Claim 1
Minutes into the interview, he (me) stopped me (Ed) talking, and chastised me for asking him questions, when he had already given me permission to ask. Then he told me to pick up a stone, hold it, and dwell on how lucky I was to be in his presence, before lecturing me on native culture, when he has never visited any native cultures, and I have spent years documenting Inuit, Athabascans and Australian Aboriginals.
My response: Ed and I agreed to conduct an interview. He started asking questions. I interrupted and—since the interview was agreed to be about our regenerative culture—I invited him to begin our conversation in our customary regenerative culture way. This involved holding a heart stone (similar practise to a talking stick) and starting with a round of gratitude. I expressed gratitude to him for travelling all this way to meet me. I never claimed he was “lucky to be in my presence”—that’s pure nonsense. I did explain the origins of our regenerative culture, which is inspired by patterns observed in and shared generously by Indigenous cultures from around the world. You can read in detail about how we hold heart stone conversations here: 
It is interesting that he sees connection and gratitude as a negative, when most people recognise these as the foundations of healthy communication. The disrespect Ed shows here toward Indigenous-inspired practices is in my opinion concerning in the context of his previous work with Indigenous People.
Claim 2
(personal insults gathered together into one claim): He (me) is rhetorical, indifferent, narcissistic (interestingly this gets repeated a lot), and displaying psychological aggression. He has a sociopathic ego. His immorality has tainted Scotland. The world is in a bad state because of people like this man. He is a living example of hypocrisy (misspelling by Ed) and clearly not a happy person. I (Ed) have never met anyone as unpleasant as him before, apart from other Belgians of course. A race more anal than Germans, and more awkward than the Dutch. He is extremely unpleasant to deal with. … has some serious mental health issues unfortunately.
My response: I have many testimonies from people who say the exact opposite. I could share them here, but I think it’s more revealing to examine Ed’s own behaviour—which suggests in my view that these accusations may be projections. You can make up your own mind: I’ve created an entire page to explore that here.
In context of his work with indigenous cultures, it is in my opinion concerning to note his xenophobic views towards other peoples.
Claim 3
He (me) bullies local people out of their homes, so he can take their land. He has taken land on the Isle of Skye illegally.
My response: These are allegations of very serious criminal offenses. A landlord bullying tenants is a serious criminal matter in Scotland. Taking land illegally is too. I doubt anyone could get away with such things in Scotland. That’s simply not how property ownership works in Scotland. We’re not in Palestine. I bought land entirely legally. I did purchase a residential house that was then occupied by people originally from England (not local), and because I intended to live there, I asked them to find another home—which they did. This is entirely ordinary and legal. The legal documents of the sale are publicly available and can be downloaded for £3. Write to me to get a link. 
It is interesting that Ed sees someone buying a home to live in legally as “bullying. I think this is interesting in light of his choice to be ‘homeless’”
Claim 4
This man is an army deserter from Belgium.
My response: I was of draft age at 18 and a Belgian national. I chose to do Civil Service instead of military service, which was a very common and fully legal alternative in Belgium. I found working for 16 months with teenagers who needed support more meaningful than learning how to kill for 12 months. With our painful history of war, Belgium has a strong tradition of preferring peace. If you know the origin of the story of the poppy, you’ll understand. Doing Civil Service is entirely different from being a deserter.
It is odd that Ed would see choosing peace over war as a fault.
Claim 5
He has been thrown out of his country for illegal protesting.
My response: Belgium does not throw citizens out of the country for protesting. I was arrested twice as a peace activist, but released without charges. Even if I had been convicted, I would have been punished in Belgium, not expelled. This claim is pure fiction and very absurd.
It is curious that Ed sees peaceful activism as a crime, when in reality it is a vital part of a democratic society. His assumption that migration needs to be because of nefarious reasons is in my opinion concerning in the context of the xenophobic remarks he made.
Claim 6
He exploits young people to work for him for free.
My response: We welcome volunteers of all ages to stay with us, unpaid, in exchange for food, board, and learning experiences. I’ve done this for over 20 years, and hundreds of people have come through our projects. We previously used Workaway and now use WWOOF, as well as direct applications. All our reviews from previous volunteers are very positive.
