Trespassing: why do people do it?!

[Maesfen]

Did you know that 50% of the uk is owned by 0.01% of the population ? Why should people who live in towns, many of them with no chance of ever owning anything other than a garden be restricted from often huge tracts of land which pass down the generations ?

There sounds a child of labour demanding their 'rights'.

What gives them the right to think they can walk over someone else's property which hasn't a ROW over it? They wouldn't be happy about us walking over their little patch so kindly have the decency to stay off unmarked property; it does belong to someone who has probably worked very hard, possibly for generations on that land. It is not your right. If they want to go anywhere, get off their fat backsides to work and buy property themselves, nobody's stopping them doing that but don't think you can take control or have rights over something which doesn't belong to you..

 

[fburton]

it does belong to someone who has probably worked very hard, possibly for generations on that land. It is not your right. If they want to go anywhere, get off their fat backsides to work and buy property themselves, nobody's stopping them doing that but don't think you can take control or have rights over something which doesn't belong to you..

And sometimes people own land not through hard work but through descent from others who appropriated it, often forcibly, centuries ago. This is particularly the case in Scotland.

"Land in Britain is more unequally distributed than in Brazil: there 1% of the population owns 49% of the land; here 0.3% per cent owns 69%.

Britain’s biggest landowner, the Duke of Buccleuch and Queensberry, owns 277,000 acres because he descends from a man who seized vast swathes of Scotland. Far from being taxed, he is rewarded with huge handouts from the Common Agricultural Policy.

What’s more, the value of land increases each year not through landowners’ striving, but that of others. As economic activity in London has soared through the ingenuity and toil of the masses of people who have flocked there, the value of the 300 acres of fields—now known as Mayfair and Belgravia—passed down to successive Dukes of Westminster over three centuries has sky-rocketed to an estimated £6.5 billion."

(From: http://www.philippelegrain.com/tax-land-not-labour/)

Churchill had it right when he said:

"Land monopoly is not the only monopoly, but it is by far the greatest of monopolies -- it is a perpetual monopoly, and it is the mother of all other forms of monopoly.
...

Land, which is a necessity of human existence, which is the original source of all wealth, which is strictly limited in extent, which is fixed in geographical position -- land, I say, differs from all other forms of property, and the immemorial customs of nearly every modern state have placed the tenure, transfer, and obligations of land in a wholly different category from other classes of property.

Nothing is more amusing than to watch the efforts of land monopolists to claim that other forms of property and increment are similar in all respects to land and the unearned increment on land.
...

The greater the population around the land, the greater the injury the public has sustained by its protracted denial. And, the more inconvenience caused to everybody; the more serious the loss in economic strength and activity -- the larger will be the profit of the landlord when the sale is finally accomplished.
...

I hope you will understand that, when I speak of the land monopolist, I am dealing more with the process than with the individual land owner who, in most cases, is a worthy person utterly unconscious of the character of the methods by which he is enriched. I have no wish to hold any class up to public disapprobation. I do not think that the man who makes money by unearned increment in land is morally worse than anyone else who gathers his profit where he finds it in this hard world under the law and according to common usage. It is not the individual I attack; it is the system. It is not the man who is bad; it is the law which is bad. It is not the man who is blameworthy for doing what the law allows and what other men do; it is the State which would be blameworthy if it were not to endeavor to reform the law and correct the practice."

 

[case895]

Abolishing the right to pass property to descendants basically makes us the property of the State, ie slaves. If that were the case, I would get off my deathbed to plough salt in to my fields to kill them, burn the house down and empty my bank accounts to have a cash bonfire.

 

[fburton]

Abolishing the right to pass property to descendants basically makes us the property of the State, ie slaves.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that - I certainly am not!

 

[Maesfen]

And sometimes people own land not through hard work but through descent from others who appropriated it, often forcibly, centuries ago. This is particularly the case in Scotland.

Are you really saying that you wouldn't accept or profit from land if it was passed down to you by a family member on their death because of the views you've quoted here?

 

[*hic*]

across it for a reason. Pheasants being reared, the land being fragile and if it gets churned up the harvesting machines struggle... Etc, etc. It's not because people are going "mine, allll mine" but because people churning it up or scaring the birds can be really damaging to livelihoods.

I have this insane urge to walk round my fields shouting "mine, alll mine" now

 

[ozpoz]

I agree with Bonny about attitudes being different in Scotland. I find there is respect on both sides of the fence - everyone does know everyone else, so that ensures polite behaviour all round.
"Freedom of the hills" is a right much loved by many Scots, landowners or not.

The only people who leave dangerous litter in my fields are people shooting, who think it's ok to leave spent cartridges.
But, as they keep the local economy going,I simply pick up after they've gone.

The flytipping mentality in England, and the overcrowding, is probably the main cause of friction.

 

[Nohorse]

It does seem to work in Scotland. And there aren't mass groups of people chucking rubbish everywhere or injuring animals. There is a countryside code that is roughly adhered to as far as any law/code is adhered to.

I don't think it prevents the farmers/landowners from making a living.

 

[case895]

I don't think anyone is suggesting that - I certainly am not!

You were arguing that land should not be inherited. The logical converse is that is appropriated by the State.

 

[pip6]

When at a livery yard where the field was bordered by a footpath there was no end of dogwalkers & kids upsetting the horses by playing frisbee of ball games then wondering what to do when the horses started charging about.

At another yard where the only footpath was 1/4 mile from the mares field, a jogger thought it would be fun to go 'off-track'. We witnessed him going into the top of the field, then running full pelt down it & hurdling fence at the bottom....with my playful youngster iin hot pursuit & closing fast Never saw him again. Funnily enough he knew his way back to the footpath without assistance.

