Home » Environment

England’s Right to Roam Law: Expanding Freedom, Access, and Nature

Examining calls for reform and the future of public access to nature in England, with focus on health, equity, and conservation.

By Medha deb

Created on Sep 27, 2025

Examining calls for reform and the future of public access to nature in England, with focus on health, equity, and conservation.

England’s Expanded Right to Roam Law: Transforming Access to Nature

Public access to the natural landscapes of England has long been a contested and evolving issue. The campaign to expand the country’s ‘right to roam’ law—which legally guarantees open access to nature—has gathered momentum, drawing attention from lawmakers, conservationists, communities, and landowners alike. Amid growing evidence of the health, social, and environmental benefits of spending time outdoors, advocates are pushing for legislative change that could redefine how millions experience the countryside. This article explores the origins, limitations, grassroots activism, proposed reforms, and the complex debate surrounding England’s right to roam.

What Is the Right to Roam?

The right to roam, sometimes referred to as “freedom to roam” or “open access,” is the legal right to walk across certain areas of natural landscape without fear of trespassing. It is designed to provide equitable, responsible public access to uncultivated lands—such as mountains, moors, and some coastal areas—subject to specific rules and exclusions.

The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CROW) enshrined these rights for England and Wales, opening millions of acres of land to the public for recreational walking and enjoyment.
Covered lands principally include mountain, moor, down, heath, and registered common land.
Rights are conditional: visitors must respect wildlife, research, land management, and private property.

England’s right to roam is much more limited than that of Scotland, which grants broad responsible access to most of the countryside, regardless of land designation, under the Land Reform Act (2003).

Current Coverage and Major Limitations

Despite its celebrated passage at the dawn of the new millennium, the right to roam in England applies to only a small fraction of land—about 8% of the total land area. Wild camping is legally guaranteed only in a few specific places, notably Dartmoor National Park.

Forests, woodlands, riversides, and lakesides (apart from specific paths and some public woodlands) are excluded from CROW’s provisions.
Urban residents and people in deprived areas often live far from accessible open countryside, compounding issues of health and environmental inequity.
Many landowners retain the right to restrict, charge for, or otherwise limit access to much of the countryside.

Regional Disparities in Access

The degree of access varies dramatically across the country:

Less than 1% of land in Kent is open access, compared to over 70% of the Peak District.
Negligible open access in much of southern and eastern England, while upland and national park areas host the bulk of accessible land.

These disparities disproportionately affect underprivileged and racially diverse communities, who, studies show, must travel much farther on average to reach open access land.

The Campaign for Expansion: Key Motivations

Advocates for expanding the right to roam emphasize a range of overlapping benefits:

Health and Wellbeing: Access to nature is associated with improved physical and mental health, lower stress, and better well-being. The benefits are especially significant for children, elderly people, and urban families lacking nearby green space.
Environmental Stewardship: Encouraging people to engage directly with local landscapes can foster appreciation for wildlife and drive conservation efforts.
Social Equity: Expanded access helps address historic inequalities in who can enjoy England’s natural beauty. Currently, the most deprived communities travel on average 48% further—and those in the most ethnically diverse areas, 73% further—than their more privileged counterparts to reach open land.
Recreational Opportunities: Legal expansion would support not only walkers but also wild swimmers, cyclists, horse riders, and campers—while ensuring such activities are conducted responsibly.

The Case for Including Woodlands and Watersides

Campaigners argue that opening up access to currently excluded areas would have a transformative effect:

Including privately owned woodland in the right to roam could more than double the land accessible under the law, raising coverage from 8% to approximately 17.5%.
Expanding rights to rivers, lakes, and watersides would unlock hundreds of miles of spaces for recreation and connection to nature.

Research suggests that if woodland access were granted, the average distance for most people to reach open land would drop by about 63%.

Grassroots Activism and the Push for Change

Expansion of the right to roam is being propelled by dynamic grassroots campaigns and a growing coalition of organizations, including:

The Ramblers – Britain’s largest walking charity, which led the campaign for the original CROW Act and continues to lobby for greater access.
Wildlife and Countryside Link – A coalition of major UK nature charities, actively advocating for legislative reform and wider open access.
The Right to Roam campaign – A network that organizes mass trespasses and protests, inspired by similar movements that led to reform in Scotland.

Activists have staged high-profile public “trespasses,” drawing thousands to land that is legally off-limits, reminiscent of the legendary Kinder Scout trespass of 1932.

The Parliamentary Push

In the wake of these campaigns, a special parliamentary group (the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Outdoor Recreation and Access to Nature) released an influential report. The report, backed by over 750 organizations and experts, calls for legislation to:

Expand open access rights to rivers, woodlands, and private countryside areas.
Permit responsible wild swimming, paddling, cycling, horse riding, and wild camping in more locations.
Create a statutory presumption in favor of public access, regulated by clear guidelines for conservation and land management.

