Two decades ago the Scottish Parliament legislated for the right to roam. What it did was formalise that which had long been practised in the Highlands and other wild areas, and long been believed in by ‘wild walkers’. Responsible access, with a respect from land custodians for the public’s desires to enjoy the wilds, and the public’s respect for the use of the land for economic ends or conservation of special sites.
But was it needed?
I Had always enjoyed a wander, free from parental interference. I loved exploring and soon I loved using maps. I grew up looking over a loch towards what seemed far off and massive mountains, those which mark where the greatness of the Highlands first rise in the west. So taking to the hills became a natural challenge. I think it lies in very many of us, getting to the top, a sense of acheivement, often of awe.
The hills seemed wild and untamed. Locally though we were very used to resrtictions on access, and also used to either working with those physical limitations, or circumventing them. Our area had both the Faslane base and the Greenfields army training camp. The former had high fences and some peripheral areas fenced off, while Greenfields operated a red flag set up for training and by in large avoided weekends I believe.
Later on we would hear things about stalking and restrictions on walking which kind of irked us, but we actually found ourselves by in large visiting national trust hills, or hills were there was no signage about the stalking season. While clubs like local ramblers asscociations or the Glasgow Uni club probably paid attention to stalking activities and spoke to keepers or estate managers, most everyone just took off. Conflicts arose of course because red deer will be hearded away by human traffic, but you could say that they are equally driven by ‘grass is greener’ grazing. They are fickle and it is impossible to own a heard in a cost effective way over such large, wild land areas.
The 1990s
So that was the 1980s. Scotland had few public rights of way, and we just had a sort of democratic demand for the right of way to mountain tops! But into the 1990s we began to see a more aggressive narrative from some land owners. There was more barbed wire. There were a few more No Parking signs. And then there were big signs about no access due to continual stalking activities which appeared to the east of the Cruachan range. I cant remember if this was refering to the stalking season alone, but they were large ugly signs. Unwelcome., Go home. Many chose the northerly approach with a big but beautiful walk in. Locally we saw famers diversifying into, or selling land to new wild fowl shooting concerns and blocking access.
The Unstoppable Force Meets the Immovable Object
So there were two opposing forces at work and it came to a head in a kind of test case , ramblers assoc vs Vlissingen, the Letterewe estate accord. I think had there not been movement to reach agreement then there would have been an inevitable rise in the exlcusion of the public from land areas by a new generation of land owners who had less understanding for the old status quo.
What was the old status quo? Well it meant that some land owners avoided stalking activities on weekends for example, while walkers respected signage and local advice. There were of course conflicts and irate ghillies or managers confronting ‘right to roam’ believers or those with zero respect for land custoidanship.
I can think of only a couple of occaisions where I was confronted and both of those were on land local to the central belt, and drove shooting so were keen to enforce a certain privacy for their economic activity. Two of those times though I was on tracks which had been used in one case for a decade, and in the other in antiquity as a drover’s road.
As the Mountaineering Council and to an extent the Ramblers said, prior to events such as the Letterewe restriction in the 1990s, the issues of access-denial were not in the highlands and true wild areas, but rather in the rural areas around populated areas, from the outskirts of the cities to access even around villages. In principle then we see conflict between two concentrations, economic activity usually farming, and the population and demand to get out from near your doorstep.
It’s the Economy, Stupid….
There were two main, driving economic forces behind the the debate as it arose in the 1990s.
Estates, especially newly founded shooting oriented business models, wanted more revenue and to offer paying guests a garuanteed ‘bag’ of grouse or head of deer. Much of this fraternity or customer base rely on repeat business, and word of mouth to market their offering. What this desire for growth entailed for land managers was concentrating wild life by fencing in areas, and of course killing predators and even species like hare…the ‘vermin’ as old school keepers and lackey’s would call them.
On the demand- side of things from the public perspective, the 1980s saw a big message from the health authorities to go out an get fit. To avoid disease due to inactivity and gain the mentail health benefits of exercise. As in the 1950s, there was a resurgance in people taking to the hills and wild places. Bringing money, and other impact on the rural areas with them. Munro bagging was the in thing, as indeed it seems to be again with an upswing in social media driving ambition and ‘achievment bragging’ plus of course ‘purchase comfort’ with selfies a-top said 3,000ft plus hills. Even the leader of the opposition, the late John Smith took up with the sport.
So here we had the need for compromise between interests which are by nature somewhat diametrically opposed. On the one hand a new generation of owners, often foreign, who did not understand why estates should not be wholly private, or with at best micro managed public access. On the other hand, the ‘Scarpa booted bolsheviks’ who demanded freedom to roam, and even rights of way to every mountian top. The key word in this debate then being ‘responsible’ access. The compromise seems to be mostly on the land owner’s side, who have their ‘economic activity’ as a bit of a foot note to otherwise a free for all……..with the other big wins for the access camp being, er camping…and access for other non motorised methods by land, air and water.
Where Are We Today?
On the plus sides , country walking is worth more than a billion in revenue to Scotlsh highlands according to several estimates. This is big business for small businesses and three times the figure of £350 million the Scottish Game Keepers association publicise themselves. Some small businesses in the highland base themselves on wild experience, while others have an important boost to revenue particularly on a year round basis in the popular mountain areas.
