Hi Everyone! We hope you enjoy this Sunday's video about a topic that we had a LOT of fun "exploring" (*is it too early for a Dad joke?). 😂 In all seriousness though - we actually have a pretty huge announcement coming to our channel this Wednesday regarding the "future" of our presence on UA-cam. As much as I hate "baiting", I want to encourage everyone to be on the lookout for a short video explanation this Wednesday since it isn't part of our normal schedule and we would greatly appreciate your feedback and support. ❤ - Ashton
@@Matt-vo1ge no you can not compare the usa to something other than usa , maybe canada, but not to all extent... but Ashton is doing this on regular base... and we see the differences between Germany( greater extension to Europe) and the USA... and it would be nice that the nice people in USA start to rethinking some of their ways, and also should we do a bit... but not in the right of way, not the freedom at all, the gun control, the health insurances, the taxes, the (insert what's important to you!)
skol from this small forest owner in Oregon USA, no fence or signs here, in the last 10 years I've only had to clean up one beer can... in 2019 😂. It's a beautiful world, thanks for sharing.
As a Norwegian, I find it ironic that in the "Land of the Free" they restrict people's movements so much, whereas here in "socialist" Norway everyone has the freedom to roam in nature.
Second that, but i'm not from Norway :) Home of the brave, land of the free; but nobody's free to go where he wants... Also, the "good fences make good neighbours"... that's so dumb, good fences only separate people, not bring them together. I rather share my garden with my neighbours so we can all enjoy one big garden in the summer, as to each having his own 15m² and barely know each other and make a fuss when a kid shoots a ball into a neighbouring garden. Good rules make good neighbours, not the fences. My frontyard is a nice big public park in the city and I love to share it with everyone from the neighbourhood and beyond, i don't need a backyard for myself..
I grew up in New York and my family regularly trespassed on private forest even climbing fences. When telling friends, they were often shocked and considered it worse than doing drugs to go on someone else’s land. After seeing your show, I realize my family must have learned this from my grandmother who grew up in the Black Forest.
My German ancestors were peasants who wanted their own land. The Palatine Germany’s came for land. The Native Americans did roam but were upset by settlers animals trampling their crops. Free roaming didn’t work with domestic livestock. But settler’s land use was very different from native land use. Modern Big agriculture is radically different. We haven’t changed attitudes though. American individualism doesn’t seem to consider others.
You just had to be careful. In Central New York there were farmers who shoot rock salt at us if we were cought taking a short cut through thier property.
As a European I went to Wyoming to view the 2017 Solar eclipse, a bit North of Lingle. We arrived at a beautiful spot, and there the landowner was standing making sure that all eclipse chasers remained on the state land and did not trespass on her private land.
I also was just north of Lingle, and found a property owner charging $50 per car to park on their field. It would have been possible to park on the side of the road, but it seemed safer, plus the owner had brought in portable bathrooms
oh, and also, the eclipse passed right over the Crescent Lake National Wildlife Refuge in Nebraska (wonderful public land), which was my original plan, but that area had a higher chance of clouds
@@alquinn8576 It was also the intention that we would view the eclipse from Nebraska, but the weather forecast made us change our plans on the morning of the eclipse and head further West to Wyoming.
When I sold a mountaibike to an American here in Bavaria, he gazed me in disbelieve, when I told him, he could go anywhere he just wanted to go to. No complaining and no shooting. For me something not even worth considering, for him a big surprise. Small country, but big freedom here, thank you for reminding me of this. Excellent, passionate contribution!
Hehe... Ich habe die gleiche Erfahrung mit meiner "Sister from another Mister" gemacht. Sie ist Amerikanerin und als ich mit ihr Wandern/Mountain biking/ Joggen war, war sie immer ganz irritiert, gar verängstigt zu Beginn, dass ein Durchqueren von (...) überhaupt kein Problem darstellt... Oder man sogar nette Gespräche gefunden hat.
But in Germany you do not have the right to roam - land owners can restrict access because they are responsible for injuries that happen on their land.
I'd look at you like you were an idiot, you can't ride your mountain bike anywhere you want in Bavaria, only on specific, legally allowed routes. Come to my forest in Bavaria and I will prosecute you.
@@Draxel restricting is something else then shooting them just because they drive up te wrong the wrong driveway. If you pass on a restictive site they just tell you to go away.
This might be a bit extreme, but a couple of weeks after a really bad downpour, my grandpa visited our cabin in the woods (no roads, no civilization for an hour and a half, built entirely by my family, cabin in the woods), only to find a makeshift wooden doorstop and a massive rock in front of the door. The lock was broken, and the linen closet had obviously been raided as 2/3 of it was neatly folded and placed on the table in the main room right next to a bottle of homemade rakia which we assume was left in apology. Other than that, everything looked as we left it. The only indication that they used the beds was the pile of laundry they left us, the bed covers and decorative pillows were all replaced perfectly. It even looked like they tried to fix our broken waterline that's consistently getting vandalized by a local bear. My grandma was a bit upset with the intrusion, but other than that, we all just accepted that these people probably got caught in a bad situation and were desperate for shelter, and clearly did their best to be respect our space despite breaking in.
I can't say I haven't been in a situation like that. I had to brake in to a cabin here in Alaska. Was up in the mountains when a blizzard swept through. There was no warning of it (this includes weather reports). I was lucky to have found it and a can of gas. I did leave my number and I even went back to check in on the place about two weeks later. I replaced the window I broke and later that same day I got a call from the family who later after finding out I replaced their window thanked me. later on we actually became. hunting Buddies.
16:24 I'm surprised by the "private beach" signs. Here in Spain the law guarantees that the sea and its surroundings as beaches must be open to the public, a law that in a way forbids private beaches. The selfishness of owning a beach looks crazy to me, like why forbid anyone to enter a part of nature, it's like I decide I own a river and no one can use it or visit it.
Most US states the beach - the tidal area or the area up the high water mark - is public. But you aren't guaranteed a path from the road to the beach. In California, we have a law that protects access to beaches, as in, in must be allowed, but it takes constant work to sue landowners who put up gates and block public easements.
I love that law. When I first came to Spain and saw how many beaches that was open to the public despite close vicinities to hotels, I was amazed! Because in my country, Malaysia, a lot of beaches has sadly been taken up by private owners (which are mostly hotels) that only made available if you pay the (stay at the hotel e.g.). It is definitely sad especially in the west coast side because we are definitely blessed with superbly beautiful tropical beaches that should be everybody's right. Thank goodness on the east coast side, they have more open beaches for the public.
This video made me realize I, as a Polish person, never worried about trespassing. Ever. I can't fathom how trespassing in a forest is even possible. Also, how can a country not have "if its not forbidden - it's allowed" as a rule is beyond me
It’s not. This video is so blatantly false, for example, only 8% of the land in the UK and 11% of the land in Norway have public “rights to roam”, compare that to Americas 35% with a near record along of large national parks. We can go anywhere, given someone doesn’t own it.
Where do you get 11% from for Norway? The vast majority land area of Norway is not fenced and +150m away from a residence as such the right to roam applies to almost the entire country. btw. England was a negative example in this video so not sure why you bring up the UK.
I had such a situation in Poland (as a Pole), where someone occupied the road as passing through land belonging to him and not only did not allow passage, but threatened to "chase me with an axe" (Poland, so not a firearm). I walked around it in the woods at the time, but after walking around I met neighbours who saw me talking to the man. They said that the troublemaking family and was annoying them (they had cut the only road through the village with this blockade), but there was nothing they could do.
PS. Of course -- the only one situation I know in Poland, where the owner was aggressive. I also know of a case where a tourist path was cut through and prevented from exploring one of the valleys near Krakow. But while I can name such cases from my own hikes, the fact is that they are few and far between and it is generally possible to hike freely.
As someone born in the U.S., it's absolutely terrifying every time I find out another right that people in other countries have, that I was never even told was a right. The more I think about it, the more I think "Land of the Free" is sarcasm.
@@iwillroamIt is for the 90% of the US citizens "made to believe" they have the best country, so the richest 10% can scam the 90% without any worries. Also this Democrats vs conservatives is for the 90%, while the rich 10% watching from above eating their popcorn and laughing.
I as an American did not actually know that "Right to Roam" actually existed anywhere. This is not something that was ever taught in school or even something that I picked up on as we visited Germany on exchange in '86 and '88. I have been a city dweller most of my life so it may never affect any land I have, but "respectfully" roaming farmland would make things easier in rural areas. Awesome topic and one to think about should the population start loving others equally instead of itself more.
As an American from the rural south west, it's usually okay to cross a farm field if you're careful but people are so insensitive, disrespectful, and non-observant that they tend to litter, stomp on and destroy plants and furrows and ditches and fences. Farming is hard enough without the neighborhood children ruining a few hundred dollars of crops every month. I am 100 percent for free roaming in America but I feel it would require a more educated, empathetic and respectful population that places more value on accountability.
It is illegal to cross farmfields in Europe too if crops has been planted there, same thing with fields of treeplants in the forest, but it is usualy ok to pass in the forest if one does not destroy anything or step on the treeplants. However, in Sweden it is fully legal to put up a tent for 24 Houers on non farmlands or forest plantages as long as it is 50 meters or more from the house where people are living (fishing, except for in the sea may requiering a licence here, but in the sea and some of the bigger lakes it is free, but ponds, creeks and smaller lakes are usualy not allowed to fish in without special premission from the landowner but it is free to swim in them, hunting does always require a special license, maybe except for things like rodents (but not birds, most birds are protected or requires a license, it also requires a special premission to carry guns in some places) if one really would like to hunt rodents... ).
Its basicly the same everywhere in europe. Stay away from peoples gardens and homes and build up earia's and don't harm any crops and stay away from lifestock (the last also more for your own safety to) but if its not fenced or fenced of with an "open" gate you can respectfully walk on it.
There's a LOT we Americans are not taught in schools, and a lot of this dearth of information stems from 'certain states' (*ahem* former Confederates) wanting to conceal the racist/white supremacist (no real difference between the terms) history that has lead to the current system. "Locking down the land" in the Great Plains may have been to 'protect crops from free-grazing cattle,' but elsewhere it was intended to provide an easy way to convict 'certain people' (blacks) of crimes such as trespass and loitering, invoking the 13th Amendment ("Slavery is prohibited ... EXCEPT AS PUNISHMENT FOR A CRIME..") to re-enslave those who had been recently freed. And now that we have these literally soulless, artificial people, called Corporations, who have been granted MORE rights than Natural Persons (the latest example is the CItizens United ruling), we have these artificial THINGS claiming perpetual ownership of land, and slowly trying to extend that into perpetual ownership of the Natural Persons who work that land.
It's so stupid. There's so much undeveloped land in a lot of places, like 10+ acres of mountainous forest behind a house that's never going to be used by the owner, and no one else can use it either, because every single piece of land has to be owned by someone and there was never sufficient interest for the local government to buy a section of this particular parcel to turn into a park. Of course 9 times out of 10 you'd never run into any trouble if you did walk on it, but between the "Posted" signs (which were probably installed decades ago by a long-dead previous owner as over-zealous CYA) and stories you hear about someone knocking on the wrong door by mistake no one tries, and everyone accepts that the only way to access nature is by going to small designated places that are few and far between.
When I first learned that in the USA people don't walk into fields or forests or other such open spaces for fear that they might get killed by the owner I was completely shocked because it simply never occured to me that such a thing would happen in the 21st century. It just sounds so....feudal.
In Canada it's often the other way around. Landowners fence their property and put up "no trespassing" signs to deter hunters who might mistake them for deer and shoot them.
@@wizardsuth As someone who grew up in rural American we mostly do that for the same reason, The only rural area you generally have to worry about being shot randomly by the "owners" is drug cartel land, "non-public" government land, and meth dens.
@@flyingmonkeydeathsquadronc968with me being Norweigan, that mindset should probably be communicated more across the world. Cause i might have gotten myself shot if i ever travelled to the US before learning this not long ago
You're generally not going to get shot, unless you stumble upon an illegal operation of some sort (drug or otherwise). But that can happen on public land as well as on private land. The real reason is the US legal system. You are legally responsible for anyone on your property. If they get hurt you will get sued. It doesn't matter how the injury happened. Fencing, posting no-trespassing signs, and generally denying access without permission is the only legal defense.
@@onehorsetoomany8006But don't U.S also have that castle law where you can legally kill someone if they get to your property? Seems perfect way for a killer to get away with murder. Or doesn't the castle thing cover the owned land?
One thing I didn't hear in this video was insurance liability. When I was a kid in upstate NY, No Trespassing signs were few and far between. Now days they are everywhere. Too many land owners have been sued by someone that may have been injured on their property.
That's insane. With right to roam comes the responsibility for yourself, nature and other people (so you don't bother them by going close to housing etc.).
Because the US fcked this up at the start. I sprain my ankle on a hike i do the following. I call my boss to tell him i‘m not coming for two weeks and i go see a doctor. Doesn’t cost me a cent. Most americans first thought is how much money they will lose with this and they need someone to compensate for those losses.
@@tinoj9661 Yeah, because *personal property rights* are such a horrid thing! In the US - honest you sprains your ankle, you walk it off (you made it home right?), skip the doctor, ice it down and get your hiney to work the next day - because you're a rugged hiking kind of person; bad sprain - borrow your buddy's crutches. Unless of course you were emergency air-lifted out of your hiking area - but you might want a bone protruding or at least broken (medical insurance probably covers that - 'sick days' can be used for time off - ergo no lost $$). Otherwise you might call your boss, tell him your not coming in for two weeks because of a sprain? He'd probably tell you to take the next month off and while off get your resume updated (cv?); dishonest you - sprains your ankle - looks around wondering how much money you can get from the land owner if they were sued because you were a stumble-bum and sprained your own ankle or you're a pretty good actor ..... before you remember you're on Federal or State lands and can't sue them - so go back to start - you walk it off.
As an European every time I’ve heard the phrase “private beach” I thought it meant that someone owned a private island. Never had it occurred to me that Americans don’t have access to regular beaches
I spain private sections of a beach exist because you can legally fence your backyard and the right to roam is not a law, so it is kind of a conflict here. People ina town near by recently rioted against the fencing of a mansion of the kazakh president (it is real) because it owned coastal area and a traditional path. They tore down the fence. Private beaches are starting to get outlawed even when the right to roam is not really tipified
I live in Switzeland and love the fact that the farmers smile and greet you pleasantly if you are crossing their land. But walkers respect the land, close gates or electric fences behind them, don't leave litter, don't trample crops and don't disturb the animals. But in England and Australia (I don't know about America) many walkers leave a trail of litter behind them and generally vandalize the environment.
Not really. The biggest problem is not the public damaging private property, but those who maintain the pubic rights of way delibrately damaging fences and so on in the name of claiming the property was damaged by the public. Reason why is to then try and remove the Public Right of Way and remove the need to maintain the PRoW and eventually reclaim the property.
@@johnclarke2997 I noticed the a similar tactic in New York state, and actually - infuriatingly - on one of my jogging paths a few miles from my condo. The homeowner adjacent to the path "incrementally" shifted his fence inch by inch, month by month, so as to encroach onto the path, with the obvious intention of eventually stealing more land. This tactic seems hugely popular, notably with billionaire Californians who want to steal their own "private beaches" from the American public who own all of them, by federal law and also by tradition that has existed since the existence of America itself.
Living for 10 months in Georgia (about 30 years ago) during my university time, I once wanted to go out to a walk in the woods, just like I was used to in Germany. So I picked my bicycle (even this made me a weirdo), rode it out of town, searching for the walking ways in the woods I expected to find. All I actually found were fences and "No trespassing" signs, leaving me really puzzled and disappointed. Thanks for clearing that up. For me, this definitely is another reason to live in Europe rather than in the US.
bruh, at first i thought you were talking about the country Georgia. Only at the very end i realised that you are talking about the state of Georgia. 😐
@@enemy1191 are you american? In my (european) language and most other languages, state = country. We have the the state/country divided into smaller bites regions. Bavaria in Germany for example. That would be the comparison to Georgia in the US.
@@klarapopilkova5791 I am also European and i also thought you meant the country and not one of the US states. (ig it was because of no specification) It made me confused also, because i don't think Georgia would have roaming relagulations (ignoring russia border problems at Caucaus).
@@klarapopilkova5791 No, im European, Latvian. In my European country and European language state isnt the same as country. Maybe it's because Germany is a Federation, there are only 13 in the world, USA is one of them, and Germany and Austria are the only ones in Europe (according of wiki and stuff). In Latvia we have municipalities, counties, regions, districts etc, BUT no states. Even if a country is made out of states, at the end it is a country, then states and then other variations of the regions.
This is why I would say this won't work well in the US. People really don't respect each other and arguably don't respect themselves. Maybe that is why this is needed, however. Maybe regularly interacting with moderately removed neighbors could imbed respect for property into the culture again. I learned it in youth groups, but not everyone was part of those. Who would have taught them? No one.
Comes down to up bringing. There are more disrespectful, entitled and DGAF people from America due to decades of poor upbringing. American culture and values have changed for the worse. Just watch ANY 1960's family show to understand the values, culture and standard of living America once had.
It might be the problem with the US is it's intensely individualistic. Everything you own is yours and if someone steps on your lawn, you point your gun at them. We're so defensive with everything it's crazy. It's definitely a topic that's worth a deeper dive because the absence of the right-to-roam law is just one of the consequences of the current state of the American psyche.
To me, a whole cultural mindset is needed to have this privilege. It’s about respecting the common good, what is good for society, nature. Same with the freedom of speech, and gun ownership. It comes with individual responsibility, to be mindful, of other people’s freedoms to be. More respect, less fear.
Bill, I agree with your thoughts, except for restrictions on "free speech". Free speech is is offensive speech; regardless of what one says, someone is offended. There is no such thing as "some" free speech, just as there is no such thing as a little bit pregnant. One is always free to ignore offensive speech or, counter it with better arguments. Libel and slander laws cover lies perpetrated about individuals. Nevertheless, the truth must always be a valid defence in such a case.
@@BasementEngineeri dont agree with you that free speech is offensive speech. And there is a difference between intentionally hurting someone or just having to say the truth, knowing you might offend people. Saying the truth in the most polite way you can, and, in an impolite way, if thats the only way the other party will understand, is crucial for a healthy society
@@hetedeleambacht6608 Disagree! Would you call today's western societies healthy? I surely do not. What has contributed to bringing on the cesspool we find ourselves in now? In my opinion, and that of others, it is political correctness and the inability to call a spade a spade. Change needs to be implemented and that begins with free speech, regardless of who gets offended. As I wrote earlier, libel and slander are already illegal under the law. Telling the truth, no matter whom it offends, is necessary for a healthy society.
@@hetedeleambacht6608 Perhaps, but the US supreme court ruled that hate speech doesn't exist, or at least can't be a crime. I think Matal v. Tam in 2017 is the most recent case where they said it's only a crime if you incite people to violence or other crimes.
Coming from Malaysia and currently living in Scotland, it's just unbelievable how much the nature is accessible for me. Given Scotland's many hills and open areas, you really could go everywhere as long as you're up to it and being responsible when doing so. It's like playing Zelda Breath of The Wild for me, you see somewhere far away that seems impossible to reach, but you could look up for records of people crossing through that place or mountain. It's just straight up amazing when you could literally go everywhere as long as you're ready for it.
To quote a line often omitted in a patriotic (actually very socialist) American song: "There was a big, high wall there that tried to stop me A sign was painted said "Private Property" But on the backside, it didn't say nothing That side was made for you and me."
Fellow Malaysian here. Malaysia's hills are covered by dense rain forests and tropical vegetations that are too challenging for most recreational hikers to navigate safely. It's hard to look 10 meters ahead and find a proper foothold. The humidity, insects, flora and fauna amongst other things call for a lot of preparation and strength
About malaysia, YOU WANNA KILL YOURSELF OR WHAT? DON'T GO TO THE JUNGLE FOREST JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT TO. Thick rainforest jungles are scary man you can just disappear without any warning and it's hard to find you. Unfortunately gotta stick with recreational areas
As an American, I couldn't tell you exactly when this idea of scarcity became so widespread and considered normal, but the concept can be seen everywhere in our culture. The idea that land is owned by someone, that unsaid shame of foraging, this idea that we need to limit our access to anything free.
@@amandak.4246 And yet there are, and have been historically, many functioning societies where land ownership didn't include the right to put up "No trespassing" signs every 20 feet and exclude everyone else from any use of your land whatsoever. Most indigenous societies, in fact, lacked a concept of individual land ownership. Land belonged to the tribe, and may have been divided into section that were, say, the hunting grounds of this or that family... but there was no concept of "This land belongs to Bob, and nobody else can go there without his permission." That's actually how it worked for most of the 300,000 years that modern humans have existed.
I'm an American who has had an interest in foraging and finding fossils. I like collecting bones and things but it feels taboo to start exploring around. Even worse that I'm in the Midwest and half the people here are just itching for an excuse to shoot somebody.
@amandak.4246 You mean CAPITALIST society. There are enough societies that worked very well without the concept of private ownership of land and looking at the crisis of affordable housing, I am not sure if even for capitalist societies it is rather the opposite: Society doesn't work without TIGHT LIMITATION of private land ownership.
I had never seen a "No trespassing" sign before I visited the US. i have been to several other countries that are great, and one is free to roam. @@amandak.4246
My home state of Oregon designated its entire coastline as a "public highway" so property rights could not infringe on the public's enjoyment of its beaches. I was surprised to learn not all coastal states allowed public access to all their beaches.
I live on the Oregon coast and your allowed to be on any stretch of beach anytime you want, you're just not allowed to sleep on it or it's a 1000 dollar ticket for illegal camping on the beach. So no, that's not really freedom unless you don't sleep. And this is exactly what the Oregon coast towns do every summer to the Oregon coast trail through hikers who opt for camping on the beach instead of shelling out 400 dollars a night for a hotel room. Which is essentially illegal for them to do being that it's designated public land, but they do it anyway because there's really no such thing as real freedom in this country, only a brainwashed illusion of it that we've been spoon fed since birth. Cheers.
@@jamierobinson3349 Well, like Ashton said, there are places in Europe where freedom to roam doesn't mean freedom to camp. The Oregon coastal towns no doubt don't want the beaches, tourism to which supports their economies, to turn into filthy permanent encampments like Portland has. Oregon declared the coastline a public highway, and I can't think of any other public highway you can camp overnight on.
@@timelston4260 lol, they don't fine the homeless for camping on the beach, only those who they know can pay the ticket like OCT backpackers and people who aren't homeless. So no, you are incorrect. And Portland became a 💩hole because the genius state government decided it was a good idea to decriminalize all drugs inviting every homeless drug addict in America to move here. That's the facts and that's the reason. I've been to Europe more than once and was blown away by how much more freedoms they enjoy than we do. Cheers. (and only 30% of the Oregon coast trail is on the "Hwy")
This is something I noticed first when watching some British history youtubers, in some places they said "Oh yeah, there's right to roam here, so we can just cross this field.", which absolutely blew me away.
@@mondaysinsanity8193 Clearly, you have no idea about how the world works Obviously if you destroy something while crossing the land, you have to compensate the owner of that land
@@starhalv2427 lol you say that and say i dont know how the world works. How how does this happen. The land owner doesnt have park rangers or time to watch everyone who comes through. If theres plenty traffic they couldnt if they tried. Simple cameras wint work because tresspassing alone isnt enough. They have to actually see the action take place. In our state parks we have rangers we have cameras and yet...still need people who pick up litter and fix vandalism. Just because something is illegal doesnt stop it from happening you need a way to enforce it
@@salerio61 oh thats even worse no everyone has a right to the farners labor? Creating and maintaining trails takes work often quite a bit of work in fact. But the farmer has to do all that work for free...and you have a right to the fruit of thst labor....uh huh You know what that is...right?
I'm Polish, currently living in the UK. I lived in a large town but surrounded by fields, lakes and forests. I knew how to forage for mushrooms and berries before I knew how to write their names. Before I started school, I knew how to McGuyver a fishing rod, bow and arrows, and a lean-to shelter from stuff I could find in the forest. When we still had winters, we'd go ice skating or just on walks across the frozen lake. As teenagers, me and my friends spent more time in fields than anywhere else - the best place for a summer party is on the beach by the lakeside (in a forest). There were 4 of us in a 2 bedroom flat (my parents, my brother and me) but I never missed nature. Now I live in a house with a garden and I feel constricted. I can't imagine having as much land as the USA has and not being able to access any of it.
@CrimsonVipera "I can't imagine having as much land as the USA has and not being able to access any of it." There are literally billions of acres of publicly accessible land here in the US. When I was young, we lived in the city, yet there were still natural places for children to play and explore. Most cities in this country do have places that are still very natural, even if there are skyscrapers only blocks away. Unfortunately, much of this is no longer accessible, especially to children, due to the liberal homelessness laws. The homeless have taken over these once natural "escapes" from the city. It's no longer safe to let your kids go by themselves to play at the stream because they are now packed with homeless drug addicts. The one place we would go as kids, we'd catch salamanders and crawfish and play with turtles, etc. We had a tree fort and about a mile away there was another little fort we'd built. The big kids grew pot plants. LOL This was literally within a few miles of the Capital in Washington, DC. The authorities seem to be keeping a handle on keeping the actual trail free of homeless, but under the bridges, etc is another issue entirely. Past dark, it's simply not safe to be there. For all those who think there is nowhere to enjoy nature, this is vid literally biking distance from our nation's capital. As you can see, a lot of effort has been made to make sure there is a very wide variety of things to do to commune with nature, even within a large city. ua-cam.com/video/V71ltqTFg_A/v-deo.htmlsi=R0bWunspZkkPZ1kS
@@revjaybird2And you still think it's okay for a quarter of your entire 50 state country to be privately owned and never accessible to the public? The owner has the right to literally set it on fire if he/she so wants and there's nothing to stop him/her or stop the fire from extending and burning public land too. And I am SURE he will be held responsible for that wildfire he caused just like SO MANY wildfire starters have before him/her. Also where should the homeless people harassed and having their lives threaten by the local rural/urban police go if not some peaceful forested area? Are the homeless people pedophiles pr even aggressive or drug users that wanna kidnap children that you're talking about them with such disdain while having no problem with one person owning A THOUSAND ACRES from his plantation owner great-grand pappy( that existed both in the North AND South of the US) while others are forced to contend with a small house and garden simply because their parents didn't came over on the Mayflower, back when even blacks owned other blacks and whites and could make a fortune off of the land they had if it was worked by people you paid for only once?
@hardstyle905 Snow and Ice are getting rarer and more ephemeral each year in Central Europe. When I was a kid in the 90s, there was almost continual frost from December to February at the foothills of the Alps in Germany.
I remember walking in Scotland with an American and she was very worried that we were “on the path” when I was trying to find the mountaineering line. It took a week for her to accept that we could actually go where we wanted to in the hills.
As an Englishman who loves to walk in the countryside, I was fascinated to watch this UA-cam video. It does, however, give the impression that hiking and walking in England is pretty much limited to the 8% of land covered by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act. What it doesn’t describe however is the enormous number of public footpaths and Bridleways across the whole country - they are everywhere! OK you are limited to where the footpath goes, but in a small country like England there are not many places you can’t get to on the public footpath network. In addition, the footpaths are generally maintained and are easier walking than just striding across rough untended land. I have only recently found your channel and I’m very impressed by the topics you cover and the open way you discuss them - keep up the good work.