Some people contribute financially to join our structured learning programs. All agreements are clearly documented, signed and supported by policies. No one is coerced, and everyone is free to leave at any time. This is not exploitation.
It is revealing that Ed describes fair cultural exchange and moneyless exchange for education as “exploitation.”
Claim 7
He published a damning and defamatory file online about me, loaded with many falsehoods.
My response: I did publish a file about him (now digested into the timeline), and it can indeed be seen as damning. However, it contains his own words – emails he wrote to me – and the events that followed our interview. I published it because vulnerable people Ed approaches should know how he behaves and how he may exploit observed vulnerabilities to get what he wants.
It is striking that Ed calls his own words “falsehoods.”
Claim 8
I (Ed Gold) have done nothing wrong.
My response: Check the timeline and decide for yourself.
It is notable that Ed sees himself as entirely blameless despite multiple pieces of evidence presented on this website suggesting otherwise.
Claim 9
He accuses me of being a Daily Mail reporter.
My response: I quote from his own email (see the timeline—search for “Daily Mail”). Here is his exact wording:
“My BBC News work goes out to millions of people, as does my work when used by The Daily Mail etc.”It is interesting that Ed now distances himself from a claim he proudly made in writing.
Claim 10
I looked at his accommodation in his community and would have never paid to stay as everything was so dirty, smelly and shambolic. This is not a fake review, and 100% true.
My response: When Ed Gold was at our community, our accommodation was not yet open for rental. It was during Covid times, and we were legally required to remain closed. He could not possibly have seen what he describes. The report from the inspection which seems to have been triggered by a complaint made by Ed Gold, confirms that we were not open for business at the time.
It is telling that he presented an inaccurate account that can be easily disproven yet again and doubles down by saying: This is not a fake review, and 100% true. People who are dishonest often say these things along side their lies.
Claim 11
He (me) is growing and distributing marijuana.
My response: Again, this is a serious criminal allegation. Our community is entirely alcohol- and drug-free. A nearby house was raided a few months ago and a cannabis plantation uncovered, but it had nothing to do with me. If I had been involved, I would have been arrested and faced consequences. The police didn’t even question me.
This allegation is pure invention with no basis in truth whatsoever—more like a work of tabloid fiction than reporting.
Claim 12
He practices the occult.
My response: We have permission from local Scottish people to follow Celtic traditions such as Beltane, Samhain, Imbolc, and Lammas. Calling these “occult” is an insult to Celtic culture and another sign of Ed’s disregard for Indigenous traditions. I honour local traditions rather than importing my own.
It is ironic that honouring local tradition is twisted by Ed into something sinister. Again this is in my opinion concerning in the context of his previous xenophobic statements and his previous work with Indigenous Peoples.
Claim 13
Other visitors have been asked to leave.
My response: Yes, that has happened occasionally over the past 20 years. We value our safe space. If issues arise that cannot be resolved, I will ask people to leave. This is not a blemish on my reputation—it is even written into our agreements that participants may be asked to leave if serious breaches occur.
It is interesting that Ed sees this as a negative, when in fact it shows our commitment to protecting the wellbeing of our community. Perhaps Ed doesn’t like finding himself excluded by clear strong boundaries that protect safe spaces.
Claim 14
It is a dump, with no plants or nice walkways.
My response: I will soon post a gallery of photos to show how absolutely absurd this statement is.
It is revealing that Ed would describe flourishing woodland and gardens as a “dump.”
Claim 15
Scruffy camping facilities are underdeveloped and the overall feeling is of being unwelcome and judged as soon as you arrive.
My response: I understand why Ed Gold felt unwelcome. Anyone with so many red flags would indeed be unwelcome in my community. Kind, respectful people are very welcome. Our campsite was closed at the time of his visit and currently only open for events and long term visits.
It is telling that Ed experiences healthy boundaries to red flags as hostility.
This website is a record of my personal experience and opinions regarding Ed Gold, based on direct interactions and supported by documented evidence including written correspondence and public statements.
All content is presented in good faith, with the intention of informing and protecting others — especially individuals or communities who may be vulnerable or targeted.
Where opinions are expressed, they are clearly identified as such. No statement here should be taken as an assertion of undisputed fact unless it is accompanied by supporting evidence.
No private personal data has been shared. Names or details of unrelated third parties have been redacted for confidentiality.