Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Friday, 5th December 2008 Change Date

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Landowner who lost fight to ban ramblers may appeal



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 25 April 2008
A MILLIONAIRE landowner who lost his battle to ban ramblers from his 70-acre Scottish estate may appeal against the court ruling, it was revealed yesterday.
Euan Snowie, 39, the owner of a waste-management firm and laird of the Boquhan estate near Kippen, Stirlingshire, took the Ramblers' Association and Stirling Council to court in a landmark challenge to Scotland's right-to-roam legislation.

Mr S
nowie and his wife, Claire, called for walkers, cyclists and horse-riders to be excluded from 40 acres of land surrounding their home, Boquhan House, because of concerns for their family's safety.

But in a judgment issued on Wednesday, Sheriff Andrew Cubie ruled that a 15-acre area surrounding the house was sufficient to protect the family, and that access rights should be maintained on the driveways and wooded parts of the estate.

A locked gate that prevented access along a route into the estate will also have to be opened up.

Sheriff Cubie's judgment was hailed as a major victory for right-to-roam access campaigners, led by the Ramblers' Association in Scotland.

But yesterday a spokeswoman for the Snowies said the couple were considering all their options, including the possibility of appealing against the decision.

She said that, while the Snowies considered the judgment as "a step" towards clarifying some of the terms of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003, they believed that some uncertainty remained.

The spokeswoman said: "They are still unsure about the exact tests which are to be applied to determine what the act requires to assess the extent of 'sufficient adjacent land to enable persons living in any house to have reasonable measures of privacy in that house, and to ensure that their enjoyment of the house is not unreasonably disturbed'."





The full article contains 301 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 24 April 2008 10:36 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Land reform
 
1

Beth Boyle,

NY 25/04/2008 01:56:35
I sure wish we had the right to ramble here in the USA. Its wonderful that this is the law of the land in Scotland! BRAVO!
2

Fanling,

Hong Kong 25/04/2008 03:31:55
#Beth

It's still a theoretical right in many, if not most, places. Attempts to clarify these supposed rights via local authority jobsworths can result in a prolonged, frustrating and suffocating mass of paper and petty bureaucracy. I can vouch for that personally in my home spot in Scotland.
3

Guga II,

Rockall 25/04/2008 04:19:02
There is nothing to stop them upping sticks and moving to England, as there is no such legislation there.
4

Pilrig.,

Livingston 25/04/2008 06:24:16
3 - exactly. Scotland: love it or leave it.
5

Pilrig.,

Livingston 25/04/2008 06:26:22
2 - right to roam responsibly is a fact and the law. No theoretical about it.
6

sam the god,

25/04/2008 08:26:59
How would these ramblers like it if the land owners were to turn up at their homes and walk about their gardens that is what the ramblers are doing . there is a reasonable number of these so called ramblers that leave rubbish lying around some of which can cause livestock to die but what the hey the rich land owners can afford these losses.
Ramblers groups should have to sit tests and provide adequate insurance against damage before they are aloud out.
7

Spoot,

Third rock pool on the left 25/04/2008 08:40:28
#6

What about all the rubbish (including large plastic sacks) dumped by farmers on their own land?
8

Rosie,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 08:40:50
Yes No. 6 I would like to know too - does this give me the right to go into anyone's garden, picnic on my neighbour's lawn (to save mine)?
9

RabtheCairnterrier,

25/04/2008 08:46:16
#6 "Ramblers ... should have to sit tests ... before they are aloud [sic] out"

You want eveyone to be tested and issued with a licence before they can step outside their houses?
God help us.
10

Conan,

Honduras 25/04/2008 09:21:57
A very reasonable and welcome ruling - long overdue.

The public's right to roam as did their ancestors MUST be restored.

The mere fact that the rich (me!) can buy proprty should not give them (me) the right to totally exclude the publice from rambling where Scots have rambled for millenia.

A reasonable balance must be struct between the rights of the individual and their privacy, versus the public's right of reasonable and unencumbered access for the purpose of transiting on long established pathways - that existed long before the current 'owner' was a figment of their parents' fancy.
11

sam the god,

25/04/2008 09:45:43
#8 on the farms that I shoot there are no plastic bags left lying about by the farmers all be some may do it also some are taken from where they were stored by low lifes and thrown about I have also caught people (so called ramblers) deliberately setting fire to barley fields these scum should not be aloud to enter the countryside at all.

#10

It is you that brought up the subject of sitting exams to get out of their houses not me.
You must live in a very deprived area if that is your type of thinking I stand by what I say there are a large number of ramblers that do not understand the workings of the countryside properly and need educated.

12

RabtheCairnterrier,

25/04/2008 11:06:11
#12 Sam the God writes:

" It is you that brought up the subject of sitting exams to get out of their houses not me.
You must live in a very deprived area if that is your type of thinking I stand by what I say there are a large number of ramblers that do not understand the workings of the countryside properly and need educated."

