![]() |
|
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|||
|
Should everyone have access to the countryside, even when it’s privately owned?
Walking in the countryside is an enjoyable activity but in many countries it is restricted to recognised footpaths and national parks. Many believe that open countryside should be just that; open for all. Britain has recently passed a ‘right to roam’ bill forcing a reclassification of the countryside into open and closed areas. This provokes many questions about what ownership of land actually means. Traditionally land ownership has never been totally free of restrictions. In countries with monarchies all land was originally held at the gift of the monarch and often a legacy of large landowners among the aristocracy can remain. Should this private ownership of land be retained or can its national character be regained? What do you think ??
__________________
|
| Sponsored Links |
|
|||
|
i always keep to the footpaths when i take the kids walking, like ela said i wouldnt want people walking across my garden. i suppose the land owners get annoyed having to keep repeating themselves about shutting gates, leaving rubbish etc, some people have no respect!
|
|
|||
|
I think this is the minority with most people who go walking. Its not like most towns. People in the country say hello to you. Very civilized.
Ive always trained my children to put there rubbish in their pockets and take it home if they cant find a bin.
__________________
|
|
|||
|
i wouldnt like it if people were walking accross my land all of the time so i suppose i can see where these people are coming from
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |