travellers

[wyk]

And there's a bit of video now:

 

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12190151

[tree-fancier123]

4 hours ago, westphalian said:

A viscous circle of behaviour due to being excluded from general society and ensuring they always are

[Khriss]

... a big fail on many Range Rovers n Triumph cars I might add. K

[billpierce]

Which commons would those be?  Most commons with public access are are covered by the law of property act, latterly others by CRoW, both of which  say ban vehicles.

Aye, honestly dont know much about it all tbh. Wasnt referring to common land owned my individuals, more spaces like village greens, verges and other little nooks which over the years have been either claimed by private individuals ( enclosures act, and adverse possession.) or become council owned.

Anyways by many accounts spaces where people can camp up have largely disappeared, so not a huge surprise that village greens are often used. I should add that many greens would have been commonly owed ( I think? Now council) and would have traditionally been used for grazing, and drovers.

Anyways, think we all agree, no ones likes a mess or anti social behaviour. I just like travelling and camping ( hate campsites) and would live there to be more spots where it's ok to do that ( like Germany, parts of Scotland, free camping is encouraged.)

[westphalian]

I love wild camping, especially in a bivvy. I’m a out of sight out of mind camper, no one would know I’d been there. Was pleased when Scotland made it “legal”. Was soon pissed off though when my favourite spots were all of a sudden filled with shit, bog roll and cans of Tenant ale

[eggsarascal]

We really don't help ourselves when it comes to travellers, Appleby aside. councils know that most travellers will be on the move from spring through autumn and will need somewhere to pull, so what did 'we' do, shut the camps down and sold off the land. What was a biggish camp in Bury-st-Eds is now the police holding centre or whatever they call it, guess what..... When the travellers turn up now they set up camp wherever they can with no facilities. I'm not excusing thieving, or any other antisocial behaviour but if they haven't got official sites to use where do we think they will go?

[openspaceman]

7 minutes ago, billpierce said:

 Wasnt referring to common land owned my individuals, more spaces like village greens, verges and other little nooks which over the years have been either claimed by private individuals ( enclosures act, and adverse possession.) or become council owned.

 

It's a subject most people don't pay attention to  but it's fundamental to English public areas, all land is owned and the public have rights over some of it. Landowners often try and remove this right and under current government we are about to lose access to some old paths. For the purposed of our current topic ; common land was often used by itinerant agricultural workers and families. The one where I lived had regular seasonal visits by travellers as there was a "sweet water" spring, (which has since been contaminated by invasive pond plants and general rubbish) and when they left there was no mess. The men worked on local horticultural holdings and the women sold pegs and white heather as late as the 60s. It was unlawful then to camp on the common (law of property act and local bye-laws) but they were tolerated. The common was open. Then in the 70s groups of Irish tinkers appeared en masse and made a complete mess which cost the charity who owned the land tens of thousands of pounds, so ditches where dug, changing the character of the open space.

 

The thing is there is no point having laws if you do not intend to enforce them and the police do not wish to enforce them . The problem is this abuse then becomes an excuse to remove public rights.

7 minutes ago, billpierce said:

Anyways by many accounts spaces where people can camp up have largely disappeared, so not a huge surprise that village greens are often used. I should add that many greens would have been commonly owed ( I think? Now council) and would have traditionally been used for grazing, and drovers.

 Common land was manorial land that  either fell out of use by agriculture or  was never part of an agricultural field system, over time locals made use of it for fuel, grazing or even surface mining, Over a period they gained the right to do this as the land owner had not prevented them. So this right (under the ancient laws of prescription) belonged to local householders, not Tom Dick or Harry.

 

By victorian times these rights had become general and the open spaces act made certain of these areas open to the public. Later in 1925 commons in urban areas were also made open to the public. However certain commons should have been registered in 1965 but many councils who had inherited them failed to register them and twenty years later closed them to the public, many were subsequently developed.

7 minutes ago, billpierce said:

Anyways, think we all agree, no ones likes a mess or anti social behaviour. I just like travelling and camping ( hate campsites) and would live there to be more spots where it's ok to do that ( like Germany, parts of Scotland, free camping is encouraged.)

Yes Scotland has different laws and so does Eire but they have much lower population densities and that is reflected in being able to tolerate such things.

 

Lest you think I have any racial bias against travellers I could post a picture of my wife's grandmother that surprised me as she appeared to be from a white middle class family , father a self made businessman and pillar of the tory council and apart from his tan and curly black hair who would have known...

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

28 minutes ago, westphalian said:

Was soon pissed off though when my favourite spots were all of a sudden filled with shit, bog roll and cans of Tenant ale

Bloody SNP conference! 

 

They’re a menace to decent society..... ?

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

It's not so much the provision of temporary sites that troubles me - fair do's - it's the cost of establishing them.  Now that is entirely down to the wasteful squanderlust of LA's when it comes to public money - example:

 

Extract from link below. "...Work is due to begin this week on the second phase of Cornwall’s first transit stopping site for Gypsies and Travellers at South Treviddo near Liskeard.

Pitches will be provided to accommodate up to 15 caravans at any one time. The transit site can be used for stays of up to three months in a year..."

 

https://www.cornwall.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/council-news-room/media-releases/news-from-2018/news-from-december-2018/work-begins-on-planned-extension-of-emergency-stopping-place-for-gypsies-and-travellers/

 

The extension to allow up to 15 caravans is costed at £1.75 million!  Bit of ground works, some foul services, bit of tarmac.  How in the hell is that £1.75 million well spent tax payers money?

 

By all means provide the land but why not allow those that wish to use it to build it themselves at a time when the LA is supposedly so hard up for cash?

 

This is by no means a criticism of the 'need' to provide safe and reasonable spaces as a responsibility of a caring society, it is however a wide eyed incredulous disbelief at the amount of money this LA is prepared to pay for something that by all reasonable measure should be a fraction of that cost. 

 

(and just for balance, it's not a view that is applied to 1 particular social group, I also believe the LA should be providing the land for private first time homeowners to self build.  The so called affordable housing schemes associated with developer led housing is a total misnomer and is a system that is failing many)

[westphalian]

There is a 10 acre field 2km from my house which opens up for them spring til autumn with toilets and rubbish collections. I do hear though of other areas not being so amenable