General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Walkers get ready to ramble

Started by Mcploppy © · · Last activity · 25 posts · 461 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
31 October 2005
Last activity
2 November 2005
Original author
Mcploppy ©
Posts
25
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
461
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 25
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Mon Oct 31, 2005 9:36 AM GMT
    http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-10-31T093627Z_01_KNE134391_RTRUKOC_0_UK-BRITAIN-RAMBLE.xml&archived=False
    http://tinyurl.com/9kwf5

    LONDON (Reuters) - Ramblers will be able to walk across over 6,000 sq miles
    of land in England and Wales from Monday when new rights to countryside
    access come into force.

    The right to roam powers, which campaigners have been demanding for more
    than 100 years, allow people to walk freely across mapped access land
    without the need to stick to paths.

    About 935,000 hectares of mountains, moors, heaths and common land -- in
    total about 7 percent of total land and much of which was previously
    off-limits, will now be open, the Countryside Agency said.
    "People can have fun exploring more of England's beautiful and varied
    landscapes," said Pam Warhurst, the agency's deputy chairman.

    "The Countryside Agency, and the Countryside Commission before it, has
    worked to increase opportunities for public enjoyment of the countryside for
    over 50 years and this new right of access is a major landmark in working
    towards this."

    Opponents of the new rights feared ramblers would end up using incorrect
    areas or damaging farmland and the Countryside Agency has spent four years
    mapping the country in consultation with landowners
    ..
    Campaigners said the freedom to roam was based on a simple principle that
    all citizens should have the right to walk freely on any open land.

    "We are delighted that the public now have the right to enjoy so much
    countryside," said Kate Conto of the Ramblers Association.

    --
    *McPloppy ©*

    { Remove both MyShoes to email me }
    { Homepage: http://tinyurl.com/bbel }
    { My Alternative Site: http://tinyurl.com/rynb }

  2. On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 10:29:04 GMT, "Mcploppy ©"
    <[email hidden]> wrote:

    | Mon Oct 31, 2005 9:36 AM GMT
    | http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-10-31T093627Z_01_KNE134391_RTRUKOC_0_UK-BRITAIN-RAMBLE.xml&archived=False
    | http://tinyurl.com/9kwf5
    |
    | LONDON (Reuters) - Ramblers will be able to walk across over 6,000 sq miles
    | of land in England and Wales from Monday when new rights to countryside
    | access come into force.

    And they had to wait till the clocks changed to implement it in my area.
    :-( Still I must be thankful for small mercies :-)

    Off to Waterstones tomorrow for the new edition OS Explorer maps.

    --
    Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk>
    Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
    please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
    Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

  3. Ysgrifennodd "Mcploppy ©" <[email hidden]> mewn neges
    newyddion:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Mon Oct 31, 2005 9:36 AM GMT
    http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-10-31T093627Z_01_KNE134391_RTRUKOC_0_UK-BRITAIN-RAMBLE.xml&archived=False
    http://tinyurl.com/9kwf5

    LONDON (Reuters) - Ramblers will be able to walk across over 6,000 sq
    miles of land in England and Wales from Monday when new rights to
    countryside access come into force.

    SNIP

    I thought the legislation was in place in Wales in May? Or am I missing
    something???

    Yours Miffed,
    Geoff Myland.
    Greater Sodbury...

    (Or more usually-->

    T Dave R.

    --

    Walk Snowdonia
    www.walkeryri.org.uk

  4. The message <[email hidden]>
    from "Dafydd Ap Arwyn" <[email hidden]> contains these words:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    LONDON (Reuters) - Ramblers will be able to walk across over 6,000 sq
    miles of land in England and Wales from Monday when new rights to
    countryside access come into force.

    Reuters used to be a trustworthy news agency.

    Quoted message said:

    SNIP

    Quoted message said:

    I thought the legislation was in place in Wales in May? Or am I missing
    something???

    The Government thought they would get more mileage out of the drip feed
    appraoch so they carved the country up into regions so that they could
    spread the release out over many months.

