Perhaps it could be defined as “self sufficient camping” or similar where transport must be han powered. Shelter must be of the variety used for hiking.
the Scottish outdoor access code refers to Lightweight Camping. Nobody seems to want to define that, but my assumption when I first saw it drafted was it meant you could carry all your equipment yourself (in your rucksack, on your bike, in your kayak etc). If you are making multiple trips back and forth to unpack the car you are not lightweight camping in my opinion. Whilst many people look on the Scottish approach as desirable it actually creates as issue, by permitting responsible access (including camping) but giving neither land managers nor local authorities any useful power to eject or prosecute those who are acting irresponsibly. That has fed the roadside campers and wild campervans (an oxymoron) – because even if they are beyond the scope of the LRA, anything beyond telling them to move is difficult. No government will want to be seen as the party that curbed walker/cyclist/canoeist/equestrian access rights so is walking a very fine balance if it tries to fix it now. That said road traffic laws etc could probably already be used (possibly with new TROs) to control the worst issues – but as Rishi is showing, nobody wants to be seen to be “anti-motorist” either – even when most people would not be affected and most people want the problem sorted!
