# The dangers of walkers and dogs



## RunToEarth (17 May 2013)

I thought I would share these two articles both relating to walkers and dogs. 

The first one is just tragic, however there seems to be a rising amount of inicdents over recent years. I read somewhere that this university lecturer who sadly lost his life when trapled by cows earlier this week, had previously worked in agriculture. 

It begs the question as to why no one has raised awareness of the dangers of walking through fields of cows with calves at foot, especially with dogs. 

http://www.thisisbath.co.uk/Walkers...tory-18981273-detail/story.html#axzz2TY8y7Sb5

The second article just makes my blood boil for the poor livestock that got mauled, the dog that was shot because its owner couldn't control it, and the farmer who has lost his livestock. Is it that difficult to control your dog when out? 

http://www.fwi.co.uk/articles/13/05...nconsolable39-after-horrific-sheep-attack.htm


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (17 May 2013)

Farming organisations try as hard as they can to publicise it, but often get criticised for trying to 'put people off exercising their rights'. Also if they try to divert the path to a safer route eg field boundary they are blocked at every turn quite often. Yet they aren't trying to stop people walking the routes, just stop them being killed. If nothing else, taking the dog through is the biggest risk factor, much more than just walking through  and personally, like many unsafe practices being restricted in life, I think that dogs should be banned from livestock fields which have stock in them, there's no use having the right to do something if you end up dead but people just seem to have no sense. 

If walking in the countryside please do NOT walk a dog through a cattle field even if you have the right to. If you do, keep it on a lead but if the cattle start to come, let go of the lead as the dog will likely get away but if the dog is with you, you possibly will not. 

And preferably don't walk a dog through a sheep field when they are in lamb or have lambs unless you have the dog on a lead and are able to stay a good long distance from them. Even being alarmed (and not physically attacked) can cause abortion or the ewe to abandon the lambs.


----------



## RunToEarth (17 May 2013)

lachlanandmarcus said:



			Farming organisations try as hard as they can to publicise it, but often get criticised for trying to 'put people off exercising their rights'. Also if they try to divert the path to a safer route eg field boundary they are blocked at every turn quite often. Yet they aren't trying to stop people walking the routes, just stop them being killed. If nothing else, taking the dog through is the biggest risk factor, much more than just walking through  and personally, like many unsafe practices being restricted in life, I think that dogs should be banned from livestock fields which have stock in them, there's no use having the right to do something if you end up dead but people just seem to have no sense. 

If walking in the countryside please do NOT walk a dog through a cattle field even if you have the right to. If you do, keep it on a lead but if the cattle start to come, let go of the lead as the dog will likely get away but if the dog is with you, you possibly will not. 

And preferably don't walk a dog through a sheep field when they are in lamb or have lambs unless you have the dog on a lead and are able to stay a good long distance from them. Even being alarmed (and not physically attacked) can cause abortion or the ewe to abandon the lambs.
		
Click to expand...

I completely agree. I feel desperately sad for the gentleman who has lost his life, but people at some point have to realise that farm animals are really not that friendly, I spent the first 18 years of my life on my parents' dairy farm and can count on one hand the amount of times I've walked through stock fields with our dogs, and then it is on the fence line. 

I really wish people would read up on the dangers of stock and understand that farmers are not trying to stop people walking their footpaths but more trying to stop people aggravating stock and getting squashed. I have seen kids from the village mess about with the cows as if it is a game, it fills me with dread, they are such defensive animals when they have young at foot, and they are so inquisitive when they are heifers running in a herd, I just wish people would realise that.


----------



## zandp (17 May 2013)

The gentlemen who died is local to me and although I don't know him, local papers have previously reported other problems with cows in the exact fields he and his brother were injured in.  He was an experienced walker, I really don't think this was anything he did, but a very unfortunate accident.

I was involved in a cow stampede last year, driving my Renault Clio home came across a queue of cars on the road.  A herd of cows had escaped from their field.  I didn't see what happened exactly as was around a sharp S bend with the cows on the other bit of the bend but suddenly the cows stampeded, back past the car in front of mine.

Unfortunately not all of the herd got past my car, with a lot of cows jumping and landing on it, some on the bonnet, some direct onto the windscreen, some slid along the bonnet and landed on the floor or slammed into the windscreen.  It was the scariest time I've had in a while, especially as I had all windows open - it was August and hot and dry for once.  The cows also looked terrified.  

Car was written off, I was fine but shocked and it really bought home how unpredictable they are.  

It also taught me not to park into the verge to get out of their way but to sit in the middle of the road.


----------



## Luci07 (17 May 2013)

Maybe a mandatory warning when stock is in the field? I don't want to place the legal onus on farmers for people's own stupidity but actually one of our local farmers DOES do that. It is much appreciated when I am hacking as there were certain fields I would give a miss to as take my dog with me but once he started putting up notices meant I knew it was safe to go through. Another does it near my home and again, appreciated as its not always obvious when you go into a field as to what is in there.


----------



## Goldenstar (17 May 2013)

Luci07 said:



			Maybe a mandatory warning when stock is in the field? I don't want to place the legal onus on farmers for people's own stupidity but actually one of our local farmers DOES do that. It is much appreciated when I am hacking as there were certain fields I would give a miss to as take my dog with me but once he started putting up notices meant I knew it was safe to go through. Another does it near my home and again, appreciated as its not always obvious when you go into a field as to what is in there.
		
Click to expand...

I don't see how signs would help walkers can see the stock is there and the farmer can't say the cattle are safe or not safe as they simply do not know , all cattle have the potential to be extremely dangerous .
I survived an attack by cows I was extremely lucky they where bullocks and attacked the horse with no warning chargeing from some distance away. They surrounded the horse who was young as I tried to leave the field in a slow non aggressive fashion , I knew as soon as they started running their behaviour was abnormal and tried to get back to the gate.
After a stand off two of the bullocks barged the horse who was terrified and reared and went over backwards leaving me on the ground I was saved by the fact I had a dressage whip and I just slashed at their eyes until I backed under the barded wire strand in front of the fence .
The farmer then arrived the bullocks  chased the horse for two and a quarter hours until we managed to get him out.
very frightening , the horse was in shock and had to be dripped before being transported home he recovered and spent part of that summer turned out with a pony in a field of cows he was fine and never showed any anxiety about cows.


----------



## MurphysMinder (17 May 2013)

There have been a number of incidents where people (and dogs) have been killed by cattle. There was someone on here whose bulldog was killed if I recall. 
Most doggy people I know are aware of the risk, but obviously it isn't as common knowledge as I thought.
As to dogs killing stock, I have no idea how the message will ever get through to people.  I read just this morning of 2 alpaca being killed by dogs.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (17 May 2013)

Its not always possible to see the cattle when you enter a field. I was walking my dogs on a lead when suddenly a large herd of bullocks appeared and for the first time in my life I was seriously worried. I contemplated letting the dogs off the lead before we all got trampled, but managed to reach the footbridge and ended up having to walk a 6 mile detour to avoid returning through the field.
 Its was a few weeks later that a walker was killed by a bull in the same village and his wife was critically injured. 
 Another field in the village had a bridlepath running through it and again, the cattle weren't visible on entry. Our horses were absolute stars despite the cattle surrounding us and following us to the gate. This wasn't normal inquisitiveness, they were bolshy and intimidating. There was no way of telling  when they would be in the field, so during the summer we couldn't use the route and had to ride along a pretty hazardous road to link up with the network of bridlepaths. 
 I can't recall having problems with livestock in any other area before or since but it's made me very reluctant to go through fields with cattle. A sign indicating when cattle are in fields would be useful.


