Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

National Park measures could threaten one of the finest pieces of national legislation

National Park measures could threaten one of the finest pieces of national legislation

This week Loch Lomond and The Trossach National Park’s highly fraught consultation closed, in which it sought to ban wild camping on several more areas of the bonny banks of Loch Lomond.

As you may have read, the park wants to extend bylaws to the western shores and to introduce similar regulations at the northern end of Loch Long, as well as six other sites.

Now don’t get me wrong, the damaging behaviour by hoodlums and litterlouts in the park should be dealt with firmly it causes distress to 15,000 plus folk who live there.

However these proposals have worrying consequences directly threatening The Land Reform Scotland Act, which is one of most radical and progressive pieces of legislation.

Cameron McNeish, who knows a thing or two about these things, said the bylaws when introduced originally in 2011 were only supposed to be temporary that’s why he supported them but sees the new proposals as a ‘dark stain’ on the integrity of the national park.

Dennis Canavan, Vice President of Ramblers Scotland and former MP for Falkirk, which used to cover large areas of the national park, told me when these proposals were first mooted, he pointed out this could be thin edge of the wedge, with bylaws extending to other parts of the park.

And here we are.

If these proposals go ahead the whole principle of land reform will be in jeopardy. A public authority undermining one of our finest pieces of national legislation is democracy turning on its head.

Ramblers Scotland and Mountaineering Council of Scotland (MCoSf) are so worried they have asked Scottish Government ministers to intervene.

The parks consultation proposals run contrary to one of the things I am most proud of in Scotland, the right to roam. Scotland has some of the best access rights in the world and should be cherished not undermined.

I’ve got a sneaky suspicion Tom Weir, whose memorial stands on the banks of Loch Lomond, would be turning in his grave at the thought of these proposals.

In a dramatic intervention, former Chief Inspector of Police in the Loch Lomond, Kevin Findlater, who retired in 2013, slammed the park’s proposals and said they would ‘criminalise people innocently accessing the countryside’.

If the very man who oversaw the implementation of the bylaws is condemning their roll out then there is a problem.

Mr Findlater believes the park authority is using a handful of problem sites “to blow up and grossly exaggerate the problems being caused by caravans and motorhomes”.

Indeed, MCofS have made repeated requests since November to obtain data from the Park Authority, which they claimed as evidence to support the introduction of the new bylaws, but not received a thing.

The former Chief Inspector also said that “despite assurances given to the contrary, the new proposals grossly and unfairly extend the scope and geography of the bylaws in a way that must raise questions as to what are the real motivations”.

This comes to the nub of the matter.

Landowners and the RSPB are said to be highly supportive of the bylaws, and many worry that if the park authority gets their way, the precedent would open the door to landowners calling for them to be applied to their land. And that would be that, the end of right to roam, as we know it.

The previous Chief Executive Fiona Logan had made it clear she wanted the park to be treated like a private enterprise and a commercial venture. It seems Mr Gordon is carrying the mantle.

He even took to the blogosphere 12 hours before the consultation closed to defend the proposals as well as attack some of the key stakeholder who oppose them, throwing in to question the whole purpose of the consultation.

The fact is banning campers from these areas is just shifting the problem from one area to another.

We are always going to have challenges having a national park within an hour’s drive of over 50% of Scotland’s population.

The real issue is criminalising people for something which they are encouraged to do in most parts of Scotland.

Perhaps the park wouldn’t be in the position if it had an Access Forum, like we have in the Cairngorms National Park to discuss these matters properly key stakeholders and deal with disputes and proposals in advance.

The plan for its introduction died by the wayside then the bylaws were first introduced. This should be revived, and quickly.

The park should be using the existing laws of Scotland, to deal with these problems, not creating more layers of bureaucracy with bylaws to victimise innocent users of the park.

I love camping, and like the majority of the responsible outdoor enthusiasts don’t want to be criminalised, nor do the climbers who sleep in their car so they can get an early start, the cycle tourers, camper van drivers needing a rest or walkers stuck in bad weather or delayed.

The park authority’s main purpose is promoting the publics use and enjoyment of all it has to offer, not stifling it and directly undermining something that should be protected dearly, our right to roam.

Carry on camping, I say.