Posted by Mike Dennis on December 14, 2004 at 07:48:28 from 81.79.236.49 user MTD.
In Reply to: Re: Land access posted by Peter H on December 13, 2004 at 21:50:57:
I'm agreement Peter. The 'field' is just an example, even mountains, becks etc etc are usually owned by somebody. Of course people should have access to parts of the countryside that are clearly not in use for farming etc., but not based on an assumption that it is a common heratige and we are all free do to what we like with it. I have followed in the press the arguments between walkers and trail bike users - both using the land as they would like to but annoying the hell out of each other in the process! Similar arguments go on between other groups, so what then for a 'right to roam', or is it only on foot? Is it just a reworking of the argument of some motorists who don't (or can't) understand why we have speed limits, and would like to drive on all residential roads at 50 or 60 mph and motorways at 100+?