Crikey, I”d hardly sell the UK as good with land access! The UK is pretty awful in comparison to the nearby Nordics. Sweden, for example, has a right to roam in nature which makes the constant antagonism between footpath walkers and landowners that are a mainstay of the English countryside seem so petty.

▲

giobox 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Depends of course upon which UK legal system we are discussing... The right to roam provided in Scotland under Scots law is often cited as one of the best examples of the concept. The UK is more than just England etc.

▲

ericmay 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I'll tell you what, the Nordics themselves are pretty awful when compared with the Outback or American southwest. You can just roam wherever you want, no questions asked!

▲

bdamm 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Try roaming through Area 51. Or White Sands.

▲

ericmay 4 days ago | parent [-]

I've heard it's great this time of year. Lots of cool stuff to look at.

▲

bdamm 4 days ago | parent [-]

Roaming on either of these will lead to you being arrested.

	▲	ericmay 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		You can just avoid those areas and roam on not government property. There's tons of it out there and nobody cares.

▲

yencabulator 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Nordics let you roam on private property.

▲

ericmay 4 days ago | parent [-]

Our national park system in the US is larger than the entire country of Sweden and Denmark and Iceland (or close enough) - depending on how it's defined maybe throw Norway in there too. I don't need to walk through someone's private property to see all this great stuff.

Maybe the Nordics should set aside more public land and catch up to the United States?

▲

bdamm 4 days ago | parent [-]

I don't want to roam in Yosemite. I want to roam starting from my house.

▲

ericmay 4 days ago | parent [-]

I don't want people roaming through my yard and stepping on my plants and stuff or god forbid they bring their stinky dogs and their urine and feces so I have a fence put up to keep them out.

▲

wood_spirit 3 days ago | parent [-]

Sweden has the right to roam on privately owned nature property but it is trumped by exceptions for crops and the right to privacy at home. So it’s not ok - and not done - to walk in peoples yards etc. The rules are well taught at schools and well explained for tourists and it just works nicely.

▲

ericmay 3 days ago | parent [-]

In the United States at least we don't really have privately owned nature property like you might in Sweden. I live in Ohio for example, there's nothing to go see or look at. We have no need for the right to roam. What are you going to do, roam through a cornfield? A parking lot? The woods? The mall? Well you can already do that. We have state parks, local parks, national parks, etc. to get your nature fix and it works very well here, there are no complaints about this whatsoever.

Sometimes Europeans are so convinced that their way of life is better or their policies are the best they forget that sometimes their policies solve problems that don't exist in other countries. There's no need to have a right to roam in America. There's nowhere to roam to, and the places that you would roam to are already owned by the public where you have... the right to roam! Though we are much more strict about natural preservation in those parks which sometimes conflicts with the desires of some to go "off trail", but that's a separate issue.

The UK might be a little different, granted, but the no-true-scotsman approach to someone suggesting they enjoy the UK's right to roam but they can't because the Nordic countries are so much better in this regard is annoying, to say the least.

▲

yencabulator 3 days ago | parent [-]

The article is literally about how privately owned landed blocked roaming public lands. You came across very American, for sure.

	▲	ericmay 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Yea but the discussion happening in this thread was about something else. If you don't want to participate that's fine but please don't derail ongoing discussions. You come across very Italian, for sure. I guess? :)