----------



## Funkyfilly024 (17 May 2013)

Ditto signage indicating stock type on entering public rights of way would be good, there is always some that will ignore it as we have found but I would like to think the majority read it.
We have fenced pieces off on our land before for the saftey of our stock and walkers and people have actually cut through the wire to get back in! These are areas not even a public right of way but some belligerent people seem to think they can go wherever they want. A major point some fail to think of is that in not being a public right of way it may not even be safe for them and their animal, ie. agri chemicals, machinery at work, wells, barbed wire, aside from just the livestock risk. Thinking in selfish terms, letting your dog loose if you can't garuntee it will comeback could lead to big bills for you as well as the farmer!


----------



## Goldenstar (17 May 2013)

But what point would the sign be a farmer can't do anything that "blocks " a ROW and how on earth would it work for liability you but up a sign saying caution  cows and calves someone uses the ROW gets hurt you have admitted liability.surely it would fall foul of thesame law that acts against beware of the dog signs.


----------



## PolarSkye (17 May 2013)

RunToEarth said:



			I completely agree. I feel desperately sad for the gentleman who has lost his life, but people at some point have to realise that farm animals are really not that friendly, I spent the first 18 years of my life on my parents' dairy farm and can count on one hand the amount of times I've walked through stock fields with our dogs, and then it is on the fence line. 

I really wish people would read up on the dangers of stock and understand that farmers are not trying to stop people walking their footpaths but more trying to stop people aggravating stock and getting squashed. I have seen kids from the village mess about with the cows as if it is a game, it fills me with dread, they are such defensive animals when they have young at foot, and they are so inquisitive when they are heifers running in a herd, I just wish people would realise that.
		
Click to expand...

This, this, this and this again.  Your average cow is far less socialized than your average domestic horse . . . and I wouldn't walk my dog through a field of horses I didn't know well (and then she'd be on the lead and we'd be hugging the fence lines).

I, too, spent my formative years working with dairy and beef cows . . . not only are they not "tame" but they are a valuable asset for the former and,, therefore, shouldn't be messed with.  

P


----------



## Jake10 (17 May 2013)

Goldenstar said:



			But what point would the sign be a farmer can't do anything that "blocks " a ROW and how on earth would it work for liability you but up a sign saying caution  cows and calves someone uses the ROW gets hurt you have admitted liability.surely it would fall foul of thesame law that acts against beware of the dog signs.
		
Click to expand...

Why not a simple sign saying 'cows/livestock in field' no need to add 'caution' to it. 

Those who perhaps are afraid of cows, have dogs, young children ect who might choose to avoid that particular field can do so before they had to enter. Those who don't mind will still use the path


----------



## prosefullstop (17 May 2013)

But I think the average person honestly thinks that cows are docile creatures. Perhaps the recent spate of attacks has changed this notion somewhat, but I don't think a precautionary sign is a bad thing, especially when calves are present in the field.


----------



## lindsayH (17 May 2013)

I feel ever so sorry for farmers, especially those who lose stock to dogs. It must be heart breaking to see your stock savaged or to have to shoot a dog. However, SO many times I have turned a corner in a field and been suddenly confronted by a herd of cattle or ewes with young lambs. Thankfully my collie is well trained but some warning would be very much appreciated. I sometimes go for very long walks that I've never been on before, obviously you can't tell from the map what's in the field and if you don't know the area well it can be hard to find a way round. Not to mention that some land owners jump down your throat if you stray so much as an inch off the path, even if you did it to avoid alarming their livestock! I would never blame the farmer if I was attacked by cows though, I could after all just stick to walking in the local park.


----------



## TheresaW (17 May 2013)

MurphysMinder said:



			There have been a number of incidents where people (and dogs) have been killed by cattle. There was someone on here whose bulldog was killed if I recall. 
Most doggy people I know are aware of the risk, but obviously it isn't as common knowledge as I thought.
As to dogs killing stock, I have no idea how the message will ever get through to people.  I read just this morning of 2 alpaca being killed by dogs.
		
Click to expand...

I remember the incident on here a few years ago, her husband was quite badly injured as well I believe.

This is a hard one.  Until I read on here about the incident that was mentioned above, I probably wouldn't have thought twice about walking along a PROW that had cows in it.  Why would the PROW be through a field that was "possibly" dangerous to enter? You wouldn't have a PROW through a field inhabited by lions, or bears, if you see what I mean?  Having read that, I would think twice.  I hack around Epping forest, in the summer, we have free roaming British long horn cows.  These are very docile, but we can walk around a corner, and they are there in front of us.  This again would make me think it would be perfectly ok to walk along a right of way through a field full of cows.

The dog issue is a whole other issue.  We were hacking in the forest last weekend when a little dog came towards us.  It wasn't aggressive as such, but stood and barked at us, ran around us.  Found his owners a good 5 minutes further along the track.  They were unable to catch the dog, who by then was coming in and snapping at heels.  3 of the horses were as good as gold.  1 is nervous around dogs because of previous experiences, but luckily stood still.  It took a good 5 minutes for the owners to catch the dog, and the whole time we had to stand, as every time we moved, dog would come in running.  To me, that dog should not have been off the lead.


----------



## bonny (17 May 2013)

I don't know if it was a factor in the sad death of the man above, and injury to his elderly brother but I think there needs to be more publicity about the fact that on the whole the cows are chasing dogs not people and that if it happens to you, let go of the dog.....


----------



## SusieT (17 May 2013)

how does joe public know about cows? most of them don't? surely a note on the gate of footpaths with stock out explaining the dangers would be sensible. You and I may know cows ahte dogs, but plenty of people don't have a clue-and that's not their fault. 
And it's a bit harsh to blame the man who died when you don't know what happened, we all know about the cows that have an attitude, 'that wild heifer' who if a non savvy person was in the wrong place wrong time could do damage!


----------



## Booboos (17 May 2013)

I had a very narrow escape in a field with bullocks. The field had the only bridleway in the area and I was walking it with OH and three dogs (on leads) to check it out before riding it. When we entered the field we did see what appeared to be cows at the very very far end of a very large field and we stayed at the completely opposite end of the field near the fence. Half way through the bullocks all run up to us and we had a really, really tough time making it back to the gate to get out. We waved sticks at them and they weren't in the least afraid. We could not let go of the dogs as the field was fenced with pigs netting and they would have been trapped.