At another yard field was bordered by some newly built houses. These all had decent wooden fencing put up at the end of their gardens. Most felt the need to cut a hole in this fencing & install a gate, so they could picnic & play football in the fields to which they believed (despite numerous reminders) they had legal access for their recreational use. Also used field as dumping ground for their grass clippings & walking their dogs. Easily remedied by putting up several strands of electric (with requisite warnng signs) connected to very strong source, that packed very decent punch (though still legal). After few belts trying to get under / over (goes for dogs as well as humans), they decided it wasn't enhancing their picnic experience. A few continued with clippings (even dropped polite notices round houses explaining dangers to horses), one who persisted was threatened with legal action should any animal be affected. Stopped that one. Ways & means. If I could afford land I'd never want other people to have free access without consulting me first, guess I'll stick to England.

Horse now 16 but still very playful & fast if you need an unwanted visitor deterrant (& hates dogs with a passion as she has been attacked by 2 whilst I've been riding her).

 

[EmmasMummy]

It does seem to work in Scotland. And there aren't mass groups of people chucking rubbish everywhere or injuring animals. There is a countryside code that is roughly adhered to as far as any law/code is adhered to.

I don't think it prevents the farmers/landowners from making a living.

Only provided you don't get some jumped up new money pillock who buys an estate and then padlocks all the gates and purposefully tried to intimidate his horsey neighbours ----------by putting up next to a livery yard a big flag and a bright yellow box. Sighted right from the school so it can flap nicely.
Has been approached by the council time and time again but just re padlocks the gates.

And he bought it AFTER the Access Code came into effect so knew full well what his obligations were....

 

[Nohorse]

Yeah there is a bit of that I'll grant you Emmasmummy! Some of the access laws are yet to filter into the consciousness of some landowners.

On the plus side...good despooking practice?!

 

[RunToEarth]

Land prices in Scotland are on average 50% less than land prices in England - you can pick up decent arable land there for as little as £4k an acre.

That, along with the British rural Idyll of having a lovely estate in the Highlands is why it attracts idiots. The access laws in Scotland do have an impact on land values.

 

[Clodagh]

Walkers with dogs off of leads putting birds up, knocking crops about and crapping everywhere.
.

Is that the walkers crapping everywhere!? We have two field gateways onto the lane past our house and they are used like public loos, and not just wee. Disgusting. Bonny would say we deserved it!

 

[bonny]

Is that the walkers crapping everywhere!? We have two field gateways onto the lane past our house and they are used like public loos, and not just wee. Disgusting. Bonny would say we deserved it!

Would I ?

 

[RunToEarth]

Is that the walkers crapping everywhere!? We have two field gateways onto the lane past our house and they are used like public loos, and not just wee. Disgusting. Bonny would say we deserved it!

I was meaning dogga - I didn't realise actual human beings shat on other people's land - imagine picking that out of your horse's hooves, or it flicking up into your face after a good canter

 

[Goldenstar]

Don

Is that the walkers crapping everywhere!? We have two field gateways onto the lane past our house and they are used like public loos, and not just wee. Disgusting. Bonny would say we deserved it!

no , unless you acquired the land by violence several centuries ago I think it would be fair to say you don't deserve it.

 

[case895]

Don

no , unless you acquired the land by violence several centuries ago I think it would be fair to say you don't deserve it.

How old are they?

 

[Goldenstar]

How old are they?

Not the current owners the ancestors of the current owners ( referring to fburtons post)

 

[wench]

My ancestors were members of the Scottish Royal Family. Maybe I should lay claim to the lot...

 

[EmmasMummy]

I was meaning dogga - I didn't realise actual human beings shat on other people's land - imagine picking that out of your horse's hooves, or it flicking up into your face after a good canter

Ha, you would think not but I HAVE caught someone crimping one out in the woods one day...........at least they were embarassed, but, Seriously...........ewwwwwww.

 

[Clodagh]

Would I ?

Well we inherited the land and even worse you can see the old tithe marks in one field, called Little Common, so it was seized from the peasants at some point. Not by Uncle Charlie though, he only bought it in 1935.

 

[Clodagh]

How old are they?

Well we are in our 40s and as for the pooey peeps I have no idea, they can drive though as they park their cars up while they do it. Bleurgh!

 

[Goldenstar]

Well we are in our 40s and as for the pooey peeps I have no idea, they can drive though as they park their cars up while they do it. Bleurgh!

What !!! Right to roam is one thing but that's another.
How ever they may be dispossessed pheasants exercising an ancient right of their forefathers.

 

[Como]

Ahhh, all property is theft isn't it?! Don't forget it is 'our' money that is being paid to landowners for maintaining those tempting bits of grass verge and field margins. However they are being paid to maintain these wild areas for our flora and fauna to survive and florish not for cloppity ponies big hooves to churn up!

 

[NoCollection]

dispossessed pheasants

Fabulous!!!

 

[Goldenstar]

Fabulous!!!

I have a complete mental block about this, peasants GS write one hundred times peasant man pheasant bird.

 

[fuffy]

I will ride on grass tracks that are used for tractors etc in my area but wouldn't dream of riding on crops! its nice to find different routes to explore..

 

[fuffy]

We are all on this earth for only a short time and land that is 'owned' is only taken care of for that generation...it can never belong so anyone.. you cant take it with you when you go nor move it somewhere else...it belongs to people who should respect these temporary carers and do no damage nor make a pest of themselves...and the carers should respect their fellow man who does no harm..

 

[Clodagh]

I will ride on grass tracks that are used for tractors etc in my area but wouldn't dream of riding on crops! its nice to find different routes to explore..

Well as long as you have permission from the landowner that is fine. I am not allowed to ride on our grass tracks because we can lose our ELS payments and I am married to the landowner!