To trespass or not to trespass...

[Briony]

I can see where people are coming from on both sides of the argument.

Legally Briony, me coming onto your farm to shoot without your permission, assuming no damage is being done, is no different to the mail guy walking up my driveway to put letters through my mailbox.

The consequences would simply be you asking me to leave your property. It's only once a person refuses to leave that it becomes a matter for the police.

But, there's legal and then there's what's right. Personally, I'm of the opinion to ask permission beforehand. If I wanted to go shoot in a run down old barn or something, I wouldn't hesitate to go knock on the door and ask if they minded.

I've yet to meet a farmer of the "get orf my land!" variety, when asking for permission, and found most to be extremely nice people, usually suggesting I pop back for a cuppa and a chat when I'm done doing whatever I'm on their land to do.

Not me me then yet have you :razz: By the way, I do hunt with guns on our land

You are not allowed to walk all over the farm where it is not a legal footpath, be it to walk the dog or take piccys, that is classed as trespass and would be dealt with in that way.

We have no objection if asked first - simples !

 

[c_robinson]

one thing to be very very carefull with on farms like in this thread is gamekeepers/farmers thinking you could be stalkers.

The farm i work on has such a problem with stalkers as soon as we see anyone, anywhere, be it footpath or not we go and investigate, normally with a 'what are you doing' attitude, not a 'what a lovely day that brings you here' thought.

Stalking is a massive problem in this country at the moment...and is taken seriously by landowners who value their land/wildlife

 

[fracster]

Your entire post is contradicting.

It's like saying 'I don't give a flyer about smokers' and then in the same breath going 'eugh, i despise people who smoke cigarettes'.

Who says I am whinging about consequences either? You don't know who I am or anything about me, so please don't make judgements or assumptions.

I suggest you read this as it will give you some insight about what urbex is and why folk do it: http://www.catchingphotons.co.uk/html/why_explore_.html

However, if you're one of these people who will only ever be as black and white as 'trespass is trespass' then I don't expect you to understand it.

I don`t dislike urbexers, I have no interest in what they do.I have made no judgements nor assumptions about you, I don`t know who you are nor really care to be honest.

What I do object to is people thinking they have the god given right to go where they want,when they want for whatever reason they want.People do not have the right to access private property without the owners permission. Bit like people excercising their dogs by chasing deer around our place because they want to.Big no,no i`m afraid.

Most farmers are very obliging if approached properly and politely, honest, they are........

 

[gingerjon]

You see, the key problem for me is that 'Urbex' sounds like an attempt to make a town planning convention sound groovy.

But leaving that aside, I'd be interested in hearing how it goes with the actual landowner and seeing what shots, if any, you end up taking.

 

[Kaouthia]

that is classed as trespass and would be dealt with in that way.

Yes it is trespass but, if no damage has been caused, it is civil trespass and in "that way", all you can do is ask the person to leave your property. If they refuse, you then call the police, and then all they can do is ask them to leave. If they still refuse, then I believe they can be arrested & charged, but I'm sure Photo Plod will correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm not saying it's right for them to do it, but it is a civil matter until they refuse to leave if requested.

We have no objection if asked first - simples !

See, I told everybody you farmers were nice guys.

 

[Briony]

Yes it is trespass but, if no damage has been caused, it is civil trespass and in "that way", all you can do is ask the person to leave your property. If they refuse, you then call the police, and then all they can do is ask them to leave. If they still refuse, then I believe they can be arrested & charged, but I'm sure Photo Plod will correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm not saying it's right for them to do it, but it is a civil matter until they refuse to leave if requested.


See, I told everybody you farmers were nice guys.

Doesn't mean we will say yes depends on the person:shrug: Especially if they have a Nikon !!!!!

 

[trencheel303]

I'm fairly ambivalent towards the whole urbexing thing. At lot will come down to judgement at the time but some people are too dense or stubborn and will go ahead regardless.

'Trencheel' (what's your real name by the way?).

There's an old saying I think you need to bear in mind...

"It's better to keep your mouth shut and have people think you're a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt"

We've safely established that on the Isle of Man, trespass would be a CRIMINAL OFFENCE... If photographers can't abide by the law, it's no wonder the police are stopping everyone left, right and centre!

Si

My real name has nothing to do with this; it's trencheel303 to everyone on here including yourself.