Yes, the real access concern is not England but Ireland. No footpaths or bridleways. Currently there's a lot of informal access, particularly to waterways (which England is especially poor on) but none of it is codified in law so access can disappear with a change of landowner or an incident. Add a US style approach to liability...
In England and Wales, in addition, 'no trespassing' signs are - outside of military areas, the vicinity of nuclear power stations, dockyards, airports and other of-necessity secure establishments and the like - just a formality. 'Trespassing' insofar as it exists (outside the curtilage of a private home, of course - which may well be extensive) is only a civil offence, not a criminal one. If you cause no harm and leave peacefully when requested, even if the landowner brought a private prosecution against you, you'd be hugely unlucky if it was ruled you had to pay the landowner five pence.
I’m a Native American, not just an American. Our traditional beliefs are that no one can actually own the land. The house you build is yours, but the land belongs to no one. If you plant crops, those are yours and I won’t disturb them. If I plant crops in the land that the law says are yours, those are mine, but you can have them too. We place a greater value on respecting the individual, not the law. Our traditional views didn’t take into account the commercialization of agriculture, because it is an alien concept.
This can work only with a very thin density of population, which is not the case anymore, nowhere in whole world. Actually everywhere the "tragedy of commons" is taking place, which leads inevitably to the destruction to our world, as long as there are no legal limitations.
@@n.mariner5610 Chicago and Finland have about the same population. Manchuria in China has about 20 million people and Outer Manchuria in Russia has a little over 1 million. California has more people than the ten least-populated states combined. Russia has roughly the same population as the UK & Germany combined, spread over 11 time zones. There is plenty of open space to support triple the world's population.
@@almitrahopkins1873 Yes there are still areas not being exploited, e.g. Antarctica, but only because there are no resources there and it is extremely difficult to reach. Man always has exploited to the max all available resources which are not protected by law. It is not only land, but also the sea, the vast oceans suffer greatly through overfishing, and maybe the biggest problem of our time is the spoiling of our atmosphere by polluting with CO2. This all is called the tragedy of commons, and the only solution to prevent this is legal protection.
@@n.mariner5610 man has not always exploited land to the maximum extent, to the point where it detriments even him. Native Americans were living sustainably and stewarding the land before colonizers showed up to ruin it for everyone. They used to do control burns to rejuvenate the land for future generations. To this fucking day we can’t even manage that
You forgot a huge issue in the States. ( or i might have missed it), If someone gets hurt on your property in America, they can sue you for everything you have and everything you make in a lifetime and more. AND You might lose your property defending yourself legally even if you win the case.
Yes, that’s exactly the problem we have here in Ireland. I commented on it, in reply to someone else and they doubted it. Now I can’t find it to respond to them, but this is exactly the issue. The occupiers liability act enshrined the landowners responsibility for the safety of everyone accessing the land, for whatever purpose. That included burglary, up to very recently.
@@duncancremin1708 In here - while this would be cases in absolutely any “public spaces”… there it is absolutely the same as what You describe. … if You step on private property (not a public space!) without permission, the risk is ABSOLUTELY on you, even if You die. You are not chased away, due to customary rights to roam - still You stepped there on your own - so YOU (that is before the law and practically) need to weight the risks yourself. For example if You went into my forest in the storm - you are absolutely in rights to do so, but you would almost surely die… and I have nothing to do with that. It would be absolutely different if You would be my employee and I would send You there (You would sue me very the same way like what you described in your country)…. roaming is something where You didn’t ask for my permission … so I didn’t give You guidance - we are neutral to each other as long as You don’t cross the line of damaging my property (it’s like if You would step into wilderness without owner - with predators and dangers - it’s completely your game. It is treated generally as a “wilderness” when you “roam” … you are just replicating millennia of tradition of crossing wilderness here to get somewhere (you wouldn’t be able to find who’s forest it is in that distant past while crossing it, you just needed to cross it - and not cause a damage… and it’s up to You protect yourself from wolves, bears and falling trees … and so is the situation inherited up to this day {even though today you hypothetically could find who the owner is… but why?})
Liability like that does exist in Germany, for example if someone slips on your part of the sidewalk because you didn't clear the snow you may be on the hook. However, the restitution sums in the German legal system tend to be a lot smaller than in the US and on top of that almost everyone has private liability insurance (Privathaftpflichtversicherung) which would cover this case. And of course, it's "within reason" if you own a forest and someone trips on a stick I don't think they'd have a case ;)
As much as I understand the motivation behind not wanting strangers to pass through your property to avoid legal trouble in the event of an accident, I don't understand how this can coincide with the right to be able to shoot them as soon as they dare set foot in your woods. Under American law I can sue you if I trip over a root in your woods, but is it all okay if you make me eat a lead-based dietary supplement without passing it through my mouth?
It's always been really ironic to me that a land that used to have literal royalty that owned all the land and would fight wars over them would end up with more public space and the freedom to use it for its people than a country that fought to free itself from the same kind of royalty.
It's probably because the US has so much public land so that rambles of hundreds of miles or more are possible -- there are great trails that stretch across multiple states and enormous tracts of land (National Parks, National Monuments, National Forests, BLM land, state forests, etc) where you can hike, camp, and even drive off road. Europe, in contrast, is much more densely populated, so that without the right to roam across private lands, there would be far fewer opportunities for such recreation. We've enjoyed hikes in Europe that passed through private lands, opening and closing gates as we went, but we don't feel at all hemmed in while exploring the vast wild areas of the American west (or, for that matter, of the large wild areas of the northern half of our own state of Michigan).
@@kibicz In Denmark a large forested area to the north of Sealand was the Kings private hunting ground for his Parforce Hunting, as also a large part of southern Sealand, witch had a stony fence keeping the animals inside! Today we still have a King (Actually a Queen), but with hardly any power anymore.
all the problems in america, ever boiling down now to our being in short supply of topsoil, fossil water, fresh water, and perpetual genocide of our otherwise genetic diversity, by african heroin having gotten into on the paper work side of law, the government, and media, leaving no means to stop africa's rape of our vital resources either. america was built on the backs of eurasian immigrants who have been, and are being, perpetually genocided. myself being a childless genocide victim, so utterly terrified of the heroin bitches that i have been alone for 18 years; nearly destitute, everything we worked for being dissolved, where if i had the monetary equivalent of picking one tuft of cotton i would be a multi-billionaire after taxes. africa's transparent foreign weapons systems have been on the ground and active in the united states since its inception. they don't report their numbers, they don't report their incomes, and they will always breed faster than the food grows until the food just suddenly stops.
I live in Australia, we have a lot of public land, beaches are not allowed to be restricted from public use, we have huge national parks, state forests & nature reserves and if you go to country areas I cannot imagine a farmer threatening someone for walking across their field unless they were disturbing animals or littering or something. It’s polite to ask permission for things but if you are just hiking I don’t think anyone would care. You’d probably get stopped for a chat though 😂
Yeah mate stay out of farmers fields. If nothing else it's a biosecurity hazard. You're walking in plant and fungal material and diseases on your shoes and tires that can ruin land for decades or forever. If you don't know the issues in the local area you should always ask.
Yesterday was a Finnish Nature Day in Finland. It's associated with a Sleep Outdoors campaign, where people are encouraged to leave their homes and spend a night outside. I just got back home, actually. Took my hammock and backpack and headed into the forest for the night, slept well and woke up feeling refreshed. I really couldn't imagine any other way to live than having an unquestionable right to access the vast outdoors.
The maker of this video has grossly misrepresented the reality of government owned land available to the people in the USA. Imagine the entire land areas of France, Germany, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Finland, Sweden and Norway without cities or people being set aside as a park and it would still be LESS land than the federally owned lands in the USA. In addition to that each state has their own separate lands and state parks some of which are vast, also counties, townships, cities etc can and do have their own public lands. Then there are considerable private conservation and recreation areas which can be assessed. The fact that property rights and private property are respected in the USA doesn't mean there is any lack of opportunity explore the outdoors and wilderness lands.
@@TheMVCoho Over here in northern Europe a little bit of right has needed to give room for a little bit of freedom. I'd say the important thing is that nobody is complaining about it, generally speaking. It's accepted as a cultural thing. You only see complaining when people are abusing the right, mostly by disturbing the landowners by getting too close to their houses or leaving trash behind. However, that's the kind of marginal behavior that affects pretty much any human existence. Like a passing driver can throw a soda can onto your lawn from their car or young adults can hang out near your house with their more-expensive-than-their-car sound system waking up the whole neighbourhood in the middle of the night. Typically the worst, most low-IQ people don't wander the wilderness, though, so undeveloped private property a distance away from cities is spared from much in that sense.
@@TheMVCoho I know, I've visited some. But like said, it's a cultural thing. Owning property and using it is one thing and well liked here too, but owning a huge piece of land and possibly restricting others from accessing it (accessing, not using as in downing trees and whatnot) just rubs us the wrong way. Being able to wander wherever is the very definition of freedom.
@@amandak.4246 Like I said, you own the land to be able to utilise it, but there's little point of restricting anyone hiking through it. What does it matter if someone wanders through your patch of forest? They're not allowed to build, down trees, make fires or so forth, which are landowner rights. They're just passing through, maybe picking up a few wild berries along the way.
As someone who lives in Utah in the US; I can confirm how HARD it is to find good backwood trails. My grandpa tells me stories about so many amazing hikes he took to the top of canyons local to my hometown, and today 80% of this canyon land is owned by a local copper mine company, and they defend their land with active armed guards and local police and search&rescue teams. So in short, I live in a state full of beautiful outdoors and gorgeous mountainsides, as it’s slowly being destroyed and blocked from access by the public.
Gee, it's almost like a person could die or be seriously injured in a canyon or mine. A business needs to obligate the lowest common denominator when it comes to safety. And that LCD is incredibly low as of late.
You have to divide that by the amount of local methheads that died there from sheer negligence. And also the fact that local police and "search&rescue teams" guard your house. And also that there are lots of empty canyons you could buy yourself and open to the public.
@@gang-ridertv5433 the police don't "guard my house." I have to guard my house. The Police show up after the fact, take note of what was stolen and probably never find it or who stole it. And if they do find it, it probably ends up eventually getting auctioned off to further fund the police.
Here in Czech Republic, there's a long-ongoing tradition of "mushroom hunting/picking". A lot of people go to the woods, to pick mushrooms, to then make Smaženice/Bramboračka/other dishes from them. Most of these woods are privately owned, yet no one bats an eye that people go there harvesting mushrooms. I couldn't imagine the access to these areas being forbidden. It's a fundamental right to me that I can literally go wherever I want in nature.
I recently found that some woodland areas I would occasionally hike in for physical and mental health were posted as no trespassing by someone who doesn’t even live here, and aren’t maintaining or developing the land. It pisses me off that natural areas are just blocked to me now, and makes me feel trapped.
Soooo... get over it? Find somehwere else to hike? Find something else to do for your health? Buy your own damn land? There are myriad of ways around this. You're whining about nothing.
@@martian14 Unfortunately, doing so can also create problems there...if they can figure out who did it, it can become a major problem beyond tresspass/destruction of property, it also means you take the liability for any injuries anyone who wouldn't have had permission has there that would have seen it.
@@GeneralNickles yeah bro he should definitely roll over for some fat fuck rich pig who can't let other people enjoy the land they have just as much right to be in.
I would have to guess another part of why it is so restrictive is because of the liability laws in the US. If someone were to hurt themselves on your property. Then you can be held liable for their misfortunate situation. This has personally happened to me. I neighborhood child hurt themselves climbing on a tree in my front yard. For some reason, this was my problem and I had to pay for their medical bills.
Basically opposite approaches. Over here the parents would be responsible. They haven't taught their kid how to climb a tree or to not climb a tree. That's the big thing parents are supposed to do, educate their kids.
@@Gazer75 It was negotiated with my insurance, and they raised my rates for 2 years after paying out $2000 to the other family. I never spoke to or ever saw these people, aside from receiving a notice from my insurance.
@@gubid Here the police and courts would laugh if someone tried to sue someone because their child fell down a tree. The child got a lesson and wont do it again most likely. And because healthcare is "free" there is no insurance company to involve. A case that would be close is some MMA guy doing a military dive of the pier near the Munch museum in Oslo and hit the bottom. Got paralyzed waste down. After suing the municipality for lack of visible signs he apparently won in court. How much hes getting has not been decided yet, but his lawyer is hinting at bout a demand for 1 million USD.
@@Gazer75Here (another EU country) we do need separate liability insurance ("familial insurance") for such mishaps as kids (not your own) falling from your trees or fences. Our health insurance is organised around mandatory insurance provided by typically non-profit mutualities.
As a Norwegian, I definitely take this right for granted. I didn't even grasp the concept that I couldn't just camp out anywhere I wanted when I was in the US. It felt like I was stripped of my basic human rights. When you buy a pass to a ski resort over here, you're not buying access to use the land; rather to use the resort's facilities (such as the ski lift, restrooms, cafés, etc)
@Henoik "It felt like I was stripped of my basic human rights." You allowed yourself to feel like you were stripped of your basic human rights. Most ski areas are privately owned, btw. Near most ski areas, there are in fact public lands that you could camp on, if you wanted to. Your ignorance of that does not constitute the stripping of your human rights.
@@revjaybird2 I didn't go to any American ski resorts (I mean, why tf would I, I live in Norway). I went to national parks (which are apparently both public and privately owned, but still it's possible to trespass...which makes no sense to me)
@@revjaybird2 They didn't want me to camp out there, which I'm guessing isn't really trespassing. But the whole concept of trespassing is... Foreign to me. We don't have a singular concept for trespassing over here - rather trespassing can be explained to a Norwegian by several different concepts, but at the same time it won't be complete.
@@Henoik It was probably part of that particular park's rules that no overnight camping is allowed. Parks have rules. Some parks have more rules than others. There is no way to say, "You don't belong here, please leave?"
When I left the states I was so appalled folks were trying to get me to walk thru other people's properties and they gave me the most ghastly look. That was the 1st of MANY culture shocks.
When I was a kid growing up in Schleswig-Holstein, I often walked home from school instead of getting picked up by my dad by car or use the school bus .... the shortest way across fields, a small forest and a cow pasture (a distance of just under 2km). These were all privately owned and I often ran into the owners and instead of yelling at me or scaring me away, the most they ever gave me was the advice not to cross the cow pasture if the cows were too close or to look out for certain birds in the forest and if I saw them, to tell the forest owner or to follow only on the tractor furrows, so as not to damage the sowing
@@victorsamsung2921 It becomes like a theme park though. You have to take time off and pay to travel and get into the parks. While that's a great opportunity, there's something to be said to just be able to walk into your nearest forest and chill out.
@@Crozz22 If i'm not mistaken, even in many rural towns in the countryside there are many forests and hills you can walk in or on. In States like Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Georgia and Arkansas etc.
@@victorsamsung2921 For most Americans it's not as simple to access tho? I'm in Norway and there's a forest just a 5 min walk form my home where I can pick mushrooms and berries or pitch a tent. We've even foraged on our short walk home from daycare. It's like that even in Oslo, not just rural towns.
@@victorsamsung2921 You don't even know what you are talking about. "The USA does have lots of national parks. Even more so than Europe." Absolutely wrong! Europe has a total of 376.461km² of national parks (546 national parks in total), the USA "only" 210.000km² (63 national parks in total). So Europe has clearly more of them, for the record. "Not to forget, more nature too" Oh no. That's just wrong. Can't get worse from here. You'll also find waaaay more nature and more diversity here in Europe, whatever metric you want to go for, when you say "more nature". edit: typos
I am from Gremany and went to the US for one year as a student exchange. It was so weird to me how aggressively protective people were of their private property. I remember us playing soccer, or some other ballsport and our ball going ove the hedge into the neighbors yard. Not even far into it or close to their house, just slightly on the other side of the hedge. As soon as we stepped over to retrieve the ball we were yelled at and threatened to get off the person's property. This was quite a formative experience for my young self. In my opinion this whole video highlights again how America is one step further ahead from us toward realizing the doctrines of profits over people and the individual over community. We are getting there in Europe as well, but the US is more extreme I would say.
@@parallelpinkparakeet As I wrote in my comment, it was more of a hedge, or barrier made up of trees and shrubs, not so much a hard fence. But in a similar case, especially in a rural area as this was, back home, yes, I would have just gone over and retrieved the ball without nobody batting an eye. I wouldn't say it is explicitly allowed to, property rights are a thing here too, but people are less paranoid and protective about it. My point was that to me, this was a banality and I never expected such a strong response.
@@Mattiesneu I don't think it's fair to base an entire country off one experience, unless this happened multiple times. In the suburbs and cities the above scenario happens a lot and most people don't care if you retrieve a ball that's barely in their yard as long as you're not damaging anything.
In Switzerland there are even a lot of public trails that go through privately owned land, often so close to a house that you could peek through the owner's windows ^^. The freedom you can get when decency is the norm is astonishing.
@@thatundeadlegacy2985No it's not 'creepy' unless you're an abnormally nosey and ruse person. The public footpaths and bridleways in England and Wales are similar, often going directly alongside private homes or through private gardens. They often go directly across farmer's fields where there may be crops growing or animals grazing. Nonetheless, you have the right to follow the path. Of course you should use common-sense and courtesy - both of which are in short supply nowadays! However, many farmers - especially hill farmers - have cause to be grateful to observant hikers, who may report an injured animal or a broken fence, before the farmer has had a chance to get to far-flung corners of his land on his daily 'rounds'.
As a forest owner, fields and meadows owner, garden and farmhouse owner in Czechia, Central Europe … - I don’t see any conflict between my property rights and freedom to roam (as is exercised over here). People absolutely do not have “freedom to roam” on my garden or any other property which does have some intimate character (those are either fenced or indicated by other means), people are not free to dig up potatoes from fields or pick up other’s people timber or wood from forests… so what harm would come from them crossing my forest ? I do not saw the mushrooms or plant the blueberries, they grow wildly on their own (though I have some modern cultivars in my garden)… it’s normal to pick what grows on their own. Because they have a right to cross my forest, I have the same right to cross any other forest in this country ☺️ and to freely roam the beauties of nature and history… and I often do ☺️. I am big proponent of property rights …. but the freedom to roam and property rights do not interfere in the slightest … There might be exception with hunting organizations - those are not organized by “freedom to roam “, but by another law. They may organize big hunts across many forests, of many forests owners to hunt for game. Here I am not pis*ed that they hunt the game in my forest, I am angry, that I might be at danger in my own forest, because they don’t need to ask me or even specifically inform me about the hunt. (They just hold some guards on roads to forest to inform about the hunt - and I even as a forest owner cannot enter, while hunt is under way … moreover as property owner, I might accidentally use some minor access available just to me - and no one will be stationed there to inform me about the dangers)
I find your comment very sensible. We don't have as much trouble with hunting in our parts, as the terrain is more mountainous and fragmented and also because hunting is organised relatively locally and communication with farmers is quite important. As a child I was, however, frustrated with the abuse of said freedom, some would commit. A typical example would be young retired or unemployed people, that would pick our forests clean of any blueberries and mushroom - to the point that we as locals and even landowners could hardly find some for personal use, and it was impossible to pick enough to make some extra money as children did usually even in my parents' generation. Then there is a continously friction with motorcycles in the woods and now with hordes of mtb riders that errode the trails and usurp the paths, so that they're unsafe to hike on. It's a struggle, but I have hope and I certainty prefer our challenges over "no trespass" signs.
@@zagrizena I see it very much as You. Generally speaking landowners and farmers as I see it are ok with prople roaming on feet … it’s completele different when it comes to cars, bikes, motorbikes… (although if with some moderation, and they follow field roads and forest roads it’s still generally ok). Here I watched video from Norway (one of the freest of the free), about landowners being pissed by people DRIVING of road! That is big no-no even there (that really creates damages) ua-cam.com/video/VJyopr4M_Xg/v-deo.htmlsi=1FUhLKybPkB_df56 Blueberries - does it really happen that they pick them clean? When I was kid people used to use some blueberries combs - and some patches were really harvested rather more, generally speaking it would be very hard to clean them here … so much of them. Mushrooms - there is a custom here to pick mushrooms a lot. Generally there is not lot of mushrooms in forests, those are picked clean from forests… there is a custom - those who can well predict their hiding places and hunt them (mushrooms are very elusive 😂, they appear and disappear in a blink) - those are the successful hunters 😊and shrooms belong just to them. (Generally people don’t pick shrooms in their woods, but in such part of woods/forests where it corresponds to their particular theory of what shrooms might need, theory about where the elusive shrooms will show their heads 😂) (I too like part of the forest far away from my own)
@@petrskupa6292 In general I agree with you, and the foraging doesn't bother me in the areas where there's large swathes of uninterrupted forest or even in the state owned forests, but the area where I come from, isn't exactly wilderness. The blueberries aren't abundantly fruitful as is, and literal rows of cars coming every day for a whole day throughout the summer to "comb" them, really doesn't help. Now, the locals also respect each other's woodland that's nearest to the house and typically leave those for the owner to pick, but people coming don't care about any of that. With mushrooms I'm generally fine for whoever has a good sense or is prepared to trek trough the forest to pick them. Just leave those growing in the orchard next to the house and on the bank facing the house, please. And leave the fruit and crops alone, unless the owner offered you some. I think most of it comes down to communication and respect. Farmers are mostly bothered by cars obstructing narrow roads, litter left behind, trampled grass or even grain, inexperienced (with the terrain) drivers inconveniencing them on the road or speeding past or even through farmyards. Quite reasonable reasons, I think. Anyone who showed at least some respect, greeted, maybe asked where to park the car, was always welcomed cordially. We never had a problem with people just foraging occasionally for fun and for personal use. I've read and thought about this before and I'm more and more convinced it's a weird artefact of our communist era. Pre communism, our customs would probably more resemble Germany, but in communism some things, including forests were considered a "public good" and in a sense everyone had the same right to them, ownership notwithstanding. So now we have a conflict of mindsets between owners, paying taxes and obliged to care for the property, who feel they should have some priority in using their property and even some say in how others can use it, and the non-land-owning general population, who views the forests as some kind of communal estate that they can use as they see fit, as that is their right. Situation being further muddied in the areas where forest estate is completely cut off from people's residences or their open land estate. And as always, when people are too adamant about their own rights to see the other's point of view, the tensions are inevitable.
Good fences do not make good neighbors, they make fearful, isolated, and selfish neighbors. Causality is the reverse: Good neighbors obviate the need for fences, whereas bad neighbors need fences to hide their bad character. People getting shot because they accidentally enter the wrong driveway - this is absolutely unthinkable in Europe.
this reminds me of how today I went to a pool in a neighbouring town, and outside of it people just left their bikes unlocked. I wish it would be that safe in my city (although it's really not bad here, never got mine stolen)
"People getting shot because they accidentally enter the wrong driveway" This almost never actually happens. On the rare occasion it does, the media plasters it all over and makes it seem like it's a daily occurrence. Generally, the people get shot because they argue and refuse to leave or are in "the wrong driveway" committing or attempting to commit a crime. This is often left out of the story in most media articles.
@@revjaybird2 ...But it does happen. And the news only covers when people die. Not all the other times people are shot, shot at, or threatened illegally.
@@CrissaKentavr Lots of things happen occasionally on a planet of 8 billion people. You seem to think that this is some sort of regular occurrence, and that's simply not true. As well, if you're going to be terrified of someone simply telling to leave their well marked private property, then don't come here to the US.... you are obviously far too fragile to safely be here. The subway in any city will eat you alive if you are *that* timid. If you're actually worried about being shot, then no major city in the US is safe for you right now. You're far more likely to get shot by someone in an urban setting that wants your neat-o personal possessions than in rural areas over trespassing. Don't go to Chicago on any given weekend in the summer. That's where the most people are most often "shot, shot at, or threatened illegally".
@@revjaybird2 You wingnuts are getting lazier, barely one example & often don't even bother as you insist ableist this jew that greed is good narcissism is good.. If it's the US, there's always the chance a wingnut will be triggered to go on a killing spree. Very often they call communal sanctioned thugs w/ a gun to bully on their behalf. Red states are fucking horrible, conservative is a pretty word for highway bandit.
Thank you for putting a name on this thing I can not explain to people around. I am a French living in Canada. I miss my freedom to hike anywhere I want. Here we have to buy the right to go in a forest or on a mountain. At least in near urban areas. I guess that if I’ll go far away from cities (I mean no road anymore far) I would be able to hike everywhere. It was a shock for me. And it is a shock for every family or friend visiting from France.
@@BandGGaming we already pay enough tax as is here in france. and a dirt road isn't really high maintenance. Also enough people travel in the forest here to create a natural "road" or more like a path that have no cost at all.
@@BrgArt You're paying for way more than just a dirt road. Govt-owned nature trails are highly maintained due to invasive plant pressure and ecosystem degradation. I am in ecosystem restoration + maintenance and it's a constant struggle battling invasives because we no longer are allowed to manage land in the way these ecosystems are adapted to be managed (very few people know here on the east coast, our ecology is fire-adapted, and has been managed with controlled burns for thousands of years). Because of this, there is a lot of work to do--pulling, sawing, herbiciding and pesticiding, caging and cleaning shrubs and trees so overpopulated deer don't eat them or knock them over during meaty antler season, etc. Land here suffer from the extirpation of people from it and the current culture of poor land stewardship, which I personally feel is caused by not having a culture of access and by extension, collective responsibility. The govt should be paying for this with our taxes anyways, so I don't support having to pay for nature access, but it is a lot more than simply managing a dirt trail. If you are hiking on a trail or public park, you are experiencing an EXTREMELY curated environment.
Freedom causes responsibility. If you have no freedom, then no one can hold you responsible for anything and if you have full freedom, you have no one else to blame. Children learn from an early age that they're free to play in the Nature, but that they are responsible. They use knives and axes and light fires. In Norway, children are also free to fish wherever they want without fee or permission, because we want to encourage them. When you are alone in the wilderness, perhaps even with potentially dangerous animals around, responsibility is as obvious as the sense of freedom. I think those happy memories help make us more responsible as adults as well, because the relationship between freedom and responsibility has been made so clear.
I actually never thought about the right to roam because it feels like our natural right over here in Europe. Now, I feel thankful that we have this right. Many times, I think that the Land of the Free is not that free after all.
There is no unlimited freedom. You always have to choose whose freedom has priority. Do you allow the freedom of a reasonable, non-profit access for the public or do you prioritize the freedom to demarcate private land? Is it more important to disallow being insulted, threatened or singled-out or is it more important to speak and express oneself freely? We don't have a perfect answer to questions like that, but we know several wrong answers.
@@valentijnrozeveld3773 What "most European" countries are you talking about? Austria, Switzerland, Germany, Italy... are not "Skandinavia" and not consdiered eastern Europe. I just did a quick internet search and did not find single country in Europe where "hiking in the nature" is generally not allowed. Restrictions I see are just on Natianal parks, specially designated private property and such. Please teach me, I want to learn.
