80th anniversary of the Mass Kinder Trespass

[mark at tlio.org.uk]

I was being tongue-in-cheek, hence the quotations.  However, if TLIO 
announced it as something being done, it wld come across (or cld be 
spun across) as being an "action".

That said, if people turned up without the proper equipment expecting 
it to be just a walk up a hill, that might be a problem.

However, the way you've expressed yourself, it sound like you feel 
that stamping TLIO's name of something you are doing anyway with 
friends is hijacking your own initiative, so don't worry.

I got 2/3rds of the way up 2 years ago, but me and my mate chickened 
out when the wind picked up & heavy cloud came over the top,
M

On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 13:55:13 +0000
  Paul Mobbs <mobbsey at gn.apc.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Here's my take -- feel free to derogate...
> 
> On Sunday 11 Mar 2012 22:20:26 mark at tlio.org.uk wrote:
>> It wld be great to do this as a TLIO "action". What do you think?
> 
>Firstly, I've been camping outdoors on 'open land' (i.e., not formal 
>sites) 
> since I was 13. Why do I need to turn something that I've been 
>'naturally' 
> doing for 30 years into an action to fight for the right to do it? 
>-- seems 
> rather silly to me. And I know of others who've been camping in the 
>hills 
> all their lives too, and they will continue to do so irrespective of 
>what 
> happens to the law on countryside access, squatting, etc.
> 
> Secondly, Kinder Scout. We're talking open moorland somewhere 
>between 
> 1,900ft and 2,075ft high (the name 'Kinder low' is a misnomer -- 
>it's the 
> highest point). It's a good 2 hours walk from the nearest road, 
>climbing 
> about 1,100ft. Lightweight/'wild' camping is therefore the only 
>practical 
> option, and you need to have good equipment -- if a storm gets up 
>the cheap 
> tents you buy for festivals will be chewed up/shredded in a few 
>hours, and 
> cheap butane stoves don't work in the cold (it can snow on Kinder in 
>late 
> April!).
> 
> Who exactly is going to go on such a hike. More importantly, if you 
>try to 
> run it as a conventional 'action', who exactly is going to exert 
>that kind 
> of effort in order to see it? That's the paradox of trying to get 
>legal 
> parity with Scottish law using the Kinder trespass as a working 
>example -- 
> e.g. I can't think of any friendly journos who'd be willing to go 
>that far 
> for a story.
> 
> The way I see it, this isn't an "action" -- it's precisely the 
>opposite. 
> Being able to camp on open land, anywhere, should be seen as normal 
>as 
> going for a walk. It doesn't require a collective 'action' to make 
>it 
> happen; people should just go and do it (see reasons in second point 
> below).
> 
> The reason for going to Kinder Scout, apart from its iconic position 
>in 
> social history, is that the land is owned by the National Trust. The 
> National Trust for Scotland has all it's open land available for 
>camping by 
> the public under the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 -- and the "sky 
>has 
> not fallen" as a result. Why then can't major English landowners, 
>like the 
> National Trust, open up their land too?; irespective of what the law 
> currently states?
> 
> 
>> Def interested in doing this.  Were you thinking of doing this on 
>>Sat
>> April 21st (Queen Liz's birthday?)
> 
> As I see it, what this 'expedition' is all about is exercising our 
>historic 
> rights -- even though England law doesn't recognise those rights as 
>a 
> result of the Norman theft of the land. We're going to do this 
>anyway, as 
> many backpackers routinely do all the time in the Pennines and other 
> places; but Instead of skulking where we can't be seen in hedgerows 
>and 
> quarries, from now on we're openly going to camp in the countryside 
> (there's an analysis of the issues realted to this in the Free Range 
> Network's sheet O1 -- http://www.fraw.org.uk/fwd?o1 ).
> 
> How I see this developing is that we put together something along 
>the lines 
> of a 'Kinder Declaration' to mark the date of the event itself. Free 
>Range, 
> TLIO, and whoever else wants to be involvedsimply draw up a text we 
>can all 
> sign-up to -- and which anyone else can 'subscribe' purely because 
>they 
> agree to it.
> 
> So, the date itself will be marked by the issuing of a declaration; 
>the 
> publication of a guide or handbook for those wanting to camp 
>outdoors which 
> outlines the disparity between the law in England and Scotland; and 
>giving 
> potential campers tips on how to camp outdoors (rather like the 
>'Great 
> Outdoors' sheets developed by the Free Range Network already do).
> 
>From the date we issue the 'declaration', we're basically saying to 
>"the 
> establishment" that irrespective of what you hold the law to be 
>we're going 
> to exercise our ancient rights to reside on open land -- and we 
>invite the 
> public to do so in their favourite locations across England and 
>Wales. Not 
> as a co-ordinated action or event, but just as an when they wish to.
> 
> Whilst Kinder might be an iconic expedition to launch this social 
>meme, we 
> need to encourage others around England and Wales to hold their own 
>actions 
> on open land/woodlands in their own area. So in a decentralised way 
>we 
> recreate the ancient practise of residing outdoors in the 
>countryside -- 
> it's then up to the establishment to either go along with that or 
>find an 
> escuse to defend the right of a minority who own the land to have 
>exclusive 
> right to it (that, after all, is the real issue that will be drawn 
>out as a 
> result of people camping out).
> 
> Thusm, with regard to dates, the date isn't relevant. We issue the 
> declaration on the anniversary, and from that moment on anyone, 
>anywhere 
> can go camping in the countryside in order to uphold the ideas 
>enshrined in 
> the declaration -- be that on Kinder or anywhere else.
> 
> Each local event, and the Kinder expedition, IS NOT AN ACTION. That 
>has to 
> be absolutely clear at the outset. The 'action' is the issuing of 
>the 
> declaration. When people go camping on land that's a 
>social/educational 
> activity -- and as such it's not covered by most of the conventional 
> criminal restrictions on protest. Then all we need do is invite 
>people to 
> post their pictures/experiences online, as a sort of travelog, to 
>celebrate 
> the recreation of our ancient rights.
> 
> 
> So, do you get it? This isn't anything new. It's something that I 
>and many 
> others have been doing for years -- and no amount of 'actions' or 
> 'protests' will change that. All we're doing is formalising this 
>practise 
> by creating a 'declaration' that codifies our ancient rights, and 
>which 
> challenges private rights over open land. Then people just get on 
>with it, 
> and any legal actions/hassle that results from that will form the 
>basis of 
> "action", not the purely social past-time of camping with your 
>friends in 
> the open countryside.
> 
> I know that might sound a bit contrived, but it negotiates around a 
>lot of 
> the current criminal legal hassles over dissent, whilst at the same 
>time 
> focussing on the issue of private rights over a resource that should 
>be 
> held in common by all.
> 
> 
> Comments?
> 
> P.
> 
> -- 
> 
> .
> 
> "We are not for names, nor men, nor titles of Government,
> nor are we for this party nor against the other but we are
> for justice and mercy and truth and peace and true freedom,
> that these may be exalted in our nation, and that goodness,
> righteousness, meekness, temperance, peace and unity with
> God, and with one another, that these things may abound."
> (Edward Burrough, 1659 - from 'Quaker Faith and Practice')
> 
> Paul's book, "Energy Beyond Oil", is out now!
>For details see http://www.fraw.org.uk/mei/ebo/
> 
> Read my 'essay' weblog, "Ecolonomics", at:
> http://www.fraw.org.uk/mei/ecolonomics/
> 
> Paul Mobbs, Mobbs' Environmental Investigations
> 3 Grosvenor Road, Banbury OX16 5HN, England
> tel./fax (+44/0)1295 261864
> email - mobbsey at gn.apc.org
> website - http://www.fraw.org.uk/mei/index.shtml
> public key - http://www.fraw.org.uk/mei/mobbsey-2011.asc
>