a booking scheme for entry-level wild campers, one that would provide them with the security and legitimacy that currently causes them concerns about camping wild, would be understood and welcome by the wider group.
“We now see this is not the case.”
“With this is mind, we are going to suspend our service and have a re-think about how we might revise it. We won’t describe any future version of our service as ‘wild camping’ because for many of you that specifically means free and unplanned camping. Nor are we likely to stray into a debate around relaxing the laws on wild camping, because we now understand this is a highly charged area.
“We’ll continue to respond to all who are in touch and, as we rethink our plans, we will be back in contact to consult about how this service might evolve in the future.
“It’s also worth reminding readers that this is a private initiative rather than one initiated by [the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs] or any of the national parks.
“We approached them, and they were good enough to encourage us in our pilot. Defra also provided a small amount of seed funding. All complaints to us please, rather than them.”
Tompion Platt, Ramblers director of policy and advocacy, said: “We were disappointed not to have heard about this before the launch and have had a chance to shape these proposals and make them work for all walkers but glad to see that UK Wild Camp are are rethinking the proposals.
“Wild camping is one of the many ways that walkers, and others, can enjoy the countryside. When done responsibly, leaving no trace in the countryside, it can be a great and spontaneous way for people to connect to nature.
“Wild camping is not part of the open access right under the Countryside and Right of Way Act 2000 in England and Wales. That means, on access land, you need to ask the landowner’s permission – unlike in Scotland, where responsible informal camping is normally allowed, under the Land Reform Act 2003.
“We are interested in looking at new ways of opening up the countryside but this needs to be for everyone. That means it is important that people are not priced out of access to the countryside by a new charge.”
The British Mountaineering Council said it too had not been informed of the scheme and its access and conservation officer is looking into the matter.
It was an honour to celebrate the launch of this pilot at the House of Commons last week in the presence of MPS, wild camping enthusiasts and friends. We are campaigning to change legalisation and this pilot will help us prove the case. Find out more at https://t.co/rHpeWQlQHs pic.twitter.com/ns9PuDrWcw
— ukwildcamp.org (@ukwildcamp_org) May 31, 2019
Paul
03 June 2019Just another thing that can be cashed in on , the whole beauty of wild camping is setting off away from the crowds and having a part of the mountain to yourself overnight , sometimes not knowing exactly where you’ll drop the tent but just finding a perfect spot a couple of hours before the sun goes down . And let’s have it right if people pay £20 for it in another five years it’ll be £30 and so on , don’t know why they can’t leave things alone , can’t see anybody paying for it and really is anybody going to roam the fells at 3am to turf folk off who haven’t got a permit , I’m actually laughing to myself as I imagine having the conversation with somebody who’s just knocked on my tent , err got a permit there lad , err no ....... night !
Dave Mycroft
03 June 2019The "public backlash" didn't just happen out of nothing. MyOutdoors highlighted the issues, filed Freedom of Information requests with Defra and the NPs involved, researched who runs the compant, researched where the funding was coming from, questioned the National Parks about their involvement etc supported by TGO's digital Editor and Chris Townsend with commentary on TGO. Yes it was common sense but it took a lot of work to get UK Wild Camp and their backers to see it.
John C Greves
03 June 2019So many words to say "Hands up we got it wrong" .... CRoW 2000 also bans "Mechanically Vehicles" which technically includes Access to the Countryside for Disabled User's mobility vehicles without Landowner's Consent .... In England Published Maps and Guides are strangely unhelpful.
Mike V
03 June 2019As the article rightly says: - "“Wild camping is not part of the open access right under the Countryside and Right of Way Act 2000 in England and Wales. That means, on access land, you need to ask the landowner’s permission – unlike in Scotland, where responsible informal camping is normally allowed, under the Land Reform Act 2003".
Surely then, to put an end to such ill conceived, (and frankly nothing other than vaguely disguised money making schemes), once and for all - is it not time for everyone in England and Wales who cares about the true spirit of responsible wild camping - (not least of all, by all those membership based organisations who promote outdoor activities such as walking and climbing), to campaign just as vociferously for legislation which is at the very least, equal to that of Scotland.
TH
03 June 2019Another crazy ill-thoughtout scheme with Richard Leafe's grubby hands all over it.
Thirlmere zipwire and Whinlatter gondolas, the LDNP has lost the plot and is not fit for purpose.
terry kitching
03 June 2019you can wild camp in towns, it is called being homeless.
Colin
03 June 2019I may be breaking the law when I wild camp in England but charging £20 for something you can do for free is criminal.