In this im on America side, private property is private. And i dont wish some random people will molest my property. Ofter i found broken bottles, sweets wraps and othet stuff in ground.. On my property i had it made so in accsessible as possible and 78 property owners had made a pact that no hunters can enter our property to hunt so we have most wolf and bear populated area. People cant respect nature and right of private property so they have no right for it. And it should be state to decide. I remeber in USA was situation about 15 years ago where person enetered on private property in night and drown in local pond and victims family accused property owner for having non fenced pond.
Legal liability is the first thing that comes to mind for reasons why lack of access continues in modern times. If someone is on your land and they hurt themselves, they can sue the landowner. The US is a *very* litigious society, and the legal lottery system is absolutely used as a get rich quick scheme. One way to fight this is to put up the No Trespassing signs. That way when you are eventually sued you can at least say they were there illegally and get off for nothing more than the legal fees ... which can still cost thousands of dollars per occurrence.
Wait, what? In Poland you can get sued if somebody slip's on the pavement / road you own and are supposed to keep clear of snow and ice. Or maybe if you leave an old well unmarked. But regular slips and falls? They would laugh you out the court! (Also I googled about slips and falls, and the only source not about icy pavements was an American law firm that takes Polish clients.)
@@fobiaargyst5875 Doesn't surprise me that it's an American company that's doing so well at slip/fall lawsuits that they're exporting the practice to other countries. As they win & lose more cases you'll see more no trespassing signs go up as word gets out. I'm sure all they see are those "untapped" markets for lawsuits they want to turn into money :( . Hopefully you guys can stand against them.
That's a superficial way of looking at it. Why is medieval fantasy so popular in America? Why do so many like to fantasize about being a member of the nobility or royality? Maybe because that's what they secretly crave and owning land or property effectively grants them exactly that. They want lawd what they have over others and be one of the Jones's.
I went on a bike ride through Eastern Oregon a couple years ago. Though the route was marked as county or Bureau of Land Management, we were met by armed ranchers in trucks and ATVs claiming we were trespassing. This is very disconcerting for someone legally taking a camping trip with their teenage son. Furthermore, look at any suburban city and you will find the majority of the walkable park space is occupied by golfing clubs that only wealthy people can afford to join.
In France for example coastline access is public, you have to allow passage along the beaches (even if some individuals try to impede it, e.g. in the Mediterranean). I was shocked when going to Ireland and realizing you could not hike across the countryside, it’s all fenced off. As a kid, we spent nearly all off our time in the woods, building huts, barraging rivulets, etc. Childhood would have been quite different without these experiences
In some states here in the US, ocean coastline passage is permitted and landowners are not supposed to halt that. I think the only restrictions there is one may not be automatically allowed to use docks or other man made structures.
I'm Finnish and I have never seen fences anywhere but to keep livestock from wandering off. It's a completely foreign concept to me that someone would fence off their property just because it's their property.
That, my friends, is called enclosure. In fact because of it many Britons at the time became extremely poor, unable to hunt or graze animals. (Don’t trust my American textbook word lol)
Yup, grew up in the French countryside, and nature was our playground. You try to avoid stepping into fields and gardens, if you see a fence, you know it is because there's livestock there and come in at your own risk. But otherwise, taking a tent and going hiking in the mountain and sleeping there was something we could obviously do.
Childhood in America has devolved to being shut inside either your house in an unwalkable neighborhood and dangerous streets full of SUVs or school where you're treated like a prisoner shuttled between them in an SUV because only vagrants and thugs walk the streets. I see my young siblings living like this and it's pretty depressing.
i'm scottish and ive always found the idea of tresspassing so bizzare, i live in the countryside so ive spent a lot of time walking through fields. scotland it beautiful, theres so many mountains and lochs and forests and fields to explore and cherish, those who are so amazed by nature don't destroy it here (if you take the effort to fight your way up unknown mountains youre not doing it to set it on fire).
@@Gary-bz1rfI live in Scotland and the right to roam is great up here, but you’re right that a good public footpath network way-marked on Ordnance Survey maps like they have in many parts of rural England is really helpful for planning walks. With this, you know that you’re unlikely to become caught in bogs, have to cross rivers or clamber through impenetrable forests.
Here in the Czech Republic, the right to walk through the countryside and enter forests is very traditional and is mentioned in the oldest medieval texts. The right to enter the forest was enacted by the Imperial Patent of 3 December 1852 - Forest Law. The same situation is in Austria and probably in all other former Austro-Hungarian lands. A similar situation is in Switzerland too. I don't know anything about such rights in Italy, France, Germany and Spain. But I have walked more than a thousand kilometres in each of these countries without any problem. A few years ago I slept near Rosskopf (next to Freiburg) and in the morning two cops on horses saw me and asked me to try my hammock and they didn't say anything about sleeping in bannwald.
In Germany (presumably just as long as in Austria and the Czech Republic) there is also a general right to enter the forest. Riding and driving is only allowed on paved paths. Closures due to logging work must be observed because of the risk of accidents. Cultivated and planted areas may not be entered.
No, in Austria entering private forests was only allowed in 1975 with a new forest law (Forstgesetz) and up to this day it is usually forbidden for mountain bikes. Actually in the Habsburg monarchy in 1852 the Reichsforstgesetz (imperial forest law) was enacted that explicitly forbade people to enter the forests!
In Norway this was codified into law in 1274, during the reign of Magnus Lagabøter (Magnus the Lawmender). This is part of The Landslaw (The Law of the Land). Since Magnus was a poweful king, also known in the rest of Europe, this inspired similar customs to be codified later on.
I think one important detail you forgot to mention that is connected to all this is how easy it is to sue a property owner in the United States. I used to work as a utility vegetation management inspector, and I would walk onto countless private properties for my job. Most property owners-in California at least- don’t care much if people hike around their undeveloped land, but they have “no trespassing” signs up for fear that they might get sued by a trespasser who falls and hurts themselves. At a lake near where my family has a cabin, there is a privately owned strip of beach where people used to always launch their canoes and kayaks. Last summer the owner was there, actively stopping anyone from launching their boats or even walking there. Apparently someone had injured themselves walking on the rocks there, the owner had gotten sued, and his property insurance had risen as a result. After that he stopped allowing anyone to use that beach.
The problem here is because health is not free and you have to get someone to pay. If you had universal health insurance, there would not be any reason to sue
A human lives about 80 years, that granite has been there for billions of years and there are pine trees that have probably been standing since the viking age. Many feet have roamed those places before us and 150 years after our passing, they are still being roamed by people who don't remember we existed. Trying to grab a part of it and fence it out for others seems a bit pointless. Well, selfish, actually. And to defend that with force.. Maybe against an invading nation. Other than that, many of us like guns, there are a lot of those, but try to find a single person who feels compelled to own one for defending their spot of land. I sort of understand the idea, but there's just no need, no need. "No siellähän kulkevat, ei se oo minulta pois." That said, while very much legal, someone else finding out your favourite cloudberry or chanterelle spot might cause some fuming and conjuring of ancient gods.
yeah but unlike in america, we dont have a 13% of the population making it impossible for this kind of shit...youd think that instead of insulting our country or hating on it for not having such an d"obvious right" like think about why we cant have nice things? its not cuz americans are prudes who dont understand that, its that we can do it without having to call the cops cuz people dont teach their kids manners or respect no more. so instead of venerating another country for something try to figure out the problem in your own before you cast judgement cuz its real easy to compare an contrast when you ignore the core root of the problem.
I'm for the right to roam--how is this an insult to America? What does "We don't have a 13% of the population making it impossible for the kind of shit" mean? @@Aqsticgod
In Sweden, commercial activities ARE allowed on private land (such as berry picking, rafting etc.), as long as you don't damage the land and it isn't cultivated. This was a topic of debate about a decade ago, but it was decided that it should remain as is. However, fishing is regulated and generally requires a license covering the particular lakes and rivers you plan to fish in. (with the exception of the big four or the ocean)
Unfortunately, the policies here in the US have created a culture of outdoor theme parks, where those areas of access are so rare and so crowded that people use them as they would a theme park. They don't know how to act outside in nature because it's not something that they have grown up with. Every occasion to visit nature is regulated and restricted, much like a trip to Disneyland. This can breed bad behavior as people don't have a universal feeling of ownership and stewardship so the disturb landscapes, graffiti on trees and rocks, leave trash for others to pick up, and generally just don't know how to act. That behavior discourages opening up lands for fear of misuse and destruction. I remember going to Red Rock Canyon a couple of years ago and seeing this one area where everyone thought it was a great idea to build cairns, not because they were needed to mark the trail but because it looked like something fun to do. So instead of getting to enjoy undisturbed nature, I was left looking at a bunch of rock pyramids. All because people didn't know how to act appropriately and enjoy the environment accordingly. If we had more access and fewer restrictions on exploring the outdoors I think people here would be more accustomed to being in nature and start treating it less like some amusement park.
Great point. Nature shouldn’t be treated as amusementparks, and it will be when the access is very restricted and people grow up without a connection to their surrounding nature. Schools in Norway (and also kindergartens) are generally good at including nature in their teachings and kids are taken out into nature as part of the curriculum. I don’t know if that would be doable for american kids, but it would a good idea I think.
@@blue2mato312 yes i would love to see more people and kids eaten by bears and other wild life in the usa your forgeting that almost all of the eu has no danger in your wild life do you have man eating animals that life within walking range of your front door in the usa gators and bears wolves snakes that can eat 9 year olds whole exist within citys and can be seen in your back yard letting people in the usa walk around with animals that will eat them isnt the best idea thats why as kids being in the woods without an adult istnt the best idea might have to plan to burry your kid before they reach 10 we havent hunted all the animals in the usa that can eat us to nearly as much as youve done in the eu you guys basicly have no more animals that youd worry about your kids being alone in the woods with most of your worries are bug and plant ones weve got lots of preditors waiting to eat even fully grown adults here its not safe to just roam the woods without at least a shot gun with slugs for any bears weve got much more wild woods than you got over there in the eu its like the comparing a empty field to a jungle of teeth and pain plus you dont want to run into a bear they eat you alive and fresh the like to eat the soft chest meat first while your still alive not a good way to die having a bear rip you apart while your still breathing and screaming
Exactly. Here in Washington (the one with the Space Needle, not the Dark Carnival!), even the "public" parks now require advance permission to enter, in the form of a Discover Pass, a placard you pay for and put on your car... and can ONLY obtain when you go to renew your registration once a year. Decide not to cough up $45 extra to get your tabs but later decide you want to go to a state park? Sucks to suck, you're legally unable to enter until your next tab renewal, better hope you remember to pay for the pass this time! Or at _some but not all_ state parks, pay $10 per day for a single use pass.
@@amandak.4246 you obviously aren’t a hiker and have no idea what “Leave no trace” means. Unless the good lord decided to miraculously pile a hundred stacks of rocks into the canyon then yes, it’s a great example of stupidity in nature. It’s not petty when yo go for a nature hike only to find that the area has been redecorated by ignorance.
@@anonymousnekokamikannakamui I’m sorry it seems like you are struggling with a lot of anxiety about wild animals. And yes you do have a lot more of them, but I’m sure if they were constantly eating children over there I would have heard about it at some point. You are wrong in your assumptions of my country, it is not in the EU and yes we have animals like wolves, lynx, brown bear, wolverine and moose. I’m adding moose because they are more dangerous than the others except for the polar bear which is not on the mainland. You would only need a gun for protection of the polar bear. Moose are generally only dangerous if a mother with a calf feels threatened, but they can kill. There are wolves (and moose) around in the forests right outside of Oslo and teachers do take their classes of kids there as do the adult employees working with kindergarten kids. It’s great for them to connect with nature. In your country there are more fatalities of children than in mine due to one big factor, guns. You have hundreds of millions of guns and military grade assault weapons and this is what you should be most afraid of in my opinion.
I’ve always noticed that during long road trips in America there will just be miles and miles of untouched land with fences around it. There’s not even anything on it, it’s just fenced off for as long as the eye can see.
I think that if any politician suggested that we should restrict the right to roam here in Finland, in favor of property rights, they'd be committing political suicide. The right to roam is essential, and people use it. Finns tend to love nature, and the right to go where you want to enjoy it cannot be questioned.
As a Swede this is a right we take for granted and it’s hard to imagine not having it. Some people take it too far though and don’t realize you aren’t allowed to chop down a Christmas tree on someone else’s land or walk too close to peoples homes but the vast majority of people treat the land, nature and the owners with resect. You can still use deadly force to protect yourself in your home here. There was recently a case with someone stabbing the attacker dozens of times to death but he was deemed not guilty because he was fighting for his life against several intruders who were trying to do the same to him. But it should be easy for everyone to understand the difference between roaming a forest or countryside and entering someone’s backyard or house. And while attacks from animals can occur they are extremely rare. Especially if you aren’t hunting the animal. You are way more likely to die in the city from a car. In more recent years it has become a class question as well since while everyone can in theory go to the forest many low income households living in big cities in apartments don’t have access to a forest nearby and don’t have cars to drive there also many immigrants don’t have the same culture where walking in the forest is part of daily life. Many inner city low income families haven’t even been to the countryside. And owning a summer house have gone from something a lot of people can afford to being quite expensive, especially close to larger cities. For me nature has always been a part of life. My grandparents had a summer house I used to spend time at since I was a baby and when I was 6 my mom got a summer house. Back then it had no electricity or water and you lived like it was the 1800s when there but over the years it’s become just like any other modern home and she lives there all year around after she retired.
Despite living in the United States, I was able to acutely roam quite a bit as a kid. I've lived in Idaho my whole life, and I love to hike and just wander. I even remember just climbing or slipping through fences. Honestly, one of the hardest things for me to see, is all the places I use to explore getting consumed by buildings, extremely expensive houses, and just greedy rich people who don't want to share. I hate seeing my childhood being destroyed like this. I'm seeing the love of natural world die in the US, and it's extremely sad.
@@amandak.4246 ok, then why don't they build houses that people can actually afford to live in? The houses that were built were I grew up are these massive houses that cost millions of dollars. The destruction of natural spaces in the USA is completely driven by greed. Not by any desire to actually help anyone. I hate the selfish culture that's become so common here.
@@WhobgobblinI’ve heard too many stories of teenagers being shot for accidentally knocking on the wrong house lately. You can’t trust that you won’t get shot for trespassing anymore
I grew up in rural rural New Mexico in US, and i barely had any concept of private property. As a child, I roamed wheteever my heart desired. I was so shocked that i was in the small small minority of people in US, and going back to my home village 20 years later, that mindset is starting to take root even there!
This is the same story in Germany! As a child I was very free, but now, being 56 years old I see many Changes in the mindset of people. Many changes are also due to " safety"reasons
Great video! I grew up on a remote island in Michigan, where I could hike/hunt/x-country ski/fish pretty much anywhere I wanted. That was great until more and more of the land became privatized. OMG! We who were born there were suddenly faced with denied access to Lake Michigan! That was just a part of it, but having lived through such a transition, I really am impressed by the European "Right to Roam" and embarrassed by the US's stance of "No Trespassing". I'm really struck by how much the "who owns this land" attitude had inhibited my fishing and hiking over the last half century. Love the comment below from Norway! It's not only ironic... it's becoming iconic in the worst way.
almost feels egotistical to see so many no trespassing signs; like what? when you die, is that no trespassing sign still lawful? (unless you've set up a will, a representative, or other arrangement)
But would you take offense if a bunch of homeless pitched camp in your backyard, ate the apples from your trees or some shady looking strangers carrying guns were always walking through as your family held their backyard bbqs? To a certain extent, those guys paid a lot of money for the land, to find their own slice of privacy and quiet, if they wanted it to be used for public access, they would have donated it to be a park.
@@katieluv8422 Why assume that this would happen? Teach people to respect privacy and property and you don't have to be afraid of all that. If you listenend closely, you heard that there are some (unwritten) laws on how to behave, so all of this would just not happen. And we don't carry guns anyway.
@@roesi1985 In a utopian world, yes, but the reality is U.S. society is filled with bad actors and irresponsible people. In order to have the tools to stop that, the laws are needed.
@@amandak.4246 I think you've missed the target. Yes, I could do those things along with Everyone else. Back then, most landowners were completely okay with the hikers and beachcombers. Of course, we picked up after ourselves too. It became frustrating when folks would buy a small bit of land, stay in it for two weeks out of the year, and picket it with no trespassing signs. Folks lived there for decades without needing to do such a thing. I think those who move into a community and attempt to make it like the place they came from are the selfish ones. We were all spoiled by being surrounded by nature; and I (among others) do get angry that some folks feel justified denying others access to nature.
The problem that we have on the USA is several reasons. The biggest is that the majority of Americans do not have a respect for other people. We use to have the ability to access many areas. This really started 30 years ago. Our access to streams rivers and lakes have been restricted. The other biggest reason for this is lawyers. If someone gets injured on your property you are responsible for their injuries and they can sue for large sums of money. Where as in Europe you are responsible for your own safety.
@timothyhoster4951 "The other biggest reason for this is lawyers." Our biggest problem in this country is lawyers. They have literally ruined every aspect of life here in the US at some level or another.
Well, if you don't maintain your public access roads, the owner can also be responsible in most of Europe. For instance, if somebody fall on your entrance, or damaged on your access roads. But of course it doesn't extend to areas that are not explicitly designed for visitor access.
@@Sigma-xb6kn "you have no other option than to sue." This is why there are so many No Trespassing signs. The land owner is not at fault for someone hurting themselves while on the property uninvited, the property owner is also not at fault for medical expenses being so high. So why do you think it's ok to sue the property owner to pay for someone else's bills? The fact that you seem to think this is reasonable is WHY there are so many signs and fences and people protecting their property to the degree that they do.
@@revjaybird2 You put words in my mouth. I just gave reasons for why it happened, not that it is a good way to organize society. If I told you how Roman slave markets worked I wouldn't support slavery, now would I? I agree that the landowner wouldn't be at fault if somebody got hurt on their property but sueing would be the only way to not live forever with debt. You confuse description with prescription.
there is a park/forest in front of a castle in my grandmas village in germany. the owners tried to close the gates once but in the end they weren't allowed to exclude the public, because people were used to going there for hundreds of years
The juxtaposition between Europe and the US is beautifully illustrated in this video. To contribute my own experience, I've walked all over Italy with very few restrictions. The restrictions there were primarily included warnings of natural dangers, disrespected and regrowing land from tourists, and personal dislocation in order to respect land that was too trodden by tourists. I tried to go rock hounding in Colorado recently. I've driven over 20 hours around and around, to find mostly gated access, "WE SHOOT ON SIGHT" signs, and barbed wire as far as the eye can see. The only accessible areas were wildness, in which many laws exists wherein you cannot "pillage" the area. I'm a proponent of "Leave No Trace," but the limitations within "the freest country in the world" is a wild claim, especially considering one could easily add topics to this same line of inquiry. 👀
In France, owners of coastal land must maitain a 3m wide passage for pedestrians, which in principle results in a unbroken path anyone can walk along the entire coast.
In Austria only when the water in lakes is low ... Though there's now talk about how to improve public access to lakes. Too much lakeshore land is private property!
A point that should also be taken into account is liability and the fact that so many people will try to sue landowners for a broken ankle or worse. There is a case in Colorado where a landowner who owns a mining claim closed off the trail to a popular mountain because the state court set a precedent that anyone who hurt themselves while hiking though his claim had the legal right to sue him personally simply because his name was on the deed.
Why though? If the damage was not caused by a person or a man-made trap, it should be considered as self-inflicted. If it was caused by a trap, then whoever placed the trap is to blame. And of course, if you choose to do a dangerous activity and without faulty equipment or another person being involved you end up injured, it should again be considered as self-inflicted.
I did not realise that the US was such a nanny state. Here people are responsible for themselves and no-one can claim that I as a landowner are responsible for them hurting themselves. Of course I would help them out if I come across them in the forest, but that still don't make me liable for their actions.
@@frantisekvrana3902 "it should be considered as self-inflicted." It *should* be, but it's not. The property owner is liable for it, even if it's completely the person's fault. One of the worst offenders of suing property owners for other people injuring themselves is the state sponsored Medical programs. They can and will sue whomever they possibly can in order to have the injury bills paid for. We do have socialized medicine in this country for the disabled, poor, and most children..... and these programs are often who sues property owners. There is no such thing as "self inflicted" if the person is on state sponsored socialized medicine. Gov't lawyers suing private citizens.
When I was a child living in Texas, I could roam for hours in the forest. No trails, no boundaries. Thanks to recent developments, though, all the tress have been cut down and replaced with ugly malls and parking lots. Now there's nowhere.
Also remember that the Swedish Allemansrätten comes with obligations: Not to crass fields of growing crops, not getting too close to homes, not to disturb farm animals, not to litter to cause damage or fire. Or shortly - just leave your footsteps when you leave. I never, or almost extremely see any signs of visitors when in the forests - just a small path, maybe some ashes from a camp fire.
@@gerhardma4297 I guess most illiterate and igorant people don't put their hike boots on and roam the wilderness as it requires intelligence and responsibility. And thanks for that ...
In Denmark, we sadly don't have a lot of land to begin with, and most of what we have is used for agriculture. But here we especially uphold the right to walk on beaches. Unless a beach is used for military or industrial purpose you can walk, swim and hang out, and even sleep there if you are more than 50 meters from their house.
When I lived/stayed in North America I was shocked at this kind of private ownership of land and the various "no tresspassing" signs. Also the fact that you simply couldn't walk out of a neighborhood into the surrounding fields - already because there aren't any "Feldwege", only driveways to farms and actual roads - which is probably connected to the understanding of private property. I don't know if I could really live in a country where you cannot walk into the open. It feels so limiting.
There are millions of acres of land in the United States where you can walk and hike for free. Where I live I am surrounded by Woods mountains and Forest and I can go hike almost anywhere I want. I respect the parts that are private why can't you?
@@johanswede8200 Some do -- particularly when it involves allowing people to use a path to connect two different park areas. But in the areas of the U.S. that have big ranches, there are invariably also enormous tracts of publicly owned land, so walking across private ranches is rarely necessary. Europeans commenting here seem to have a hard time grasping how much open public land there is in the U.S. Which is odd, because we run into Europeans enjoying U.S. public lands while on holiday quite often.
@@markweaver1012 You seem to miss the entire point of this discussion. It is not about how much public land there is. It is about the general concept of freedom and landownership. In the Nordics you just cannot own land to the extend that you are able to block access to it. Because nature belongs to everyone in the country, that's why the right to roam is called "every man's right". This is ultimate freedom.
Guess I'm one of those lucky Americans that has always been able to roam wherever I wanted, whenever I wanted. Though having recently been in Sacramento, that was not the case and it really isn't in the small town I live in now. In fact, I would say that No Trespass is worse here because it's a rural community and farmers will vehemently protect their land with deadly force, regardless of the legal consequences to them. That said, if you kindly approach them and ask permission to cross their land to simply get from point A to point B on foot or horse, most will oblige.
it should be a human right, and here in norway it practicly are. here you free to roam whereever you want regardless if its private land or not, tho i with that means out in nature, and not in somones backyard:) we on the other hand also have a leave-no-trace law, so means if you go camping somewhere, make sure to bring your garbage and so on.
sure, it should be your right. But if anything happens to YOU, it must be solely your legal, financial, and moral responsibility, not mine. Deal? If you dont like that, dont go into my turf, uninvited. Its that simple.
@@michajastrzebski4383 that's kinda given In the hole world with us as the only exception. If I do something stupid and get hurt, ofc it's my own fault and need to take responsibility. How you can sue a property owner over it in the US are so stupidly mentaly retarded no words can really describe how messed up your entire legal system are, but it allso show how messed up and retarded your entire Healthcare system and worker rights are. If I tried to do the same here, the judge would just laugh at me and Toss me out of his courtroom. Allso In my country if I get hurt and end up in the hospital, it ain't gonna cost me anything, because getting free Healthcare should be a basic human right witch it is in more or less entire Europe. Furthermore not just that, if I get sick, I allso would still get fully paid as if I was at work. Here in Europe we allso understand people are different and some people are getting more sick than others and considering it's not something you can deside if you get sick or not, there's no limit on how many days in a year you allowed to take sick leave. Simply put, if you sick, then stay home.
@@michajastrzebski4383 But that is exactly how it is in Europe? Why should you be responsible for something happening to someone else (as long as you not purposfully done something to harm someone, like laying a trap)?
Yep. It's precisely why I actually call the USA the "Land of the Oppressed". In practically every way and aspect of life, they have far less rights and freedoms, than citizens of other first-world countries.
That's amusing considering the complete disregard Euro governments have for your natural rights. Your collectivism amounts to hell on earth in my book.
I made the experience in a small town in Oregon. A nice little creek was running thru it, but I was not able to get to the river bank because all along it was privat property. While here in Germany most of the time between a river and the closet houses is a path (called Leinpfad) where you can access the water.
Here in Sweden, as part of the ”Allemansrätten”, there is also a ”strandskydd” or a shore protection which means you can’t build anything that restricts access to the water within 100m of a river, lake or the sea. Of course there are exceptions but it is generally adhered to pretty strictly.
In the U.S. ocean and Great Lakes beaches are public to the highest tide line. In California, the Coastal Commission maintains easements to reach these beaches (resulting in occasional squabbles with Hollywood celebrities who don't want the general public passing near their Malibu beach houses -- the celebs invariably these cases). Inland river and lake bottom land is owned by the adjoining landowners but private owners generally cannot restrict the public's right to use the waters (though the shoreline remains private). But in most of the U.S., there are large waterfront parks of various kinds.
Mostly, it isn't even permissible to have private land bordering to a body of water. This land is usually owned by the 'Wasser- and Schifffahrtsbehörde', which sometimes close off some of it for safety reasons around locks and weirs. Alas, there have been cases where influential people were able to get away with closing off the water access in the past, just because they want to have exclusive access.
It used to be legal to build your summer cottage or sauna right on the edge of water, and in these cases the immediate area around these buildings is off limits. New laws prohibit building that close to water, and access to the lake is granted to everyone. Then again, it's not good manners to cross between someone's house and the lake, especially if someone is staying there. Or fish less than, say a hundred feet from someone's jetty. But usually, being Finns, we abhor being close to other people anyway, so the legality is a moot point...
Personally I live in the US in Arizona and grew up surrounded by almost 3 million acres of national forest so I never felt a lack of freedom to roam but i get alot of states dont have that many large national forests. I would be fine with a freedom to roam law as long as people actually followed the rules and respected the land and if there were adequate repercussions for those who didnt follow the rules. I''m also a land owner and purposely keep my land open so people can camp and hunt on it. My main worry though is that one day someone may hurt themselves on my land and try to sue me
Hold up... Are you telling me that, over there... If someone goes to the forest and gets hurt, just because it so happens that you own that forest, they can sue you?!?! That... That's ridiculous...
That's the US for you, a country made for and by lawyers. But don't hold your nose too high, we're getting there in Europe, too; every bad thing from the US is copied sooner or later under the guise of progress or "consumer rights" and similar shibboleths, with huge net costs to society. Already, beautiful trees near walkways get felled because somebody might sue if a branch breaks during a storm and injures walkers.
Here in Canada I am frequently annoyed by the number of fences I encounter on long walks. I understand people fencing off their own property, but often there is no path for people to walk between a public street and public land due to private land in between. There are even fences between land owned by the city and by the federal government, both of which are public.