    --
    Roger Chapman so far this year 61 summits
    New - 28 (Marilyns 14, Nuttalls 5, Outlying Fells 10)
    Repeats - 34 (Marilyns 16, Nuttalls 24, Wainwrights 12, Outlying Fells 0)

  5. On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 20:59:42 GMT, Roger <[email hidden]> wrote:

    | The message <[email hidden]>
    | from "Dafydd Ap Arwyn" <[email hidden]> contains these words:
    |
    | > > LONDON (Reuters) - Ramblers will be able to walk across over 6,000 sq
    | > > miles of land in England and Wales from Monday when new rights to
    | > > countryside access come into force.
    |
    | Reuters used to be a trustworthy news agency.
    |
    | > SNIP
    |
    | > I thought the legislation was in place in Wales in May? Or am I missing
    | > something???
    |
    | The Government thought they would get more mileage out of the drip feed
    | appraoch so they carved the country up into regions so that they could
    | spread the release out over many months.

    No it was the Ordnance Survey who had a hell of a lot of hard work to do to
    get the new maps issued. It was bit by bit or wait till the new maps were
    ready for the whole country.
    --
    Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk>
    Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
    please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
    Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

  6. The message <[email hidden]>
    from Dave Fawthrop <[email hidden]> contains these words:

    Quoted message said:

    The Government thought they would get more mileage out of the drip feed
    | approach so they carved the country up into regions so that they could
    | spread the release out over many months.

    Quoted message said:

    No it was the Ordnance Survey who had a hell of a lot of hard work to do to
    get the new maps issued. It was bit by bit or wait till the new maps were
    ready for the whole country.

    The OS is very good at making mountains out of mole hills. They had
    bugger hard work to do. The maps were already in existence in digital
    form and with over 100 years of experience actually printing them should
    have been a doddle, particularly as very few are actually going to waste
    their hard earned cash just to get replacement 1:25000 maps showing the
    access areas.

    --
    Roger Chapman so far this year 61 summits
    New - 28 (Marilyns 14, Nuttalls 5, Outlying Fells 10)
    Repeats - 34 (Marilyns 16, Nuttalls 24, Wainwrights 12, Outlying Fells 0)

  7. On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:23:47 GMT, Roger <[email hidden]> wrote:

    | The message <[email hidden]>
    | from Dave Fawthrop <[email hidden]> contains these words:
    |
    | > The Government thought they would get more mileage out of the drip feed
    | > | approach so they carved the country up into regions so that they could
    | > | spread the release out over many months.
    |
    | > No it was the Ordnance Survey who had a hell of a lot of hard work to do to
    | > get the new maps issued. It was bit by bit or wait till the new maps were
    | > ready for the whole country.
    |
    | The OS is very good at making mountains out of mole hills. They had
    | bugger hard work to do. The maps were already in existence in digital
    | form and with over 100 years of experience actually printing them should
    | have been a doddle, particularly as very few are actually going to waste
    | their hard earned cash just to get replacement 1:25000 maps showing the
    | access areas.

    Have you never modified a huge set of existing documents, and ensured that
    everything in the new version, copied from the old version is still true? I
    have and it is a *real* pain. It takes a *lot* of time and effort. They
    also AFAIK put in the changes to the landscape which had occurred between
    the two editions.
    --
    Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk>
    Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
    please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
    Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

  8. On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:23:47 GMT, Roger <[email hidden]> wrote:

    | The message <[email hidden]>
    | from Dave Fawthrop <[email hidden]> contains these words:
    |
    | > The Government thought they would get more mileage out of the drip feed
    | > | approach so they carved the country up into regions so that they could
    | > | spread the release out over many months.
    |
    | > No it was the Ordnance Survey who had a hell of a lot of hard work to do to
    | > get the new maps issued. It was bit by bit or wait till the new maps were
    | > ready for the whole country.
    |
    | The OS is very good at making mountains out of mole hills. They had
    | bugger hard work to do. The maps were already in existence in digital
    | form and with over 100 years of experience actually printing them should
    | have been a doddle, particularly as very few are actually going to waste
    | their hard earned cash just to get replacement 1:25000 maps showing the
    | access areas.

    Have you never modified a huge set of existing documents, and ensured that
    everything in the new version, copied from the old version is still true? I
    have and it is a *real* pain. It takes a *lot* of time and effort. They
    also AFAIK put in the changes to the landscape which had occurred between
    the two editions.
    --
    Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk>
    Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
    please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
    Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

  9. On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:23:47 GMT, Roger <[email hidden]> wrote:

    | The message <[email hidden]>
    | from Dave Fawthrop <[email hidden]> contains these words:
    |
    | > The Government thought they would get more mileage out of the drip feed
    | > | approach so they carved the country up into regions so that they could
    | > | spread the release out over many months.
    |
    | > No it was the Ordnance Survey who had a hell of a lot of hard work to do to
    | > get the new maps issued. It was bit by bit or wait till the new maps were
    | > ready for the whole country.
    |
    | The OS is very good at making mountains out of mole hills. They had
    | bugger hard work to do. The maps were already in existence in digital
    | form and with over 100 years of experience actually printing them should
    | have been a doddle, particularly as very few are actually going to waste
    | their hard earned cash just to get replacement 1:25000 maps showing the
    | access areas.

