free camping

[lemur]

Pedestrian nomadism, including hiking and bicycling, would be a nice way for people with little economic means to travel around on a budget. There is lots of open land where people could pitch camp for the night, but the problem is liability for the property owner for anything that occurs on their land and risks to lone campers in relatively unpopulated areas. Could governments allow special liability-free free-camping areas to be set up along roads so that pedestrian nomads could pitch camp for free or very low cost? If this was allowed by governments and land owners, would campers clean up after themselves to a standards that would keep land owners and governments from shutting down camping areas? Are there other reasons free camping would or wouldn't be a good idea?

[pwagen]

In Sweden, we have something called "everybody's right" (very loosely translated), which basically gives anyone the right to set up a camp on someone else's property, provided they don't ruin anything and pick up their trash. Also, this goes for non-private locations, so you can't put up a tent in someone's backyard. But go hiking in the woods and spend the night, no problem.

 

This hasn't caused any problem whatsoever, since pretty much everybody who does this are careful not to ruin the fun for everyone else. How it would work in a bigger country with a bigger number of hikers though, I can't tell.

[lemur]

In Sweden, we have something called "everybody's right" (very loosely translated), which basically gives anyone the right to set up a camp on someone else's property, provided they don't ruin anything and pick up their trash. Also, this goes for non-private locations, so you can't put up a tent in someone's backyard. But go hiking in the woods and spend the night, no problem.

 

This hasn't caused any problem whatsoever, since pretty much everybody who does this are careful not to ruin the fun for everyone else. How it would work in a bigger country with a bigger number of hikers though, I can't tell.

It's sounds great. Probably the fact that it's already done in Sweden means that US politicians would call it socialist and condemn it. I think if government allowed liability immunity for the property owner and allowed owners to withdraw their camping rights when people trashed their properties, it could work.

[pwagen]

Of course it's socialistic. Don't forget, we've had public healthcare for ages!

 

Such a ruling would, of course, require the hikers to be responsible. Luckily, most of the people interested in hiking have been brought up with organisations such as the boy/girl scouts or other wildlife organisations, so have a basic understanding of nature and how not to wreck it. And they understand that, if abused, this right goes away. As long as the better part of hikers understand that, there's no problem.

[lemur]

Of course it's socialistic. Don't forget, we've had public healthcare for ages!

 

Such a ruling would, of course, require the hikers to be responsible. Luckily, most of the people interested in hiking have been brought up with organisations such as the boy/girl scouts or other wildlife organisations, so have a basic understanding of nature and how not to wreck it. And they understand that, if abused, this right goes away. As long as the better part of hikers understand that, there's no problem.

For some reason, many people with socialist governments are proud of socialism. I don't know about you personally, but it seems like it has something to do generally with suppression of individualism in favor of collectivism. Anyway, that's a topic for another thread but the reason I mention it is because there's nothing particularly socialistic about free camping. It's just as ruggedly individualistic to venture off on a nomadic journey with just a tent and some basic necessities, arranging food/etc. on the way. I wish Americans would view free camping as a modern form of freely roaming the western plains or something like that so that it would gain political support. If politicians starting claiming that free camping is popular in socialist Sweden where everyone has public healthcare, etc. they would rally against it just because it was mentioned in the same sentence with public healthcare.

[Marat]

Just start a campaign to get landowners who don't mind people camping on their land to put up signs saying something to the effect that: "By spending time on this land, you waive all rights against the owner of the land for any injuries suffered."

[lemur]

Just start a campaign to get landowners who don't mind people camping on their land to put up signs saying something to the effect that: "By spending time on this land, you waive all rights against the owner of the land for any injuries suffered."

I have heard that liability-waivers don't hold up in court. Supposedly, if someone wants to sue someone else for something involving them or their property, they can and this causes the person getting sued to at least go to the trouble of assessing whether the claim has any validity. For this reason, many people prefer not to deal with people at all unless the benefit substantially outweighs any costs or liabilities.

 

Maybe there is a form of public easement that could allow a section of a piece of property have the status of public land without actually transferring ownership to the government. I would guess that even if this was possible, though, local governments would eschew attracting low-income campers with the presumption that they would cause some kind of nuisance.

 

 

[imatfaal]

A French correspondent might be able to clarify, but I believe that to be recognized as a rural town/village (and thus get certain benefits of determination and rule) within parts of France that you must have a public camp site with minimum level of facilities. Whilst these do get booked up - with a little foresight or off-season you can have a very cheap holiday as they cost a four or five euro per night. Du vin, du pain etc

 

It is quite difficult to limit/waive liability for personal injury caused by negligence in general - but I am sure there is settled law on this matter, I just don't know what it is.