That which is not illegal cannot be punished sounds like a neat concept. Where I'm from if it's not illegal they'll just call it 'disorderly conduct' or one neat one is 'committing an act that serves no legitimate purpose'.
It never came to my mind that walking through an open area could be restricted. Why on earth would a country decide to restrict this? It just does not make any sense - and honestly, it is hard to say whether an area is publicly or privately owned when there is no fence - and erecting a fence needs a good reason (protecting livestock, marking your garden or avoiding that freshly planted trees are harmed, etc). Any other restriction would seem like a senseless "this is mine, not yours" claim serving nobody.
If there is no sign or fences it is generally not illegal to non destructively pass though someone else's land in most US juristrictions. I live in a somewhat rural area and most of the people I've known who have put up fences or no tresspassing signs on their land have done so in response to people who weren't respecting their land, leaving trash making too much noise, disturbing their animals, being destructive to plantlife and crops etc.
@@TheAtkey but much of the US also has castle doctrine. You might be legally allowed to cross land, but the landowner is legally allowed to kill you if they *feel* threatened by you being there.
@@jodajoda2863 My state has castle doctrine and is one of the most pro 2 A states in the union if you shoot someone walking across your field you will go to prison. They have to have broken into "Dwelling" hoping a fence or ignoring a no trespassing sign doesn't count let alone walking though an open field.
@@jodajoda2863 That's a little vague. You can't shoot someone for crossing your land. If someone who comes on your land with intent to harm you then you're mostly likely to be ambushed. Which in some states can be regarded as premeditated attempted murder. If you shoot them then it is self defense. The Castle doctrine in some states covers inside the home as well the Curtledge of the yard as well as attempted carjacking. Shooting someone for incidental trespassing is murder. Another thing about property rights. The law allows owners to post signs that say no firearms on property without owners permission.
I was living and working in Sweden for a while and was often told about the Swedish "everybody's right" to access landscapes and forests, and I was wondering why, because we have that in Germany, too, and I thought it was a normal thing in most countries. Only now I've learned that there is a small difference, as in Germany, camping is limited to designated areas, as for protecting nature, while in Sweden, everybody has the right to camp everywhere (if I understood it right). Again living in Germany, my house borders at a farmer's land, and my kids grew up observing the farmer sewing and harvesting. When jogging I'm using the pathways the farmer is using to access his land. When going out for a walk, we often took a path through the farmer's grounds. And some neighbors are doing the same, e.g. by taking the shortest way to the church or to walk their dog for a stroll. Nobody even thinks about it being something special.
The north-south road between our house and the farming area is public, all the others deriving from it in western direction and running between the different crop-fields are the farmer's.
@@whuzzzup You've obviously never been to a real rural area like the Eifel or the Black Forest. ;-) (Hint: Even the small part of forests owned by my relatives have private "roads" on them - which you are of course free to roam, as usual.)
@@IgorRockt I was indeed not thinking about forest paths, although here they also belong to the state and very rarely can I remember a private one that is blocked (of course all of them are not for normal traffic of course). Also all Feldwege - running along the fields - here also are state "roads".
As a person who travels mostly without the use of motorized vehicles and hotels it's really important to me. I never ever had a problem to sleep anywhere I wanted in my hammock (which is kinda gray zone because sleeping under the sky is almost everywhere allowed but camping not so often) or going where ever I wanted. As long as you have enough respect for nature and people around, you can roam freely and feel safe almost anywhere in Europe.
all the problems in america, ever boiling down now to our being in short supply of topsoil, fossil water, fresh water, and perpetual genocide of our otherwise genetic diversity, by african heroin having gotten into on the paper work side of law, the government, and media, leaving no means to stop africa's rape of our vital resources either. america was built on the backs of eurasian immigrants who have been, and are being, perpetually genocided. myself being a childless genocide victim, so utterly terrified of the heroin bitches that i have been alone for 18 years; nearly destitute, everything we worked for being dissolved, where if i had the monetary equivalent of picking one tuft of cotton i would be a multi-billionaire after taxes. africa's transparent foreign weapons systems have been on the ground and active in the united states since its inception. they don't report their numbers, they don't report their incomes, and they will always breed faster than the food grows until the food just suddenly stops.
Even in countries like Belgium and Germany where camping in the wild is not allowed, I always did and never got in any trouble. No one ever chased me away because they could see I was keeping it clean and it was always only for 1 night.
@@lorrefl7072I think most people's mistake is not going for that approach...if you're inconsiderate, messy, have a bad attitude, anyone who happens across you is not going to be as willing to "let it slide" as they would be otherwise. It's just common sense. you wouldn't go to a job interview in your rattiest clothes. in the same way you wouldn't want somebody's first impression of you to be ruined by a trash heap if somebody walks up on your campsite.
Same in Iceland - you have the right to roam. ALMOST everywhere - within reason. Usually restrictions are there to protect you ... or nature from you. As long as you do not litter or disturb animals or plants, dont pick up stuff .. or annoy the elves or trolls.
all the problems in america, ever boiling down now to our being in short supply of topsoil, fossil water, fresh water, and perpetual genocide of our otherwise genetic diversity, by african heroin having gotten into on the paper work side of law, the government, and media, leaving no means to stop africa's rape of our vital resources either. america was built on the backs of eurasian immigrants who have been, and are being, perpetually genocided. myself being a childless genocide victim, so utterly terrified of the heroin bitches that i have been alone for 18 years; nearly destitute, everything we worked for being dissolved, where if i had the monetary equivalent of picking one tuft of cotton i would be a multi-billionaire after taxes. africa's transparent foreign weapons systems have been on the ground and active in the united states since its inception. they don't report their numbers, they don't report their incomes, and they will always breed faster than the food grows until the food just suddenly stops.
In England we have such an extensive network of public footpaths across private and public lands, that landowners have to maintain, that I suspect we don't miss the Right To Roam other countries enjoy as much as we might do.
As a French, I never thought about that, I can go anywhere I want, even inside farms, crops... if there is a fence I won’t go in (optional) because maybe some dangerous cow or dog. Of course I won’t get in somebody’s garden, but if there isn’t any fence I won’t mind going through. I’m glad I saw your video cause nobody would have kept me from going anywhere in any country 😂
I'm from one of the countries mentioned here, Estonia(omg estonia mention we go wild for that), and yeah, we have right to roam and i couldnt imagine anything else... As a kid i explored every trail throughout my village and many neighbouring villages by foot or bike, went swimming and skating on the sea, foraging all kinds of things from the forest and fields(not from right beside roads tho, cars pollute...) like berries, mushrooms, plant matter, bones, flowers, and just exploring. We hiked in nature half across the island in different ways every year, as is a middle school tradition. I often went sledding on an abandoned military structure in the winter. I have never known any of the owners of these lands and i dont think any of them know of me. I never leave any trash anywhere because nature is sacred and there are trashcans in more populated areas everywhere anyways so why be an asshole?? If i fall off a rock or something bc im doing stupid shit thats my own fault. Urban exploring is a bit more legally shady, but it definitely happens without serious consequences to my knowledge... A lot of the things brought up in the video and comments feel so bizarre and like from another world... The stuff about people straight up being violent against people just. existing near them sounds so... dystopian... It sounds like something went very wrong in the beginning of the development of overall community that is now hurting absolutely everyone involved. (that something is probably greed) And i feel so bad for everyone who has to deal with that. Especcially native americans, who have had this happen over such a long history of their rights and access being stolen. Absolutely horrifying. I heard they privatized a beach on my island that i used to frequent... really hope we aren't heading in the same direction here :( (Kind of an USA rant, im a foreginer so i dont have an in-perspective, so my thoughts are certainly limited to impressions formed of what i hear from friends in mostly middle/lower class situations and see of shitty rich people in media) This kind of topic is only a small part of how restricting and invasive USA seems, at least from the outside... No wonder things have been heading downward so fast if most of the population is struggling in pretty much poverty and under constant surveillance and scrutiny form your fellow people, who might easily have access to deadly weapons, and maybe don't even know how wrong and inhumane that is. It's such an eradication of trust in humanity and well. goodness, which contributes to having that distrust validated, because its "everyone for themselves" which is such bullshit. Humans are social creatures who belong in nature and need to create or contribute to the vastness of our infinite variety of experience. Being separated from community and nature, afraid of anyone "not our own" and often unable to create freely without financial incentive sounds like a wholly miserable experience. I know that is a hyperbolic example but it's the vibe ive gathered over the years... i dont like capitalism invading everything and trying to make us "productive" at all costs, and asking money for necessary human rights like being in nature and staying alive.
As an American, you are completely right. It is terrifying to be here. If you speak about dreams outside of capitalism or anything related to the arts people look at you like you’re dumber than a box of rocks Every day I feel like I’m talking to 1 million of the same negative person. I have multiple friends whose teeth are rotting out of their heads after years of being unable to afford care. Filling in a tooth is about six to $700 and after years of not being able to go some of my friends are quoted around $35-$75,000 When they obviously can’t afford this, the dentists basically scoff at them and explain to them how life-threatening the situation could be and then wonder why they’re so stupid for not JUST fixing it. Rent is like $2000 with a 10% increase every single YEAR (that happened because of a rent control bill that was meant to help us) And each and every day there are more surveillance cameras, and GROUND LEVEL Microphones installed for our “own safety” while simultaneously stripping our LGBTQIA family members, safety away and changing NOTHING about the guns There is no help. The food is all grown with glyphosate and has been genetically modified to withstand the fucking Monsanto shit. It’s tense everywhere you look people don’t spend time in community squares talking with each other, or parks or cafes (some people do, but there isn’t a culture here for it and it’s seen as disruptive or loitering) They just try and avoid each other. Human lives feel disposable, and that’s by design!😂 gotta feed the capitalism. It’s exponential growth is our one and only goal no matter who’s loved ones have to die to get there. Now there’s the 2024 election to look forward too. I’m making my family get passports in case we have to leave. This is is fucking nightmare and growing up here feels hopeless. I want to have children, but what do I leave them to when I pass? To do it all over again? The best part is the only one seeing this are the rest of the world - and the younger generations of America. Most older people in positions of power in America look back on their youth thinks of the country in its heyday, when THEY were young and then gaslights us out of everything and just tells us to work harder and buy less food and coffee. It feels like a cruel joke😂 but it’s REAL😂😂
@@majiaqua6670 You're obviously a Democrat. You should know that the DNC platform is gaslighting you worse now than the Repugnicans ever have. Otherwise the DNC would not have rejected, ostracized, and silenced Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, and RFK Jr. If you're a typical Democrat, you barely know anything about Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr except what Rachel Madow told you about them being Russian assets. And of course you're going to believe her without question. You mentioned glyphosate. Are you aware that RFK Jr has been fighting Monsanto and other similarly destructive companies for his entire career as an environmental lawyer? Probably not. Why do you think the DNC has effectively shut him out as a candidate? The DNC is firmly in the pockets of Monsanto, Bayer, Pfizer, BlackRock, Vanguard, Raytheon, etc... and the current POTUS idiot is their biggest puppet. And don't even get me started on why the DNC hates Tulsi, one of the most LGBTQIA supportive congresswomen. She's against endless wars of attrition and poking the Russian bear into WWIII Armageddon - that's the DNC third rail. The DNC has become the party of war, death, and Orwellian doublespeak. Ironically, you plan to leave the country if the big orange buffoon wins in 2024, but for all his many faults, he's the only viable candidate right now who is NOT happy with the way things are and the way things are going. You'd really better keep your passport ready if the DNC, Grandpa Joe, or any of the other DNC darlings like Newsome ascend to the throne, because that WILL be the end. Stop letting the clowns fool you - the DNC is NOT your friend.
@@majiaqua6670 Lady, you're delusional, and DEFINITELY need to hang out with others who disagree with you and touch grass. The only people losing rights are little Christian school children losing their right to live in Nashville, Tennessee because the LGBT in this country are so intolerant and insane they need to ki11 those who uphold their religious beliefs. I remember all the liberals and leftists who cried with joy at those Christian school children being gunned down, blaming Christians, their parents, and the children themselves for that horrific act. Nice people, you must run in close circles with those chuckleheads.
Thanks for such an interesting video! I'm Scottish and I walk extensively in Scotland. Access in Scotland is good, but common sense and respect is necessary. Don't wild-camp within sight of houses. Keep out of fields with crops. Keep clear of farm animals. Ask, as a courtesy, if someone is working on the land, before crossing it. However, when on the Highland hills, I can sometimes walk for days and not see anyone else. Bliss! In Scotland, when we do meet someone else, we tend to stop and get into conversations, It is good to hear other's experiences of what is good to see, wildlife to look out for, places best avoided etc. I occasionally go down to England and that is a very different experience for me.....
"... Don't wild-camp within sight of houses. Keep out of fields with crops. Keep clear of farm animals. Ask, as a courtesy, if someone is working on the land, before crossing it..." "... but common sense and respect is necessary..." That is the very definition of Right to Roam. Common sense, Respect, Courtesy. For the people and for the land.
A bit too "busy" for me. Less freedom to land access. Wild camping is a problem. On the plus side, there are often local inns in remote places where it is possible to stop for a bowl of soup, or a "ploughman's lunch", which can be very welcome.
As an American, I was very much aware that private property meant stay out( and as teens we didn’t always listen.)There was one old timer that used rock salt in shot gun cartridges to run people off. As adult I spent a few years in Germany. I would take my daughter on walks along the canal behind our neighborhood, but not before asking our landlord if it was private property. This video explains the odd look she had when I asked. She said it didn’t matter I could walk any where that was open( closed gardens around residences were a thing)we could walk there.
Here in Scotland I find freedom to roam is essential to bring up well rounded individuals. Learning about the countryside and its wildlife is good for the soul.
The problem in the USA is if you let people cross your land long enough they feel it isn’t yours anymore. Then their are people that will trash you land if you allow them access.
Thank you so much. I had a LOT of fun editing this video. The sound clip at the beginning is from the library of Congress and sung by a Florida prisoner in the early 1920's... and given that he is singing about freedom, it makes the eerie/beautiful song somewhat haunting.
@@capistev U cannot walk with little kids? Think on it.......OK......U have to think a little bit longer, but i got hope u heard the CLICK in your head!
This in many ways is a cultural issue that has many facets, but it really comes down to three things. 1. In the US much of our law is frozen in time of around the late 1700s. At that time US laws and regulations became based on "British Common Law" and in many ways hasn't changed much since then, and there lies many of the problems. It was a time of different views on land and how its use and ownership rights were viewed. As you said about England and aristocratic land ownership, many of those norms and traditions found there way to the other side of the Atlantic. We still use the expression that a man's home is his "castle" today many, many years after castles (never really a thing, except for a few ultra rich who wanted to be kings, in America anyway) ceased to be a dominant part of the landscape. 2. The reticence of land owners to allow access to the public, although not warranted, can be a real issue and has some foundation in reality. Have you visited a National Park lately? How those visiting these national treasures behave when visiting can be down right despicable. Trash thrown everywhere, items defaced and wildlife disrupted are all common sights. Respect and a sense of stewardship of the environment are not as common as they should be. 3. Lawyers and being a society that sues everybody, all the time. My family lived on a farm that was no longer being used for agriculture and we allowed access for hunting and fishing in a somewhat controlled manner. You just had to ask. That did not stop us from worrying and having to carry costly liability insurance. There was always that nagging fear when we saw a group going out during deer season, with permission, of What If........?
"Entitlement" seams to be ingrained in the US mentality...just looking at the damage caused by visitors to the national parks, which have rules, I can not fathom the destruction that would be caused by a freedom to roam law.
I think "Lawyers and being a society that sues everybody, all the time" hits the nail on the head. For those outside the US, liability is a huge issue here. Criminals have been injured burglarizing a house, sued the homeowner and won. It started in the 80s and now, many property owners just won't take the risk.
@@sw6428 ""Entitlement" seams to be ingrained in the US mentality" Many of those visitors are not from the US. People in vacation, in general, seem to be problematic.
@@hlarks "Criminals have been injured burglarizing a house, sued the homeowner and won. " yes, exactly. This is why people are so strict about no trespassing laws here. Our entire culture would be so much better off if we got rid of most of the lawyers. Perhaps we could send them to roam in Europe. LOL
For finnish people the forests and nature in general is very important culturally. So much so that when building new housing, large swaths of forest and natural fields are left unbuilt in and around the developed area so that the residents can use it for recreation. If you look at a map of the city of Turku, for example, you can see the dense city center surrounded by these satellite "suburbs" that are basically towns within the city that have their own shops and other services, and are separated by sometimes kilometres of fields and forests. This is for the wildlife to have these corridors they can travel through without coming too close to humans. I was a city kid, living only 3km from the city centre of Turku, and i spent most of my days roaming the nearby forest with my friends and collecting butterflies in the meadows next to our house. I cannot even imagine a childhood without nature close by.
I live very close to Yosemite National Park. There are several pullouts on the road (Highway 41) that are trailheads to waterfalls, creeks, and hiking trails. I am increasingly appalled by the garbage people leave in these parking areas. I walked one of the trails recently, and along the trail there was also garbage - mostly empty water bottles. The tourists who come here came specifically to see the beauty of Yosemite, yet that didn't stop them from leaving their plastic and candy wrappers on the ground. I cannot comprehend their mindset. This does color my attitude toward making my land available to other people I don't know.
@@ginemginem Yes, I see your point. I would like to have a culture of public land, and I would like to believe that Americans would honor it.. I know some of them would- I wonder how long it would take for people to develop the same respect that the people who grew up with public land have?
@@ginemginem You seem to have missed the fact that the highway where their story takes place is public land. There was never a culture of public land for the US to have lost in the first place. Rather, the attitude of tourists has grown increasingly worse over the years.
As someone who grew up in America, I’ve always wished for what I call “a world without fences”. Thank you for making such a concise video about why I’ve always felt this way! I guess it’s time to finally move to Sweden like I’ve always wanted to anyway!
Although the general right to roam is more limited in England than in some other countries, there is a very extensive network of footpaths designated as "Public Rights of Way" which are jealously guarded, to an extent by the local authorities as well as volunteer walking groups. Many of these rights of way go back 100s of years.
Yeah. I could actually hear myself if I did this in Europe, repeatedly asking throughout the entire journey, "You sure we're not going to get shot?" "Did you talk to the landowner?" "You're not lying to me are you?" "You know what they do in Texas and a few other states if you just go walking around like this"
I love your well researched and always informative videos, they make my sunday 👍🏼. What came to my mind instantly about the scandinavian approach to the "use of nature" is that it is based on trust. "You can go where you like, bacause I trust you to do no harm". While the US approach (not only in this matter, but in general) is based on mistrust. "You stay out, because I don't want you to have the opportunity of damaging my stuff". And this seems to be the core of all cultural differences between Europe and the US. Trust vs Mistrust !
This! Much of what works in Europe works because people trust each other and the institutions that they've built. That's why you can't just transplant European laws or infrastructure to the US, they either won't work or crumble in short order.
"Das ich denke, das ich tu', trau' ich jedem andern zu." So ist es wohl, das Land der Freien. Hier liegt vielleicht auch einer der Gründe für die latente Gewaltbereitschaft. Und den hohen Munitionsverbrauch.
In general, people in USA and North-Europe, are different. In USA it is more common to; litter, steal, vandalis, cause forest fires... Americans have more reason to protect there property. Life in Europe is safer. I am from Finland.
as an owner of a pasture in Germany I find dogs to be the biggest problem. They dig deep holes that could be dangerous to my animals and shit on their food (gras). BTW: great video !
Well, the problem aren't the dogs, but their irresponsible owners. I don't let my dog to dig holes (though it's her instinct, as she is a dachshund), and pick up her 💩 even in the meadows.
Totally correct. It is the dog owners responsibility. I hve my 2 Labbies running freely, however passing a fenced property of lifestock it is mandatory to put the dogs on their leash. I always pick up the residues of my dogs, even of the meadows in case, quite often "forreign dog residues" as well. There is a lack of respect the dog owners show on public territory; unfortunately. @jozefchocholacek6349
@@hansweith4947 My real dog(pet) was the last without while I played ball and a place to run. And I cared the dog was never where the fenced children play ground war. Because the dirt. Only if they wanted to play with my dog. It's the place they made. Now, I don't know. Play frisbe on the lash.
well, if you have whole kennel of dogs regularly using yor pasture I can see its problem( but I guess their urine would be even bigger one) but how different shit on grass from some random dog crossing it with his owner than from rabbits, foxes, birds, lizards, snakes, mice, hell even horses, cows and sheeps do shit( as anyone who ever walked over some pasture can attest theres sometimes hardly any space left without their shit) on the grass a.k.a. their own food as you put it. every single living thing shit and animals living outdoors both shit and eat outdoors and do all sorts of other things there, no matter how intimate or gory, they surely aren't squeamish about their stuff like humans. also I do think animal shit in forest, pasture or nature in general, is a different thing from shit on sidewalk and in inhabited areas. a/ in nature its just one of many shits around and they are all rather dispersed as the density of animals just like humans is rather low there unlike in cities with many ppl and dogs etc per square km. and b/ theres hardly any person( other animals dont mind and if they do they dont complain about it) to step into it and ruin ones shoes and whole day unlike the situation when theres shit in middle of sidewalk or some park primary intended for human recreation . so I really dont get a/ why ones so angry about one particular kind of shit on pasture already brimming with it and b/ being so anal about picking one particular kind of shit off the said pasture( while leaving all the other kinds of it) like it was busy street or square or inner city park and not some far away pasture with cows or sheep shitting all over it.
As a European (Dutch, from the Netherlands) I like that you try your best to represent data fairly and accurately, and you are not in the business of purposefully juxtaposing the USA against Europe in a way that unfairly paints the USA in an unrepresentatively negative light. It is all too common for UA-cam channels who compare countries to engage in such practice, because it appeals to a sense of national pride within the audience and makes them feel good (because they self-identify with that which is painted as superior). I know when I watch your channel, and you compare the USA to Germany in a way that is favorable to Germany, that I can rely on your comparison to be fair not just to Germany but also the USA. This is important to me. Keep up the good work, TheBlackForestFamily, and best wishes from the Netherlands!
Hi Everyone! We hope you enjoy this Sunday's video about a topic that we had a LOT of fun "exploring" (*is it too early for a Dad joke?). 😂 In all seriousness though - we actually have a pretty huge announcement coming to our channel this Wednesday regarding the "future" of our presence on UA-cam. As much as I hate "baiting", I want to encourage everyone to be on the lookout for a short video explanation this Wednesday since it isn't part of our normal schedule and we would greatly appreciate your feedback and support. ❤ - Ashton
👶?
never to early for any joke, will have a look, hope you stay here on youtube too...sunday breakfast without the four of you isn't as good as with you
@@SirHeinzbondFor me too
You cannot compare Scandinavian country’s to the likes of the USA and UK. The Scandinavians are civilised.
@@Matt-vo1ge no you can not compare the usa to something other than usa , maybe canada, but not to all extent... but Ashton is doing this on regular base... and we see the differences between Germany( greater extension to Europe) and the USA... and it would be nice that the nice people in USA start to rethinking some of their ways, and also should we do a bit... but not in the right of way, not the freedom at all, the gun control, the health insurances, the taxes, the (insert what's important to you!)
I am a swedish forest owner and I create paths for the public in my forest, to show the most beautiful areas in it, because I am proud of it.
I wish all land owners would do that - especially if they have something significant like a neolithic monument or forest or beach.
Oh good then we will send you a couple thousand of our illegals to your land
skol from this small forest owner in Oregon USA, no fence or signs here, in the last 10 years I've only had to clean up one beer can... in 2019 😂. It's a beautiful world, thanks for sharing.
Thats so beautiful and awesome. 🥰
Thank you for your public service!
As a Norwegian, I find it ironic that in the "Land of the Free" they restrict people's movements so much, whereas here in "socialist" Norway everyone has the freedom to roam in nature.
Second that, but i'm not from Norway :) Home of the brave, land of the free; but nobody's free to go where he wants...
Also, the "good fences make good neighbours"... that's so dumb, good fences only separate people, not bring them together. I rather share my garden with my neighbours so we can all enjoy one big garden in the summer, as to each having his own 15m² and barely know each other and make a fuss when a kid shoots a ball into a neighbouring garden. Good rules make good neighbours, not the fences. My frontyard is a nice big public park in the city and I love to share it with everyone from the neighbourhood and beyond, i don't need a backyard for myself..
Strong rights to private property goes above everything else in the land of the free 🤷
tbf norway is mega liberal in camping and stuff
Let people roam on private land? THAT WOULD BE SOCIALISM!
@@FINNSTIGAT0R"land of the free" 😂😂😂
I grew up in New York and my family regularly trespassed on private forest even climbing fences. When telling friends, they were often shocked and considered it worse than doing drugs to go on someone else’s land. After seeing your show, I realize my family must have learned this from my grandmother who grew up in the Black Forest.
😂👍
Yay, someone with German Ancestors!
My German ancestors were peasants who wanted their own land. The Palatine Germany’s came for land. The Native Americans did roam but were upset by settlers animals trampling their crops. Free roaming didn’t work with domestic livestock. But settler’s land use was very different from native land use. Modern Big agriculture is radically different. We haven’t changed attitudes though. American individualism doesn’t seem to consider others.
You just had to be careful. In Central New York there were farmers who shoot rock salt at us if we were cought taking a short cut through thier property.
They think they have a right to own a beach.... that's apalling.
As a European I went to Wyoming to view the 2017 Solar eclipse, a bit North of Lingle. We arrived at a beautiful spot, and there the landowner was standing making sure that all eclipse chasers remained on the state land and did not trespass on her private land.
what a waste of time, i'm suprised this owner was not charging fees.... ech
I also was just north of Lingle, and found a property owner charging $50 per car to park on their field. It would have been possible to park on the side of the road, but it seemed safer, plus the owner had brought in portable bathrooms
oh, and also, the eclipse passed right over the Crescent Lake National Wildlife Refuge in Nebraska (wonderful public land), which was my original plan, but that area had a higher chance of clouds
@@alquinn8576 It was also the intention that we would view the eclipse from Nebraska, but the weather forecast made us change our plans on the morning of the eclipse and head further West to Wyoming.
@@alquinn8576 He must have become rich that day....
When I sold a mountaibike to an American here in Bavaria, he gazed me in disbelieve, when I told him, he could go anywhere he just wanted to go to. No complaining and no shooting. For me something not even worth considering, for him a big surprise. Small country, but big freedom here, thank you for reminding me of this.
Excellent, passionate contribution!
Hehe... Ich habe die gleiche Erfahrung mit meiner "Sister from another Mister" gemacht. Sie ist Amerikanerin und als ich mit ihr Wandern/Mountain biking/ Joggen war, war sie immer ganz irritiert, gar verängstigt zu Beginn, dass ein Durchqueren von (...) überhaupt kein Problem darstellt... Oder man sogar nette Gespräche gefunden hat.
But in Germany you do not have the right to roam - land owners can restrict access because they are responsible for injuries that happen on their land.
@@Draxel ich denke es geht um nicht eingefriedete Gelände wie Felder Wiesen und Wälder
I'd look at you like you were an idiot, you can't ride your mountain bike anywhere you want in Bavaria, only on specific, legally allowed routes. Come to my forest in Bavaria and I will prosecute you.