    Have you never modified a huge set of existing documents, and ensured that
    everything in the new version, copied from the old version is still true? I
    have and it is a *real* pain. It takes a *lot* of time and effort. They
    also AFAIK put in the changes to the landscape which had occurred between
    the two editions.
    --
    Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk>
    Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
    please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
    Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

  10. "Dave Fawthrop" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:23:47 GMT, Roger <[email hidden]> wrote:

    | The message <[email hidden]>
    | from Dave Fawthrop <[email hidden]> contains these
    words:
    |
    | > The Government thought they would get more mileage out of the drip
    feed
    | > | approach so they carved the country up into regions so that they
    could
    | > | spread the release out over many months.
    |
    | > No it was the Ordnance Survey who had a hell of a lot of hard work to
    do to
    | > get the new maps issued. It was bit by bit or wait till the new maps
    were
    | > ready for the whole country.
    |
    | The OS is very good at making mountains out of mole hills. They had
    | bugger hard work to do. The maps were already in existence in digital
    | form and with over 100 years of experience actually printing them should
    | have been a doddle, particularly as very few are actually going to waste
    | their hard earned cash just to get replacement 1:25000 maps showing the
    | access areas.

    Have you never modified a huge set of existing documents, and ensured that
    everything in the new version, copied from the old version is still true?
    I
    have and it is a *real* pain. It takes a *lot* of time and effort. They
    also AFAIK put in the changes to the landscape which had occurred between
    the two editions.
    --
    Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk>
    Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
    please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
    Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

    But please remember that ALL land belongs to somebody and is often
    somebody's livelihood. Many years ago I - and others - used to roam on the
    Arans in Wales "without let or hindrance". Then a small group of people
    started getting militant about so called access RIGHTS. Understandably the
    local farmers got a bit miffed about this and said "OK you can have access
    but it's on OUR terms". That tended to spoil it for the ones who had quietly
    gone about their walking and climbing whilst "keeping their heads down" and
    fully understanding the feelings of the locals.

    Access MUST be regarded as a privilege and not a right. If you don't believe
    that consider the situation if somebody started walking through your back
    garden.

  11. "Dave Fawthrop" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:23:47 GMT, Roger <[email hidden]> wrote:

    | The message <[email hidden]>
    | from Dave Fawthrop <[email hidden]> contains these
    words:
    |
    | > The Government thought they would get more mileage out of the drip
    feed
    | > | approach so they carved the country up into regions so that they
    could
    | > | spread the release out over many months.
    |
    | > No it was the Ordnance Survey who had a hell of a lot of hard work to
    do to
    | > get the new maps issued. It was bit by bit or wait till the new maps
    were
    | > ready for the whole country.
    |
    | The OS is very good at making mountains out of mole hills. They had
    | bugger hard work to do. The maps were already in existence in digital
    | form and with over 100 years of experience actually printing them should
    | have been a doddle, particularly as very few are actually going to waste
    | their hard earned cash just to get replacement 1:25000 maps showing the
    | access areas.

    Have you never modified a huge set of existing documents, and ensured that
    everything in the new version, copied from the old version is still true?
    I
    have and it is a *real* pain. It takes a *lot* of time and effort. They
    also AFAIK put in the changes to the landscape which had occurred between
    the two editions.
    --
    Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk>
    Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
    please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
    Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

    But please remember that ALL land belongs to somebody and is often
    somebody's livelihood. Many years ago I - and others - used to roam on the
    Arans in Wales "without let or hindrance". Then a small group of people
    started getting militant about so called access RIGHTS. Understandably the
    local farmers got a bit miffed about this and said "OK you can have access
    but it's on OUR terms". That tended to spoil it for the ones who had quietly
    gone about their walking and climbing whilst "keeping their heads down" and
    fully understanding the feelings of the locals.

    Access MUST be regarded as a privilege and not a right. If you don't believe
    that consider the situation if somebody started walking through your back
    garden.

