Chuffing do-gooders and busybodies
- Thread starter FoxEye
- Start date
No, I don't have a deathwish. I am aware of the numerous dangers of entering mines, such as false floors, ceiling collapse, etc. It's not something I'd ever recommend doing alone. Yes I've done it with others.
That's probably illegal too. I'm sure there's probably a law against entering old mine workingsEsp since I don't own them
You may be aware of this but children may not. Everyone knows kids can be adventurous, as it follows into adulthood, I know I made my fair share of dens and whatnot with friends a few years back when I was even in secondary school. What if one child goes through the access you've cut, into a mine which is easily accessible through the 'hole' you've cut, and they go and explore the mine... and die? I know this is an extreme example, but who's to say it can't and won't happen? Would you own up to cutting the access if questions get asked locally about it/by police etc. ?
I'm all for exploring and discovering places and things, but the way you're considering other factors is pretty ignorant. It's a simple 'task' with so much to consider, seems quite ridiculous all in all, because if I were honest I'd say I'd be in the same position as you and go for it, although I doubt I'd cut down the brambles, just hack away with a stick (as you do) and walk over them when they get to waist height/slightly lower.
I obviously got the wrong impression of your question.
My opinion on those things is that I will defer to the scientific community's consensus. I have no knowledge on the subject.
In any case, I don't recall offering an opinion on those things before, and have never campaigned against them or interfered with anybody performing such activities.
The spread of TB is, as far as I'm aware, not fully understood at this time. I have no opinion either way of shooting foxes; I don't believe they're endangered so it hasn't featured prominently in my thinking.
Like a lot of people, I do find hunting with hounds to be unnecessary. But again I don't recall offering any opinion unless asked, and have no interfered with people who hunt.
I've answered your question but I don't see how my opinion on those matters is relevant to the discussion. If somebody opens a thread on such matters and someone where to give their opinion, that would not qualify them as a busybody. It would just be a discussion.
If, on the other hand, somebody asked what a good pair of riding boots was, and then somebody said "What do you want riding boots for? I hope you're not hunting foxes with hounds!" (silly example), that would be more what I'm talking about.
Your calling it property gives the impression it is someone's garden.
It's about as far removed from that as you can imagine. It's land that has been abandoned and sat unused for, in some cases, over 100 years. Cornwall is dotted with old abandoned mines on waste ground.
An example. Imagine a fairly small woodland, bordered on one or two sides by a road, and on the other side by the boundary wall of a field. The field is clearly owned, and I have no need to enter it. The road is a public highway. The little micro wood contains the ruins of some buildings, a large quantity of brambles, and various other plants. There are no fences, the area is open. There are no "keep off" signs.
There is no doubt that foxes and other creatures do live here. There is evidence of burrows (this is true in almost all cases).
You know where a mine entrance should be, but cannot access it. In your way is a 3m thick wall of brambles. You don't want to clear all of them, just a path to where you believe the entrance is. You've done your research, so you are only interested in a very small area of this wood, and limit your investigation to that area. The other brambles remain untouched and intact.
You have a choice: stamp on them. Bash them with stick. Use some form of cutting tool (inc inconspicuous tools like hand sheers). In any event you will leave some trace. The people saying "leave no trace" are effectively saying "don't go here".
The only valid argument I've heard so far against this scenario is opening up potentially unsafe mine workings to children. But these are normally pretty remote places, far aware from where kids play. Older children who might make it here on their bikes should have the common sense not to go in.
But please, stop calling this kind of place "someone's property". It's accessible to the public, and due to its very nature, is only ever given any thought when someone wants to build on it (roads, new housing estates, business parks).
Heres a crazy idea: Write to the local council or look on a land registry site and find out who owns any of these derelict mines/land.
Contact them all via email so no cost to you, and ask for their official stance on what you are doing re: Killing habitat/clearing path to mine entrances.
You have a care not attitude to it but there probably, really is, some kind of legal nonsense for you to be trying to adhear to doing this kind of thing.
I do a lot of Geocaching here in Summer and we are often in old bunkers, military structures and fortifications. THe whole town and surrounding forest is littered with ww1-ww2 era stuff . Its all very exciting and if you let your mind wander **** scary too, so i can relate to your interest.
A suspect at the end of the day its the personal attitude of the youself that matters, treat the place with respect dont cut/clear anything with tools. Dont make a giant retard of yourself on a public forum etc etc
Contact them all via email so no cost to you, and ask for their official stance on what you are doing re: Killing habitat/clearing path to mine entrances.
You have a care not attitude to it but there probably, really is, some kind of legal nonsense for you to be trying to adhear to doing this kind of thing.
I do a lot of Geocaching here in Summer and we are often in old bunkers, military structures and fortifications. THe whole town and surrounding forest is littered with ww1-ww2 era stuff . Its all very exciting and if you let your mind wander **** scary too, so i can relate to your interest.
A suspect at the end of the day its the personal attitude of the youself that matters, treat the place with respect dont cut/clear anything with tools. Dont make a giant retard of yourself on a public forum etc etc
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 1,056
- Location
- On the wagon
But it IS someone's property. Which is why you're being told you should ask the landowner before you start vandalising it.
I live in Fife and we have lots of abandoned industrial sites which like you, I enjoy exploring. Access laws are different up here and provided I don't interfere with business or damage property then I can pretty much walk where I like. I understand your desire to explore these areas and I understand that realistically it means making a small track through. What people are saying is ask permission and be as careful and minimal in the damage you do to the environment, only cutting when absolutely necessary.