I don't see why this was our fault. We were using a PROW, in a responsible and safe manner. The farmer was effectively obstructing the right of way by having bullocks in there. He continued to do similar things in that field and in the 4 years I lived in the area I didn't meet a single rider who had been able to use the bridleway.


----------



## bonny (17 May 2013)

Maybe that would work if a lot of farmers put up signs saying if chased let your dog go. I've only ever seen 1 sign about it, in the lake district which actually said, do not walk dogs on a lead.....which is a bit contrary to the usual advice !


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (17 May 2013)

Booboos said:



			I had a very narrow escape in a field with bullocks. The field had the only bridleway in the area and I was walking it with OH and three dogs (on leads) to check it out before riding it. When we entered the field we did see what appeared to be cows at the very very far end of a very large field and we stayed at the completely opposite end of the field near the fence. Half way through the bullocks all run up to us and we had a really, really tough time making it back to the gate to get out. We waved sticks at them and they weren't in the least afraid. We could not let go of the dogs as the field was fenced with pigs netting and they would have been trapped.

I don't see why this was our fault. We were using a PROW, in a responsible and safe manner. The farmer was effectively obstructing the right of way by having bullocks in there. He continued to do similar things in that field and in the 4 years I lived in the area I didn't meet a single rider who had been able to use the bridleway.
		
Click to expand...

You were using the ROW, he was using his field for its normal purpose ie livestock farming!....

I ride through fields of bullocks or cows up here every time I ride out (have to or wouldnt get to hack) Not nearly as dangerous as walking a dog through. Farmers won't generally argue with someone diverting to skirt the cattle herd as they don't want to pick up a body, but they would think someone daft and reckless to take a dog through.

The horse riders choosing not to use the bridleways would in fact have probably been  ok on horseback so long as they were assertive and carried a stick and prepared to shout.  it's the dog that is the dangerous aspect with cattle the majority of the time and lead to most of the fatalities, with horses the most you generally get is curiosity. 

I would NEVER take my dog through a cattle field, I can still exercise my right to walk through the field but while one might have the right in theory to take a dog through, it's a hollow right once you're dead. And I recognise that farmers use their fields for livestock as that's their purpose and why they're not housing estates.


----------



## Spook (17 May 2013)

If in doubt do not go!!...... use a tad of common sense! The farmer has as much right to "farm" his ground as you have to "garden" yours. 

You are very fortunate to have access to any countryside!!!!!! imagine the alternative?


----------



## bonny (17 May 2013)

Spook said:



			If in doubt do not go!!...... use a tad of common sense! The farmer has as much right to "farm" his ground as you have to "garden" yours. 

You are very fortunate to have access to any countryside!!!!!! imagine the alternative?
		
Click to expand...

That's very harsh, the man who died and his injured brother were keen walkers, I don't know exactly what happened, maybe they had walked that route many times, maybe it was the first time but I do know they had 2 dogs with them, hence my saying there should be more publicity about letting the dogs go if you are chased.


----------



## Spook (18 May 2013)

As they say "You pays your money and you takes your chance" except you don't PAY..... except with possibly your life, do take care, you are so very lucky to have the countryside available at all..


----------



## RunToEarth (18 May 2013)

SusieT said:



			how does joe public know about cows? most of them don't? surely a note on the gate of footpaths with stock out explaining the dangers would be sensible. You and I may know cows ahte dogs, but plenty of people don't have a clue-and that's not their fault. 
And it's a bit harsh to blame the man who died when you don't know what happened, we all know about the cows that have an attitude, 'that wild heifer' who if a non savvy person was in the wrong place wrong time could do damage!
		
Click to expand...

ignorance is not really an excuse IMO. If you go to a country who has a completely different culture to yours, you educate yourself on it so as not to get locked up. If you go walking in the countryside you should have educated yourself on how herd animals behave and the dangers of walking with them, they are dangerous enough when you know them and work along side them everyday, people need to respect them. 

Putting signs in each field is not really workable when your stock change fields regularly, and to be fair if people understood how these animals function they would know to let go of thaor dog as soon as they saw them. The only thing you cannot put in a field with a PROW is a dairy bull, the farmer isn't breaking any law by putting stock out and not putting a sign on the gate. 

I do think if people applied more common sense to things there would be fewer accidents, and that is not aimed at the story above exclusively. Two winters ago my father found someone rambling over a frozen slurry pit, he was stood above 12ft of liquid cow muck and just didn't see the danger, I may be ignorant but when I see a sign saying "danger slurry store" my immediate reaction is retreat, not to trespass along it. 

Whilst people have a right to PROWs, they do have seasonal hazards which i wish people would take heed of, walking the direct line of a footpath even though their is a combine in the way isn't sensible or safe. I know some people will think Ive made these up but there are people like that and we come across them more often than you would believe.


----------



## Booboos (18 May 2013)

We passed the farmer going into her home as we were openning the gate to the field with the bullocks. To be polite we said good morning and asked if we were on the right track for the bridleway and she said yes. She said nothing about the bullocks. IMO had we been hurt she would have been morally responsible for putting the animals in a bridleway and for not warning us about it.

It is pointless to have a right of way that cannot be used (this particular field had three collapsed gates leading to it, one of which was so heavy I couldn't move it on my own on foot - I think this farmer knew exactly what she was doing with the gates and the bullocks in the bridleway).


----------



## MerrySherryRider (18 May 2013)

Goldenstar said:



			But what point would the sign be a farmer can't do anything that "blocks " a ROW and how on earth would it work for liability you but up a sign saying caution  cows and calves someone uses the ROW gets hurt you have admitted liability.surely it would fall foul of thesame law that acts against beware of the dog signs.
		
Click to expand...

This farmer was left with a £1 million bill after a walker was left brain damaged by a cow attack; http://www.fwi.co.uk/articles/21/07/2009/116693/avoid-cow-attacks-and-their-costs.htm#.UZdTDklwbIU

The advice is that putting signs up indicating that livestock are in the field is good, but warning signs about them being dangerous is potentially admitting liability.
 Under the Countryside Rights Of Way Act, its illegal to put people off walking along ROW, and if a particular herd or breed is known to be aggressive, then the farmer could be liable if he doesn't take reasonable steps to protect people using the route.
 Its a two way responsibility, the public and farmers have a duty to be informed and respectful of each others right to both earn a living and walk along footpaths safely.

Have to disagree with the poster who said its safer to ride a horse than walk. 
 My horses are very used to cattle and but some herds are very bolshy and not only won't move away when you move towards them but try to push horse and rider. With the particular incident I mentioned before, waving a whip at them didn't have any effect at all. They were completely fearless. 
 Lucky for the farmer, our horses were so good with a herd stuck up their backsides, that we managed to safely open the gate onto a main road, get the horses out and prevent his livestock following us onto the road.


----------



## hayley.t (18 May 2013)

Booboos said:



			We passed the farmer going into her home as we were openning the gate to the field with the bullocks. To be polite we said good morning and asked if we were on the right track for the bridleway and she said yes. She said nothing about the bullocks. IMO had we been hurt she would have been morally responsible for putting the animals in a bridleway and for not warning us about it.

