Would a federal freedom to roam law work in USA?

[firesign]

Not everybody that would have the freedom to roam would respect that right, and some would commit criminal acts whilst roaming, e.g. criminal damage, arson, assault, rape and murder. Its the world that we live in. Assuming that there are no more criminals: Who is responsible for cleaning up after some hikers/travelers/campers (whist being free to roam) have left their rubbish on the private land; the owner? or a coalition of volunteers who give up their own time to compensate for those who do not give a $hit?

So, we live in an imperfect world where we need laws to protect us from the lowest common denominators, i.e. criminals and idiots; we need to have trespass laws to protect the owner of the property and that is why we cannot have freedom to roam.

Perhaps one day we will evolve and we shall not need such laws.

[rickb]

Not everybody that would have the freedom to roam would respect that right, and some would commit criminal acts whilst roaming, e.g. criminal damage, arson, assault, rape and murder. Its the world that we live in. Assuming that there are no more criminals: Who is responsible for cleaning up after some hikers/travelers/campers (whist being free to roam) have left their rubbish on the private land; the owner? or a coalition of volunteers who give up their own time to compensate for those who do not give a $hit?

So, we live in an imperfect world where we need laws to protect us from the lowest common denominators, i.e. criminals and idiots; we need to have trespass laws to protect the owner of the property and that is why we cannot have freedom to roam.

Perhaps one day we will evolve and we shall not need such laws.

I think most of Sportsmen in Maine would agree that the have the right to hunt, fish, trap and ride snow machines on the vast tracts of private land that are not explicitly posted.

[rocketsocks]

Not everybody that would have the freedom to roam would respect that right, and some would commit criminal acts whilst roaming, e.g. criminal damage, arson, assault, rape and murder. Its the world that we live in. Assuming that there are no more criminals: Who is responsible for cleaning up after some hikers/travelers/campers (whist being free to roam) have left their rubbish on the private land; the owner? or a coalition of volunteers who give up their own time to compensate for those who do not give a $hit?

So, we live in an imperfect world where we need laws to protect us from the lowest common denominators, i.e. criminals and idiots; we need to have trespass laws to protect the owner of the property and that is why we cannot have freedom to roam.

Perhaps one day we will evolve and we shall not need such laws.

...and that's exactly why I mention decency in my first post, you want decency you pay for it, i.e. "owning property" and making the rules.

[rocketsocks]

...and that's exactly why I mention decency in my first post, you want decency you pay for it, i.e. "owning property" and making the rules.

correction, third post.


i find the whole concept of owning land a bit of a farce, but the laws of the land hinge on the ideas and mutual understanding of a modern society, and with those we maintain decency and an expectation reed on to do with your land as you see fit. Don't pay your taxes and the land your family has own for 400 years will be sucked up, so freedom ain't really free is it.

[Dogwood]

I really do like the idea of not needing permits or paying to visit parks; I do wish we had that here in the U.S. but it seems like, at least what you hear on this site, that many people love the permit/pay system. Crazy

Not singling you out(this is more for Oslohiker) with a $10 donation to the PCTA, which is involved in countless activities administrating and protecting the Pacific Crest Trail, one can hike for almost 2700 miles along the entire length of the western U.S. coast. That's a lot of roaming! Some conditions apply, as again conditions also apply to the freedom to roam law in Norway, but one can visit 25 U.S. National Forests and 7 U.S. National Parks. Not exactly free but what a GREAT U.S. bargain hey? The PCT also crosses private lands as does the AT(to a small extent) and CDT. I can add to that list another 30 U.S. named trails and hiking routes without much deep thought that exist as benefitted by private property owners. Assuming there is no or little cooperation among private property owners here in the U.S. and outdoors people engaging in such activities as CONDITIONAL CONSCIENTIOUS hiking and camping because practicing it here is different than under a law in another country is nonsense. It's not based on actual extensive U.S. backpacking and other outdoor activity experiences.

The point here is that IF it is one's desire to roam rather than complain and magnify something that can easily be solved there are few better places on the planet to experience such a high degree and diversity of roaming/hiking opportunities as here in the U.S. Private property issues is an issue that can easily be legally circumnavigated here in the U.S.! This notion that the U.S. is rife with selfish private property curmudgeons is nonsense in practice. People from around the globe come here to the U.S. in droves for the VAST opportunities to freely roam.

[Pedaling Fool]

I mentioned it before, but should emphasize that this is something that is deeply embedded in the culture of Norway (and a few other countries in that region), at least from what I've read and it's practice supposedly goes back to ancient times. I think it works well for them, but with our population numbers it just wouldn't work here; just look to Oregon and various other problems along the AT and so many other places. Interesting reading: https://www.visitnorway.com/plan-you...ght-of-access/



However, there are initiatives that are in the basic spirit of FtR https://www.imba.com/resources/liabi...creational-use

[Dogwood]

PF, you are getting at an important point. The situations that exist in several significant aspects pertaining to free roaming, whatever that may mean to different cultures, is different in different places.