  12. "Dave Fawthrop" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:23:47 GMT, Roger <[email hidden]> wrote:

    | The message <[email hidden]>
    | from Dave Fawthrop <[email hidden]> contains these
    words:
    |
    | > The Government thought they would get more mileage out of the drip
    feed
    | > | approach so they carved the country up into regions so that they
    could
    | > | spread the release out over many months.
    |
    | > No it was the Ordnance Survey who had a hell of a lot of hard work to
    do to
    | > get the new maps issued. It was bit by bit or wait till the new maps
    were
    | > ready for the whole country.
    |
    | The OS is very good at making mountains out of mole hills. They had
    | bugger hard work to do. The maps were already in existence in digital
    | form and with over 100 years of experience actually printing them should
    | have been a doddle, particularly as very few are actually going to waste
    | their hard earned cash just to get replacement 1:25000 maps showing the
    | access areas.

    Have you never modified a huge set of existing documents, and ensured that
    everything in the new version, copied from the old version is still true?
    I
    have and it is a *real* pain. It takes a *lot* of time and effort. They
    also AFAIK put in the changes to the landscape which had occurred between
    the two editions.
    --
    Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk>
    Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
    please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
    Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

    But please remember that ALL land belongs to somebody and is often
    somebody's livelihood. Many years ago I - and others - used to roam on the
    Arans in Wales "without let or hindrance". Then a small group of people
    started getting militant about so called access RIGHTS. Understandably the
    local farmers got a bit miffed about this and said "OK you can have access
    but it's on OUR terms". That tended to spoil it for the ones who had quietly
    gone about their walking and climbing whilst "keeping their heads down" and
    fully understanding the feelings of the locals.

    Access MUST be regarded as a privilege and not a right. If you don't believe
    that consider the situation if somebody started walking through your back
    garden.

  13. Michael Hobby said:


    Access MUST be regarded as a privilege and not a right. If you don't believe
    that consider the situation if somebody started walking through your back
    garden.

    Actually, I think privacy and profit are the privileges. I can enjoy the
    privacy of my garden by agreeing to cooperate with planning controls etc,
    which strive to stop me from destroying adjacent homeowner's amenities.

    Similarly, someone who makes a profit from land can do that without
    needlessly restricting access. It's certainly true that if we enjoy
    that access we should use it considerately in such a way that
    reasonable use for other purposes (including profit-making) isn't
    unduly difficult.

    Access is only a privilege in the sense that it could be removed if
    it can't be provided without being abused.

    -adrian

  14. Michael Hobby said:


    Access MUST be regarded as a privilege and not a right. If you don't believe
    that consider the situation if somebody started walking through your back
    garden.

    Actually, I think privacy and profit are the privileges. I can enjoy the
    privacy of my garden by agreeing to cooperate with planning controls etc,
    which strive to stop me from destroying adjacent homeowner's amenities.

    Similarly, someone who makes a profit from land can do that without
    needlessly restricting access. It's certainly true that if we enjoy
    that access we should use it considerately in such a way that
    reasonable use for other purposes (including profit-making) isn't
    unduly difficult.

    Access is only a privilege in the sense that it could be removed if
    it can't be provided without being abused.

    -adrian

  15. Michael Hobby said:


    Access MUST be regarded as a privilege and not a right. If you don't believe
    that consider the situation if somebody started walking through your back
    garden.

    Actually, I think privacy and profit are the privileges. I can enjoy the
    privacy of my garden by agreeing to cooperate with planning controls etc,
    which strive to stop me from destroying adjacent homeowner's amenities.

    Similarly, someone who makes a profit from land can do that without
    needlessly restricting access. It's certainly true that if we enjoy
    that access we should use it considerately in such a way that
    reasonable use for other purposes (including profit-making) isn't
    unduly difficult.

    Access is only a privilege in the sense that it could be removed if
    it can't be provided without being abused.

    -adrian


  16. Quoted message said:

    Access MUST be regarded as a privilege and not a right.

    And that is true for everyone.. Even those with the right bits beside
    their name on a bank computer.

    Quoted message said:

    If you don't believe
    that consider the situation if somebody started walking through your back
    garden.

    They did... So what!

    Gomls are history... Bye!
    America that way --- Enjoy!

    BTW I was wandering all over the Arans throughout that nonsense...
    Funny thing is that there , more than anywhere I have been, I met more
    farmers on the hill.. Almost every visit, save those climbing on Craig
    Cywarch (they have more sense). Every meeting amicible...

