Hacker News Reader

Comment by cel1ne | Hacker News Reader

Since we're talking about how awesome Norway is, this [0] should be mentioned.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roam#Norway

Scotland also has similar "right to roam" legislation (as listed on that page you linked to) - which given the ways that large landowners often acquired land here seems rather just to me.

It's an awesome right.

As a Finn I always find it really weird when visiting places outside Nordic Countries that for them most of the country is unaccessible.

In Germany we don't got this right, but seldom I have been prohibited from "roaming" the landside. But we aren't allowed to put a tent anywhere and sleep in it, which is rather sad.

A friend of mine went on a hiking holiday in Scotland and he told me, he just walked till he was tired, put his tent up on the next green spot and slept there.

As an aside, here in Scotland you quite often don't even need to put up a tent - there are houses/huts in a lot of wild locations, known as bothies, that are completely free to use:

http://www.mountainbothies.org.uk/

we aren't allowed to put a tent anywhere and sleep in it, which is rather sad

Probably connected to the risk that squatter's rights poses to the land owner... not that pitching a tent for a night is a serious risk, but squatter's rights really encourages that kind of culture.

Not knowing anything about squatter's rights (or law in general), shouldn't it be possible to just create a law putting whatever limits we want on camping WITHOUT the need for it to be completely forbidden?

I am just now in a place where free camping is not allowed, but the local authorities interpret the law as: "no tents between dawn and dusk". I wish that was put into a written law.

The key item of squatter's rights is that if a squatter occupies land with the land-owner's knowledge for a number of years, the land now legally belongs to the squatter.

One night of camping is not years, but squatter's rights certainly encourages land-owners to be ever-strict about visitors to their land.

Yes, owning land is a big problem in all countries.

Only 7% of the land in Finland and Sweden is Agricultural land, compared to 70% in the UK, so it's no wonder that the countryside is much more inaccessible.

That being said, there's a lot more that could be done, such as allowing kayaks into rivers and lakes without so many unreasonable limitations and/or paperwork.

Driving across the US west, you can’t help but notice how every bit of land is cordoned off with barbed wire or fences. Doesn’t matter if it’s in the middle of emply plains or uninhabited mountains. "Private property" and "no trespassing" signs abound.

Hardly "every bit". The federal government owns more than half of the land west of the Rockies [0], and most of that (e.g. US Forest Service and BLM land) is free to roam over. Much of it you can camp anywhere you want, too.

[0] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2013/10/15/al...

You do have to ask permission of the landowner to hike/camp on their property. But with the size of some of the cattle on the land (I'm thinking of Texas Longhorns) and the presence of common predators/pests like feral hogs and coyotes, it's not always safe to just wander around.

There's also the water issue. If you run out of water in the west while on your hike/tramp, you're in life-threatening trouble. And there's often no cellular service.

Yeah, so awesome. 729 whales so far, tell me again how awesome they are.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/norway-kills-...

What is the problem? These whales are not near extinction like some whales outside Japan. The allowed quota for whales each year is strictly regulated by Norway which is one of the most environmental states in the world (yes we have lots of oil feel free to point out the double standard there). The killing itself is in most cases instant. If you care about how animals are treated you should be much more disgusted at how chicken are raised and their living conditions. The whale lives a happy life until it is killed.

Oh and whale meat is delicious.

That's just sensationalist clickbait. The whale species hunted are not endangered and there is no ban on hunting these whales. There are many species of creatures which actually are and which you should spend more time caring about though. These whales are not among them.

So Norway isn't violating a whaling ban?

There is no law which bans it. Just an agreement among several countries which Norway isn't a part of as far as I know.

Yep, just like the Kyoto Protocol. (no sarcasm, just pointing out that he's right, and that most people also think every nation is bound by the Kyoto Protocol)

Fair enough. Although I personally would prefer it if whales were left alone.

why? they aren't endangered, people like to eat them. why is a whale different from say a deer?

Yes. They are. However, the IWC resolution to ban whaling is not binding. It's advisory and in my opinion not based on facts but feelings.

Deleted comment

Minke whales are not in any way endangered (or close to it). Check your facts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minke_whale

Yet. I take the view that the human race should only be harvesting things it really needs. The case for whaling (that I'm aware of) seems pretty weak. And if Norway did sign up to protect marine wildlife in exchange for oil rights (I'm taking that at face value at the moment) then it does seem like a jerk move to take the oil and not protect the whales.

"Protect marine wildlife" is not the same thing as "ban harvesting of a species that is not endangered."

This is where we part company. My belief is that they are. It is my view that the end result of "protecting wildlife" should be that the wildlife flourishes.

Whaling is a tradition in Norway and has been going on since medieval times.

More information: http://www.fisheries.no/ecosystems-and-stocks/marine_stocks/...

In my view, whalers are decent people - they generally aren't "jerks". You probably have never even talked to nor met any one of them.

I understand your point that hunting and farming of animals in general is not good, but it's a pretty hard habit to break.

This is how the world works at this time - people hunt all sort of animals whether it's ethically right or not. Also remember that of all the meat produced in this world, whale meat is but a tiny fraction of it, so perhaps spend more of your time protesting the way fish is treated (which is also a valid concern).

> Whaling is a tradition in Norway and has been going on since medieval times.

Jumping in a longboat and pillaging neighboring villages was also a Norwegian tradition in medieval times, but we find such practices barbaric today.

Eh, depends on how you frame it. Is a troop transport taking US forces over to Iraq barbaric? Depends on who you ask.

Absolutely, I'm not claiming the US doesn't participate in forms of barbarism.

We had a completely different set of unjustified justifications for the Iraq invasion, but we didn't use tradition as the excuse.

> Whaling is a tradition in Norway and has been going on since medieval times.

Eh, but back in medieval times it was a fair fight--no sonar, no diesel engines, no grenade-tipped harpoons, and as a bonus, there was actually a legitimate need to do this.

The whaling now is done by people with money, in order to earn more money. Nothing more.

If you write "Fact" you really should produce facts.

* The whales that we in Norway hunt are not endangered.

* Norway is not the richest country in the world.

Also no need to call anyone jerks.

Here is some more info: http://www.fisheries.no/ecosystems-and-stocks/marine_stocks/...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com