It is pointless to have a right of way that cannot be used (this particular field had three collapsed gates leading to it, one of which was so heavy I couldn't move it on my own on foot - I think this farmer knew exactly what she was doing with the gates and the bullocks in the bridleway).
		
Click to expand...

I agree that it is annoying when gates are not kept in good order or if the way is blocked on purpose (rocks put behind gates so that they are difficult to open etc). I live on a dairy farm and we do have one footpath that is part of a popular route but no bridleways, however if a group of walkers said hello to me it wouldn't occur to me to warm them about cows being in fields.

Edited to say- perhaps the farmer wasn't trying to cause you problems but it just didn't occur to her to mention it, on a farm you should really expect there to be livestock about. Also she perhaps didn't know that they would cause a problem, they are unpredictable animals.


----------



## Pale Rider (18 May 2013)

The common factor in most of these trampling incidents is dogs. Perhaps if there was more education for people, about walking dogs through fields of cattle and how to react if the cattle do decide to attack the dog, things might be a little safer for folk.


----------



## Pale Rider (18 May 2013)

I understand that people have a right to use bridleways and paths, but does that include the right to take a dog with them?
If it's widely known cattle will attack people with dogs are the dog walkers putting themselves at risk and increasing their own liability?


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (18 May 2013)

Pale Rider said:



			I understand that people have a right to use bridleways and paths, but does that include the right to take a dog with them?
If it's widely known cattle will attack people with dogs are the dog walkers putting themselves at risk and increasing their own liability?
		
Click to expand...

They do, but only because footpaths were often working routes in the past, for farm workers or even taking a coffin etc, and they may have had working dogs with them, not because there is a specific right to have them with you, it is sort of implied. 

I do think that a system where dogs are not allowed through livestock fields when stock are in them and farmers can  put up standard signs at those times (and remove them as they remove the stock)  would save the majority of the lost lives. It would have to work a little differently here in Scotland as people could come from different access points, rather than along specific footpaths, but here they can already divert to the next field without risk so it would be incumbent on them to look for cattle unless entering via the main track entrance/exit points where the signs were displayed.

In the meantime, I do think that taking a dog through cattle fields does constitute such an increase in the risk that it would or should constitute an element of contributory negligence in the event of an accident (for all I know it already does)


----------



## siennamum (18 May 2013)

When I was a child i was surrounded by herds a couple of times, and although they were just being curious, I felt really threatened and vulnerable. Consequently I've never happily entered a field with cattle in it of any sort and always stick to the edge.

I agree with the earlier poster who said they simply aren't pets, they are pretty dangerous,  a farmer was killed by his herd recently. I think a public information campaign is long overdue, people need to know at the very least, if there are animals in the field, to stick to the boundaries.


----------



## pip6 (18 May 2013)

IMHO the root of the problem with many is lack of contact with farm animals beyond a pretty kiddie picture book or tv screen, so their understanding of how to behave around animals & ability to read the animals body language is sadly lacking. I also think this is the problem with car drivers passing horses. Again their lack of understanding & predicting the animals response to their actions causes the dangerous situation.

There are educational videos shown to kids in schools (primary age would be most responsive), maybe one on walkingon PROW with dogs would be useful. Then when they are out as a family, or later when they have kids & go walking they may recall what was said. No easy answer, dreadful when people get hurt/killed, but the countryside is a dangerous working place not a playground.


----------



## bonny (18 May 2013)

pip6 said:



			IMHO the root of the problem with many is lack of contact with farm animals beyond a pretty kiddie picture book or tv screen, so their understanding of how to behave around animals & ability to read the animals body language is sadly lacking. I also think this is the problem with car drivers passing horses. Again their lack of understanding & predicting the animals response to their actions causes the dangerous situation.

There are educational videos shown to kids in schools (primary age would be most responsive), maybe one on walkingon PROW with dogs would be useful. Then when they are out as a family, or later when they have kids & go walking they may recall what was said. No easy answer, dreadful when people get hurt/killed, but the countryside is a dangerous working place not a playground.
		
Click to expand...

You dont' think that sounds a bit patronising ? I don't think people are stupid and I also don't think the countryside is a dangerous working place....everybody surely is entitled to go for a walk ?


----------



## pip6 (18 May 2013)

You've got a very restricted spectrum of people on this forum who do have an interest in the countryside. Most of the population live in surburban areas with no exposure to stock. If it was patronising, then there wouls be fewer incidents. I'm not being rude at all, just saying it wold be helpful for them to have more information before they went for their walk. Yes I do believe the countryside is dangerous. If you are aware & appreciative of potential problems they can be mitigated, if you aren't, you're in a dodgy situation. I'm not trying to restrict anyones access at all, just trying to suggest ways they can stay safe. I used to be on a farm that raised bullocks, with a PROW (footpath) through the fields. The number of times I had to 'rescue' trapped people in the fields was unreal. I fail to see how informing kids in a safety film in schools is more patronising than putting a sign stating the obvious on a fence/gate.


----------



## Cinnamontoast (18 May 2013)

Signs would help. A massive field we always used to use suddenly had sheep put in it after being empty for years so we knew to leash the dogs. We didn't see the sheep til nearly the end of the field. 

I've heard of quite a few cow herds killing people, particularly when they have calves at foot. I wouldn't dream of walking through them but I'm not sure how many people are aware of how protective cows can be and they probably wouldn't think twice about meandering through a field looking at the pretty calves.


----------



## RunToEarth (18 May 2013)

Booboos said:



			We passed the farmer going into her home as we were openning the gate to the field with the bullocks. To be polite we said good morning and asked if we were on the right track for the bridleway and she said yes. She said nothing about the bullocks. IMO had we been hurt she would have been morally responsible for putting the animals in a bridleway and for not warning us about it.

It is pointless to have a right of way that cannot be used (this particular field had three collapsed gates leading to it, one of which was so heavy I couldn't move it on my own on foot - I think this farmer knew exactly what she was doing with the gates and the bullocks in the bridleway).
		
Click to expand...

in the same way that having a field you cannot put stock in for the sporadic Walker wandering through stock with a dog. 

My parents have a 350dairy herd, and 200youngs/drys, they have 900 acres and the nearest field without a PROW is over a mile away, the option would either be to keep inside or to trek them a mile away morning and night, all for the sake of walkers who haven't read their countryside code and are mostly ignorant to how dangerous herd animals are. 

The only things you can't keep in fields with PROWs in are dairy bulls, farmers are not obliged to tell the general public exactly what is in each field because that yould be a legal minefield. Why should we be restricted to the use of our fields, which we legally own, because someone wants to walk their dog through it, is that fair in any way? 

Its about time people took responsibility for their own actions instead of searching for who is liable. 

And to the poster who suggested farms are not dangerous - what? They are the cause of most industrial deaths in this country, machinery, slurry pits, stock and chemicals make they incredibly dangerous, made more so by Joe public wandering through fields with several large bits of machinery moving about at harvest time. Madness, I've lived on farms my whole life and I would never be on my feet in a field with machinery in unless I had called everyone and they knew I were there.


