Så här funkar allemansrätten – how right of public access works
En del på ja-till-förbifarts-sidan säger att exploateringen är bra eftersom det gör det möjligt för fler att bo nära naturen. Jag har svårt att få resonemanget att gå ihop av två orsaker.
Om vi bebygger naturen finns den inte längre kvar. Exploateringen innebär alltså inte framtida naturnära boende. Om vi bebygger natur som idag är tillgänglig för alla enligt allemansrätten minskar vi ju i själva verket tillgången för många att vistas naturnära.
Allemansrätten är en av de bästa rättigheterna vi har. Den öppnar för alla att uppleva naturen när som helst alla dagar om året. Både fattig och rik har samma tillgång till naturen. Ingen behöver äga egen mark för att få vistas där. För varje kvadratmeter vi tillåter till exploatering förlorar vi naturtillgänglighet för alla till förmån för några få.
Så länge naturen är orörd tillhör den alla, när vi exploaterar den tillhör den bara några få. Därför kämpar jag för att alla ska ha fortsatt tillgång till Hungaskogen och Tureholmshalvön i stället för några få.
Some people on the yes-to-new-big-road-side says we should exploit the nature so more people can live near nature. I don’t really get how they think. If we build away nature, there is no nature to live near. If we exploit nature fewer people get access to nature.
In Sweden we have the most beautiful right. The right of public access to nature. That means everyone can visit nature whenever they like all year around. The right comes with the responsibility to take good care of nature and not hurt anything in nature. You are allowed to pick berries and mushrooms. This right means you don’t have to own land by yourself to get out in nature. You can be the poorest person in the world and still have access to nature. You can have zillions of money and also have access to nature without owning land.
This is a right worth fighting for. When we exploit nature the right of public access ends. We can no more visit the nature that was. Only the person who buys the land have access to it.
So when I say Save Trosa nature I fight for everyone’s right to visit Trosa nature in future too.
It’s a big difference between theoretical access for billions of people and only a few house owners.
But you’re smart people so you probably already figured this out 🙂
Anna
I visited Sweden last summer and saw for myself how beautiful a country it is. My efforts to communicate that beauty to my readers can be seen in the posts you will find on this link: https://aspi.blog/?s=Sweden
Your fight is a fight for all of us all over the world who love nature and don’t want to see it spoiled.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You are right and your Sweden posts on your blog are lovely. Our right for public access is for everyone, so tourists from all over the world also risk the loss of nature access.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Follow the money, Anna. It’s not for “the greater good”. It’s for lining the pockets of a few. They really think people can’t see through the rhetoric, don’t they? 😏
LikeLiked by 1 person
Many see it, but not enough people yet, but we keep fighting for them to open their eyes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on aspiblog and commented:
Anna’s latest offering about the campaign to save Trosa nature. Having visited Sweden myself it is particularly obvious to me that she is on the right side. My posts about Sweden can be found here: https://aspi.blog/?s=Sweden.
This is Anna’s piece, so to comment please visit the original.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for reblog 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
You are welcome 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
You are right about that, Anna and your drawings say it all.
Leslie
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you very much! Drawings can be powerful sometimes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
They certainly can be.
LikeLiked by 1 person
😃👍
LikeLiked by 1 person
🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for linkback 🙂
LikeLike
As long as we don’t leave mess behind, this should be everybody’s right.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I totally agree 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person