@@Draxel restricting is something else then shooting them just because they drive up te wrong the wrong driveway. If you pass on a restictive site they just tell you to go away.
This might be a bit extreme, but a couple of weeks after a really bad downpour, my grandpa visited our cabin in the woods (no roads, no civilization for an hour and a half, built entirely by my family, cabin in the woods), only to find a makeshift wooden doorstop and a massive rock in front of the door. The lock was broken, and the linen closet had obviously been raided as 2/3 of it was neatly folded and placed on the table in the main room right next to a bottle of homemade rakia which we assume was left in apology. Other than that, everything looked as we left it. The only indication that they used the beds was the pile of laundry they left us, the bed covers and decorative pillows were all replaced perfectly. It even looked like they tried to fix our broken waterline that's consistently getting vandalized by a local bear.
My grandma was a bit upset with the intrusion, but other than that, we all just accepted that these people probably got caught in a bad situation and were desperate for shelter, and clearly did their best to be respect our space despite breaking in.
This is really wholesome!
@hardstyle905 Bulgaria
Bottle of rakia... Bulgaria i guess? Anyways, incredibly wholesome, thank you for sharing!
I can't say I haven't been in a situation like that. I had to brake in to a cabin here in Alaska. Was up in the mountains when a blizzard swept through. There was no warning of it (this includes weather reports). I was lucky to have found it and a can of gas. I did leave my number and I even went back to check in on the place about two weeks later.
I replaced the window I broke and later that same day I got a call from the family who later after finding out I replaced their window thanked me.
later on we actually became. hunting Buddies.
This is honest to god good human nature. People helping people. Love to see it
16:24 I'm surprised by the "private beach" signs. Here in Spain the law guarantees that the sea and its surroundings as beaches must be open to the public, a law that in a way forbids private beaches. The selfishness of owning a beach looks crazy to me, like why forbid anyone to enter a part of nature, it's like I decide I own a river and no one can use it or visit it.
Same in France
Same in Portugal. Hotel chains tried to do that on Algarve and where forced to up the gates
Most US states the beach - the tidal area or the area up the high water mark - is public. But you aren't guaranteed a path from the road to the beach.
In California, we have a law that protects access to beaches, as in, in must be allowed, but it takes constant work to sue landowners who put up gates and block public easements.
Same in Croatia
I love that law. When I first came to Spain and saw how many beaches that was open to the public despite close vicinities to hotels, I was amazed!
Because in my country, Malaysia, a lot of beaches has sadly been taken up by private owners (which are mostly hotels) that only made available if you pay the (stay at the hotel e.g.). It is definitely sad especially in the west coast side because we are definitely blessed with superbly beautiful tropical beaches that should be everybody's right.
Thank goodness on the east coast side, they have more open beaches for the public.
This video made me realize I, as a Polish person, never worried about trespassing. Ever. I can't fathom how trespassing in a forest is even possible.
Also, how can a country not have "if its not forbidden - it's allowed" as a rule is beyond me
Because 'if it's not specifically allowed, it's forbidden' creates more profit for the police and corrections industry.
It’s not. This video is so blatantly false, for example, only 8% of the land in the UK and 11% of the land in Norway have public “rights to roam”, compare that to Americas 35% with a near record along of large national parks. We can go anywhere, given someone doesn’t own it.
Where do you get 11% from for Norway? The vast majority land area of Norway is not fenced and +150m away from a residence as such the right to roam applies to almost the entire country. btw. England was a negative example in this video so not sure why you bring up the UK.
I had such a situation in Poland (as a Pole), where someone occupied the road as passing through land belonging to him and not only did not allow passage, but threatened to "chase me with an axe" (Poland, so not a firearm). I walked around it in the woods at the time, but after walking around I met neighbours who saw me talking to the man. They said that the troublemaking family and was annoying them (they had cut the only road through the village with this blockade), but there was nothing they could do.
PS. Of course -- the only one situation I know in Poland, where the owner was aggressive. I also know of a case where a tourist path was cut through and prevented from exploring one of the valleys near Krakow. But while I can name such cases from my own hikes, the fact is that they are few and far between and it is generally possible to hike freely.
As someone born in the U.S., it's absolutely terrifying every time I find out another right that people in other countries have, that I was never even told was a right. The more I think about it, the more I think "Land of the Free" is sarcasm.
It is propaganda
@@iwillroamIt is for the 90% of the US citizens "made to believe" they have the best country, so the richest 10% can scam the 90% without any worries. Also this Democrats vs conservatives is for the 90%, while the rich 10% watching from above eating their popcorn and laughing.
Probably the same for ''home of the brave''
@@trashcatlinol and for the God part
As George Carlin said: "It's Called the American Dream Because You Have To Be Asleep to Believe It."
I as an American did not actually know that "Right to Roam" actually existed anywhere. This is not something that was ever taught in school or even something that I picked up on as we visited Germany on exchange in '86 and '88. I have been a city dweller most of my life so it may never affect any land I have, but "respectfully" roaming farmland would make things easier in rural areas. Awesome topic and one to think about should the population start loving others equally instead of itself more.
As an American from the rural south west, it's usually okay to cross a farm field if you're careful but people are so insensitive, disrespectful, and non-observant that they tend to litter, stomp on and destroy plants and furrows and ditches and fences. Farming is hard enough without the neighborhood children ruining a few hundred dollars of crops every month. I am 100 percent for free roaming in America but I feel it would require a more educated, empathetic and respectful population that places more value on accountability.
It is illegal to cross farmfields in Europe too if crops has been planted there, same thing with fields of treeplants in the forest, but it is usualy ok to pass in the forest if one does not destroy anything or step on the treeplants. However, in Sweden it is fully legal to put up a tent for 24 Houers on non farmlands or forest plantages as long as it is 50 meters or more from the house where people are living (fishing, except for in the sea may requiering a licence here, but in the sea and some of the bigger lakes it is free, but ponds, creeks and smaller lakes are usualy not allowed to fish in without special premission from the landowner but it is free to swim in them, hunting does always require a special license, maybe except for things like rodents (but not birds, most birds are protected or requires a license, it also requires a special premission to carry guns in some places) if one really would like to hunt rodents... ).
Its basicly the same everywhere in europe. Stay away from peoples gardens and homes and build up earia's and don't harm any crops and stay away from lifestock (the last also more for your own safety to) but if its not fenced or fenced of with an "open" gate you can respectfully walk on it.
There's a LOT we Americans are not taught in schools, and a lot of this dearth of information stems from 'certain states' (*ahem* former Confederates) wanting to conceal the racist/white supremacist (no real difference between the terms) history that has lead to the current system. "Locking down the land" in the Great Plains may have been to 'protect crops from free-grazing cattle,' but elsewhere it was intended to provide an easy way to convict 'certain people' (blacks) of crimes such as trespass and loitering, invoking the 13th Amendment ("Slavery is prohibited ... EXCEPT AS PUNISHMENT FOR A CRIME..") to re-enslave those who had been recently freed.
And now that we have these literally soulless, artificial people, called Corporations, who have been granted MORE rights than Natural Persons (the latest example is the CItizens United ruling), we have these artificial THINGS claiming perpetual ownership of land, and slowly trying to extend that into perpetual ownership of the Natural Persons who work that land.
It's so stupid. There's so much undeveloped land in a lot of places, like 10+ acres of mountainous forest behind a house that's never going to be used by the owner, and no one else can use it either, because every single piece of land has to be owned by someone and there was never sufficient interest for the local government to buy a section of this particular parcel to turn into a park. Of course 9 times out of 10 you'd never run into any trouble if you did walk on it, but between the "Posted" signs (which were probably installed decades ago by a long-dead previous owner as over-zealous CYA) and stories you hear about someone knocking on the wrong door by mistake no one tries, and everyone accepts that the only way to access nature is by going to small designated places that are few and far between.
When I first learned that in the USA people don't walk into fields or forests or other such open spaces for fear that they might get killed by the owner I was completely shocked because it simply never occured to me that such a thing would happen in the 21st century. It just sounds so....feudal.
In Canada it's often the other way around. Landowners fence their property and put up "no trespassing" signs to deter hunters who might mistake them for deer and shoot them.
@@wizardsuth As someone who grew up in rural American we mostly do that for the same reason, The only rural area you generally have to worry about being shot randomly by the "owners" is drug cartel land, "non-public" government land, and meth dens.
@@flyingmonkeydeathsquadronc968with me being Norweigan, that mindset should probably be communicated more across the world. Cause i might have gotten myself shot if i ever travelled to the US before learning this not long ago
You're generally not going to get shot, unless you stumble upon an illegal operation of some sort (drug or otherwise). But that can happen on public land as well as on private land.
The real reason is the US legal system. You are legally responsible for anyone on your property. If they get hurt you will get sued. It doesn't matter how the injury happened. Fencing, posting no-trespassing signs, and generally denying access without permission is the only legal defense.
@@onehorsetoomany8006But don't U.S also have that castle law where you can legally kill someone if they get to your property? Seems perfect way for a killer to get away with murder. Or doesn't the castle thing cover the owned land?
One thing I didn't hear in this video was insurance liability. When I was a kid in upstate NY, No Trespassing signs were few and far between. Now days they are everywhere. Too many land owners have been sued by someone that may have been injured on their property.
That's insane. With right to roam comes the responsibility for yourself, nature and other people (so you don't bother them by going close to housing etc.).
Because the US fcked this up at the start. I sprain my ankle on a hike i do the following. I call my boss to tell him i‘m not coming for two weeks and i go see a doctor. Doesn’t cost me a cent.
Most americans first thought is how much money they will lose with this and they need someone to compensate for those losses.
@@tinoj9661 Yeah, because *personal property rights* are such a horrid thing!
In the US - honest you sprains your ankle, you walk it off (you made it home right?), skip the doctor, ice it down and get your hiney to work the next day - because you're a rugged hiking kind of person; bad sprain - borrow your buddy's crutches. Unless of course you were emergency air-lifted out of your hiking area - but you might want a bone protruding or at least broken (medical insurance probably covers that - 'sick days' can be used for time off - ergo no lost $$). Otherwise you might call your boss, tell him your not coming in for two weeks because of a sprain? He'd probably tell you to take the next month off and while off get your resume updated (cv?); dishonest you - sprains your ankle - looks around wondering how much money you can get from the land owner if they were sued because you were a stumble-bum and sprained your own ankle or you're a pretty good actor ..... before you remember you're on Federal or State lands and can't sue them - so go back to start - you walk it off.
That's of course everyones responsibilty. Except trees falling on public roads f.e.
Every now and then I‘m in utter shok that there is no public and universal health insurance in the us.
As an European every time I’ve heard the phrase “private beach” I thought it meant that someone owned a private island. Never had it occurred to me that Americans don’t have access to regular beaches
I spain private sections of a beach exist because you can legally fence your backyard and the right to roam is not a law, so it is kind of a conflict here. People ina town near by recently rioted against the fencing of a mansion of the kazakh president (it is real) because it owned coastal area and a traditional path. They tore down the fence. Private beaches are starting to get outlawed even when the right to roam is not really tipified
It depends on the state. California owns all beach below the high tide line and holds it for public access
In Italy no one can own beaches. You can buy concessions though.
we do
I live in Switzeland and love the fact that the farmers smile and greet you pleasantly if you are crossing their land. But walkers respect the land, close gates or electric fences behind them, don't leave litter, don't trample crops and don't disturb the animals. But in England and Australia (I don't know about America) many walkers leave a trail of litter behind them and generally vandalize the environment.
Freedom and responsibility come hand in hand. Unfortunately not something everyone seems to understand.
Not really. The biggest problem is not the public damaging private property, but those who maintain the pubic rights of way delibrately damaging fences and so on in the name of claiming the property was damaged by the public. Reason why is to then try and remove the Public Right of Way and remove the need to maintain the PRoW and eventually reclaim the property.
@@johnclarke2997That is not how it works in almost all European countries.
english speaking countries are the filthiest in the western hemisphere.
@@johnclarke2997 I noticed the a similar tactic in New York state, and actually - infuriatingly - on one of my jogging paths a few miles from my condo. The homeowner adjacent to the path "incrementally" shifted his fence inch by inch, month by month, so as to encroach onto the path, with the obvious intention of eventually stealing more land. This tactic seems hugely popular, notably with billionaire Californians who want to steal their own "private beaches" from the American public who own all of them, by federal law and also by tradition that has existed since the existence of America itself.
Living for 10 months in Georgia (about 30 years ago) during my university time, I once wanted to go out to a walk in the woods, just like I was used to in Germany.
So I picked my bicycle (even this made me a weirdo), rode it out of town, searching for the walking ways in the woods I expected to find. All I actually found were fences and "No trespassing" signs, leaving me really puzzled and disappointed. Thanks for clearing that up. For me, this definitely is another reason to live in Europe rather than in the US.
could be because of cold war and ussr if it was 30 years back :)
bruh, at first i thought you were talking about the country Georgia. Only at the very end i realised that you are talking about the state of Georgia. 😐
@@enemy1191 are you american? In my (european) language and most other languages, state = country. We have the the state/country divided into smaller bites regions. Bavaria in Germany for example. That would be the comparison to Georgia in the US.
@@klarapopilkova5791 I am also European and i also thought you meant the country and not one of the US states. (ig it was because of no specification) It made me confused also, because i don't think Georgia would have roaming relagulations (ignoring russia border problems at Caucaus).
@@klarapopilkova5791 No, im European, Latvian. In my European country and European language state isnt the same as country. Maybe it's because Germany is a Federation, there are only 13 in the world, USA is one of them, and Germany and Austria are the only ones in Europe (according of wiki and stuff). In Latvia we have municipalities, counties, regions, districts etc, BUT no states. Even if a country is made out of states, at the end it is a country, then states and then other variations of the regions.
The key part of all this is "respectful". Many people, not just in the US, have made the choices to not respect other people.
This is why I would say this won't work well in the US. People really don't respect each other and arguably don't respect themselves. Maybe that is why this is needed, however. Maybe regularly interacting with moderately removed neighbors could imbed respect for property into the culture again. I learned it in youth groups, but not everyone was part of those. Who would have taught them? No one.
Comes down to up bringing.
There are more disrespectful, entitled and DGAF people from America due to decades of poor upbringing.
American culture and values have changed for the worse.
Just watch ANY 1960's family show to understand the values, culture and standard of living America once had.
It might be the problem with the US is it's intensely individualistic. Everything you own is yours and if someone steps on your lawn, you point your gun at them. We're so defensive with everything it's crazy. It's definitely a topic that's worth a deeper dive because the absence of the right-to-roam law is just one of the consequences of the current state of the American psyche.
To me, a whole cultural mindset is needed to have this privilege. It’s about respecting the common good, what is good for society, nature. Same with the freedom of speech, and gun ownership. It comes with individual responsibility, to be mindful, of other people’s freedoms to be.
More respect, less fear.
Bill, I agree with your thoughts, except for restrictions on "free speech".
Free speech is is offensive speech; regardless of what one says, someone is offended.
There is no such thing as "some" free speech, just as there is no such thing as a little bit pregnant.
One is always free to ignore offensive speech or, counter it with better arguments.
Libel and slander laws cover lies perpetrated about individuals. Nevertheless, the truth must always be a valid defence in such a case.
Absolutely. It should not need to be said, and it should not need to be wiped from people's consciousness so it is not said.
@@BasementEngineeri dont agree with you that free speech is offensive speech. And there is a difference between intentionally hurting someone or just having to say the truth, knowing you might offend people. Saying the truth in the most polite way you can, and, in an impolite way, if thats the only way the other party will understand, is crucial for a healthy society
@@hetedeleambacht6608 Disagree!
Would you call today's western societies healthy? I surely do not. What has contributed to bringing on the cesspool we find ourselves in now?
In my opinion, and that of others, it is political correctness and the inability to call a spade a spade.
Change needs to be implemented and that begins with free speech, regardless of who gets offended.
As I wrote earlier, libel and slander are already illegal under the law.
Telling the truth, no matter whom it offends, is necessary for a healthy society.
@@hetedeleambacht6608 Perhaps, but the US supreme court ruled that hate speech doesn't exist, or at least can't be a crime. I think Matal v. Tam in 2017 is the most recent case where they said it's only a crime if you incite people to violence or other crimes.
Coming from Malaysia and currently living in Scotland, it's just unbelievable how much the nature is accessible for me. Given Scotland's many hills and open areas, you really could go everywhere as long as you're up to it and being responsible when doing so. It's like playing Zelda Breath of The Wild for me, you see somewhere far away that seems impossible to reach, but you could look up for records of people crossing through that place or mountain. It's just straight up amazing when you could literally go everywhere as long as you're ready for it.
To quote a line often omitted in a patriotic (actually very socialist) American song:
"There was a big, high wall there that tried to stop me
A sign was painted said "Private Property"
But on the backside, it didn't say nothing
That side was made for you and me."
Fellow Malaysian here. Malaysia's hills are covered by dense rain forests and tropical vegetations that are too challenging for most recreational hikers to navigate safely. It's hard to look 10 meters ahead and find a proper foothold. The humidity, insects, flora and fauna amongst other things call for a lot of preparation and strength
About malaysia, YOU WANNA KILL YOURSELF OR WHAT? DON'T GO TO THE JUNGLE FOREST JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT TO. Thick rainforest jungles are scary man you can just disappear without any warning and it's hard to find you. Unfortunately gotta stick with recreational areas
Sure none of that is privately held land.
Go back to Malaysia. We have enough foreigners here
As an American, I couldn't tell you exactly when this idea of scarcity became so widespread and considered normal, but the concept can be seen everywhere in our culture. The idea that land is owned by someone, that unsaid shame of foraging, this idea that we need to limit our access to anything free.
Many of the methods and justifications 4 removing a native Americans hinged on the ability to absolutely control and restrict access to the land
@@amandak.4246 And yet there are, and have been historically, many functioning societies where land ownership didn't include the right to put up "No trespassing" signs every 20 feet and exclude everyone else from any use of your land whatsoever. Most indigenous societies, in fact, lacked a concept of individual land ownership. Land belonged to the tribe, and may have been divided into section that were, say, the hunting grounds of this or that family... but there was no concept of "This land belongs to Bob, and nobody else can go there without his permission."
That's actually how it worked for most of the 300,000 years that modern humans have existed.
I'm an American who has had an interest in foraging and finding fossils. I like collecting bones and things but it feels taboo to start exploring around. Even worse that I'm in the Midwest and half the people here are just itching for an excuse to shoot somebody.
@amandak.4246 You mean CAPITALIST society. There are enough societies that worked very well without the concept of private ownership of land and looking at the crisis of affordable housing, I am not sure if even for capitalist societies it is rather the opposite: Society doesn't work without TIGHT LIMITATION of private land ownership.
I had never seen a "No trespassing" sign before I visited the US. i have been to several other countries that are great, and one is free to roam. @@amandak.4246
My home state of Oregon designated its entire coastline as a "public highway" so property rights could not infringe on the public's enjoyment of its beaches. I was surprised to learn not all coastal states allowed public access to all their beaches.
Now if they could just kick all the anti-constitutional nonsense out and delete the cartels with the fury of 1776.
@@manictiger Unfortunately, not enough Republicans are interested in opposing the anti-constitutional, authoritarian impulses of Trump to do that.
I live on the Oregon coast and your allowed to be on any stretch of beach anytime you want, you're just not allowed to sleep on it or it's a 1000 dollar ticket for illegal camping on the beach. So no, that's not really freedom unless you don't sleep. And this is exactly what the Oregon coast towns do every summer to the Oregon coast trail through hikers who opt for camping on the beach instead of shelling out 400 dollars a night for a hotel room. Which is essentially illegal for them to do being that it's designated public land, but they do it anyway because there's really no such thing as real freedom in this country, only a brainwashed illusion of it that we've been spoon fed since birth. Cheers.
@@jamierobinson3349 Well, like Ashton said, there are places in Europe where freedom to roam doesn't mean freedom to camp. The Oregon coastal towns no doubt don't want the beaches, tourism to which supports their economies, to turn into filthy permanent encampments like Portland has. Oregon declared the coastline a public highway, and I can't think of any other public highway you can camp overnight on.
@@timelston4260 lol, they don't fine the homeless for camping on the beach, only those who they know can pay the ticket like OCT backpackers and people who aren't homeless. So no, you are incorrect. And Portland became a 💩hole because the genius state government decided it was a good idea to decriminalize all drugs inviting every homeless drug addict in America to move here. That's the facts and that's the reason. I've been to Europe more than once and was blown away by how much more freedoms they enjoy than we do. Cheers. (and only 30% of the Oregon coast trail is on the "Hwy")
This is something I noticed first when watching some British history youtubers, in some places they said "Oh yeah, there's right to roam here, so we can just cross this field.", which absolutely blew me away.
"Oh yeah we dont have property rights so well just violate this farmers hard work and privacy"
@@mondaysinsanity8193 the farmer has a legal obligation to keep footpaths clear
@@mondaysinsanity8193
Clearly, you have no idea about how the world works
Obviously if you destroy something while crossing the land, you have to compensate the owner of that land
@@starhalv2427 lol you say that and say i dont know how the world works.
How how does this happen. The land owner doesnt have park rangers or time to watch everyone who comes through. If theres plenty traffic they couldnt if they tried.
Simple cameras wint work because tresspassing alone isnt enough. They have to actually see the action take place.
In our state parks we have rangers we have cameras and yet...still need people who pick up litter and fix vandalism.
Just because something is illegal doesnt stop it from happening you need a way to enforce it
@@salerio61 oh thats even worse no everyone has a right to the farners labor? Creating and maintaining trails takes work often quite a bit of work in fact.
But the farmer has to do all that work for free...and you have a right to the fruit of thst labor....uh huh
You know what that is...right?
I'm Polish, currently living in the UK. I lived in a large town but surrounded by fields, lakes and forests. I knew how to forage for mushrooms and berries before I knew how to write their names. Before I started school, I knew how to McGuyver a fishing rod, bow and arrows, and a lean-to shelter from stuff I could find in the forest. When we still had winters, we'd go ice skating or just on walks across the frozen lake. As teenagers, me and my friends spent more time in fields than anywhere else - the best place for a summer party is on the beach by the lakeside (in a forest). There were 4 of us in a 2 bedroom flat (my parents, my brother and me) but I never missed nature. Now I live in a house with a garden and I feel constricted. I can't imagine having as much land as the USA has and not being able to access any of it.
@CrimsonVipera "I can't imagine having as much land as the USA has and not being able to access any of it."
There are literally billions of acres of publicly accessible land here in the US.
When I was young, we lived in the city, yet there were still natural places for children to play and explore. Most cities in this country do have places that are still very natural, even if there are skyscrapers only blocks away.
Unfortunately, much of this is no longer accessible, especially to children, due to the liberal homelessness laws. The homeless have taken over these once natural "escapes" from the city. It's no longer safe to let your kids go by themselves to play at the stream because they are now packed with homeless drug addicts.
The one place we would go as kids, we'd catch salamanders and crawfish and play with turtles, etc. We had a tree fort and about a mile away there was another little fort we'd built.
The big kids grew pot plants. LOL
This was literally within a few miles of the Capital in Washington, DC.
The authorities seem to be keeping a handle on keeping the actual trail free of homeless, but under the bridges, etc is another issue entirely.
Past dark, it's simply not safe to be there.
For all those who think there is nowhere to enjoy nature, this is vid literally biking distance from our nation's capital. As you can see, a lot of effort has been made to make sure there is a very wide variety of things to do to commune with nature, even within a large city.
ua-cam.com/video/V71ltqTFg_A/v-deo.htmlsi=R0bWunspZkkPZ1kS
Were your Polish forests private ones?
@@AntonKobaVast majority of forests are the public property, so anyone can go there.
@@revjaybird2And you still think it's okay for a quarter of your entire 50 state country to be privately owned and never accessible to the public?
The owner has the right to literally set it on fire if he/she so wants and there's nothing to stop him/her or stop the fire from extending and burning public land too.
And I am SURE he will be held responsible for that wildfire he caused just like SO MANY wildfire starters have before him/her.
Also where should the homeless people harassed and having their lives threaten by the local rural/urban police go if not some peaceful forested area?
Are the homeless people pedophiles pr even aggressive or drug users that wanna kidnap children that you're talking about them with such disdain while having no problem with one person owning A THOUSAND ACRES from his plantation owner great-grand pappy( that existed both in the North AND South of the US) while others are forced to contend with a small house and garden simply because their parents didn't came over on the Mayflower, back when even blacks owned other blacks and whites and could make a fortune off of the land they had if it was worked by people you paid for only once?
@hardstyle905 Snow and Ice are getting rarer and more ephemeral each year in Central Europe. When I was a kid in the 90s, there was almost continual frost from December to February at the foothills of the Alps in Germany.
I remember walking in Scotland with an American and she was very worried that we were “on the path” when I was trying to find the mountaineering line. It took a week for her to accept that we could actually go where we wanted to in the hills.
Maybe she was a 'pusher' herself.
As an Englishman who loves to walk in the countryside, I was fascinated to watch this UA-cam video. It does, however, give the impression that hiking and walking in England is pretty much limited to the 8% of land covered by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act. What it doesn’t describe however is the enormous number of public footpaths and Bridleways across the whole country - they are everywhere! OK you are limited to where the footpath goes, but in a small country like England there are not many places you can’t get to on the public footpath network. In addition, the footpaths are generally maintained and are easier walking than just striding across rough untended land.
I have only recently found your channel and I’m very impressed by the topics you cover and the open way you discuss them - keep up the good work.
Well said.
Yes, the real access concern is not England but Ireland. No footpaths or bridleways. Currently there's a lot of informal access, particularly to waterways (which England is especially poor on) but none of it is codified in law so access can disappear with a change of landowner or an incident. Add a US style approach to liability...
In England and Wales, in addition, 'no trespassing' signs are - outside of military areas, the vicinity of nuclear power stations, dockyards, airports and other of-necessity secure establishments and the like - just a formality.
'Trespassing' insofar as it exists (outside the curtilage of a private home, of course - which may well be extensive) is only a civil offence, not a criminal one. If you cause no harm and leave peacefully when requested, even if the landowner brought a private prosecution against you, you'd be hugely unlucky if it was ruled you had to pay the landowner five pence.
I’m a Native American, not just an American. Our traditional beliefs are that no one can actually own the land.
The house you build is yours, but the land belongs to no one. If you plant crops, those are yours and I won’t disturb them. If I plant crops in the land that the law says are yours, those are mine, but you can have them too. We place a greater value on respecting the individual, not the law. Our traditional views didn’t take into account the commercialization of agriculture, because it is an alien concept.
♥️♥️♥️
This can work only with a very thin density of population, which is not the case anymore, nowhere in whole world. Actually everywhere the "tragedy of commons" is taking place, which leads inevitably to the destruction to our world, as long as there are no legal limitations.
@@n.mariner5610 Chicago and Finland have about the same population. Manchuria in China has about 20 million people and Outer Manchuria in Russia has a little over 1 million. California has more people than the ten least-populated states combined. Russia has roughly the same population as the UK & Germany combined, spread over 11 time zones.
There is plenty of open space to support triple the world's population.
@@almitrahopkins1873 Yes there are still areas not being exploited, e.g. Antarctica, but only because there are no resources there and it is extremely difficult to reach.