----------



## SusieT (18 May 2013)

So RTE-how does the family who decide to stop and walk along a designated footpath know that cows are dangerous so they should have read their countryside code before going? Or do they assume that since the cows are in the field with a footpath that they are safe?  Or having seen farmers driving stock think it's just a case of waving your arms if they get too close?
The point is that while You know all these things having been brought up on the farm, some people don't know what slurry is so would have no idea that it was just stored in the ground. So a sign on a gate may be the least you can do to prevent a death. 

Ignorance is an excuse because the footpath is a right of way and there is no education out there for people who are town reared (And who are not automatically a stupid breed of people despite what you may think just because they don't think like you). I don't see a countryside code advertised in the countryside so how do you know what it is if you spend your life in the town? 

And again-plenty of farms have the odd 'screw loose' cow knocking about that the farmer is careful about, and they have a responsibility to be aware that there will be people along the footpath.


----------



## Dizzydancer (18 May 2013)

Im in the midlands a lot of fields round here do have signs up saying if cows come close then let go of dog. Signs like this may help everywhere at least to educate. 
A farmer local to us  lost his dog in the week after his highland cow stabbed it. These cows were used to it too but still attack. 
I admit i walk through fields with cows and sometimes have dog with me i avoid if calves at foot, or go the opposite side of field. But it is the only stock i sometimes feel intimidated by when walking- especially young bullocks.


----------



## Alec Swan (18 May 2013)

Dizzydancer said:



			Im in the midlands a lot of fields round here do have signs up saying if cows come close then let go of dog. Signs like this may help everywhere at least to educate. 
A farmer local to us  lost his dog in the week after his highland cow stabbed it. These cows were used to it too but still attack. 
I admit i walk through fields with cows and sometimes have dog with me i avoid if calves at foot, or go the opposite side of field. But it is the only stock i sometimes feel intimidated by when walking- especially young bullocks.
		
Click to expand...

The answer is simple;  *DO NOT ENTER FIELDS WHICH HAVE CATTLE IN,  WHEN YOU HAVE A DOG WITH YOU*.  Ignore that,  and you are a tragedy waiting to happen.

Alec.


----------



## Pebble101 (18 May 2013)

We have cows in the field opposite - I will not go in there on my own let alone with a dog.  However there are some fields around here that are shaped so it is impossible to see if there are any livestock in them until you are more or less in the middle and completely exposed.  So a simple sign just saying 'Livestock in field' would be useful - as long as it was removed when they weren't.

And maybe if the farmer has enough land and didn't want people using that particular path they could have a 'permissive' route.  I understand they wouldn't want to allow a right of way to be established but there must surely be a solution in a lot of cases.


----------



## Dizzydancer (18 May 2013)

Yes its true i shouldn't but its not always clear whether there are cows in field until your already in due to shape of field- i do stand on stiles and look. The fields i walk dog in have dairy cows and i have walked the same fields for years. 99% of time there is electric fence separating them from us but on the odd occasion the fence is down but its too late once in to turn. 
To clarify i don't take dog in with bulloaks. 
There are occasions you can't avoid it- if i go into the peaks and walk for 3 maybe 4 hours- i can be nearly back and have to cross a field with cattle, if i can't find any other route due to being impossible to get through hedges etc i will walk through- its my choice to do so but its not always simple to avoid them at every opportunity. I don't expect farmers to not use the fields with paths and it does take common sense from users.
I have actually been sent back by a farmer when walking a different route to avoid his cattle but he didn't want to know and just told us off for tresspassing- we didn't have dog at this point either.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (18 May 2013)

While it isn't always practical, some farmers can and do fence off the footpaths, or use electric fencing during the months when fields are in use. 
 Some farmers simply do not want walkers or riders using ROW's and make life as difficult as possible for people to access routes, while others are fantastic, not only using temporary fencing, but ensure bridlepaths have rider-friendly gates too. 
 Some are good, some bad, but those that do enable people to safely access paths are much appreciated.

I do not think it is acceptable to expect walkers with dogs under control not to use POW's. Neither did the judge who ordered a farmer to compensate and pay costs to an injured dog walker of nearly £1million.

Incidently, the man who was killed in the next village to me, was an experienced hiker. As was his critically injured wife. They did not have a dog with them. The farmer was beyond  devastated and had the bull shot that day.


----------



## hnmisty (18 May 2013)

bonny said:



			I don't know if it was a factor in the sad death of the man above, and injury to his elderly brother but I think there needs to be more publicity about the fact that on the whole the cows are chasing dogs not people and that if it happens to you, let go of the dog.....
		
Click to expand...

Definitely this. People have it drummed (or some do at least...) into them to keep hold of their dogs in fields of sheep or their dog could be shot, so they presume if a herd of cows stampede towards them that the same rule applies. I have told several people to let go of their dog if this happens, none of them knew to do so before. A dog will usually easily fit through a gap in the hedge.

We've had a few of our lambs killed by people's dogs (our flock is my dad's "hobby", we have about 15 ewes and lamb every year). One of the fields we keep them in is bordered by a nature reserve. People happily let their dogs off the lead because they aren't walking on the village rec ground, and don't think  twice about where their beloved pooch is. There's the woman who says "oh, he's just off chasing the deer", rather like I might say "oh, I'm just off for an ice cream" on a really hot day. Yes, because the deer are there purely for your dog's entertainment, and your dog can tell the difference between a deer and a sheep...


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (19 May 2013)

If your going to live rural then you should follow the bleeding rules. They arent there to stop you enjoying the country side but to keep you from getting hurt.

Walking a dog on a lead or even loose through a field with livestock is just asking for it IMO regardless of ROW (which in Scotland means jot, SOAC states you can pretty much go where you like ) I mean really putting your life at risk for the sake of walking your dog?? Am I missing something having lived on a working farm from the cradle until my teen years. We had some close calls and we knew the rules and the way to handle these animals.

Its all great to want to live rural but I think its a downright shame that these incidents occur for the sake of either ignorance or pigheadedness. I dont think people realise how the farmer feels when his animals hurt someone regardless of reasons


----------



## Booboos (19 May 2013)

RunToEarth said:



			Why should we be restricted to the use of our fields, which we legally own, because someone wants to walk their dog through it, is that fair in any way?
		
Click to expand...

But it isn't someone who just wants to walk their dog, it's someone who has a right to walk their dog through the fields because there is a PROW. Effectively you are saying that you are happy to put people's lives at risk because you can't be bothered to walk a mile. If walking (presumably taking a quad, tractor or 4x4 is also a possibility?) a mile to tend your stock maybe farming is not for you? Or perhaps finding a farm with less walking involved?


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (19 May 2013)

Booboos said:



			But it isn't someone who just wants to walk their dog, it's someone who has a right to walk their dog through the fields because there is a PROW. Effectively you are saying that you are happy to put people's lives at risk because you can't be bothered to walk a mile. If walking (presumably taking a quad, tractor or 4x4 is also a possibility?) a mile to tend your stock maybe farming is not for you? Or perhaps finding a farm with less walking involved?
		