Your post doesn't seem to have that much in common at all with what you quoted, so I'm guessing that you've just used it as an excuse to take a pop at me. Like you did on the 1D thread as well. I'd appreciate it if you could refrain from doing this (as I have asked you already).

As for what people think of me on a forum - I couldn't give two hoots. I'm not here to make friends, and if people think I'm <whatever> for speaking my mind (something that people are far too reserved about these days) then that is their priviledge. It doesn't make my opinions and beleifs any more right or wrong than anyone else's here, and I am not a fool (as you surreptitiously suggest) by simply speaking my mind. Thanks.

 

[TheTimeChamber]

Yes it is trespass but, if no damage has been caused, it is civil trespass and in "that way", all you can do is ask the person to leave your property. If they refuse, you then call the police, and then all they can do is ask them to leave. If they still refuse, then I believe they can be arrested & charged, but I'm sure Photo Plod will correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm not saying it's right for them to do it, but it is a civil matter until they refuse to leave if requested.


See, I told everybody you farmers were nice guys.

Itm ay only be a civil matter, and the landowner can only request you leave (not using force), but they can take you to the civil court if they deem it worthy (although unlikely). It isn't just a matter of being told to sod off, as you are putting it, there is civil law surrounding it and you could potentially land in how water.

 

[grum]

What I do object to is people thinking they have the god given right to go where they want,when they want for whatever reason they want.

All property is theft anyway. Why should the fact that someone's ancestors helped the king out by rounding up peasants and forcing them to join the army mean that someone now has the exclusive use of large tracts of the country?

 

[trencheel303]

Right to roam also springs to mind.

/Waits for three thousand people to tell me I'm wrong and that I use crowbars and dynamite and stuff.

 

[Kaouthia]

but they can take you to the civil court if they deem it worthy (although unlikely). It isn't just a matter of being told to sod off, as you are putting it, there is civil law surrounding it and you could potentially land in how water.

Yes, civil law, civil court. It is a simple matter of asking them to leave your property. Anybody can take anybody to civil court for any reason. I could take you to civil court for making an offensive post aimed at me on the forums, doesn't mean I won't get laughed out of the place.

Whether somebody deems it worthy enough to take somebody to court or not doesn't really matter. It's the court's determination that counts on the day, and you would have to prove a loss of earnings/income or other costs that have been incurred as a result of the trespass, otherwise, why are you taking them to court?

I imagine they'd have to be fairly substantial costs too otherwise it wouldn't even be enough to cover the legal fee.

Like I said, I'm not saying it's right, but that's the way it is.

 

[Spiritflier]

I remember a pub landlord who thought he had the 'right to roam' wherever he liked with his huge great doberman (which was a lovely, friendly dog by the way)... He used to lift it over a stone wall and into a field belonging to a farmer friend of mine and then allowed it to run riot (there were sheep and cattle in there).

I had a polite but stern word reminding him that he was trespassing and that if the landowner considered his dog to be 'worrying' the livestock, I had every right to stick a treble-two round through it! (not that I ever would)

Unfortunately, the same law can't be applied to ignorant trespassers!

 

[Kaouthia]

Perhaps not that specific response Simon, but that's a good point for what I said about potential lost earnings, etc.

In the example above, it would still be civil trespass, he would have to leave if requested to do so by the property owner or police, but if the dog (or the dog's owner) truly had been "worrying the livestock", I would think that'd be a pretty good case in civil court if, for example, it stressed pregnant sheep to the point of miscarriage.

That would be a loss of earnings caused by the civil trespass, even though no "criminal damage" may have been done.

 

[Spiritflier]

Hi John,

Yeah, I know the analogy was a little 'off topic' but it served to place a little emphasis on the subject... Civil trespass is such a can of worms it's no wonder people get confused.

I daresay we've all been guilty of it... There's a ruined castle in North Wales called Gyrch Castle and it used to be an urbexer's paradise (along with the old looney bin in Denbigh). Nowadays the castle is still easy to get into but the nuthouse is like Fort Knox now!

Take care,
Si

 

[sj9966]

I was very recently at St Crispin's Asylum in Northampton when I bumped into two local Police Officers, when I asked them if it was OK to take some pictures, I was told

"Well you are on private property but we have no problem with you taking pictures and are not going to ask you to leave. There is also nobody else here who is going to ask you to leave either"

So I stayed on site and carried on. It seems that they were not too bothered about me being there at all as long as I wasn't smashing the place up.