Man always has exploited to the max all available resources which are not protected by law.
It is not only land, but also the sea, the vast oceans suffer greatly through overfishing, and maybe the biggest problem of our time is the spoiling of our atmosphere by polluting with CO2.
This all is called the tragedy of commons, and the only solution to prevent this is legal protection.
@@n.mariner5610 man has not always exploited land to the maximum extent, to the point where it detriments even him. Native Americans were living sustainably and stewarding the land before colonizers showed up to ruin it for everyone. They used to do control burns to rejuvenate the land for future generations. To this fucking day we can’t even manage that
You forgot a huge issue in the States. ( or i might have missed it), If someone gets hurt on your property in America, they can sue you for everything you have and everything you make in a lifetime and more. AND You might lose your property defending yourself legally even if you win the case.
Yes, that’s exactly the problem we have here in Ireland. I commented on it, in reply to someone else and they doubted it. Now I can’t find it to respond to them, but this is exactly the issue. The occupiers liability act enshrined the landowners responsibility for the safety of everyone accessing the land, for whatever purpose. That included burglary, up to very recently.
@@duncancremin1708
In here - while this would be cases in absolutely any “public spaces”… there it is absolutely the same as what You describe.
… if You step on private property (not a public space!) without permission, the risk is ABSOLUTELY on you, even if You die.
You are not chased away, due to customary rights to roam - still You stepped there on your own - so YOU (that is before the law and practically) need to weight the risks yourself.
For example if You went into my forest in the storm - you are absolutely in rights to do so, but you would almost surely die… and I have nothing to do with that.
It would be absolutely different if You would be my employee and I would send You there (You would sue me very the same way like what you described in your country)…. roaming is something where You didn’t ask for my permission … so I didn’t give You guidance - we are neutral to each other as long as You don’t cross the line of damaging my property (it’s like if You would step into wilderness without owner - with predators and dangers - it’s completely your game. It is treated generally as a “wilderness” when you “roam” … you are just replicating millennia of tradition of crossing wilderness here to get somewhere (you wouldn’t be able to find who’s forest it is in that distant past while crossing it, you just needed to cross it - and not cause a damage… and it’s up to You protect yourself from wolves, bears and falling trees … and so is the situation inherited up to this day {even though today you hypothetically could find who the owner is… but why?})
Liability like that does exist in Germany, for example if someone slips on your part of the sidewalk because you didn't clear the snow you may be on the hook. However, the restitution sums in the German legal system tend to be a lot smaller than in the US and on top of that almost everyone has private liability insurance (Privathaftpflichtversicherung) which would cover this case. And of course, it's "within reason" if you own a forest and someone trips on a stick I don't think they'd have a case ;)
As much as I understand the motivation behind not wanting strangers to pass through your property to avoid legal trouble in the event of an accident, I don't understand how this can coincide with the right to be able to shoot them as soon as they dare set foot in your woods.
Under American law I can sue you if I trip over a root in your woods, but is it all okay if you make me eat a lead-based dietary supplement without passing it through my mouth?
the main problem is the fact they leave litter behind or damage property, but get offended if they are called out. The problem is entitlement.
It's always been really ironic to me that a land that used to have literal royalty that owned all the land and would fight wars over them would end up with more public space and the freedom to use it for its people than a country that fought to free itself from the same kind of royalty.
There is certainly an alarming level of irony, yes.
Moreover - the "freedom to roam" often come from times when the kings ruled the land. It was right for commoners..
It's probably because the US has so much public land so that rambles of hundreds of miles or more are possible -- there are great trails that stretch across multiple states and enormous tracts of land (National Parks, National Monuments, National Forests, BLM land, state forests, etc) where you can hike, camp, and even drive off road. Europe, in contrast, is much more densely populated, so that without the right to roam across private lands, there would be far fewer opportunities for such recreation. We've enjoyed hikes in Europe that passed through private lands, opening and closing gates as we went, but we don't feel at all hemmed in while exploring the vast wild areas of the American west (or, for that matter, of the large wild areas of the northern half of our own state of Michigan).
@@kibicz In Denmark a large forested area to the north of Sealand was the Kings private hunting ground for his Parforce Hunting, as also a large part of southern Sealand, witch had a stony fence keeping the animals inside! Today we still have a King (Actually a Queen), but with hardly any power anymore.
all the problems in america, ever boiling down now to our being in short supply of topsoil, fossil water, fresh water, and perpetual genocide of our otherwise genetic diversity, by african heroin having gotten into on the paper work side of law, the government, and media, leaving no means to stop africa's rape of our vital resources either.
america was built on the backs of eurasian immigrants who have been, and are being, perpetually genocided.
myself being a childless genocide victim, so utterly terrified of the heroin bitches that i have been alone for 18 years;
nearly destitute, everything we worked for being dissolved, where if i had the monetary equivalent of picking one tuft of cotton i would be a multi-billionaire after taxes.
africa's transparent foreign weapons systems have been on the ground and active in the united states since its inception.
they don't report their numbers, they don't report their incomes, and they will always breed faster than the food grows until the food just suddenly stops.
I live in Australia, we have a lot of public land, beaches are not allowed to be restricted from public use, we have huge national parks, state forests & nature reserves and if you go to country areas I cannot imagine a farmer threatening someone for walking across their field unless they were disturbing animals or littering or something. It’s polite to ask permission for things but if you are just hiking I don’t think anyone would care. You’d probably get stopped for a chat though 😂
we have parks too
Yeah mate stay out of farmers fields. If nothing else it's a biosecurity hazard. You're walking in plant and fungal material and diseases on your shoes and tires that can ruin land for decades or forever. If you don't know the issues in the local area you should always ask.
Yesterday was a Finnish Nature Day in Finland. It's associated with a Sleep Outdoors campaign, where people are encouraged to leave their homes and spend a night outside. I just got back home, actually. Took my hammock and backpack and headed into the forest for the night, slept well and woke up feeling refreshed. I really couldn't imagine any other way to live than having an unquestionable right to access the vast outdoors.
The maker of this video has grossly misrepresented the reality of government owned land available to the people in the USA. Imagine the entire land areas of France, Germany, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Finland, Sweden and Norway without cities or people being set aside as a park and it would still be LESS land than the federally owned lands in the USA. In addition to that each state has their own separate lands and state parks some of which are vast, also counties, townships, cities etc can and do have their own public lands. Then there are considerable private conservation and recreation areas which can be assessed. The fact that property rights and private property are respected in the USA doesn't mean there is any lack of opportunity explore the outdoors and wilderness lands.
Cope@@TheMVCoho
@@TheMVCoho Over here in northern Europe a little bit of right has needed to give room for a little bit of freedom. I'd say the important thing is that nobody is complaining about it, generally speaking. It's accepted as a cultural thing. You only see complaining when people are abusing the right, mostly by disturbing the landowners by getting too close to their houses or leaving trash behind. However, that's the kind of marginal behavior that affects pretty much any human existence. Like a passing driver can throw a soda can onto your lawn from their car or young adults can hang out near your house with their more-expensive-than-their-car sound system waking up the whole neighbourhood in the middle of the night. Typically the worst, most low-IQ people don't wander the wilderness, though, so undeveloped private property a distance away from cities is spared from much in that sense.
@@TheMVCoho I know, I've visited some. But like said, it's a cultural thing. Owning property and using it is one thing and well liked here too, but owning a huge piece of land and possibly restricting others from accessing it (accessing, not using as in downing trees and whatnot) just rubs us the wrong way. Being able to wander wherever is the very definition of freedom.
@@amandak.4246 Like I said, you own the land to be able to utilise it, but there's little point of restricting anyone hiking through it. What does it matter if someone wanders through your patch of forest? They're not allowed to build, down trees, make fires or so forth, which are landowner rights. They're just passing through, maybe picking up a few wild berries along the way.
As someone who lives in Utah in the US; I can confirm how HARD it is to find good backwood trails. My grandpa tells me stories about so many amazing hikes he took to the top of canyons local to my hometown, and today 80% of this canyon land is owned by a local copper mine company, and they defend their land with active armed guards and local police and search&rescue teams.
So in short, I live in a state full of beautiful outdoors and gorgeous mountainsides, as it’s slowly being destroyed and blocked from access by the public.
Gee, it's almost like a person could die or be seriously injured in a canyon or mine.
A business needs to obligate the lowest common denominator when it comes to safety. And that LCD is incredibly low as of late.
You have to divide that by the amount of local methheads that died there from sheer negligence. And also the fact that local police and "search&rescue teams" guard your house. And also that there are lots of empty canyons you could buy yourself and open to the public.
@@gang-ridertv5433 the police don't "guard my house." I have to guard my house. The Police show up after the fact, take note of what was stolen and probably never find it or who stole it. And if they do find it, it probably ends up eventually getting auctioned off to further fund the police.
So, if you can't roam because of guards, become one of them and walk freely 🤭
In New Zealand we have a problem with some Americans who have bought land in the mountains and don't respect free access to the backcountry
Well - since the government does not allow them guns… adapt or find yourself in a plane back to the US.
inforce the law they either have to deal with it or leave
Amerikaner werden, von zahlreichen rühmlichen Ausnahmen abgesehen, überall in der Welt zunächst einmal als Problem angesehen.
As a Swiss the only time I've heard a complaint about me being on their "private property" in Switzerland was in English... with an American accent.
Same in Scotland with people coming from England.
Here in Czech Republic, there's a long-ongoing tradition of "mushroom hunting/picking". A lot of people go to the woods, to pick mushrooms, to then make Smaženice/Bramboračka/other dishes from them. Most of these woods are privately owned, yet no one bats an eye that people go there harvesting mushrooms. I couldn't imagine the access to these areas being forbidden. It's a fundamental right to me that I can literally go wherever I want in nature.
I recently found that some woodland areas I would occasionally hike in for physical and mental health were posted as no trespassing by someone who doesn’t even live here, and aren’t maintaining or developing the land. It pisses me off that natural areas are just blocked to me now, and makes me feel trapped.
That is really sad. 😢
Soooo... get over it?
Find somehwere else to hike?
Find something else to do for your health? Buy your own damn land?
There are myriad of ways around this. You're whining about nothing.
I would just take the sign down 😆
@@martian14 Unfortunately, doing so can also create problems there...if they can figure out who did it, it can become a major problem beyond tresspass/destruction of property, it also means you take the liability for any injuries anyone who wouldn't have had permission has there that would have seen it.
@@GeneralNickles yeah bro he should definitely roll over for some fat fuck rich pig who can't let other people enjoy the land they have just as much right to be in.
I would have to guess another part of why it is so restrictive is because of the liability laws in the US. If someone were to hurt themselves on your property. Then you can be held liable for their misfortunate situation. This has personally happened to me. I neighborhood child hurt themselves climbing on a tree in my front yard. For some reason, this was my problem and I had to pay for their medical bills.
Are you serious!? That is just plain stupidity! Who is dumb enough to write such laws? Jeeze!
Basically opposite approaches. Over here the parents would be responsible. They haven't taught their kid how to climb a tree or to not climb a tree. That's the big thing parents are supposed to do, educate their kids.
@@Gazer75 It was negotiated with my insurance, and they raised my rates for 2 years after paying out $2000 to the other family. I never spoke to or ever saw these people, aside from receiving a notice from my insurance.
@@gubid Here the police and courts would laugh if someone tried to sue someone because their child fell down a tree.
The child got a lesson and wont do it again most likely. And because healthcare is "free" there is no insurance company to involve.
A case that would be close is some MMA guy doing a military dive of the pier near the Munch museum in Oslo and hit the bottom. Got paralyzed waste down.
After suing the municipality for lack of visible signs he apparently won in court.
How much hes getting has not been decided yet, but his lawyer is hinting at bout a demand for 1 million USD.
@@Gazer75Here (another EU country) we do need separate liability insurance ("familial insurance") for such mishaps as kids (not your own) falling from your trees or fences. Our health insurance is organised around mandatory insurance provided by typically non-profit mutualities.
As a Norwegian, I definitely take this right for granted. I didn't even grasp the concept that I couldn't just camp out anywhere I wanted when I was in the US. It felt like I was stripped of my basic human rights. When you buy a pass to a ski resort over here, you're not buying access to use the land; rather to use the resort's facilities (such as the ski lift, restrooms, cafés, etc)
@Henoik "It felt like I was stripped of my basic human rights." You allowed yourself to feel like you were stripped of your basic human rights.
Most ski areas are privately owned, btw.
Near most ski areas, there are in fact public lands that you could camp on, if you wanted to.
Your ignorance of that does not constitute the stripping of your human rights.
@@revjaybird2 I didn't go to any American ski resorts (I mean, why tf would I, I live in Norway). I went to national parks (which are apparently both public and privately owned, but still it's possible to trespass...which makes no sense to me)
@@Henoik "but still it's possible to trespass" Did you get caught trespassing in a National Park? If so, please tell the story.
@@revjaybird2 They didn't want me to camp out there, which I'm guessing isn't really trespassing. But the whole concept of trespassing is... Foreign to me. We don't have a singular concept for trespassing over here - rather trespassing can be explained to a Norwegian by several different concepts, but at the same time it won't be complete.
@@Henoik It was probably part of that particular park's rules that no overnight camping is allowed.
Parks have rules. Some parks have more rules than others.
There is no way to say, "You don't belong here, please leave?"
When I left the states I was so appalled folks were trying to get me to walk thru other people's properties and they gave me the most ghastly look.
That was the 1st of MANY culture shocks.
When I was a kid growing up in Schleswig-Holstein, I often walked home from school instead of getting picked up by my dad by car or use the school bus .... the shortest way across fields, a small forest and a cow pasture (a distance of just under 2km).
These were all privately owned and I often ran into the owners and instead of yelling at me or scaring me away, the most they ever gave me was the advice not to cross the cow pasture if the cows were too close or to look out for certain birds in the forest and if I saw them, to tell the forest owner or to follow only on the tractor furrows, so as not to damage the sowing
😊
Imagine that....freedom and learning😅
You lived🥲
Same. I basically grew up on the cow pasture next door and no one minded. I knew to stay away from the bulls' fields, though. ;)
@@janwemmel4414 Those things have no mercy 😂
Made me realise how important the right to roam is to me, something I always took for granted.
The USA does have lots of national parks. Even more so than Europe. Not to forget, more nature too. When you go to Alaska or Wyoming etc.
@@victorsamsung2921 It becomes like a theme park though. You have to take time off and pay to travel and get into the parks. While that's a great opportunity, there's something to be said to just be able to walk into your nearest forest and chill out.
@@Crozz22 If i'm not mistaken, even in many rural towns in the countryside there are many forests and hills you can walk in or on. In States like Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Georgia and Arkansas etc.
@@victorsamsung2921 For most Americans it's not as simple to access tho? I'm in Norway and there's a forest just a 5 min walk form my home where I can pick mushrooms and berries or pitch a tent. We've even foraged on our short walk home from daycare. It's like that even in Oslo, not just rural towns.
@@victorsamsung2921 You don't even know what you are talking about.
"The USA does have lots of national parks. Even more so than Europe." Absolutely wrong! Europe has a total of 376.461km² of national parks (546 national parks in total), the USA "only" 210.000km² (63 national parks in total).
So Europe has clearly more of them, for the record.
"Not to forget, more nature too" Oh no. That's just wrong. Can't get worse from here. You'll also find waaaay more nature and more diversity here in Europe, whatever metric you want to go for, when you say "more nature".
edit: typos
I am from Gremany and went to the US for one year as a student exchange. It was so weird to me how aggressively protective people were of their private property. I remember us playing soccer, or some other ballsport and our ball going ove the hedge into the neighbors yard. Not even far into it or close to their house, just slightly on the other side of the hedge. As soon as we stepped over to retrieve the ball we were yelled at and threatened to get off the person's property. This was quite a formative experience for my young self.
In my opinion this whole video highlights again how America is one step further ahead from us toward realizing the doctrines of profits over people and the individual over community. We are getting there in Europe as well, but the US is more extreme I would say.
I find it funny the way Americans are obbsessed with "My property." Like little kids who are refusing to share.
@@charybdis8113 They are obsessed with the little crumbs they do have, without realizing it's basically nothing.
You're allowed to jump fences in Germany?
@@parallelpinkparakeet As I wrote in my comment, it was more of a hedge, or barrier made up of trees and shrubs, not so much a hard fence. But in a similar case, especially in a rural area as this was, back home, yes, I would have just gone over and retrieved the ball without nobody batting an eye. I wouldn't say it is explicitly allowed to, property rights are a thing here too, but people are less paranoid and protective about it. My point was that to me, this was a banality and I never expected such a strong response.
@@Mattiesneu I don't think it's fair to base an entire country off one experience, unless this happened multiple times. In the suburbs and cities the above scenario happens a lot and most people don't care if you retrieve a ball that's barely in their yard as long as you're not damaging anything.
In Switzerland there are even a lot of public trails that go through privately owned land, often so close to a house that you could peek through the owner's windows ^^. The freedom you can get when decency is the norm is astonishing.
However wild camping is still mostly forbidden which, as a fellow swiss person, i find very frustrating
Creepy
@@thatundeadlegacy2985No it's not 'creepy' unless you're an abnormally nosey and ruse person. The public footpaths and bridleways in England and Wales are similar, often going directly alongside private homes or through private gardens. They often go directly across farmer's fields where there may be crops growing or animals grazing. Nonetheless, you have the right to follow the path. Of course you should use common-sense and courtesy - both of which are in short supply nowadays!
However, many farmers - especially hill farmers - have cause to be grateful to observant hikers, who may report an injured animal or a broken fence, before the farmer has had a chance to get to far-flung corners of his land on his daily 'rounds'.
As a forest owner, fields and meadows owner, garden and farmhouse owner in Czechia, Central Europe …
- I don’t see any conflict between my property rights and freedom to roam (as is exercised over here). People absolutely do not have “freedom to roam” on my garden or any other property which does have some intimate character (those are either fenced or indicated by other means), people are not free to dig up potatoes from fields or pick up other’s people timber or wood from forests… so what harm would come from them crossing my forest ? I do not saw the mushrooms or plant the blueberries, they grow wildly on their own (though I have some modern cultivars in my garden)… it’s normal to pick what grows on their own.
Because they have a right to cross my forest, I have the same right to cross any other forest in this country ☺️ and to freely roam the beauties of nature and history… and I often do ☺️.
I am big proponent of property rights …. but the freedom to roam and property rights do not interfere in the slightest …
There might be exception with hunting organizations - those are not organized by “freedom to roam “, but by another law. They may organize big hunts across many forests, of many forests owners to hunt for game. Here I am not pis*ed that they hunt the game in my forest, I am angry, that I might be at danger in my own forest, because they don’t need to ask me or even specifically inform me about the hunt. (They just hold some guards on roads to forest to inform about the hunt - and I even as a forest owner cannot enter, while hunt is under way … moreover as property owner, I might accidentally use some minor access available just to me - and no one will be stationed there to inform me about the dangers)
I find your comment very sensible.
We don't have as much trouble with hunting in our parts, as the terrain is more mountainous and fragmented and also because hunting is organised relatively locally and communication with farmers is quite important.
As a child I was, however, frustrated with the abuse of said freedom, some would commit. A typical example would be young retired or unemployed people, that would pick our forests clean of any blueberries and mushroom - to the point that we as locals and even landowners could hardly find some for personal use, and it was impossible to pick enough to make some extra money as children did usually even in my parents' generation. Then there is a continously friction with motorcycles in the woods and now with hordes of mtb riders that errode the trails and usurp the paths, so that they're unsafe to hike on. It's a struggle, but I have hope and I certainty prefer our challenges over "no trespass" signs.
@@zagrizena I see it very much as You.
Generally speaking landowners and farmers as I see it are ok with prople roaming on feet … it’s completele different when it comes to cars, bikes, motorbikes… (although if with some moderation, and they follow field roads and forest roads it’s still generally ok).
Here I watched video from Norway (one of the freest of the free), about landowners being pissed by people DRIVING of road! That is big no-no even there (that really creates damages)
ua-cam.com/video/VJyopr4M_Xg/v-deo.htmlsi=1FUhLKybPkB_df56
Blueberries - does it really happen that they pick them clean? When I was kid people used to use some blueberries combs - and some patches were really harvested rather more, generally speaking it would be very hard to clean them here … so much of them.
Mushrooms - there is a custom here to pick mushrooms a lot. Generally there is not lot of mushrooms in forests, those are picked clean from forests… there is a custom - those who can well predict their hiding places and hunt them (mushrooms are very elusive 😂, they appear and disappear in a blink) - those are the successful hunters 😊and shrooms belong just to them.
(Generally people don’t pick shrooms in their woods, but in such part of woods/forests where it corresponds to their particular theory of what shrooms might need, theory about where the elusive shrooms will show their heads 😂) (I too like part of the forest far away from my own)
@@petrskupa6292 In general I agree with you, and the foraging doesn't bother me in the areas where there's large swathes of uninterrupted forest or even in the state owned forests, but the area where I come from, isn't exactly wilderness. The blueberries aren't abundantly fruitful as is, and literal rows of cars coming every day for a whole day throughout the summer to "comb" them, really doesn't help. Now, the locals also respect each other's woodland that's nearest to the house and typically leave those for the owner to pick, but people coming don't care about any of that.
With mushrooms I'm generally fine for whoever has a good sense or is prepared to trek trough the forest to pick them. Just leave those growing in the orchard next to the house and on the bank facing the house, please. And leave the fruit and crops alone, unless the owner offered you some.
I think most of it comes down to communication and respect. Farmers are mostly bothered by cars obstructing narrow roads, litter left behind, trampled grass or even grain, inexperienced (with the terrain) drivers inconveniencing them on the road or speeding past or even through farmyards. Quite reasonable reasons, I think. Anyone who showed at least some respect, greeted, maybe asked where to park the car, was always welcomed cordially. We never had a problem with people just foraging occasionally for fun and for personal use.
I've read and thought about this before and I'm more and more convinced it's a weird artefact of our communist era. Pre communism, our customs would probably more resemble Germany, but in communism some things, including forests were considered a "public good" and in a sense everyone had the same right to them, ownership notwithstanding. So now we have a conflict of mindsets between owners, paying taxes and obliged to care for the property, who feel they should have some priority in using their property and even some say in how others can use it, and the non-land-owning general population, who views the forests as some kind of communal estate that they can use as they see fit, as that is their right. Situation being further muddied in the areas where forest estate is completely cut off from people's residences or their open land estate. And as always, when people are too adamant about their own rights to see the other's point of view, the tensions are inevitable.
I wonder do you have a right to completely cut that forest down to a ground? Do you feel like you *really* own it?
@@AntonKoba You own it enough to pay taxes from it, but not enough to manage it without limitations 🤷♀️
Good fences do not make good neighbors, they make fearful, isolated, and selfish neighbors. Causality is the reverse: Good neighbors obviate the need for fences, whereas bad neighbors need fences to hide their bad character. People getting shot because they accidentally enter the wrong driveway - this is absolutely unthinkable in Europe.
this reminds me of how today I went to a pool in a neighbouring town, and outside of it people just left their bikes unlocked. I wish it would be that safe in my city (although it's really not bad here, never got mine stolen)
"People getting shot because they accidentally enter the wrong driveway" This almost never actually happens. On the rare occasion it does, the media plasters it all over and makes it seem like it's a daily occurrence.
Generally, the people get shot because they argue and refuse to leave or are in "the wrong driveway" committing or attempting to commit a crime.
This is often left out of the story in most media articles.
@@revjaybird2 ...But it does happen. And the news only covers when people die. Not all the other times people are shot, shot at, or threatened illegally.
@@CrissaKentavr Lots of things happen occasionally on a planet of 8 billion people.
You seem to think that this is some sort of regular occurrence, and that's simply not true.
As well, if you're going to be terrified of someone simply telling to leave their well marked private property, then don't come here to the US.... you are obviously far too fragile to safely be here.
The subway in any city will eat you alive if you are *that* timid.
If you're actually worried about being shot, then no major city in the US is safe for you right now. You're far more likely to get shot by someone in an urban setting that wants your neat-o personal possessions than in rural areas over trespassing.
Don't go to Chicago on any given weekend in the summer. That's where the most people are most often "shot, shot at, or threatened illegally".
@@revjaybird2 You wingnuts are getting lazier, barely one example & often don't even bother as you insist ableist this jew that greed is good narcissism is good..
If it's the US, there's always the chance a wingnut will be triggered to go on a killing spree. Very often they call communal sanctioned thugs w/ a gun to bully on their behalf. Red states are fucking horrible, conservative is a pretty word for highway bandit.
Thank you for putting a name on this thing I can not explain to people around.
I am a French living in Canada. I miss my freedom to hike anywhere I want. Here we have to buy the right to go in a forest or on a mountain. At least in near urban areas. I guess that if I’ll go far away from cities (I mean no road anymore far) I would be able to hike everywhere.
It was a shock for me. And it is a shock for every family or friend visiting from France.
You better fix up france or that won't be possible much longer. France is turning into a Islamic African authotherian state
Are you referring to trails maintained by the government? You're just paying for their maintenance
@@BandGGaming for what do you pay taxes? That money should be enough to maintain them…
@@BandGGaming we already pay enough tax as is here in france. and a dirt road isn't really high maintenance. Also enough people travel in the forest here to create a natural "road" or more like a path that have no cost at all.
@@BrgArt You're paying for way more than just a dirt road. Govt-owned nature trails are highly maintained due to invasive plant pressure and ecosystem degradation. I am in ecosystem restoration + maintenance and it's a constant struggle battling invasives because we no longer are allowed to manage land in the way these ecosystems are adapted to be managed (very few people know here on the east coast, our ecology is fire-adapted, and has been managed with controlled burns for thousands of years). Because of this, there is a lot of work to do--pulling, sawing, herbiciding and pesticiding, caging and cleaning shrubs and trees so overpopulated deer don't eat them or knock them over during meaty antler season, etc. Land here suffer from the extirpation of people from it and the current culture of poor land stewardship, which I personally feel is caused by not having a culture of access and by extension, collective responsibility.
The govt should be paying for this with our taxes anyways, so I don't support having to pay for nature access, but it is a lot more than simply managing a dirt trail. If you are hiking on a trail or public park, you are experiencing an EXTREMELY curated environment.
Freedom causes responsibility. If you have no freedom, then no one can hold you responsible for anything and if you have full freedom, you have no one else to blame. Children learn from an early age that they're free to play in the Nature, but that they are responsible. They use knives and axes and light fires. In Norway, children are also free to fish wherever they want without fee or permission, because we want to encourage them. When you are alone in the wilderness, perhaps even with potentially dangerous animals around, responsibility is as obvious as the sense of freedom. I think those happy memories help make us more responsible as adults as well, because the relationship between freedom and responsibility has been made so clear.
I actually never thought about the right to roam because it feels like our natural right over here in Europe. Now, I feel thankful that we have this right. Many times, I think that the Land of the Free is not that free after all.
The “land of the free” is a police state.
Why do you say Europe when most European countries don't have the right to roam.. it's just Scandinavia and some eastern countries.
There is no unlimited freedom. You always have to choose whose freedom has priority.
Do you allow the freedom of a reasonable, non-profit access for the public or do you prioritize the freedom to demarcate private land?