Click to expand...

But there are lots of 'rights' in life we have but any safety assessment would determine that aren't safe enough to risk. for example we have the right to walk along the public highway even when its dark and there are no pavements, but most people choose not to do it cos its simply too dangerous!

 Its almost like this 'right' is determined to be exercised in defiance of common sense. Theres no suggestion of banning cars from all roads where there are no pavements or streetlights even tho they are (rarely) killing these pedestrians, just as farmers are not banned from using their land in a normal legal way which presents a tiny risk to those without dogs and a small but larger one to those who insist on taking an animal into the field which they know the cattle will see as a threat.

Cattle in enclosed fields with defined rights of way are rarely out all year, normally being housed in the poorer weather months
. so it isn't like there aren't months and months when it would be completely safe to walk a dog through. In addition you can exercise the core right to walk through - its the dog you choose to take with you that makes it more than neglible risk statistically. 

 Im not sure why it is less reasonable for you to walk a bit further to a route that doesn't involve cattle in the few months they are out than it is to require the farmer not to use their own land for farming??


----------



## Luci07 (19 May 2013)

Goldenstar said:



			I don't see how signs would help walkers can see the stock is there and the farmer can't say the cattle are safe or not safe as they simply do not know , all cattle have the potential to be extremely dangerous .
I survived an attack by cows I was extremely lucky they where bullocks and attacked the horse with no warning chargeing from some distance away. They surrounded the horse who was young as I tried to leave the field in a slow non aggressive fashion , I knew as soon as they started running their behaviour was abnormal and tried to get back to the gate.
After a stand off two of the bullocks barged the horse who was terrified and reared and went over backwards leaving me on the ground I was saved by the fact I had a dressage whip and I just slashed at their eyes until I backed under the barded wire strand in front of the fence .
The farmer then arrived the bullocks  chased the horse for two and a quarter hours until we managed to get him out.
very frightening , the horse was in shock and had to be dripped before being transported home he recovered and spent part of that summer turned out with a pony in a field of cows he was fine and never showed any anxiety about cows.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe my post wasn't clear. There are times when you cannot see over the brow of a hill and don't know is stock is in there but a sign at the gates saying warning, cows with calves, or lambing sheep, etc is helpful. Neither would I expect the farmer to personally vouch for each animals behaviour! However, if there was stock in the fields, a simple sign at the beginning is not a bad idea and works around us. In terms of educating the public, someone earlier made an excellent point that there are a lot of people who do not know about the basic principles and rules of the countryside. It is not saying they are stupid, just have not been taught. 

Think how people react around your pets when they are unfamiliar with animals. Think how a lot of "country" people would react at the idea of driving around London. A lot of my friends think I am nuts that its no big deal to me, but as someone who has lived both in London and the country, it's no issue to me. Doesn't mean I am more intelligent, simply that I have been more exposed to this.


----------



## Alec Swan (19 May 2013)

Booboos said:



			But it isn't someone who just wants to walk their dog, it's someone who has a right to walk their dog through the fields because there is a PROW. Effectively you are saying that you are happy to put people's lives at risk because you can't be bothered to walk a mile. If walking (presumably taking a quad, tractor or 4x4 is also a possibility?) a mile to tend your stock maybe farming is not for you? Or perhaps finding a farm with less walking involved?
		
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure that the mile of travelling is here or there.  It will be the availability of grass,  and the previously planned for calving time,  hoping and praying that it will coincide with sunshine and showers,  and the vital grass!

The point that you've raised regarding the "Rights" of others to use a PROW,  is valid,  and it meets,  head on,  the "Rights" of a livestock keeper to use his grass when it's available.  There needs to be a clear and unambiguous ruling,  which gives precedence to one party or the other,  when fields are in use,  or aren't,  for cattle.  Quite obviously there's little point in expecting dog walkers to use their common sense and keep out,  and as you seem to suggest,  quite rightly,  why should they?



lachlanandmarcus said:



			But there are lots of 'rights' in life we have but any safety assessment would determine that aren't safe enough to risk. for example we have the right to walk along the public highway even when its dark and there are no pavements, but most people choose not to do it cos its simply too dangerous!

 Its almost like this 'right' is determined to be exercised in defiance of common sense. .......
		
Click to expand...

There's far to much reason and common sense in your post for those who are determined to exercise their legal right,  and as above,  legal rights are just that.  

I'm not generally one for "Rules",  but in consultation with the farming community and those who would exercise their rights,  there needs to be a firm and unequivocal ruling which gives a president to one side or the other. 

I had a former employer who,  on a day's shooting,  on his own land,  was left behind with his dog to look for a dead bird.  There were cattle (presumably steers) in the field,  and no one gave it a second thought.  When he didn't turn up at the Gun's Bus,  they went looking for him.  No one knew how it happened,  but he died the next day.

Alec.


----------



## Jools2345 (19 May 2013)

there never seems to be any meet in the middle on this one.

i spent 8 yrs on beef and arable farms (still have contact with farmers both good and not so good) and i have to say i was and am still shocked by the fact that heifers that are very agressive/reactive/flighty are still kept and bred from. the farmers are fully aware that the calves from these cows are likely to be of similar temperament. also the fact that these same cows/heifers will be turned out where there are PROW. 

personally i make sure my dogs are stock proof and will not put them on lead with cattle but always with sheep, twice i have been approached by aggressive (?) cattle and both times my dogs have tried to escape the field and the cattle have followed them the dogs got out of the filed then followed me from fromt he other side of the fence-neither time have there been calves in the field but steers.

i have been approached by cross farmers that have seen my dogs off lead (but close to me) in fields with cattle but when i explain why with my dogs sitting/lying with me under control they have all been more understanding and happy with it.

i avoid walking through fields with cattle i dont know in as i dont feel comfortable with it. often the cattle are not aggressive but you get one inquisitive animal that becomes spooked and it sets them all off, often the ones at the front get pushed forward creating an accident-i have seen cows trample cows when one at the front goes down.

i agree with the previous poster that its not always possible to avoid a field with cows, some times i walk an 18 mile round trip in an area i do not know and if at a latter point i come across a field of cows i am not going to turn round and go back.

i reckon a sign on gates would be a good idea and i for one would avoid the field when possible


----------



## RunToEarth (19 May 2013)

Booboos said:



			But it isn't someone who just wants to walk their dog, it's someone who has a right to walk their dog through the fields because there is a PROW. Effectively you are saying that you are happy to put people's lives at risk because you can't be bothered to walk a mile. If walking (presumably taking a quad, tractor or 4x4 is also a possibility?) a mile to tend your stock maybe farming is not for you? Or perhaps finding a farm with less walking involved?
		
Click to expand...

oh for god sake. I have the right to ride my horse down the a15, it doesn't mean im stupid enough to do it. 

By your comment im guessing you dont understand a great deal about farming, but no, walking 350 dairy cows two miles a day is not reasonable to ensure the person who doesn't understand about stock isn't squashed, because if they bothered to even look on the internet about the recent accidents involving walkers or dogs, they would have a better idea. 