The Debate: Landowners, Conservation, and Responsible Access

Proposed expansion of the right to roam faces opposition, most notably from some private landowners, farming groups, and land management organizations.

Principal Concerns of Landowners and Opponents

Property Rights: Some argue that compulsory public access infringes on legitimate private property rights and threatens land values.
Conservation Risks: Intensive footfall and recreational use could damage sensitive habitats, disturb livestock, or disrupt conservation practices.
Liability and Management: Landowners fear additional burdens and legal liability for injuries or accidents, as well as costs related to maintaining access for visitors.

Supporters respond that Scottish and Scandinavian models demonstrate that broad access can be balanced with stewardship and responsible behavior, especially when paired with clear regulation and education.

Learning from Other Countries: The Scottish Example

Since 2003, Scotland’s Land Reform Act has granted citizens responsible access to most land and inland water. Key features of Scotland’s approach include:

Presumption in Favor of Access: Except in specific restricted areas, the public may walk, cycle, swim, or camp responsibly anywhere.
Emphasis on Responsibility: Access is conditional on respecting privacy, conservation needs, and land management; irresponsible or destructive behavior is explicitly forbidden.
Clear Guidance: Scotland provides official codes and signage to educate the public on acceptable conduct.

Research suggests that incidents of abuse are rare—most people act responsibly when given opportunity and guidance.

Potential Impacts of Expansion

If England’s right to roam law were substantially broadened, likely impacts include:

Improved Public Health: More people would have the opportunity for routine outdoor exercise, which reduces stress, improves cardiovascular health, and lowers health expenditures.
Greater Nature Engagement: Routine access fosters public connection to wildlife and may encourage stewardship behavior.
Boost to Rural Economies: Expanded recreation could support tourism and local business, as walkers, cyclists, and wild swimmers frequent rural shops, inns, and attractions.
Challenges for Conservation: The risk of environmental degradation in over-visited locations remains an important challenge. Strong partnerships, clear access guidelines, and public education will be crucial.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Q: What is the difference between access rights in Scotland and England?

A: Scotland grants responsible access to nearly all land and water under the Land Reform Act 2003. In England, the right to roam applies only to designated types of countryside (mountains, moors, heathlands, downs, some commons and public woodlands), excluding most woodlands, riversides, and agricultural land.

Q: Why are woodlands and watersides excluded?

A: The exclusions result from competing interests during the CROW Act’s passage and ongoing lobbying by groups worried about property rights, conservation, and land management. Only publicly managed woodlands have routinely open access.

Q: Would expansion of the right to roam impact land conservation?

A: It depends. Unregulated, intensive recreational use can damage sensitive habitats, but with effective management and public education, many risks can be mitigated (as seen in Scotland).

Q: Who supports expanding the right to roam law?

A: The campaign is supported by a coalition of charities, outdoor recreation groups (like the Ramblers), health advocates, and many politicians, especially those seeking nature access for urban and disadvantaged populations.

Q: What activities would the expansion allow?

A: In addition to walking, proposed reforms would legalize wild swimming, paddling, wild camping, cycling, and horse riding in many more places, subject to codes of conduct.

Proposed Reforms: What Might Change?

Current recommendations focus on expanding access in an equitable and regulated manner:

Extend CROW Act coverage to include:
- Private and public woodlands
- Riversides and lakes
- Additional grasslands and fields
Permit responsible camping, swimming, riding, and paddling in more areas.
Link access to educational efforts around wildlife protection, personal responsibility, and conservation law.
Integrate new routes with existing footpath and trail networks, improving connectivity and ease of use.

Table: Comparison of Right to Roam—England vs. Scotland

Aspect	England (2025)	Scotland
Legal Basis	CROW Act 2000	Land Reform Act 2003
Public Access Coverage	~8% (limited to special land types)	Most land and inland water
Wild Camping	Rare (permitted by law only on Dartmoor)	Generally allowed if responsible
Excluded Areas	Most farmland, woods, rivers, gardens	Dwelling curtilages and sensitive sites only
Principal Activities Allowed	Walking, some cycling	Walking, cycling, camping, swimming, riding
Management	Designated open access; signage required	General presumption in favor of access

Summary: Toward a Greener, Fairer Future?

England’s right to roam law marked a watershed moment but now stands at a crossroads. Advocates say that only by expanding rights—to woodland, watersides, and more grassland, alongside robust public education and conservation partnerships—can the country deliver on the promise of equitable, healthy access for all. The path forward will require careful negotiation, compromise, and an enduring commitment to both people and the land.

Additional Resources

Wildlife and Countryside Link: expanding the freedom to roam
Ramblers: Freedom to Roam campaign
Right to Roam campaign network

References

Author

medha deb

Medha Deb is an editor with a master's degree in Applied Linguistics from the University of Hyderabad. She believes that her qualification has helped her develop a deep understanding of language and its application in various contexts.

Read full bio of medha deb