Is it more important to disallow being insulted, threatened or singled-out or is it more important to speak and express oneself freely?
We don't have a perfect answer to questions like that, but we know several wrong answers.
@@valentijnrozeveld3773 What "most European" countries are you talking about? Austria, Switzerland, Germany, Italy... are not "Skandinavia" and not consdiered eastern Europe. I just did a quick internet search and did not find single country in Europe where "hiking in the nature" is generally not allowed. Restrictions I see are just on Natianal parks, specially designated private property and such.
Please teach me, I want to learn.
In this im on America side, private property is private. And i dont wish some random people will molest my property. Ofter i found broken bottles, sweets wraps and othet stuff in ground.. On my property i had it made so in accsessible as possible and 78 property owners had made a pact that no hunters can enter our property to hunt so we have most wolf and bear populated area. People cant respect nature and right of private property so they have no right for it. And it should be state to decide.
I remeber in USA was situation about 15 years ago where person enetered on private property in night and drown in local pond and victims family accused property owner for having non fenced pond.
Legal liability is the first thing that comes to mind for reasons why lack of access continues in modern times. If someone is on your land and they hurt themselves, they can sue the landowner. The US is a *very* litigious society, and the legal lottery system is absolutely used as a get rich quick scheme. One way to fight this is to put up the No Trespassing signs. That way when you are eventually sued you can at least say they were there illegally and get off for nothing more than the legal fees ... which can still cost thousands of dollars per occurrence.
This exactly
Wait, what? In Poland you can get sued if somebody slip's on the pavement / road you own and are supposed to keep clear of snow and ice. Or maybe if you leave an old well unmarked. But regular slips and falls? They would laugh you out the court!
(Also I googled about slips and falls, and the only source not about icy pavements was an American law firm that takes Polish clients.)
@@fobiaargyst5875 Doesn't surprise me that it's an American company that's doing so well at slip/fall lawsuits that they're exporting the practice to other countries. As they win & lose more cases you'll see more no trespassing signs go up as word gets out. I'm sure all they see are those "untapped" markets for lawsuits they want to turn into money :( . Hopefully you guys can stand against them.
It feels surreal to know current US property law is on the same level as the one Europe had in the middle ages.
Well it's because landowners are liable unlike in Europe
That's a superficial way of looking at it. Why is medieval fantasy so popular in America? Why do so many like to fantasize about being a member of the nobility or royality? Maybe because that's what they secretly crave and owning land or property effectively grants them exactly that. They want lawd what they have over others and be one of the Jones's.
@@gavinrolls1054 People can be sued in Europe too
I went on a bike ride through Eastern Oregon a couple years ago. Though the route was marked as county or Bureau of Land Management, we were met by armed ranchers in trucks and ATVs claiming we were trespassing. This is very disconcerting for someone legally taking a camping trip with their teenage son. Furthermore, look at any suburban city and you will find the majority of the walkable park space is occupied by golfing clubs that only wealthy people can afford to join.
These madmen ate just looking for an excuse to shoot you.
In France for example coastline access is public, you have to allow passage along the beaches (even if some individuals try to impede it, e.g. in the Mediterranean). I was shocked when going to Ireland and realizing you could not hike across the countryside, it’s all fenced off. As a kid, we spent nearly all off our time in the woods, building huts, barraging rivulets, etc. Childhood would have been quite different without these experiences
In some states here in the US, ocean coastline passage is permitted and landowners are not supposed to halt that. I think the only restrictions there is one may not be automatically allowed to use docks or other man made structures.
I'm Finnish and I have never seen fences anywhere but to keep livestock from wandering off. It's a completely foreign concept to me that someone would fence off their property just because it's their property.
That, my friends, is called enclosure. In fact because of it many Britons at the time became extremely poor, unable to hunt or graze animals. (Don’t trust my American textbook word lol)
Yup, grew up in the French countryside, and nature was our playground. You try to avoid stepping into fields and gardens, if you see a fence, you know it is because there's livestock there and come in at your own risk. But otherwise, taking a tent and going hiking in the mountain and sleeping there was something we could obviously do.
Childhood in America has devolved to being shut inside either your house in an unwalkable neighborhood and dangerous streets full of SUVs or school where you're treated like a prisoner shuttled between them in an SUV because only vagrants and thugs walk the streets. I see my young siblings living like this and it's pretty depressing.
i'm scottish and ive always found the idea of tresspassing so bizzare, i live in the countryside so ive spent a lot of time walking through fields. scotland it beautiful, theres so many mountains and lochs and forests and fields to explore and cherish, those who are so amazed by nature don't destroy it here (if you take the effort to fight your way up unknown mountains youre not doing it to set it on fire).
@@Gary-bz1rfI live in Scotland and the right to roam is great up here, but you’re right that a good public footpath network way-marked on Ordnance Survey maps like they have in many parts of rural England is really helpful for planning walks. With this, you know that you’re unlikely to become caught in bogs, have to cross rivers or clamber through impenetrable forests.
Here in the Czech Republic, the right to walk through the countryside and enter forests is very traditional and is mentioned in the oldest medieval texts. The right to enter the forest was enacted by the Imperial Patent of 3 December 1852 - Forest Law. The same situation is in Austria and probably in all other former Austro-Hungarian lands. A similar situation is in Switzerland too. I don't know anything about such rights in Italy, France, Germany and Spain. But I have walked more than a thousand kilometres in each of these countries without any problem. A few years ago I slept near Rosskopf (next to Freiburg) and in the morning two cops on horses saw me and asked me to try my hammock and they didn't say anything about sleeping in bannwald.
In Germany (presumably just as long as in Austria and the Czech Republic) there is also a general right to enter the forest. Riding and driving is only allowed on paved paths. Closures due to logging work must be observed because of the risk of accidents. Cultivated and planted areas may not be entered.
No, in Austria entering private forests was only allowed in 1975 with a new forest law (Forstgesetz) and up to this day it is usually forbidden for mountain bikes.
Actually in the Habsburg monarchy in 1852 the Reichsforstgesetz (imperial forest law) was enacted that explicitly forbade people to enter the forests!
In Norway this was codified into law in 1274, during the reign of Magnus Lagabøter (Magnus the Lawmender). This is part of The Landslaw (The Law of the Land). Since Magnus was a poweful king, also known in the rest of Europe, this inspired similar customs to be codified later on.
I think one important detail you forgot to mention that is connected to all this is how easy it is to sue a property owner in the United States. I used to work as a utility vegetation management inspector, and I would walk onto countless private properties for my job. Most property owners-in California at least- don’t care much if people hike around their undeveloped land, but they have “no trespassing” signs up for fear that they might get sued by a trespasser who falls and hurts themselves.
At a lake near where my family has a cabin, there is a privately owned strip of beach where people used to always launch their canoes and kayaks. Last summer the owner was there, actively stopping anyone from launching their boats or even walking there. Apparently someone had injured themselves walking on the rocks there, the owner had gotten sued, and his property insurance had risen as a result. After that he stopped allowing anyone to use that beach.
That is utterly bizarre.
The problem here is because health is not free and you have to get someone to pay. If you had universal health insurance, there would not be any reason to sue
I'm all for the 'right to roam'. I'm an American who lived in the Finnish countryside for a couple of years. I don't remember ever seeing a fence.
And if there is it's on farm to keep wild animals in enclosed area or a side of a road to keep moose and other big animals from running into roads.
A human lives about 80 years, that granite has been there for billions of years and there are pine trees that have probably been standing since the viking age. Many feet have roamed those places before us and 150 years after our passing, they are still being roamed by people who don't remember we existed. Trying to grab a part of it and fence it out for others seems a bit pointless. Well, selfish, actually. And to defend that with force.. Maybe against an invading nation. Other than that, many of us like guns, there are a lot of those, but try to find a single person who feels compelled to own one for defending their spot of land. I sort of understand the idea, but there's just no need, no need. "No siellähän kulkevat, ei se oo minulta pois."
That said, while very much legal, someone else finding out your favourite cloudberry or chanterelle spot might cause some fuming and conjuring of ancient gods.
...or into the barrels of a shotgun of some angry landowner, you might want to add? ;-)
yeah but unlike in america, we dont have a 13% of the population making it impossible for this kind of shit...youd think that instead of insulting our country or hating on it for not having such an d"obvious right" like think about why we cant have nice things? its not cuz americans are prudes who dont understand that, its that we can do it without having to call the cops cuz people dont teach their kids manners or respect no more. so instead of venerating another country for something try to figure out the problem in your own before you cast judgement cuz its real easy to compare an contrast when you ignore the core root of the problem.
I'm for the right to roam--how is this an insult to America? What does "We don't have a 13% of the population making it impossible for the kind of shit" mean? @@Aqsticgod
In Sweden, commercial activities ARE allowed on private land (such as berry picking, rafting etc.), as long as you don't damage the land and it isn't cultivated.
This was a topic of debate about a decade ago, but it was decided that it should remain as is.
However, fishing is regulated and generally requires a license covering the particular lakes and rivers you plan to fish in. (with the exception of the big four or the ocean)
Same here in Finland. Only for angling and ice fishing you don't need a permit.
Riverways and the wetted shorelines are still public here in the USA.
@@DrD0000Monly navigable rivers. In our state you can’t walk up a stream on private property if it isn’t navigable.
Unfortunately, the policies here in the US have created a culture of outdoor theme parks, where those areas of access are so rare and so crowded that people use them as they would a theme park. They don't know how to act outside in nature because it's not something that they have grown up with. Every occasion to visit nature is regulated and restricted, much like a trip to Disneyland. This can breed bad behavior as people don't have a universal feeling of ownership and stewardship so the disturb landscapes, graffiti on trees and rocks, leave trash for others to pick up, and generally just don't know how to act. That behavior discourages opening up lands for fear of misuse and destruction. I remember going to Red Rock Canyon a couple of years ago and seeing this one area where everyone thought it was a great idea to build cairns, not because they were needed to mark the trail but because it looked like something fun to do. So instead of getting to enjoy undisturbed nature, I was left looking at a bunch of rock pyramids. All because people didn't know how to act appropriately and enjoy the environment accordingly. If we had more access and fewer restrictions on exploring the outdoors I think people here would be more accustomed to being in nature and start treating it less like some amusement park.
Great point. Nature shouldn’t be treated as amusementparks, and it will be when the access is very restricted and people grow up without a connection to their surrounding nature. Schools in Norway (and also kindergartens) are generally good at including nature in their teachings and kids are taken out into nature as part of the curriculum. I don’t know if that would be doable for american kids, but it would a good idea I think.
@@blue2mato312 yes i would love to see more people and kids eaten by bears and other wild life in the usa your forgeting that almost all of the eu has no danger in your wild life do you have man eating animals that life within walking range of your front door in the usa gators and bears wolves snakes that can eat 9 year olds whole exist within citys and can be seen in your back yard letting people in the usa walk around with animals that will eat them isnt the best idea thats why as kids being in the woods without an adult istnt the best idea might have to plan to burry your kid before they reach 10 we havent hunted all the animals in the usa that can eat us to nearly as much as youve done in the eu you guys basicly have no more animals that youd worry about your kids being alone in the woods with most of your worries are bug and plant ones weve got lots of preditors waiting to eat even fully grown adults here its not safe to just roam the woods without at least a shot gun with slugs for any bears weve got much more wild woods than you got over there in the eu its like the comparing a empty field to a jungle of teeth and pain plus you dont want to run into a bear they eat you alive and fresh the like to eat the soft chest meat first while your still alive not a good way to die having a bear rip you apart while your still breathing and screaming
Exactly. Here in Washington (the one with the Space Needle, not the Dark Carnival!), even the "public" parks now require advance permission to enter, in the form of a Discover Pass, a placard you pay for and put on your car... and can ONLY obtain when you go to renew your registration once a year. Decide not to cough up $45 extra to get your tabs but later decide you want to go to a state park? Sucks to suck, you're legally unable to enter until your next tab renewal, better hope you remember to pay for the pass this time! Or at _some but not all_ state parks, pay $10 per day for a single use pass.
@@amandak.4246 you obviously aren’t a hiker and have no idea what “Leave no trace” means. Unless the good lord decided to miraculously pile a hundred stacks of rocks into the canyon then yes, it’s a great example of stupidity in nature. It’s not petty when yo go for a nature hike only to find that the area has been redecorated by ignorance.
@@anonymousnekokamikannakamui I’m sorry it seems like you are struggling with a lot of anxiety about wild animals. And yes you do have a lot more of them, but I’m sure if they were constantly eating children over there I would have heard about it at some point. You are wrong in your assumptions of my country, it is not in the EU and yes we have animals like wolves, lynx, brown bear, wolverine and moose. I’m adding moose because they are more dangerous than the others except for the polar bear which is not on the mainland. You would only need a gun for protection of the polar bear. Moose are generally only dangerous if a mother with a calf feels threatened, but they can kill. There are wolves (and moose) around in the forests right outside of Oslo and teachers do take their classes of kids there as do the adult employees working with kindergarten kids. It’s great for them to connect with nature.
In your country there are more fatalities of children than in mine due to one big factor, guns. You have hundreds of millions of guns and military grade assault weapons and this is what you should be most afraid of in my opinion.
I’ve always noticed that during long road trips in America there will just be miles and miles of untouched land with fences around it. There’s not even anything on it, it’s just fenced off for as long as the eye can see.
I think that if any politician suggested that we should restrict the right to roam here in Finland, in favor of property rights, they'd be committing political suicide. The right to roam is essential, and people use it. Finns tend to love nature, and the right to go where you want to enjoy it cannot be questioned.
As a Swede this is a right we take for granted and it’s hard to imagine not having it. Some people take it too far though and don’t realize you aren’t allowed to chop down a Christmas tree on someone else’s land or walk too close to peoples homes but the vast majority of people treat the land, nature and the owners with resect. You can still use deadly force to protect yourself in your home here. There was recently a case with someone stabbing the attacker dozens of times to death but he was deemed not guilty because he was fighting for his life against several intruders who were trying to do the same to him. But it should be easy for everyone to understand the difference between roaming a forest or countryside and entering someone’s backyard or house. And while attacks from animals can occur they are extremely rare. Especially if you aren’t hunting the animal. You are way more likely to die in the city from a car. In more recent years it has become a class question as well since while everyone can in theory go to the forest many low income households living in big cities in apartments don’t have access to a forest nearby and don’t have cars to drive there also many immigrants don’t have the same culture where walking in the forest is part of daily life. Many inner city low income families haven’t even been to the countryside. And owning a summer house have gone from something a lot of people can afford to being quite expensive, especially close to larger cities. For me nature has always been a part of life. My grandparents had a summer house I used to spend time at since I was a baby and when I was 6 my mom got a summer house. Back then it had no electricity or water and you lived like it was the 1800s when there but over the years it’s become just like any other modern home and she lives there all year around after she retired.
Despite living in the United States, I was able to acutely roam quite a bit as a kid. I've lived in Idaho my whole life, and I love to hike and just wander. I even remember just climbing or slipping through fences. Honestly, one of the hardest things for me to see, is all the places I use to explore getting consumed by buildings, extremely expensive houses, and just greedy rich people who don't want to share. I hate seeing my childhood being destroyed like this. I'm seeing the love of natural world die in the US, and it's extremely sad.
@@amandak.4246 ok, then why don't they build houses that people can actually afford to live in? The houses that were built were I grew up are these massive houses that cost millions of dollars. The destruction of natural spaces in the USA is completely driven by greed. Not by any desire to actually help anyone. I hate the selfish culture that's become so common here.
@@amandak.4246the houses and buildings should not be built into nature they should be built in cities
@railroadforest30
Where do you think the cities came from? And cities are horrible places to live, why would anyone want to live there?
@@amandak.4246there are ten homes sitting empty for every single homeless American. We don't need more homes.
@@WhobgobblinI’ve heard too many stories of teenagers being shot for accidentally knocking on the wrong house lately. You can’t trust that you won’t get shot for trespassing anymore
I grew up in rural rural New Mexico in US, and i barely had any concept of private property. As a child, I roamed wheteever my heart desired. I was so shocked that i was in the small small minority of people in US, and going back to my home village 20 years later, that mindset is starting to take root even there!
This is the same story in Germany!
As a child I was very free, but now, being 56 years old I see many Changes in the mindset of people.
Many changes are also due to " safety"reasons
Great video! I grew up on a remote island in Michigan, where I could hike/hunt/x-country ski/fish pretty much anywhere I wanted. That was great until more and more of the land became privatized. OMG! We who were born there were suddenly faced with denied access to Lake Michigan! That was just a part of it, but having lived through such a transition, I really am impressed by the European "Right to Roam" and embarrassed by the US's stance of "No Trespassing". I'm really struck by how much the "who owns this land" attitude had inhibited my fishing and hiking over the last half century. Love the comment below from Norway! It's not only ironic... it's becoming iconic in the worst way.
almost feels egotistical to see so many no trespassing signs; like what? when you die, is that no trespassing sign still lawful? (unless you've set up a will, a representative, or other arrangement)
But would you take offense if a bunch of homeless pitched camp in your backyard, ate the apples from your trees or some shady looking strangers carrying guns were always walking through as your family held their backyard bbqs? To a certain extent, those guys paid a lot of money for the land, to find their own slice of privacy and quiet, if they wanted it to be used for public access, they would have donated it to be a park.
@@katieluv8422 Why assume that this would happen? Teach people to respect privacy and property and you don't have to be afraid of all that. If you listenend closely, you heard that there are some (unwritten) laws on how to behave, so all of this would just not happen. And we don't carry guns anyway.
@@roesi1985 In a utopian world, yes, but the reality is U.S. society is filled with bad actors and irresponsible people. In order to have the tools to stop that, the laws are needed.
@@amandak.4246 I think you've missed the target. Yes, I could do those things along with Everyone else. Back then, most landowners were completely okay with the hikers and beachcombers. Of course, we picked up after ourselves too. It became frustrating when folks would buy a small bit of land, stay in it for two weeks out of the year, and picket it with no trespassing signs. Folks lived there for decades without needing to do such a thing. I think those who move into a community and attempt to make it like the place they came from are the selfish ones. We were all spoiled by being surrounded by nature; and I (among others) do get angry that some folks feel justified denying others access to nature.
The problem that we have on the USA is several reasons. The biggest is that the majority of Americans do not have a respect for other people. We use to have the ability to access many areas. This really started 30 years ago. Our access to streams rivers and lakes have been restricted. The other biggest reason for this is lawyers. If someone gets injured on your property you are responsible for their injuries and they can sue for large sums of money. Where as in Europe you are responsible for your own safety.
@timothyhoster4951 "The other biggest reason for this is lawyers."
Our biggest problem in this country is lawyers. They have literally ruined every aspect of life here in the US at some level or another.
Well, if you don't maintain your public access roads, the owner can also be responsible in most of Europe. For instance, if somebody fall on your entrance, or damaged on your access roads. But of course it doesn't extend to areas that are not explicitly designed for visitor access.
An even larger problem is healthcare. If an injury costs upwards of thousands of dollars you have no other option than to sue.
@@Sigma-xb6kn "you have no other option than to sue." This is why there are so many No Trespassing signs. The land owner is not at fault for someone hurting themselves while on the property uninvited, the property owner is also not at fault for medical expenses being so high. So why do you think it's ok to sue the property owner to pay for someone else's bills?
The fact that you seem to think this is reasonable is WHY there are so many signs and fences and people protecting their property to the degree that they do.
@@revjaybird2 You put words in my mouth. I just gave reasons for why it happened, not that it is a good way to organize society. If I told you how Roman slave markets worked I wouldn't support slavery, now would I?
I agree that the landowner wouldn't be at fault if somebody got hurt on their property but sueing would be the only way to not live forever with debt.
You confuse description with prescription.
there is a park/forest in front of a castle in my grandmas village in germany. the owners tried to close the gates once but in the end they weren't allowed to exclude the public, because people were used to going there for hundreds of years
The juxtaposition between Europe and the US is beautifully illustrated in this video. To contribute my own experience, I've walked all over Italy with very few restrictions. The restrictions there were primarily included warnings of natural dangers, disrespected and regrowing land from tourists, and personal dislocation in order to respect land that was too trodden by tourists.
I tried to go rock hounding in Colorado recently. I've driven over 20 hours around and around, to find mostly gated access, "WE SHOOT ON SIGHT" signs, and barbed wire as far as the eye can see. The only accessible areas were wildness, in which many laws exists wherein you cannot "pillage" the area.
I'm a proponent of "Leave No Trace," but the limitations within "the freest country in the world" is a wild claim, especially considering one could easily add topics to this same line of inquiry. 👀
In France, owners of coastal land must maitain a 3m wide passage for pedestrians, which in principle results in a unbroken path anyone can walk along the entire coast.
Same with rivers, from tiny too big one. The river's bank should stay accessible for pedestrians, fishers.
In Austria only when the water in lakes is low ... Though there's now talk about how to improve public access to lakes. Too much lakeshore land is private property!
A point that should also be taken into account is liability and the fact that so many people will try to sue landowners for a broken ankle or worse. There is a case in Colorado where a landowner who owns a mining claim closed off the trail to a popular mountain because the state court set a precedent that anyone who hurt themselves while hiking though his claim had the legal right to sue him personally simply because his name was on the deed.
That old idea of just removing warning labels/signs and getting back to letting Darwin sort them out seems more and more alluring... :-
Why though?
If the damage was not caused by a person or a man-made trap, it should be considered as self-inflicted.
If it was caused by a trap, then whoever placed the trap is to blame.
And of course, if you choose to do a dangerous activity and without faulty equipment or another person being involved you end up injured, it should again be considered as self-inflicted.
I did not realise that the US was such a nanny state.
Here people are responsible for themselves and no-one can claim that I as a landowner are responsible for them hurting themselves.
Of course I would help them out if I come across them in the forest, but that still don't make me liable for their actions.
@@frantisekvrana3902 "it should be considered as self-inflicted."
It *should* be, but it's not. The property owner is liable for it, even if it's completely the person's fault.
One of the worst offenders of suing property owners for other people injuring themselves is the state sponsored Medical programs. They can and will sue whomever they possibly can in order to have the injury bills paid for.
We do have socialized medicine in this country for the disabled, poor, and most children..... and these programs are often who sues property owners.
There is no such thing as "self inflicted" if the person is on state sponsored socialized medicine.
Gov't lawyers suing private citizens.
@@revjaybird2 That idiocracy at its finest.
A song in the Netherlands, “ Iedereen is van de wereld, de wereld is van iedereen”
Everyone belongs to the world, the world belongs to everyone
Mag ik zo je huis in lopen zonder jou toestemming?
When I was a child living in Texas, I could roam for hours in the forest. No trails, no boundaries. Thanks to recent developments, though, all the tress have been cut down and replaced with ugly malls and parking lots. Now there's nowhere.
Also remember that the Swedish Allemansrätten comes with obligations:
Not to crass fields of growing crops, not getting too close to homes, not to disturb farm animals, not to litter to cause damage or fire. Or shortly - just leave your footsteps when you leave.
I never, or almost extremely see any signs of visitors when in the forests - just a small path, maybe some ashes from a camp fire.
@@gerhardma4297 I guess most illiterate and igorant people don't put their hike boots on and roam the wilderness as it requires intelligence and responsibility. And thanks for that ...
Take nothing but pictures
Leave nothing but footprints
Kill nothing but time
In Denmark, we sadly don't have a lot of land to begin with, and most of what we have is used for agriculture. But here we especially uphold the right to walk on beaches. Unless a beach is used for military or industrial purpose you can walk, swim and hang out, and even sleep there if you are more than 50 meters from their house.
When I lived/stayed in North America I was shocked at this kind of private ownership of land and the various "no tresspassing" signs. Also the fact that you simply couldn't walk out of a neighborhood into the surrounding fields - already because there aren't any "Feldwege", only driveways to farms and actual roads - which is probably connected to the understanding of private property.
I don't know if I could really live in a country where you cannot walk into the open. It feels so limiting.
There are millions of acres of land in the United States where you can walk and hike for free. Where I live I am surrounded by Woods mountains and Forest and I can go hike almost anywhere I want. I respect the parts that are private why can't you?
In Sweden you can walk anywhere.
If you are a big ranch owner in the US...Why wouldn't you let people walk on your land?
@@johanswede8200 Some do -- particularly when it involves allowing people to use a path to connect two different park areas. But in the areas of the U.S. that have big ranches, there are invariably also enormous tracts of publicly owned land, so walking across private ranches is rarely necessary. Europeans commenting here seem to have a hard time grasping how much open public land there is in the U.S. Which is odd, because we run into Europeans enjoying U.S. public lands while on holiday quite often.
@@markweaver1012 I get that. The US is enormous. But what I as a Swede don't get is the "no trespassing" thing.
It is just weird.
@@markweaver1012 You seem to miss the entire point of this discussion. It is not about how much public land there is. It is about the general concept of freedom and landownership. In the Nordics you just cannot own land to the extend that you are able to block access to it. Because nature belongs to everyone in the country, that's why the right to roam is called "every man's right". This is ultimate freedom.
as an american the idea that you can just _walk_ is bewildering
like the no trespass signs imply *you’re gonna get blasted*
Guess I'm one of those lucky Americans that has always been able to roam wherever I wanted, whenever I wanted. Though having recently been in Sacramento, that was not the case and it really isn't in the small town I live in now. In fact, I would say that No Trespass is worse here because it's a rural community and farmers will vehemently protect their land with deadly force, regardless of the legal consequences to them. That said, if you kindly approach them and ask permission to cross their land to simply get from point A to point B on foot or horse, most will oblige.
America is such a shithole you have to worry about getting shot if you walk into an open field like some warring nation.
I love the idea of framing the right to roam as a human right.
it should be a human right, and here in norway it practicly are. here you free to roam whereever you want regardless if its private land or not, tho i with that means out in nature, and not in somones backyard:) we on the other hand also have a leave-no-trace law, so means if you go camping somewhere, make sure to bring your garbage and so on.
sure, it should be your right. But if anything happens to YOU, it must be solely your legal, financial, and moral responsibility, not mine. Deal? If you dont like that, dont go into my turf, uninvited. Its that simple.
@@michajastrzebski4383 that's kinda given In the hole world with us as the only exception. If I do something stupid and get hurt, ofc it's my own fault and need to take responsibility. How you can sue a property owner over it in the US are so stupidly mentaly retarded no words can really describe how messed up your entire legal system are, but it allso show how messed up and retarded your entire Healthcare system and worker rights are. If I tried to do the same here, the judge would just laugh at me and Toss me out of his courtroom. Allso In my country if I get hurt and end up in the hospital, it ain't gonna cost me anything, because getting free Healthcare should be a basic human right witch it is in more or less entire Europe. Furthermore not just that, if I get sick, I allso would still get fully paid as if I was at work. Here in Europe we allso understand people are different and some people are getting more sick than others and considering it's not something you can deside if you get sick or not, there's no limit on how many days in a year you allowed to take sick leave. Simply put, if you sick, then stay home.
@@michajastrzebski4383 But that is exactly how it is in Europe? Why should you be responsible for something happening to someone else (as long as you not purposfully done something to harm someone, like laying a trap)?
@@michajastrzebski4383The US must really be an awful place to live in^^...