I think people need to engage common sense more often.


----------



## Nudibranch (19 May 2013)

Unfortunately it seems rather a polarised argument here when it isn't. I am not a "proper" farmer but do graze a field which has a bridleway running through it. In fact technically I think it's a BOAT. So it annoys me that some weekends a procession of 4x4's with poor map skills will drive through and then come back after about two minutes and sometimes leave the gate ajar. It annoys me that a local rider was quite forthright and verging on rude when claiming she could no longer ride through because I have two horses grazing in there. She demanded to know what times I turned them out - and wasn't pleased when I said they are out 24/7. It annoys me that sometimes we have to tell walkers to put their dogs on leads because there are sheep with lambs grazing, and which they should plainly be able to see for themselves.

However it also annoys me that with two exceptions, every bridleway gate round here is broken, some to the extend they are unusable. I have posted about this before and will be contacting the council once I've completed all my photos. It annoys me that I avoid a route because a beef herd with calves and a bull are grazing, only to find they have been moved. They could not be seen from the first section of field and I found myself being chased by three irritable cows (the bull didn't give a stuff) who were confident enough to ignore shouting and whip waving. Fortunately I was riding the older mare who is sensible, but god forbid it had been the youngster. A sign on the gate would have been useful.

It falls to both sides to take responsibility. Walkers and riders need to use common sense and inform themselves before using right of ways, but equally farmers do not have god-given right and power over everyone and everything to the exclusion of basic safety. It wouldn't hurt to mend a broken gate or sign a field which is used by suckling cattle, even if it's only occasionally.


----------



## Booboos (19 May 2013)

lachlanandmarcus said:



			But there are lots of 'rights' in life we have but any safety assessment would determine that aren't safe enough to risk. for example we have the right to walk along the public highway even when its dark and there are no pavements, but most people choose not to do it cos its simply too dangerous!




			It's not a 'right', it's a right. 

Erh people do walk along public highways in the dark which is why cars should look out for them! Roads are not just for cars and if as a driver you mow a pedestrian down you can't claim it was his fault for being there!
		
Click to expand...



Click to expand...


----------



## Booboos (19 May 2013)

RunToEarth said:



			oh for god sake. I have the right to ride my horse down the a15, it doesn't mean im stupid enough to do it. 

By your comment im guessing you dont understand a great deal about farming, but no, walking 350 dairy cows two miles a day is not reasonable to ensure the person who doesn't understand about stock isn't squashed, because if they bothered to even look on the internet about the recent accidents involving walkers or dogs, they would have a better idea. 

I think people need to engage common sense more often.
		
Click to expand...

No I don't know much about farming at all, I was going by your comment that your parents cannot be expected to walk a mile each way! If you didn't mean that then you should have explained yourself better. 


Ditto the 'common sense', for me common sense dictates that if a path is a PROW the owner should expect to see people using it and shouldn't place animals that are dangerous on it. Why is the 'common sense' assumption on the users rather than the owner?

Also why not use 'common sense' and buy a farm with no PROW? Or if your farm has a PROW farm less dangerous animals or crops? I don't see why you expect others to show all the responsibility and you none. I had my dog on a leash and was walking a PROW in full view of the farmer who knew he had bullocks in there, but clearly he has no responsibility whatsoever and I have all of it!


----------



## JessPickle (19 May 2013)

round my way we have signs that can be easily changed with a screwdriver showing which livestock is in the field.  So it'll say no livestock in this field, or Sheep in this field, please keep your dog on a lead.  Seems to work well.

Lack of warnings don't help in some cases though.  I was chased by a herd of cows when riding a few months ago which scared me big time.  I was on a TROT toll ride, which I pay to use, there was no warning cows were in the field and I only saw them as I went round the corner.  On a ride I specifically pay to use and access on my horse i'd expect them to be fenced off!


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (19 May 2013)

Booboos said:





lachlanandmarcus said:



			But there are lots of 'rights' in life we have but any safety assessment would determine that aren't safe enough to risk. for example we have the right to walk along the public highway even when its dark and there are no pavements, but most people choose not to do it cos its simply too dangerous!




			It's not a 'right', it's a right. 

Erh people do walk along public highways in the dark which is why cars should look out for them! Roads are not just for cars and if as a driver you mow a pedestrian down you can't claim it was his fault for being there!
		
Click to expand...

It is a right, the inverted commas were just to illustrate the way some people say it. All I'm saying is that rights aren't much use to someone when they are dead, you can be righteous n your coffin but noone will hear you saying 'i was in the right'

I'd rather be sensible and alive by reducing the risk to an reasonable level. 

And really we are mainly talking about the dogs issue here, the risk is much lower without the dogs any you can still exercise a right to walk through, just much safer not to choose to take a dog through.
		
Click to expand...



Click to expand...


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (19 May 2013)

JessPickle said:



			round my way we have signs that can be easily changed with a screwdriver showing which livestock is in the field.  So it'll say no livestock in this field, or Sheep in this field, please keep your dog on a lead.  Seems to work well.

Lack of warnings don't help in some cases though.  I was chased by a herd of cows when riding a few months ago which scared me big time.  I was on a TROT toll ride, which I pay to use, there was no warning cows were in the field and I only saw them as I went round the corner.  On a ride I specifically pay to use and access on my horse i'd expect them to be fenced off!
		
Click to expand...

I agree with you, although given stock fencing is about £5 a linear metre plus gates, there would be unlikely to be any viability in providing TROT rides were that to be a requirement, I guess. However they could maybe use temp electric at lower cost with cattle, tho it would poss need mains power so it would depend on location.


----------



## paddy555 (19 May 2013)

the only safe solution is for the taxpayer to pay to fence off the footpaths with sturdy fencing. Cattle especially and walkers don't mix. Having kept both cattle and horses I would be very nervous of having the public walking around either. I am afraid that they have little grasp of the risks. 

Yesterday I watched a few heifers lying down next to a stile. A couple climbed the stile with their very young children, not to walk along the footpath but for the kids to stroke the cattle. The cattle were not happy and got up and walked off. 
The people had no idea whatsover of the risk they were putting their kids in. 

The public need to exercise responsibility in their right to walk on paths. I often look at a field of cattle with a bridlepath and evaluate if it is safe to ride through or if I would rather go elsewhere. 

Every animal, be it cow sheep, pig, horse etc is a potential risk given the wrong situation. Farmers are running a business. It would not be practical to change the use of many fields with footpaths to different sorts of farming, the only practical use of that field is grazing. People are demanding meat so the animals have to live somewhere and many farmers are operating on a tight budget and have to make use of all of their fields in order to service the bank loans which are supporting their businesses.
I have seen several instances of farmers being injured over the years when cattle have been put in a stressful situation. These farmers have grown up with cattle. Many of the general public have no hope whatsoever of reading farm animals.