But it IS someones property.....
Do you have "Keep off" signs around your garden and on every entrance to your house?
I certainly do not own a single "keep off" sign....
Luckily for me people around here are decent and respectful so will ask for permission to go on my property.
The field I own is my property
The derelict building in some woodland (borders a field) i own is my property.
The old disused railway line (borders a field) i own is my property.
All the above have a road or footpath bordering the boundary so are accessible to the public.
This still does not give anyone the right to be there without permission.
The point is someone, somewhere owns it and you are trespassing.
Clearly the correct thing to do is obtain permission to be there.
If I caught someone on an area of my property without permission I would be out to make sure they where caught if they tried it again (checking that area more often, asking neighbours to keep an eye out).
You could make life difficult for yourself if you enjoy this area so much.
Try and make the effort to find out the landowner and contact them you might surprise yourself on how easy it was.
So you expect children to have common sense but you as an adult don't have any.
If something happens to you while you're there the landowner would be probably liable to pay some kind of compensation to you and possibly a fine.
Can't wait for your next thread 'How to claim compensation for my ignorance of other person's property'
There's a very good chance, that due to the compensation culture we live in, the default position of the landowner would be to deny permission. But I'm basing that on an assumption, so...
Does anyone know the actual legal position re liability? I'm not the type to look for compensation if I injure myself through my own idiocy. That's my problem.
But if a landowner gives permission for me to be on his land, and I injure myself on his land, is he more/less liable than if I was trespassing? Or is there no difference?
The assumption I'm making is that he'd be (more) liable, hence he'd be likely to say no, even if otherwise he'd not be bothered.
Also, "trail of destruction" is just more nonsense talk, NVP. Must be national exaggeration month or something.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,482
lol - Foxeye strikes again. I dont really need to say any more.
But I will.
Did you ever stop and think that the land has been allowed to get into that state for a reason? Lets expand on what you said is the only valid argument - children.
Lets look at the facts.
B-b-but busybodies?!?!
"Whooooosh" - thats the sound of the point you are missing sailing right over your head
But I will.
Did you ever stop and think that the land has been allowed to get into that state for a reason? Lets expand on what you said is the only valid argument - children.
Lets look at the facts.
- You are trespassing (civil offence).
- You are causing damage to a property/land that does not belong to you (criminal offence).
- You are potentially creating a gateway to injury for children or adults (or even other animals, such as Dogs or Badgers) by removing the natural barrier that the land owner has left in place for a reason (it is likely you would be prosecuted if anything bad happened and witnesses placed you in the area)
- You are disturbing and potentially damaging wildlife (possibly an offence if the area is protected or contains protected species).
- You are carrying around a weapon, and whilst it is not for violent purposes it is for purposes which put you on the wrong side of the line legally, as per point 2 (double whammy criminal offence).
B-b-but busybodies?!?!
"Whooooosh" - thats the sound of the point you are missing sailing right over your head
lol - Foxeye strikes again. I dont really need to say any more.
But I will.
Did you ever stop and think that the land has been allowed to get into that state for a reason? Lets expand on what you said is the only valid argument - children.
Lets look at the facts.
- You are trespassing (civil offence).
- You are causing damage to a property/land that does not belong to you (criminal offence).
- You are potentially creating a gateway to injury for children or adults (or even other animals, such as Dogs or Badgers) by removing the natural barrier that the land owner has left in place for a reason (it is likely you would be prosecuted if anything bad happened and witnesses placed you in the area)
- You are disturbing and potentially damaging wildlife (possibly an offence if the area is protected or contains protected species).
- You are carrying around a weapon, and whilst it is not for violent purposes it is for purposes which put you on the wrong side of the line legally, as per point 2 (double whammy criminal offence).
B-b-but busybodies?!?!
"Whooooosh" - thats the sound of the point you are missing sailing right over your head
Cheers for the thread recap, Buffet.
Anyway, having heard all arguments, the conclusion I'm drawing is that there are greater evils in this world than a guy cutting down a few brambles.
Illegal or not, nobody will even see me. I'll remind you that I've been doing this for about a year, and in most places I never bump into another person.
So I'll be the Phantom Bramble Cutter of Old Cornwall Town. Despite all the hot air in here, none of you really care what I get up to after all.
/thread
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 1,056
- Location
- On the wagon
Where has anyone said that it's the worst of all evil crimes? Whether you think it's acceptable or not it IS illegal. That's all people are saying, and rightly so.
As for your comments about not being seen - are you suggesting that if someone does something illegal and they remain unseen then their crime is somehow diminished?
It's obvious no one here can stop you. Doesn't mean they're going to exonerate you though.
In reality, there would be little difference in terms of liability. If the owner (or occupier) of the land knows (or reasonably believes the existence) of any danger on the land and could be reasonably expected to believe that people could - lawfully or otherwise - be in the vicinity of the danger and he may be reasonably expected to offer some form of protection against the danger then he has a duty of care to provide that protection - failure to do so could be considered negligent. That said, the owner of the land would only be required to take reasonable steps and these could even be limited to just providing warning signs.
On the flip side, if you go onto the land knowing the danger involved you would likely be considered to have willingly accepted the risks and any duty of care would be set aside.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,482
lol
*FoxEye makes a thread on an internet forum filled with people he does not know*
"hey guys what do you think about such and such?"
*thread fills with well reasoned and helpul replies*
"To hell with you I don't care what internet strangers think!!*"
Typical MO for a FoxEye thread
* "unless you agree with me!".