SCPL Online NonFiction Book Club discussion

The theme of this book is John’s and his companion’s ramble across England’s vast countryside taking the Macmillian Way, a 300-mile coast-to-coast journey through various towns and villages. For some great shots of Macmillian Way views, check out this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a8d_...

Cherrington refers to the Countryside and Rights of Way Act (CROW) in 2000 in his introduction, which gives walkers to the right through properties both public and private. This “right to roam” allows the general public to walk in certain areas of the English and Welsh countryside: principally downland, moorland, heathland and coastal land, without compensation for landowners.

Despite its growing popularity, not all landowners are very happy about the CROW Act, Madonna and Nicholas van Hoogstraten being two prominent members of the opposition. What do you think about the CROW act? Do you think groups who pushed for this law are, both figuratively and literally, overstepping the boundaries of privacy?

Let me know your thoughts!
~Marcella~

I experienced this issue a little bit when I was in Hawaii. A very popular tourist book came out called Maui Revealed, it gave tourists the information to get to some of the islands most hidden treasures. Which were usually amazing hiking trails, beaches, waterfalls ... the problem like this trail was that many of the spots required walking across the back of someone's property or field to get to them and while landowners there had no problem with locals using the paths tourists was a whole other issue. It created a very unfriendly environment for tourists who meant no harm and were just trying to explore the islands natural beauty.

I think the CROW act is a good balance, since it is mainly on uncultivated land and does not include any economic exploitation or disruptive activities, the landowners are still protected and the public can still access nature and historical sites. I do not think it is overstepping privacy boundaries but I can also see how some landowners would feel that way, especially if it is on cultivated land.

I love the video link it looks like a beautiful area to hike.

Valerie

Hi Valerie,

Thank you for your insight into this! I did some research on the book you mentioned and wow, is there ever a lot of controversy about it! Entire websites, in fact! It seems as thought the author of Maui Revealed wrote about these hidden natural treasures with the ideology of "freedom to roam" without it being legally mandated.

I agree that the CROW act is a good balance. As you read further in the book, however, you'll discover that "freedom to roam" doesn't necessarily mean "safe to roam"! Just to give you a little teaser :)
~Marcella~

When I was in England, we went for a walk following the trail in the official map of the town. It took us through a farmers field with sheep and while we were suprised it really allowed us to see the countryside. So I guess I am for it, especially when it is possible to walk so many places there.

I agree - I'm for it too, as long as it doesn't infringe on people's personal privacy. There's a little side story later on in the book when John speaks to a woman who says that the trail used to go past their dining room window and walkers used to stop and watch the home owners eat their breakfast. What did the homeowners do? They donated a piece of land so that the trail could go on an alternate route further away from their house! I thought that was a really impressive response on their part.

Although not walking through property we walked in Holland a fair bit and the houses where right up against the side walks. In the town where my sister in law lives people don't shutter their windows with drapes like we do and you could see right into the houses easily.
We have become a society that does not want people to see into our spaces, or walk on our lawns.
I understand this somewhat as growing up on our farm we roamed pretty freely. Nice ours did too. You walked threw others fields to get to the creek to skate.
Now however people tend to take advantage of it. Snowmobiling across the fields with out permission and doing damage, camping kids making fires on the property, people helping them selves to fruit without permission or payment. These are all real things that have happened to my parents. Many instances of people just feeling like it is their right to do what they want. The neighbourhood and knowing who people are personally has changed from my dads time to now.
I love the trails like the ones we walked in Britian or even our own Bruce trail. We have to realize and teach our kids and others it is not a right but a privelige to be able to keep using these types of trails and paths.
I also think the fear of being sued as property owners makes a difference.

I really like the point you make here Jo - about it being a privilege to hike down a trail or walk on a path. The "right" to do something sounds somewhat demanding and denotes a sense of entitlement to one party - instead of sharing it between two.

Sticking to a path and respecting the land and other people's property is so important so that many can continue to enjoy the "privilege" of using nature trails etc.

Many of the things you mentioned about people using other people's property without permission have happened to my family as well: snowmobiling down our walking path, quading through ripening fields, taking bags of onions and carrots from my dad's fields (they won't notice if we just take a few! Look how many there are!) and people leaving their trash in our forest. Rather rude in my opinion! It's about respecting others and it is possible to be respectful while embracing the "right to roam" as John Cherrington proves in his book!