    Was there really a problem with the Arans?

    Richard Webb


  17. Quoted message said:

    Access MUST be regarded as a privilege and not a right.

    And that is true for everyone.. Even those with the right bits beside
    their name on a bank computer.

    Quoted message said:

    If you don't believe
    that consider the situation if somebody started walking through your back
    garden.

    They did... So what!

    Gomls are history... Bye!
    America that way --- Enjoy!

    BTW I was wandering all over the Arans throughout that nonsense...
    Funny thing is that there , more than anywhere I have been, I met more
    farmers on the hill.. Almost every visit, save those climbing on Craig
    Cywarch (they have more sense). Every meeting amicible...

    Was there really a problem with the Arans?

    Richard Webb


  18. Quoted message said:

    Access MUST be regarded as a privilege and not a right.

    And that is true for everyone.. Even those with the right bits beside
    their name on a bank computer.

    Quoted message said:

    If you don't believe
    that consider the situation if somebody started walking through your back
    garden.

    They did... So what!

    Gomls are history... Bye!
    America that way --- Enjoy!

    BTW I was wandering all over the Arans throughout that nonsense...
    Funny thing is that there , more than anywhere I have been, I met more
    farmers on the hill.. Almost every visit, save those climbing on Craig
    Cywarch (they have more sense). Every meeting amicible...

    Was there really a problem with the Arans?

    Richard Webb

  19. The message <[email hidden]>
    from Dave Fawthrop <[email hidden]> contains these words:

    Quoted message said:

    | The OS is very good at making mountains out of mole hills. They had
    | bugger hard work to do. The maps were already in existence in digital
    | form and with over 100 years of experience actually printing them should
    | have been a doddle, particularly as very few are actually going to waste
    | their hard earned cash just to get replacement 1:25000 maps showing the
    | access areas.

    Quoted message said:

    Have you never modified a huge set of existing documents, and ensured that
    everything in the new version, copied from the old version is still true? I
    have and it is a *real* pain. It takes a *lot* of time and effort. They
    also AFAIK put in the changes to the landscape which had occurred between
    the two editions.

    I was a production engineer, not a draftsman, so the only drawings I
    ever personally modified were ones I drew myself but the era of drawing
    boards, pencils and tracing paper has long since gone and even the OS
    has been dragged kicking and screaming into the later part of the 20th
    century with digital mapping and computer generated just about
    everything. The boundaries of every parcel of access land were fixed no
    later than the end of the appeal process and was already present on the
    consultation maps. It should have been a simple matter to transfer those
    details to whatever passes as the master file so the individual maps
    could be printed.

    --
    Roger Chapman so far this year 61 summits
    New - 28 (Marilyns 14, Nuttalls 5, Outlying Fells 10)
    Repeats - 34 (Marilyns 16, Nuttalls 24, Wainwrights 12, Outlying Fells 0)

  20. The message <[email hidden]>
    from Dave Fawthrop <[email hidden]> contains these words:

    Quoted message said:

    | The OS is very good at making mountains out of mole hills. They had
    | bugger hard work to do. The maps were already in existence in digital
    | form and with over 100 years of experience actually printing them should
    | have been a doddle, particularly as very few are actually going to waste
    | their hard earned cash just to get replacement 1:25000 maps showing the
    | access areas.

    Quoted message said:

    Have you never modified a huge set of existing documents, and ensured that
    everything in the new version, copied from the old version is still true? I
    have and it is a *real* pain. It takes a *lot* of time and effort. They
    also AFAIK put in the changes to the landscape which had occurred between
    the two editions.

    I was a production engineer, not a draftsman, so the only drawings I
    ever personally modified were ones I drew myself but the era of drawing
    boards, pencils and tracing paper has long since gone and even the OS
    has been dragged kicking and screaming into the later part of the 20th
    century with digital mapping and computer generated just about
    everything. The boundaries of every parcel of access land were fixed no
    later than the end of the appeal process and was already present on the
    consultation maps. It should have been a simple matter to transfer those
    details to whatever passes as the master file so the individual maps
    could be printed.

    --
    Roger Chapman so far this year 61 summits
    New - 28 (Marilyns 14, Nuttalls 5, Outlying Fells 10)
    Repeats - 34 (Marilyns 16, Nuttalls 24, Wainwrights 12, Outlying Fells 0)

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.