Lee Barton
03 June 2019A similar scheme is already up and running with almost a 1000 members and 67 locations, it's aim is not to replace wild camping but to offer an alternative with permission from landowners (for a small fee). Setup as a member owned co-operative club it offers a solution between commercial campsites and true wild camping: www.nearlywildcamping.org
More information here: https://nearlywildcamping.org/clearing-up-some-of-the-confusion-about-wild-camping-and-an-update/
Sheepy
03 June 2019So, according to them it's illegal but if you pay £20 it will still be illegal but allowed?
That makes absolute sense.........Not!
Unless of course you change the law to make wild camping legal and then you've no need to pay any money to anybody.
In my view no one owns the high hills and mountains, they belong to everybody. Enjoy them, respect them and look after them.
R Webb
04 June 2019It’s not a criminal offence in England, unlike some parts of Scotland (hangs head in shame).
TravellingLight
04 June 2019Dave Mycroft, could someone please share the details of just who was responsible for this ill conceived, money making scheme. The individuals and organisations concerned should be widely identified so that we can protect ourselves and our National Parks from these parasitic types, perhaps even boycotting whatever schemes they currently have underway. I am most disappointed that any park authority would have even entertained this notion, they appear to be just as complicit as those who wish to (excessively) profit from our desire for wildcamping. It's about time people were held to account by the public.
Roger Taylor
04 June 2019Although this proposal obviously has its flaws, I do think it's a step in the right direction for legalised/accepted wild camping in England & Wales. Okay so it doesn't tick my boxes for wild camping and I probably wouldn't use it but if some people are happy to "wild" camp and it gets good press from that then to me that's a big positive. People make money from would be free things all the time so no issue there. For people who are getting into it, haven't done it before or don't know where to go I think it's a good scheme. Run it alongside campaigns to open up the national parks to proper wild camping and it's onto a winner. Scotland's Land Reform act has a massive flaw in that there are still people who abuse it and leave rubbish and big obvious fire pits, I saw 5 on a 100m stretch of Loch Awe's shore recently, something I very rarely see in the Lake District. Food for thought.
Kevin
04 June 2019This country is disgusting all they can think about is charging the tax payer for everything are we tax payers not even allowed to enjoy our free time activities with out someone looking to make something from it.
Night-on-the-Tops
04 June 2019And the prize for plonker of the week goes to #Roger Taylor.
He wrote "For people who are getting into it, haven't done it before or don't know where to go I think it's a good scheme. Run it alongside campaigns to open up the national parks to proper wild camping and it's onto a winner."
What absolute rubbish.
Colleen Eccles
07 June 2019As a family who have always cherished visiting the Lake District due to its unique a d protected natural heritage I am becoming increasingly concerned about decisions made by the National Park's most senior leadership. Enterprise at what long-term cost??
Gilbert Roberts
08 June 2019Surely Richard Leafe should have resigned by now
In The Ravine
11 June 2019TH: "LDNPA has lost the plot" No. The Dear Leader is reading a different novel.
"..... and is not fit for purpose." No, again. His Lieutenant, Steven Ratcliffe, Head of Sustainable Development, asserts that "we have to do this" (at the time, speaking of the Whinlatter Gondola project, but in effect of all commercial development) because "the government has told us to grow the GDP of the park". So, you see: it's the government that's to blame.
Leafe would defend his support of this by saying that it would bring income to the landowners. And so LDNPA can be seen to be on the side of local people, bringing income to hard-pressed farmers, whilst growing the GDP of the Park.
Of Gilbert Roberts comment "Surely Richard Leafe should have resigned by now." How charitable of you. He appears to treat the Park as his personal fiefdom. When challenged, he denies collusion with big business, while promoting a succession of fantastical projects to justify his organisation's existence. Already too long in post (now into his 12th year, Ratcliffe his 15th), his leadership over such issues as zip-wires and gondolas and commercial expansion lead most people, residents and visitors alike, to want him sacked. Instead, having had over 3200 objections to the gondola, he's applied for an award for engaging the public in decision making!
Ian Edwards
12 June 2019The lunatics are not all in the asylum,!
Perhaps a mass wild camp like the mass trespass would get the message across.
"We're wild campers too" they say.... Get lost!