Proposed Loch Lomond Bylaws (1 Viewer)

[AuldCodger]

Just received this article today by Cameron McNeish regarding the proposed bylaws for the National Park and I consider it well worth a read for a balanced opinion on the situation.
Motorhomers come out of this article well which is a nice plus.

http://www.walkhighlands.co.uk/news...-bylaws-are-shameful-and-unnecessary/0012260/

 

[DBK]

"Indeed, the vast majority of motorhome users are respectable senior citizens! And yet they could be criminalised if they camp up for the night in the wrong place."

Yes, that's me! But I agree with his sentiment that to prevent people backpacking from putting up a small tent goes against all that is good about Scottish right to roam laws. However, looking at the map the stretch of the loch which the proposed byelaw would cover is fairly small and if there have been problems with litter then it may be necessary, but he does argue that the people who were littering appear to have moved on now so the law is not necessary.

 

[GJH]

I looked at the article so far and then saw

Only recently the Highland Council was threatened with legal action because they had signs on some laybys that stated “No Overnight Parking.”

It was made clear to them that if someone became tired and wanted a sleep before continuing his or her journey, and were moved on by the police or by a Council employee, then if that person was involved in an accident due to tiredness, then the police or the Council could be privately sued. The signs are being removed.

Totally inaccurate. The removal of the signs came about as a result of it being established that they were not backed by a legal order (many threads on this in the past). It makes me wonder whether the rest of the article is similarly spun to fit the author's perception/wishes.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[John & Joan]

An the other viewpoint is here Broken Link Removed and here http://www.thisisyourpark.org.uk/your-park-your-questions-answered/

The proposed management zones (including the existing east Loch Lomond zone) equate to less than 5% of the National Park.
The proposed zones are focused on the busiest lochshore areas which are easily accessible from a public road and where car-borne camping pressures are greatest.
Boundaries include:
the land between the road and lochshore and, on the other side of the road, at a distance of approximately 200 metres from the public road.
Where possible the boundary follows visible features such as field boundaries or tracks.
Lochshores with no public roads have not been included in zones.

This should give genuine backpackers so room to pitch tents

Did any of you bother to respond to the consultation? I did.