[lonehiker]

Not singling you out(this is more for Oslohiker) with a $10 donation to the PCTA, which is involved in countless activities administrating and protecting the Pacific Crest Trail, one can hike for almost 2700 miles along the entire length of the western U.S. coast. That's a lot of roaming! Some conditions apply, as again conditions also apply to the freedom to roam law in Norway, but one can visit 25 U.S. National Forests and 7 U.S. National Parks. Not exactly free but what a GREAT U.S. bargain hey? The PCT also crosses private lands as does the AT(to a small extent) and CDT. I can add to that list another 30 U.S. named trails and hiking routes without much deep thought that exist as benefitted by private property owners. Assuming there is no or little cooperation among private property owners here in the U.S. and outdoors people engaging in such activities as CONDITIONAL CONSCIENTIOUS hiking and camping because practicing it here is different than under a law in another country is nonsense. It's not based on actual extensive U.S. backpacking and other outdoor activity experiences.

The point here is that IF it is one's desire to roam rather than complain and magnify something that can easily be solved there are few better places on the planet to experience such a high degree and diversity of roaming/hiking opportunities as here in the U.S. Private property issues is an issue that can easily be legally circumnavigated here in the U.S.! This notion that the U.S. is rife with selfish private property curmudgeons is nonsense in practice. People from around the globe come here to the U.S. in droves for the VAST opportunities to freely roam.

Permit/pay systems, or use taxes, whatever you desire to call them, are by far the most equitable way to tax (read fund). Why should non-hiking tax payers bear the burden of your $200 (or $1,500) thru-hike? On another note and why I quoted Dog's post, I actually mostly agree with what he has written here. Unusual in that generally I think his responses are gibberish.

[Pedaling Fool]

PF, you are getting at an important point. The situations that exist in several significant aspects pertaining to free roaming, whatever that may mean to different cultures, is different in different places.

I guess the real question is: Why do we have such a problem here with people trashing places, be it public or private land?

This has been a problem for a while and seems to be growing, but why is this happening in our culture. My simplistic answer is population. The larger the population the more problems you have from dirtbags. We have a population of over 300-million, Norway has a population of just over 5-million. So any dirtbags they have will be slight, compared to a country with 300-million.

However, that is, as I said, simplistic and it's not the entire reason, culture does play in. So is there something in our culture that is a major factor? Interesting question that I don't have the answer to.

[Oslohiker]

Ok, a few more words about how this works.
Who maintains the trails? It is different organisations. Everything from local groups of volunteers to the the counties. But more often there are skiing/hikers organisations. There are one huge national, and many local. This is serious stuff. Not only do they maintain the trails but they also have a vast network of huts/cabins that you can visit. You really don't have to carry much when you hike in Norway. Mainly extra clothes and emergency stuff. The huts can be manned or unmanned. But they have beds and are stocked full of food. Paying for food is based on the honer system on the unmanned huts. Backpacker.com seem to like it. Even very close to Oslo you find them, a lot of them. We really don't have open shelters like you do on the Appalachian trail. http://www.backpacker.com/trips/inte...norway-tested/

How is in financed? Most people have a membership or several in those organisations, but they are heavily supported by the government. A membership gives you a key to the unmanned huts, and lover prices on the manned. This is really low priced. Not everything is expensive in Norway. If you don't use the huts you don't need to pay anything. Even ski trails in winter time is free by law. If you maintain a ski trail you have to let everyone use it for free, even if it is on your land.

One thing you will not see in Norway are park ranger or park visitor centres. We don't see any need for them.
If someone litter, I think it is the land owner that has to clean it up. But people don't behave like that.

This is an example of one of those "huts" (consisting of several buildings):

image.jpg

This is how the national hiking organisation present them selves:

[Odd Man Out]

I guess the real question is: Why do we have such a problem here with people trashing places, be it public or private land?

This has been a problem for a while and seems to be growing, but why is this happening in our culture. My simplistic answer is population. The larger the population the more problems you have from dirtbags. We have a population of over 300-million, Norway has a population of just over 5-million. So any dirtbags they have will be slight, compared to a country with 300-million.

However, that is, as I said, simplistic and it's not the entire reason, culture does play in. So is there something in our culture that is a major factor? Interesting question that I don't have the answer to.

We just returned from a trip to Europe Andy wife immediately noticed how in general public place we're much more tidy over there. This morning we went to our local Memorial Day parade where politicians throw candy to children. During a lull in the action a kid ran out into the street to pick up an unclaimed goody. Finding it was just a wrapper he threw it back down. A minute later another kid does the same thing. Neither parent saw the opportunity to teach their child the value in picking up the garbage. My observation is that the desire to take care of public spaces is related to the people's relationship with government. Where there is a history of effective government, everything is neat as a pin (Nederlands eg). But where there is a history of poor governmwnt, (Romania), public spaces were not well kept but private spaces were well beautiful (balcony gardens eg).

