The friend is not the climber so I have passed on what I can to him and leave him to it. Let’s hope he sorts it. Thanks
Anyone fancy a family day out at NT? Limited time to get a free Family Trust pass - access on NT Site above.
I’d sooner spend the money on some extra tickets for the next GADC Raffle 
1 Like
Id rather as many people as possible stand outside and fly their drones over the scenery.
Difficult to put my contempt for them into words, not just drone related but all photography/IP and rights related.
1 Like
@gnirtS I’ve actually only been refused permission to film and take pictures thrice; once inside Powys Castle, once for video only in Hanbury Hall and the other was both vid and pictures in Lord Lichfields apartments in Shugborough. But all would have refused the use of drones for sure.
That’s a new one Colin is that in between three & twice 
adverb
adverb: thrice
- archaic
three times.
“Dean was thrice married”
- archaic
extremely; very.
“I was thrice blessed”
Dean was not thinking straight 
It’s more the attitude and tactics they use outside that.
For example sending legal threats to people who had pictures of Whitby Abby on Flickr and the way they actively tried to get all images of NT land (NOT just properties, talking UK coastline and mountains here) removed off stock sites to monopolise the lot.
Although all the above wasn’t legally valid they continued to use legal threats to pull everything like that.
They’re actively trying to monopolise all images for any commercial entity of any land they control regardless of it being 100% natural coastline or hillside that has been around thousands of years.
For a theoretical charity, they have far far too much power, control and no accountability.
(and thats me being kind, i can think of many other reasons id never, ever give them a penny voluntarily).
3 Likes
I see what you mean. Just ignore them, (I do) there are GADC members, including me, that have been threatened with NT legal action, but as far as I am aware they have not taken it any further (if there is anyone in GADC that has had NT legal action taken against them it would be interesting to share). I’d like to see them claim copyright for a picture that can be taken in public, or indeed, in wild open spaces.
I ignore them. Its the way they threatened and made demands of people who may not have understood it was a completely unlawful demand who complied thats annoying.
It does affect me in a way - i sell images on stock sites. Every now and again NT demand the sites remove images of “their” land. Quite often the bigger companies comply.
For example ive had photos of the Lake District along with some of the Jurassic Coast removed. All taken legally but the NT backroom threats saw the stock libraries remove images from there.
Ultimately their attitude (which has been like this for years) is enough to make me want to avoid giving them a penny of money if possible for anything.
Whitby Abbey is English Heritage. So National Trust have no claims over it at all.
@PimRoad Good spot Doc, but they are just another NT without the sharp teeth! 
One thing I wondered is that although a public footpath may cross NT land they do not own the footpath. In the same way you cannot own a public road. You aren’t trespassing on a public footpath - clue’s in the name. What happens then if you flew from a public footpath which crossed NT property? Strictly speaking you’re not on their ‘land’.
Although a public footpath it can still be owned by someone. Is technically a right of way which means you have a right to traverse along it but abide by the landowners rules as you traverse.
1 Like
There is a Bridleway that is part of the Staffordshire Way that runs through the middle of NT Shuborough Estate. It is very much a public path and must be maintained to ensure public access at all times but has shared ownership between Staffordshire CC and the NT. It was one of the places where I TOAL recently there and I was aware it was a sketchy move at best. I waited until the place had been closed for sometime and the NT staff were long gone though, therby reducing the possibility of any conflict. I would do the same at other locations that are also listed as public paths in OS maps. Thats my choice I guess and am willing to suffer the consequences, such as they are!
At the end of the day footpaths, bridleways, footways, canals are all highways.
The common law definition that says ‘A highway is a way over which there exists a public right of passage, that is to say a right for all Her Majesty’s subjects at all seasons of the year freely and at their will to pass and repass without let or hindrance. ‘ (Halsbury’s Laws 21[1]).
So whether this should allow for drone flying, I don’t know. This was published in 1907.
Possibly yes.
The only reason that I say possibly is because many roads are also privately owned yet are not private highways. I own one for example (or my company does) yet in reality I have little say in what happens on the road. And nor do I want any say.
The issue comes when land owners decide to try and control the use of the footpath.
I have faintly looked into this before, albeit for an entirely different purpose unrelated to drones.
Although this comes from an article focused on cycling, I think there is still some relevance as the argument for reasonable use comes back to whether or not an activity restricts use for others.
A right of reasonable use
A right of way includes not only the right to pass and repass, but also includes any reasonable use that does not interfere with the primary right of passage. The definition of this is decided on a case-by-case basis.
The courts have in the past found that such uses as photography and picnics, and even protests, may be permissible as ‘reasonable’, but it depends on the nature of the right of way and the level of intrusion caused.
Cycling UK, and, indeed, Parliament, believe that this is almost certain to extend to wheeling a bicycle, and there are arguments that in some cases it could even extend to camping overnight by the side of a highway as long as it did not prevent use by others.
Just seen this n YouTube, from ladyflyeruk.
I asked her in the comments if she was familiar with the NTs policy on flying from their properties, or if she was familiar with NATS or Dronescene. Or if she somehow asked for and was granted permission. Nice shots, too.