In an over simplified comparison between “huntin’, shootin’, fishin’ ” and access to the wilds for visitors, there is a larger market arriving and the concentration of footfall is denser. A deer stallking estate has only so many parties out on the hill in the course of a week, each being a handful of guests. Stalking red deer on open ground is still a very expensive outing and an exclusive ‘1850’ tweeded experience.
Both have then co existed within the legislation for 20 years now. Once again though there is uneasyness on both sides.
Dirty Camping and Wild Fencing
From the land owner and local authority perspective, the one down side of freedom for all is that some people just do not have the respect to act responsibly. I think it is a bit euphenistic to say they lack a little education on responsible access, they are littering, destroying trees, churning up illicit parking spots and bringing music systems to peaceful glens where noise travels far! Such a big problem that the Lomond national park and local land owners have pushed for bylaws prohibiting camping. However there is a difference between wild campers and those chucking a tent out the back of a car and making a fire with the nearest tree and a can of petrol. That being said I have seen Shenaval bothy stuffed with litter under it’s eaves and other signs of post wild camp littering. Even bothies with fairly long walk ins are subject to drunken parties, over use of fuels, and vandalism spoiling for the majority . By in large though, wild campers have a good respect for nature.
Wild fencing though, what is that about? Well here we are back to estates wanting to “manage’ wild resources by coralling them into destinct areas. Previously deer fencing was by in large to keep them OUT, where this is to the reverse. Also there have been fencing of land to exclude public access, using the right to use ‘economic activity’ within the legislation, or so they believe. So we now see long deer fences at high altitude in the Cairngorms, which are unsightly and also outright dangerous for hillwalkers who find themselves in need to descend by the quickest possible route. The Ramblers and Scottish Mountaineering Council rattle sabres here, but it is for the time being quite limited. Also in all the cases i know of, the land owners try to manage access , to corall the visiting public and keep them on the fringe of the hunting or flocks grazing glens and corries. This is kind of in the letter of the law , sort of a compromise, but it isnt really in the spirit of what the public want.
The Motor Vehicle Issue
On mentioning the coralling of walkers and other users on wild land we come upon a real area of conflict in public parks, and munro bagging being a victim of its’ own success. Parking.
When I started walking there seemed to always be a lay-by or wide forrest road access junction to park at. Sometimes you would park in a village at the church hall. Other times you would end up in a non signed parking place, which may have been intended for lorry use or what ever. Sometimes you would see a no parking sign, make a judgement on you causing any harm, and park there in disregard. Only in the most popular areas at high season was there a lot of irreponsible parking. Here i mean blocking access to forrest roads completely, parking half on half off roads, using passing places to park, and the idiotic parking on one lane of a public road.
The latter has become increasingly prevalent I understand from a far. B ut the worse problem is Dirty Parking you could say. People driving onto the verge or surrounding land. Often with heavy four by fours. This leads to unsightly quagmyres but is just very disrpectful and fully illegal.
The point being here that right of access does not extend to motorised vehicles. This has then become something land owners are using to limit or further corall the public, and to a large extent I fully agree that where there is pressure on parking and an opportunity to have a win win on route choice for the land owner to steer folk away from grazing corries for example, or a grouse moor, then this is acceptable. When they then close these or start to charge for them, then there is renewed conflict. I think a friendly,” please contribute to the construction and unkeep of this responsuible parking area” is what is needed and a better revenue model than sending a ghillie up to put notes on windsreens and pursue fines in the courts. Local councils are cashing in on this too, with the Cobbler parking being a money machine for Argyle and Bute. It would be interesting to see what they put back into the hillside and roads, but they are strapped for cash with an ageing population.
To The Future, a Law At Peace With Public And Capital?
There is a sense of unease amongst the community of pro access. The new super rich, are also super arrogant. This may seem like a trite statment. But it is in a context of the gray area of the law so to speak. That the law allows for privacy and the restriction on interference of legitimate economic activity on wild land. Being a little vague here, the legislation has been tested but in fact it looks like the Ramblers are staying clear of litigation, as a collective plaintiff, due to one or more expensive failures in court. Lawyers can bamboozle or worse, set a new precedent for the interpreation of the law which then Land Custodians use to restrict access to wild areas and essentailly curtail some routes.
On the plus side, public rights of way have been established over a stated 22,000km in Scotland now. They were never a big deal, versus England and Wales, becasue there was the old status quo and less pressure on wild areas, or even over farms in the central belt. Now they are secured.
But what else do we need to secure? What issues Remain Unresolved Or Challenging for the Legislation in Practice?
We heve no right to parking as being the major example of an obvious source for conflict, frustration and irresponsilibtility. In the always on line age thought , a number plate is usually a quick way for owners, the police and councils or concerned by passers to set in motion a warning or fine for offenders.