[SWODaddy]

That and eminent domain. Land was actually taken (forced buyout) from people to establish portions of the AT using eminent domain.

Not to mention the National Parks. Many of the PATC cabins were homes that people we kicked out of when SNP was created.

[tdoczi]

Since you claim I am ill informed, that indirectly means that you are informed. Please inform me with your information.

ive hiked all over the US (have you?) and regularly meet europeans who have come here to hike. i dare say you cant go to a major hiking area in this country without meeting a few.

[Dogwood]

Pedaling Fool relates a hugely significant stat to bear in mind on why different systems of management styles of potential hiking areas exist in Norway and the U.S. In 2015 in the U.S National Park system alone there were about 300 MILLION visitors. Again, these are NOT, definitely not, the only places in the U.S. people visit to experience outdoor activities such as hiking/roaming/trekking, not by a far margin. Compare that to the total population of just over 5 million for the entire country of Norway. Further, consider the size in sq miles of the U.S. is 3.8 million and that of Norway is 150,000. Vastly different sized areas being managed for 'free roaming!" Numbers mean something in your analysis Oslohiker.

Considering the sheer size of the U.S. alone one can certainly certainly find huge swaths of National Forests, Wilderness Area, etc to "freely roam' IF IF one truly wanted instead of merely assuming free roaming is not allowed in the U.S. Come to the U.S. and find out for yourself.

[CamelMan]

Statements like this sound groovy and peachy until we all show up at your place and seize your shart, take all your food, remove you from where you sleep, and put you out in the rain. Then, we'll see just how much you believe having this concept of no one should have private property.

All the stuff you mentioned is personal property, which I do believe in. I don't believe in private property in land or the means of production. I don't know what you mean by "groovy" but I'm no hippy. I'm a libertarian socialist, hence I have an anarchist conception of which property somebody is entitled to. Does that sound better?

(Btw: those actions are things landlords do all the time, because of private property. It's enough to make somebody say that no one should have private property.)

[rickb]

ive hiked all over the US (have you?) and regularly meet europeans who have come here to hike. i dare say you cant go to a major hiking area in this country without meeting a few.

his

This list of AT 2000 milers confirms that a few Europeans have come to the US to hike.

http://www.appalachiantrail.org/home...-miler-listing

Not all that many, however.

[Connie]

North America? Pick your favorite terrain, here.

The 1,200 mile Pacific Northwest Scenic National Trail scarcely marked trail can be very much a wilderness experience.

The Northern California - Oregon "Bigfoot Trail" is a trail to consider as a serious "nature walk".

Our high desert country, as public land, available for recreational use, could be a "roam".

[rafe]

I have seen many bicyclists who think it is right to camp next to a church.

Not so odd is it, given that churches and other places of worship are often seen and used as sanctuary and refuge, indeed the sanctuary is where services take place, no? Several AT hostels are church-run. It's an ancient tradition, not a bad one as these things go.

[CamelMan]

Not everybody that would have the freedom to roam would respect that right, and some would commit criminal acts whilst roaming, e.g. criminal damage, arson, assault, rape and murder.

Those criminals aren't going to respect your private property sign, either.

[Connie]

I mentioned camping next to churches, because the link article about camping in Norway mentioned how disrespectful it was to set up a tent next to a church, the fact there was a churchyard graveyard added to the distress.

Things are not universal.

I am glad Norway has a nice situation, for hikers.

I know cabins, for public use, stocked with emergency food, that leave a note asking if you use the cabin, you leave some unused shelf stable food items for emergengy food for others.

The trail work I have done in the Bob Marshall Wilderness was approved, and a part of East Slope Backcountry Horsemen. I was loaned a jackass, once. the other time, I was loaned an Arabian stallion. Fun.

More recently, I can't get anyone interested in "trail grooming".

Why? Inconsiderate and ill-prepared hikers.

If that changes and hikers are not complete idiots, relying on rescue, enthusiasm for keeping trails open will return. Meanwhile, trails are being allowed to become overgrown with brush.

If you think about it, why should a volunteer do all that hard work for jerks, and, why should volunteers rescue ill-prepared "hikers" with a sense of entitlement, especially so, at risk of their life.

I was a co-founder of the Outdoor Program, at my college. We used our budget to have a lending equipment room. We had sign-up sheets for hikes: easy to difficult, with the trip leaders having a required equipment list and doing a shakedown of equipment before the hike. There were even meetings for a hike, before the hike.

It was an effective program, for getting new people out in the mountains for a good experience.