Sorry Sam, not having the advantage of divine status I hadn't actually realised I was living in a deprived area. Living on the edge of a nice wee village surrounded by fields, woods and heather moors I always thought I was quite lucky, but there you go.
Most of the surrounding countryside (about 20,000 acres or so) is owned by a man who lives in a fine big hoose a mile or so from my own rather more modest dwelling. The locals have been wandering around the place just as they please for as long as anyone can remember. The landowner isn't the least bit bothered by this - indeed he positively encourages it (the presence of walkers helps deter poachers, vandals and other undesirables), and people regularly stroll or cycle up the main drive of the Big Hoose en route to the woods behind. The immediate curtilage of the house itself is indeed private, except for the couple of days a year he opens it up for daffodil teas and the like (proceeds to charity), and amounts to a lot less than the 13 acres Sheriff Cubie ruled appropriate for Boquhan. Maybe be the difference is that this landowner's family has owned the place for over 200 years whereas Snowie, being a tad arriviste, is perhaps afflicted by a touch of status anxiety and therefore feels a bit insecure about himself, as if he doesn't quite really belong? An apparently common disease among the ranks of the nouveau riche (cf. Mrs Gloag).
PS Sam, have you ever considered learning to spell - or are Gods above such
considerations?
13

sam the god,

25/04/2008 11:30:37
#13

You are right us god’s are above such trivial things like that unlike you mere mortals.
It still does not alter the fact that a number of so called ramblers cause damage to the countryside and these scum should be excluded from the countryside until they are educated. You have stated that you live in a wee village so you will probably have seen some of the damage these scum have caused so why defend the indefensible.
14

Calum Crubag,

25/04/2008 12:53:06
Sam, these toffs ARE more than welcome to my shared back yard. As long as they don't charging around in 4x4s, shooting birds or hunting 'vermin' with packs of hounds.

The land belongs to the people.
15

Calum Crubag,

25/04/2008 12:55:51
A handful of landowning rich toffs cause more damage than a thousand ramblers - most of whom resepect the environment they use and enjoy.

It's not ramblers than take delight in killing wildlife for 'sport'. Or poisoning rare birds of prey. Or dumping chemicals and other rubbish in burns and pits. Remember, these rich freaks would hunt us if they got the chance. They loved the clearances.

Time for a Scots Pol Pol. Taigh na croich' orra!
16

sam the god,

25/04/2008 13:02:36
#16
(Time for a Scots Pol Pol. Taigh na croich' orra!)
So you think that this person is someone that should be respected try reading some factual history on this man and the mass genocide of the population done in his name odds are you would have ended up in his killing fields.
Also hunting with hounds has been banned in Scotland for a few years try keeping up to date on things.

17

RabtheCairnterrier,

25/04/2008 13:22:47
#14
I've checked the wording of the Land Reform Act and the Access Code and both documents confirm that access rights apply to the public in general, ie all of us - including Mr Snowie and Mrs Gloag. Yet from reading the newspapers one could be forgiven for thinking this particular civil right only extends to a privileged minority known as "ramblers". I find this confusing. What, exactly, is the difference between a "rambler" and a regular ordinary person? How do you recognise one, and why are they (apparently) so dangerous?
It's generally agreed that a rambler is someone who walks about, but then given that all of us who are able-bodied walk about for some of the time at least, why then are we all not "ramblers"? Or are we? There does appear to be a Ramblers Association, so maybe a rambler is someone who considers it unseemly to walk about without holding a committee meeting first. If so, it sounds very tedious indeed so I wouldn't like to be one. I did once meet some self-confessed members of the Ramblers Association and they were indeed walking about (actually at that precise moment they had stopped walking about and were perched on a rock looking at the view, but I'm sure they walked about a bit again later). They were a trio of middle-aged ladies who were very polite, well-behaved and not at all threatening. I didn't feel the least bit frightened, unlike poor Mr Snowie, but maybe he knows something about them I don't. Sam seems to, but he's a God, so I suppose he would.
18

sam the god,

25/04/2008 15:13:42
#18 yes you are right
19

Pilrig.,

Livingston 25/04/2008 16:14:38
6- one of these days the penny will drop. ordinary sized gardens of average-sized hooses will not be affected, We're talking aboot large estates.
Besides the Land Reform Act (Scotland) is for the benefit of everyone who wants to go hiking, even yerself bruv. As long as you behave responsibly, that's all that is asked of you. If you don't behave yersel the landowner can have the law onto you.
20

Pilrig.,

Livingston 25/04/2008 16:16:10
9 - see post 20, or better still read the LRA.
21

Pilrig.,

Livingston 25/04/2008 16:17:40
A) call the polis B) good idea about education.
22

Pilrig.,

Livingston 25/04/2008 16:28:29
18 - that it seems that the LRA is to the benefit of the "Ramblers", is lazy journalism. In fact it is for the benefit of EVERY citizen who want to walk the country, and observes the ways and laws of the country - in other words behave sensibly.
Of course there are those who would dilute the LRA, or abolish it. Such likes of reactionaries as Gerald Warner, who harks back to a golden age, where everyone knew their place...and doffed their hat to their "betters". And of course the bonkers ruling in the Kilfauns case was celebrated in the Scotsman leader column, the Scotsman living up to it's long-held reputation as a Tory paper.
23

Horrible Cankers at the Cyber Shebeen,

25/04/2008 16:40:23
Its quite simple really...if you do not wish anyone to walk on your property...do not buy land that allows access to people....now you would have to be pretty thick to do that now would'nt you?
24

Calum Crubag,

25/04/2008 19:06:59
#24 - Yeah, but Sam the God isn't very 'all-knowing' or 'all-seeing'. Does he know what irony or humour is? As to hunting, the toffs are still going out with the hounds. They just claim not to kill the foxes that way.
25

sam the god,

25/04/2008 19:25:21
They are not using hounds as you state but using terriers but that fact has probably gone over your head. The use of terriers is still permitted under very strict conditions.
Mind you people must question you judgment (#16) Pol Pol was one of this centauries
instigator of mass genocide if he was your hero is about sums you up.
26

Conan the Librarian™,

25/04/2008 20:14:54
Pol Pol?

I presume you all mean Pol Pot.

But Pol Pol is funnier.

In a French mime artist sort of way.
27

Gordon lying traitor scum,

25/04/2008 22:12:44
BBC Anchor Who Reported on WTC7 Collapse Early Agrees There May Be a 'Conspiracy'

YouTube

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.