We can be limited in our access by forrestry works, shooting or special conservation interests in straategic areas. Here is a case in hand, that geography and specifically topography have a lot to say. Many hills are fringed by communities and cultivated or graised private land. Road access naturally follows this for walkers. I have mentioned one estate from the 1990s with ‘ Get Orff My Land” in twenty foot high signage, and there is another in central scotland now who have tried to curtail access especially in the stalking season. In both cases a longer walk in from the north avoided their boundaries with roads and could drive deer into their glens if that hill-walker-hearding is to be believed.
Test and Review The Law Work
We need then there to be further test cases where restrictions due to economic activity are challenged or established. This can then be assessed as to changes in the law which address new or enlarged conflict, and secure a new legal footing for responsible permission to access I would say. .
However we get back to the auld wisdom of the status quo. A slight grudging respect for each other’s needs. You could be asked in no uncertain terms to leave the land, by the fastest route (have perhaps a memory of one such wee contra temps where we carried on as it was shorter to summit then descend a diffrerent route in practice from that point) Currently there are stalking advice telephone lines and web information for example. But owners could well start to swing their weight and fence off areas denying access carte blanche. Then we may be looking for more secured rights of way to mountain tops such that owners cant implicitally deny access. However that is a stick to beat ourselves with because a land owner can manage parking, signage and most of all fencing to restrict access to a single ‘tourist path’ and have a stronger legal footing in their area of ‘economic activity’ to prosecute.
Fencing off in very wild areas with few crossing styles is not very desirable from both a ‘wild beauty’ and access with safety on the hills in being able to retreat, an aspect here. I believe the use of more of this and more coralling onto paths which may not be suited due to wet bogland, wil lead to less respect for land managers, and the active vandalism of fencing.
On the other extreme, I would see that the active prosecution of dirty campers and others who abuse the right to access, acting irresponsibly in littering, disturbing hunting parties, generally breaches of the peace related to ‘bevvying’ and aggression, is something very important. The ubiquity of mobile phones with cameras will help with this aim, and education as how to make an anonymous submission, or to use your material as evidence and stand witness being good. The ranger service in Loch Lomond and Trossachs national park were at their whits end with dirty campers, although they encountered mostly ignorance and not aggression luckily in their encounters with dirty campers.
We see that Scotland is a bit polarised on phsyical health. There is ‘body image’ pressure driving fitness fanatiicism on the one hand, versus defiance of health advice fish suppers for lunch brigade. An ageing population means more leisure hours per capita but does that mean more wild access? We come back to the need for local access around habitation as a big issue which is actually very much being addressed by local authorities and some very welcom private land owner collaborations.
Will we see a rise , or are we at ‘peak munro bagging’ ?
I understand that since I emmigrated, there has been an explosion in Munro bagging and this has lead to paths appearing on all the munros within easy reach of the central belt, and on many more remote hills where once there were no real paths, just some soil creepage points to catch out the poor of navigation into thinking they should follow a bare patch. These mountain paths need unfortunetly management because permanent use of the route leads to perpetual damage and with more rainfall recorded in some areas, greater errosiion and greater water saturation of underlying flat secstions. Bogs and scars. Like Ben Lomond was.
Path repair and managment in itself is a noble aim, but it does then corall people into a single route, with a single parking area on outset. Hopefully where there is need for alternative path routes or on the popular routes, there can be signed access from public transport stops and stations.
About the Author’s Experience
I began hill walking with a jaunt up Ben Lomond on of all things, a birthday party outing for my earlier BFF, Eric Dixon. Think it was 1979. I can’t say I was in any way fit or prepared enough for the tour, and was dragged up, being a hefty and unsporty kid. However at the top, there were patches of snow and the north face was decked in snow, with some kick-in footprints of an ice climber. We rolled easter eggs. Eric’s brithdays had been outdoors affairs, Glen Fruin and the Drover’s Road above Helensburgh featuring. This one though was monumental.
So I joined the Hill Walking Club, Mr.Urqhuart being the leader and my registration teacher making it an easier way in for me and my new best pal Ian. Hill walking prooved tough for me, I think I had some issues with muscles in my body as I was always a tail ender. We did Ben Venue and we did the hill to the west of Ben Na Lochain.
I think we re ascended Ben Lomond before maybe taking on various hills like the Cobbler. My first serisou ascent was Ben Lawyers, main peak, in a blizzard, guided by Peter Nicol my Scout Leader. That gave me the bug for winter walking, and summer cycling.
Munros became a big thing then, but very often the same munro many times, such as Vane, Narnian, Nevis, and of course Ben Lomond the diamond of a mountain which really inspires many to this day, and was my first encoutner with the high top experience…and the frustration of many fals tops while ascending in welllies and as a no very fit chubby kid.
I went on to count over 70 completed ascents, mostly in the southern and western highlands with a few of those, what prove to be ionce in a life time, wild camping tours to the likes of Glen Affric and the Fisherfield ‘Forrest’ . I had plans of completing all then 273 tops, but emmigration curtailed that. Stil in my last year in Scotland, I did manage about ten new tops.
I could be up at least half way by now, but the thing is that I like a sociable walk often, the weather was often fickle of course, I am a bad morning lark, I like to lead other people up hills so they feel safe and that they accomplish something in good hands, and there is the easthetics of doing a great day out on say a Corbett, or a snow covered munro you have been up twice before.
keithlmelvin 