For the supposed "Land of the Free" the USA are really restrictive in quite a lot of ways.
I definitely feel a lot more free over here in Europe.
Yep. It's precisely why I actually call the USA the "Land of the Oppressed". In practically every way and aspect of life, they have far less rights and freedoms, than citizens of other first-world countries.
@narve7337 It's a land of free consumers and it's proportionate to the amount of money one has to spend...
That's amusing considering the complete disregard Euro governments have for your natural rights. Your collectivism amounts to hell on earth in my book.
Btw, I was never once "locked down" or masked during the last 3 years nor were my usual activities curtailed in any way. Can you claim the same?
@@MatthewC137
Freedom requieres protection. Americans don't understand this and thus they are less free.
I made the experience in a small town in Oregon. A nice little creek was running thru it, but I was not able to get to the river bank because all along it was privat property. While here in Germany most of the time between a river and the closet houses is a path (called Leinpfad) where you can access the water.
Here in Sweden, as part of the ”Allemansrätten”, there is also a ”strandskydd” or a shore protection which means you can’t build anything that restricts access to the water within 100m of a river, lake or the sea. Of course there are exceptions but it is generally adhered to pretty strictly.
In the U.S. ocean and Great Lakes beaches are public to the highest tide line. In California, the Coastal Commission maintains easements to reach these beaches (resulting in occasional squabbles with Hollywood celebrities who don't want the general public passing near their Malibu beach houses -- the celebs invariably these cases). Inland river and lake bottom land is owned by the adjoining landowners but private owners generally cannot restrict the public's right to use the waters (though the shoreline remains private). But in most of the U.S., there are large waterfront parks of various kinds.
Mostly, it isn't even permissible to have private land bordering to a body of water. This land is usually owned by the 'Wasser- and Schifffahrtsbehörde', which sometimes close off some of it for safety reasons around locks and weirs. Alas, there have been cases where influential people were able to get away with closing off the water access in the past, just because they want to have exclusive access.
That Leinpfad is called a towpath in English and was used to tow barges using horses.
It used to be legal to build your summer cottage or sauna right on the edge of water, and in these cases the immediate area around these buildings is off limits. New laws prohibit building that close to water, and access to the lake is granted to everyone. Then again, it's not good manners to cross between someone's house and the lake, especially if someone is staying there. Or fish less than, say a hundred feet from someone's jetty.
But usually, being Finns, we abhor being close to other people anyway, so the legality is a moot point...
Personally I live in the US in Arizona and grew up surrounded by almost 3 million acres of national forest so I never felt a lack of freedom to roam but i get alot of states dont have that many large national forests. I would be fine with a freedom to roam law as long as people actually followed the rules and respected the land and if there were adequate repercussions for those who didnt follow the rules. I''m also a land owner and purposely keep my land open so people can camp and hunt on it. My main worry though is that one day someone may hurt themselves on my land and try to sue me
Hold up... Are you telling me that, over there... If someone goes to the forest and gets hurt, just because it so happens that you own that forest, they can sue you?!?! That... That's ridiculous...
That's the US for you, a country made for and by lawyers. But don't hold your nose too high, we're getting there in Europe, too; every bad thing from the US is copied sooner or later under the guise of progress or "consumer rights" and similar shibboleths, with huge net costs to society. Already, beautiful trees near walkways get felled because somebody might sue if a branch breaks during a storm and injures walkers.
Here in Canada I am frequently annoyed by the number of fences I encounter on long walks. I understand people fencing off their own property, but often there is no path for people to walk between a public street and public land due to private land in between. There are even fences between land owned by the city and by the federal government, both of which are public.
That which is not illegal cannot be punished sounds like a neat concept. Where I'm from if it's not illegal they'll just call it 'disorderly conduct' or one neat one is 'committing an act that serves no legitimate purpose'.
It never came to my mind that walking through an open area could be restricted. Why on earth would a country decide to restrict this? It just does not make any sense - and honestly, it is hard to say whether an area is publicly or privately owned when there is no fence - and erecting a fence needs a good reason (protecting livestock, marking your garden or avoiding that freshly planted trees are harmed, etc). Any other restriction would seem like a senseless "this is mine, not yours" claim serving nobody.
If there is no sign or fences it is generally not illegal to non destructively pass though someone else's land in most US juristrictions. I live in a somewhat rural area and most of the people I've known who have put up fences or no tresspassing signs on their land have done so in response to people who weren't respecting their land, leaving trash making too much noise, disturbing their animals, being destructive to plantlife and crops etc.
@@TheAtkey but much of the US also has castle doctrine. You might be legally allowed to cross land, but the landowner is legally allowed to kill you if they *feel* threatened by you being there.
@@jodajoda2863 My state has castle doctrine and is one of the most pro 2 A states in the union if you shoot someone walking across your field you will go to prison. They have to have broken into "Dwelling" hoping a fence or ignoring a no trespassing sign doesn't count let alone walking though an open field.
@@jodajoda2863 That's a little vague. You can't shoot someone for crossing your land. If someone who comes on your land with intent to harm you then you're mostly likely to be ambushed. Which in some states can be regarded as premeditated attempted murder. If you shoot them then it is self defense. The Castle doctrine in some states covers inside the home as well the Curtledge of the yard as well as attempted carjacking. Shooting someone for incidental trespassing is murder. Another thing about property rights. The law allows owners to post signs that say no firearms on property without owners permission.
Private property right. I don't want my land to be free for all either.
I was living and working in Sweden for a while and was often told about the Swedish "everybody's right" to access landscapes and forests, and I was wondering why, because we have that in Germany, too, and I thought it was a normal thing in most countries. Only now I've learned that there is a small difference, as in Germany, camping is limited to designated areas, as for protecting nature, while in Sweden, everybody has the right to camp everywhere (if I understood it right). Again living in Germany, my house borders at a farmer's land, and my kids grew up observing the farmer sewing and harvesting. When jogging I'm using the pathways the farmer is using to access his land. When going out for a walk, we often took a path through the farmer's grounds. And some neighbors are doing the same, e.g. by taking the shortest way to the church or to walk their dog for a stroll. Nobody even thinks about it being something special.
Those paths you talk about in Germany (usually) are public roads. They do not belong to the farmer.
The north-south road between our house and the farming area is public, all the others deriving from it in western direction and running between the different crop-fields are the farmer's.
@@whuzzzup You've obviously never been to a real rural area like the Eifel or the Black Forest. ;-)
(Hint: Even the small part of forests owned by my relatives have private "roads" on them - which you are of course free to roam, as usual.)
@@IgorRockt I was indeed not thinking about forest paths, although here they also belong to the state and very rarely can I remember a private one that is blocked (of course all of them are not for normal traffic of course).
Also all Feldwege - running along the fields - here also are state "roads".
As a person who travels mostly without the use of motorized vehicles and hotels it's really important to me. I never ever had a problem to sleep anywhere I wanted in my hammock (which is kinda gray zone because sleeping under the sky is almost everywhere allowed but camping not so often) or going where ever I wanted. As long as you have enough respect for nature and people around, you can roam freely and feel safe almost anywhere in Europe.
all the problems in america, ever boiling down now to our being in short supply of topsoil, fossil water, fresh water, and perpetual genocide of our otherwise genetic diversity, by african heroin having gotten into on the paper work side of law, the government, and media, leaving no means to stop africa's rape of our vital resources either.
america was built on the backs of eurasian immigrants who have been, and are being, perpetually genocided.
myself being a childless genocide victim, so utterly terrified of the heroin bitches that i have been alone for 18 years;
nearly destitute, everything we worked for being dissolved, where if i had the monetary equivalent of picking one tuft of cotton i would be a multi-billionaire after taxes.
africa's transparent foreign weapons systems have been on the ground and active in the united states since its inception.
they don't report their numbers, they don't report their incomes, and they will always breed faster than the food grows until the food just suddenly stops.
Even in countries like Belgium and Germany where camping in the wild is not allowed, I always did and never got in any trouble. No one ever chased me away because they could see I was keeping it clean and it was always only for 1 night.
hey fellow hammocker! 👋😎👍
@@lorrefl7072I think most people's mistake is not going for that approach...if you're inconsiderate, messy, have a bad attitude, anyone who happens across you is not going to be as willing to "let it slide" as they would be otherwise. It's just common sense. you wouldn't go to a job interview in your rattiest clothes. in the same way you wouldn't want somebody's first impression of you to be ruined by a trash heap if somebody walks up on your campsite.
In Canada no one would choose to sleep "under the sky" without a tent. They'd be eaten alive by mosquitoes and blackflies.
Same in Iceland - you have the right to roam. ALMOST everywhere - within reason. Usually restrictions are there to protect you ... or nature from you. As long as you do not litter or disturb animals or plants, dont pick up stuff .. or annoy the elves or trolls.
all the problems in america, ever boiling down now to our being in short supply of topsoil, fossil water, fresh water, and perpetual genocide of our otherwise genetic diversity, by african heroin having gotten into on the paper work side of law, the government, and media, leaving no means to stop africa's rape of our vital resources either.
america was built on the backs of eurasian immigrants who have been, and are being, perpetually genocided.
myself being a childless genocide victim, so utterly terrified of the heroin bitches that i have been alone for 18 years;
nearly destitute, everything we worked for being dissolved, where if i had the monetary equivalent of picking one tuft of cotton i would be a multi-billionaire after taxes.
africa's transparent foreign weapons systems have been on the ground and active in the united states since its inception.
they don't report their numbers, they don't report their incomes, and they will always breed faster than the food grows until the food just suddenly stops.
In America, people would do all those things, including annoying the trolls just to see if the trolls would attack them.
In England we have such an extensive network of public footpaths across private and public lands, that landowners have to maintain, that I suspect we don't miss the Right To Roam other countries enjoy as much as we might do.
As a French, I never thought about that, I can go anywhere I want, even inside farms, crops... if there is a fence I won’t go in (optional) because maybe some dangerous cow or dog.
Of course I won’t get in somebody’s garden, but if there isn’t any fence I won’t mind going through.
I’m glad I saw your video cause nobody would have kept me from going anywhere in any country 😂
I'm from one of the countries mentioned here, Estonia(omg estonia mention we go wild for that), and yeah, we have right to roam and i couldnt imagine anything else... As a kid i explored every trail throughout my village and many neighbouring villages by foot or bike, went swimming and skating on the sea, foraging all kinds of things from the forest and fields(not from right beside roads tho, cars pollute...) like berries, mushrooms, plant matter, bones, flowers, and just exploring. We hiked in nature half across the island in different ways every year, as is a middle school tradition. I often went sledding on an abandoned military structure in the winter. I have never known any of the owners of these lands and i dont think any of them know of me. I never leave any trash anywhere because nature is sacred and there are trashcans in more populated areas everywhere anyways so why be an asshole?? If i fall off a rock or something bc im doing stupid shit thats my own fault. Urban exploring is a bit more legally shady, but it definitely happens without serious consequences to my knowledge... A lot of the things brought up in the video and comments feel so bizarre and like from another world...
The stuff about people straight up being violent against people just. existing near them sounds so... dystopian... It sounds like something went very wrong in the beginning of the development of overall community that is now hurting absolutely everyone involved. (that something is probably greed) And i feel so bad for everyone who has to deal with that. Especcially native americans, who have had this happen over such a long history of their rights and access being stolen. Absolutely horrifying.
I heard they privatized a beach on my island that i used to frequent... really hope we aren't heading in the same direction here :(
(Kind of an USA rant, im a foreginer so i dont have an in-perspective, so my thoughts are certainly limited to impressions formed of what i hear from friends in mostly middle/lower class situations and see of shitty rich people in media)
This kind of topic is only a small part of how restricting and invasive USA seems, at least from the outside... No wonder things have been heading downward so fast if most of the population is struggling in pretty much poverty and under constant surveillance and scrutiny form your fellow people, who might easily have access to deadly weapons, and maybe don't even know how wrong and inhumane that is. It's such an eradication of trust in humanity and well. goodness, which contributes to having that distrust validated, because its "everyone for themselves" which is such bullshit. Humans are social creatures who belong in nature and need to create or contribute to the vastness of our infinite variety of experience. Being separated from community and nature, afraid of anyone "not our own" and often unable to create freely without financial incentive sounds like a wholly miserable experience. I know that is a hyperbolic example but it's the vibe ive gathered over the years... i dont like capitalism invading everything and trying to make us "productive" at all costs, and asking money for necessary human rights like being in nature and staying alive.
Do you live near from Tallin.?
As an American, you are completely right. It is terrifying to be here. If you speak about dreams outside of capitalism or anything related to the arts people look at you like you’re dumber than a box of rocks
Every day I feel like I’m talking to 1 million of the same negative person.
I have multiple friends whose teeth are rotting out of their heads after years of being unable to afford care.
Filling in a tooth is about six to $700 and after years of not being able to go some of my friends are quoted around $35-$75,000
When they obviously can’t afford this, the dentists basically scoff at them and explain to them how life-threatening the situation could be and then wonder why they’re so stupid for not JUST fixing it.
Rent is like $2000 with a 10% increase every single YEAR (that happened because of a rent control bill that was meant to help us)
And each and every day there are more surveillance cameras, and GROUND LEVEL Microphones installed for our “own safety” while simultaneously stripping our LGBTQIA family members, safety away and changing NOTHING about the guns
There is no help. The food is all grown with glyphosate and has been genetically modified to withstand the fucking Monsanto shit.
It’s tense everywhere you look people don’t spend time in community squares talking with each other, or parks or cafes (some people do, but there isn’t a culture here for it and it’s seen as disruptive or loitering) They just try and avoid each other.
Human lives feel disposable, and that’s by design!😂 gotta feed the capitalism. It’s exponential growth is our one and only goal no matter who’s loved ones have to die to get there. Now there’s the 2024 election to look forward too.
I’m making my family get passports in case we have to leave. This is is fucking nightmare and growing up here feels hopeless. I want to have children, but what do I leave them to when I pass? To do it all over again?
The best part is the only one seeing this are the rest of the world - and the younger generations of America. Most older people in positions of power in America look back on their youth thinks of the country in its heyday, when THEY were young and then gaslights us out of everything and just tells us to work harder and buy less food and coffee.
It feels like a cruel joke😂 but it’s REAL😂😂
@@majiaqua6670 You're obviously a Democrat. You should know that the DNC platform is gaslighting you worse now than the Repugnicans ever have. Otherwise the DNC would not have rejected, ostracized, and silenced Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, and RFK Jr.
If you're a typical Democrat, you barely know anything about Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr except what Rachel Madow told you about them being Russian assets. And of course you're going to believe her without question. You mentioned glyphosate. Are you aware that RFK Jr has been fighting Monsanto and other similarly destructive companies for his entire career as an environmental lawyer? Probably not. Why do you think the DNC has effectively shut him out as a candidate? The DNC is firmly in the pockets of Monsanto, Bayer, Pfizer, BlackRock, Vanguard, Raytheon, etc... and the current POTUS idiot is their biggest puppet. And don't even get me started on why the DNC hates Tulsi, one of the most LGBTQIA supportive congresswomen. She's against endless wars of attrition and poking the Russian bear into WWIII Armageddon - that's the DNC third rail. The DNC has become the party of war, death, and Orwellian doublespeak.
Ironically, you plan to leave the country if the big orange buffoon wins in 2024, but for all his many faults, he's the only viable candidate right now who is NOT happy with the way things are and the way things are going. You'd really better keep your passport ready if the DNC, Grandpa Joe, or any of the other DNC darlings like Newsome ascend to the throne, because that WILL be the end. Stop letting the clowns fool you - the DNC is NOT your friend.
@@majiaqua6670 Lady, you're delusional, and DEFINITELY need to hang out with others who disagree with you and touch grass.
The only people losing rights are little Christian school children losing their right to live in Nashville, Tennessee because the LGBT in this country are so intolerant and insane they need to ki11 those who uphold their religious beliefs. I remember all the liberals and leftists who cried with joy at those Christian school children being gunned down, blaming Christians, their parents, and the children themselves for that horrific act. Nice people, you must run in close circles with those chuckleheads.
@@majiaqua6670 Terrifying? Aren't all things dangerous in some way or other?
Thanks for such an interesting video!
I'm Scottish and I walk extensively in Scotland. Access in Scotland is good, but common sense and respect is necessary.
Don't wild-camp within sight of houses. Keep out of fields with crops. Keep clear of farm animals.
Ask, as a courtesy, if someone is working on the land, before crossing it.
However, when on the Highland hills, I can sometimes walk for days and not see anyone else. Bliss!
In Scotland, when we do meet someone else, we tend to stop and get into conversations, It is good to hear other's experiences of what is good to see, wildlife to look out for, places best avoided etc.
I occasionally go down to England and that is a very different experience for me.....
Sound advice. What point is being made in the last line btw?
@@badcrumble1that England a worse country than Scotland..less free.. lower education standard .. lower economic outlook
"... Don't wild-camp within sight of houses. Keep out of fields with crops. Keep clear of farm animals. Ask, as a courtesy, if someone is working on the land, before crossing it..."
"... but common sense and respect is necessary..."
That is the very definition of Right to Roam.
Common sense, Respect, Courtesy. For the people and for the land.
I so long to visit your country one day! Maybe we will manage in one or two years, I am very much looking forward to it!
A bit too "busy" for me. Less freedom to land access. Wild camping is a problem.
On the plus side, there are often local inns in remote places where it is possible to stop for a bowl of soup, or a "ploughman's lunch", which can be very welcome.
As an American, I was very much aware that private property meant stay out( and as teens we didn’t always listen.)There was one old timer that used rock salt in shot gun cartridges to run people off. As adult I spent a few years in Germany. I would take my daughter on walks along the canal behind our neighborhood, but not before asking our landlord if it was private property. This video explains the odd look she had when I asked. She said it didn’t matter I could walk any where that was open( closed gardens around residences were a thing)we could walk there.
Here in Scotland I find freedom to roam is essential to bring up well rounded individuals. Learning about the countryside and its wildlife is good for the soul.
The problem in the USA is if you let people cross your land long enough they feel it isn’t yours anymore. Then their are people that will trash you land if you allow them access.
But proper culture will never develop if you never let it! Of course people don't know how to behave, they've never gotten a chance to learn this
Your videos are becoming even better. Excellent work you guys.
Thank you so much. I had a LOT of fun editing this video. The sound clip at the beginning is from the library of Congress and sung by a Florida prisoner in the early 1920's... and given that he is singing about freedom, it makes the eerie/beautiful song somewhat haunting.
And that´s along keeping a big family and having jobs, you guys are astounding@@TypeAshton
@@TypeAshtonMaybe U can make a vid, walking from your neighbourhood to the next path into nature?
Ha ha, with little kids??? 😂@@mauertal
@@capistev U cannot walk with little kids? Think on it.......OK......U have to think a little bit longer, but i got hope u heard the CLICK in your head!
This in many ways is a cultural issue that has many facets, but it really comes down to three things. 1. In the US much of our law is frozen in time of around the late 1700s. At that time US laws and regulations became based on "British Common Law" and in many ways hasn't changed much since then, and there lies many of the problems. It was a time of different views on land and how its use and ownership rights were viewed. As you said about England and aristocratic land ownership, many of those norms and traditions found there way to the other side of the Atlantic. We still use the expression that a man's home is his "castle" today many, many years after castles (never really a thing, except for a few ultra rich who wanted to be kings, in America anyway) ceased to be a dominant part of the landscape. 2. The reticence of land owners to allow access to the public, although not warranted, can be a real issue and has some foundation in reality. Have you visited a National Park lately? How those visiting these national treasures behave when visiting can be down right despicable. Trash thrown everywhere, items defaced and wildlife disrupted are all common sights. Respect and a sense of stewardship of the environment are not as common as they should be. 3. Lawyers and being a society that sues everybody, all the time. My family lived on a farm that was no longer being used for agriculture and we allowed access for hunting and fishing in a somewhat controlled manner. You just had to ask. That did not stop us from worrying and having to carry costly liability insurance. There was always that nagging fear when we saw a group going out during deer season, with permission, of What If........?
"Entitlement" seams to be ingrained in the US mentality...just looking at the damage caused by visitors to the national parks, which have rules, I can not fathom the destruction that would be caused by a freedom to roam law.
How many times can I "like" to signal agreement with the statements of fact in this one?
I think "Lawyers and being a society that sues everybody, all the time" hits the nail on the head. For those outside the US, liability is a huge issue here. Criminals have been injured burglarizing a house, sued the homeowner and won. It started in the 80s and now, many property owners just won't take the risk.
@@sw6428 ""Entitlement" seams to be ingrained in the US mentality" Many of those visitors are not from the US.
People in vacation, in general, seem to be problematic.
@@hlarks "Criminals have been injured burglarizing a house, sued the homeowner and won. " yes, exactly. This is why people are so strict about no trespassing laws here.
Our entire culture would be so much better off if we got rid of most of the lawyers.
Perhaps we could send them to roam in Europe. LOL
For finnish people the forests and nature in general is very important culturally. So much so that when building new housing, large swaths of forest and natural fields are left unbuilt in and around the developed area so that the residents can use it for recreation. If you look at a map of the city of Turku, for example, you can see the dense city center surrounded by these satellite "suburbs" that are basically towns within the city that have their own shops and other services, and are separated by sometimes kilometres of fields and forests. This is for the wildlife to have these corridors they can travel through without coming too close to humans.
I was a city kid, living only 3km from the city centre of Turku, and i spent most of my days roaming the nearby forest with my friends and collecting butterflies in the meadows next to our house. I cannot even imagine a childhood without nature close by.
I live very close to Yosemite National Park. There are several pullouts on the road (Highway 41) that are trailheads to waterfalls, creeks, and hiking trails. I am increasingly appalled by the garbage people leave in these parking areas. I walked one of the trails recently, and along the trail there was also garbage - mostly empty water bottles.
The tourists who come here came specifically to see the beauty of Yosemite, yet that didn't stop them from leaving their plastic and candy wrappers on the ground.
I cannot comprehend their mindset. This does color my attitude toward making my land available to other people I don't know.
they are scum and their society never taught them to respect anything at all.
Well, that's what happens when you lose the culture of public land. If everything is somebody else's property, your litter is their problem.
@@ginemginem Yes, I see your point. I would like to have a culture of public land, and I would like to believe that Americans would honor it.. I know some of them would- I wonder how long it would take for people to develop the same respect that the people who grew up with public land have?
@@ginemginem You seem to have missed the fact that the highway where their story takes place is public land.
There was never a culture of public land for the US to have lost in the first place. Rather, the attitude of tourists has grown increasingly worse over the years.
It’s also an individualistic versus collectivist ideals.
As someone who grew up in America, I’ve always wished for what I call “a world without fences”. Thank you for making such a concise video about why I’ve always felt this way! I guess it’s time to finally move to Sweden like I’ve always wanted to anyway!
Although the general right to roam is more limited in England than in some other countries, there is a very extensive network of footpaths designated as "Public Rights of Way" which are jealously guarded, to an extent by the local authorities as well as volunteer walking groups. Many of these rights of way go back 100s of years.
Yeah. I could actually hear myself if I did this in Europe, repeatedly asking throughout the entire journey, "You sure we're not going to get shot?" "Did you talk to the landowner?" "You're not lying to me are you?" "You know what they do in Texas and a few other states if you just go walking around like this"
I love your well researched and always informative videos, they make my sunday 👍🏼.
What came to my mind instantly about the scandinavian approach to the "use of nature" is that it is based on trust. "You can go where you like, bacause I trust you to do no harm". While the US approach (not only in this matter, but in general) is based on mistrust. "You stay out, because I don't want you to have the opportunity of damaging my stuff".
And this seems to be the core of all cultural differences between Europe and the US.
Trust vs Mistrust !
Excellent analysis
This! Much of what works in Europe works because people trust each other and the institutions that they've built. That's why you can't just transplant European laws or infrastructure to the US, they either won't work or crumble in short order.
"Das ich denke, das ich tu', trau' ich jedem andern zu." So ist es wohl, das Land der Freien. Hier liegt vielleicht auch einer der Gründe für die latente Gewaltbereitschaft. Und den hohen Munitionsverbrauch.
In general, people in USA and North-Europe, are different. In USA it is more common to; litter, steal, vandalis, cause forest fires... Americans have more reason to protect there property. Life in Europe is safer. I am from Finland.
if you think america was built on mistrust, you are worse than the people who protect criminals under the banner of social justice.
as an owner of a pasture in Germany I find dogs to be the biggest problem. They dig deep holes that could be dangerous to my animals and shit on their food (gras). BTW: great video !
Well, the problem aren't the dogs, but their irresponsible owners. I don't let my dog to dig holes (though it's her instinct, as she is a dachshund), and pick up her 💩 even in the meadows.
Totally correct. It is the dog owners responsibility. I hve my 2 Labbies running freely, however passing a fenced property of lifestock it is mandatory to put the dogs on their leash. I always pick up the residues of my dogs, even of the meadows in case, quite often "forreign dog residues" as well. There is a lack of respect the dog owners show on public territory; unfortunately. @jozefchocholacek6349
@@hansweith4947
My real dog(pet) was the last without while I played ball and a place to run. And I cared the dog was never where the fenced children play ground war. Because the dirt. Only if they wanted to play with my dog. It's the place they made. Now, I don't know. Play frisbe on the lash.
well, if you have whole kennel of dogs regularly using yor pasture I can see its problem( but I guess their urine would be even bigger one) but how different shit on grass from some random dog crossing it with his owner than from rabbits, foxes, birds, lizards, snakes, mice, hell even horses, cows and sheeps do shit( as anyone who ever walked over some pasture can attest theres sometimes hardly any space left without their shit) on the grass a.k.a. their own food as you put it.
every single living thing shit and animals living outdoors both shit and eat outdoors and do all sorts of other things there, no matter how intimate or gory, they surely aren't squeamish about their stuff like humans.
also I do think animal shit in forest, pasture or nature in general, is a different thing from shit on sidewalk and in inhabited areas. a/ in nature its just one of many shits around and they are all rather dispersed as the density of animals just like humans is rather low there unlike in cities with many ppl and dogs etc per square km. and b/ theres hardly any person( other animals dont mind and if they do they dont complain about it) to step into it and ruin ones shoes and whole day unlike the situation when theres shit in middle of sidewalk or some park primary intended for human recreation .
so I really dont get a/ why ones so angry about one particular kind of shit on pasture already brimming with it and b/ being so anal about picking one particular kind of shit off the said pasture( while leaving all the other kinds of it) like it was busy street or square or inner city park and not some far away pasture with cows or sheep shitting all over it.
Bad luck if you own a pasture near a city, where dogs (and their owners) walk by every few minutes.@@rehurekj
As a European (Dutch, from the Netherlands) I like that you try your best to represent data fairly and accurately, and you are not in the business of purposefully juxtaposing the USA against Europe in a way that unfairly paints the USA in an unrepresentatively negative light. It is all too common for UA-cam channels who compare countries to engage in such practice, because it appeals to a sense of national pride within the audience and makes them feel good (because they self-identify with that which is painted as superior). I know when I watch your channel, and you compare the USA to Germany in a way that is favorable to Germany, that I can rely on your comparison to be fair not just to Germany but also the USA. This is important to me. Keep up the good work, TheBlackForestFamily, and best wishes from the Netherlands!