----------



## SusieT (19 May 2013)

nudibranch-v. sensible post


----------



## MurphysMinder (19 May 2013)

Booboos said:





lachlanandmarcus said:



			But there are lots of 'rights' in life we have but any safety assessment would determine that aren't safe enough to risk. for example we have the right to walk along the public highway even when its dark and there are no pavements, but most people choose not to do it cos its simply too dangerous!




			It's not a 'right', it's a right. 

Erh people do walk along public highways in the dark which is why cars should look out for them! Roads are not just for cars and if as a driver you mow a pedestrian down you can't claim it was his fault for being there!
		
Click to expand...

Someone was knocked down and killed by a police car on a busy road near me.  It was the early hours of the morning, he was wearing black clothes and was apparently drunk and possibly actually wandering in the road.   There was no action taken against the driver , and the inquest gave the cause of death as accident.
I do see this argument from both points of view, I do like to use public footpaths, and it can be a bit of a pain if a field is full of cows.  A few years ago myself and some friends did a sponsored walk for Help for Heroes.  Right near the end of our 10 mile route we came to a footpath through a field full of very lively bullocks.  As we had around 6 dogs with us we decided to retrace our steps, and ended up putting an extra couple of miles on the walk when we were already cold and wet.
However the field I rent has a footpath through it, luckily it is not often used, but on occasions I have had to ask people to put dogs on lead.  I was also very peeved when the local ramblers group decided to walk across the field, around 10 abreast, just before we had it mown for hay, I would have thought common courtesy would have made them walk in single file.  My donkey is currently grazing this field, and in his youth he would attack strange dogs,  I did wonder about putting a warning sign, but as he is now old and not very fast, and there is only a narrow stretch he can access, I decided to see how fast the walkers can run.

Click to expand...



Click to expand...


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (19 May 2013)

Booboos said:



			No I don't know much about farming at all, I was going by your comment that your parents cannot be expected to walk a mile each way! If you didn't mean that then you should have explained yourself better. 


Ditto the 'common sense', for me common sense dictates that if a path is a PROW the owner should expect to see people using it and shouldn't place animals that are dangerous on it. Why is the 'common sense' assumption on the users rather than the owner?

Also why not use 'common sense' and buy a farm with no PROW? Or if your farm has a PROW farm less dangerous animals or crops? I don't see why you expect others to show all the responsibility and you none. I had my dog on a leash and was walking a PROW in full view of the farmer who knew he had bullocks in there, but clearly he has no responsibility whatsoever and I have all of it!
		
Click to expand...

Im sorry but are you for real? Buy a farm with no PROW? I take it you dont look beyond the borders of the country where you live?? To the Far North of you is Scotland (where I think L&M is from  ) for your geographical information, where SOAC is in effect so really NO FARM is safe from walkers, ramblers, riders etc. So Farmers need to keep the livestock in all year so should heaven forbid MR Twigle wants to walk bonzo round the outside of the field for his daily stroll? Really???

I just dont get peoples reactions to being asked to walk your do somewhere else, I mean my life means more to me than walking my dog through a field full of beasts with babies.  Do the people asking that farmers not use certain fields actually eat Beef?? Mutton/Lamb?? Drink milk?? As without the farmers utilising their land to the best ability then these things arent going to be available.

Maybe Im just blessed in that where I stay there are square miles of forests, country walks (that dont once go through a farmers field shock horror ) and places where dogs are welcome and can be off the leash without being in siht of livestock. I would say popping the dog in the car and driving to a nice safe walking place would be more productive and less selfish than risking your life to walk through a field just because you have the right to do so.


----------



## RunToEarth (19 May 2013)

Booboos said:



			No I don't know much about farming at all, I was going by your comment that your parents cannot be expected to walk a mile each way! If you didn't mean that then you should have explained yourself better. 


Ditto the 'common sense', for me common sense dictates that if a path is a PROW the owner should expect to see people using it and shouldn't place animals that are dangerous on it. Why is the 'common sense' assumption on the users rather than the owner?

Also why not use 'common sense' and buy a farm with no PROW? Or if your farm has a PROW farm less dangerous animals or crops? I don't see why you expect others to show all the responsibility and you none. I had my dog on a leash and was walking a PROW in full view of the farmer who knew he had bullocks in there, but clearly he has no responsibility whatsoever and I have all of it!
		
Click to expand...

Your ignorance actually offends me, its people with attitudes like yours that really give walkers a bad name. 

My family have had their farm for generations, before the no win no fee culture and before people seemingly lost all common sense. On the flip side if you are so insistant on walking your dog through fields why do you buy your own land, and then I can come walk in it and try to sue you for tripping over my own feet - believe me it happens. 

You are perfectly within your right to walk through a field of stock with your dog, at least now you are aware of the dangers. This is the countryside, it is where stock lives, if you dont want the danger of walking through cows go to a park, or buy your own. 

Incidently this morning my OH has just found some idiot equine person riding through his oil seed rape whilst her husband took photos, a mile from a PROW. Absolute rude, stupid woman.


----------



## Honeylight (19 May 2013)

As a young teen I had my pony at a local farm yard that land behind it with a moated site, earthworks & a public right of way.
One of the problems was that housing estates of bungalows had butted up with this land at the edge of the village & residents, most of whom had grown up in towns, walked there dogs there.
One morning whilst I was schooling (probably very badly) on the earthwork I heard yells & yaps & someone very distressed calling for help. the woman had let her Yorkshire Terrier of it's lead & it was worrying a nesting swan & the cob was attacking it. I rode to the farm & one of the labourers ran up with a pitchfork, but it was too late, the cob had drowned the terrier & the woman had twisted her ankle & was in a state of shock.
This has always made me alert to wildlife & livestock. The farmer's wife had warned us not to school our ponies, ride or approach the nest.
Unfortunately some people without rural connections are not aware of dangers. A campaign needs to be held in the media to alert people as so many towns people are accessing the countryside now & are clueless; like the couple mentioned who let the children stroke the cows. Through a fence ok, but going in the field is risky.


----------



## Honeylight (19 May 2013)

Apologise for all those typos! Should check in the future.


----------



## Dizzydancer (19 May 2013)

Slightly off topic but how come dairy bulls aren't allowed in prow but beef bulls are?


----------



## Alec Swan (19 May 2013)

Dizzydancer said:



			Slightly off topic but how come dairy bulls aren't allowed in prow but beef bulls are?
		
Click to expand...

Because nobody in their right minds goes in a pen with a dairy bull.  All dairy bulls are considered to be dangerous,  and by those who own and keep them.  I saw a Landrover written off,  whilst a young Friesan bull had been turned out with heifers,  with the driver still in the vehicle!  Apart from a few bruises,  the driver/bull-owner was OK!!

Dairy bulls should never be given their freedom,  ever.

Alec.


----------



## Honeylight (19 May 2013)

A dairy/beef farmer told me it was no longer safe to walk in fields with beef cattle. This he said, was due to the fact that they are no longer routinely castrated, as the supermarkets/buyers want lean meat. Also a lot of them are first crosses of dairy or bull dairy calves.
When I have been out & about I have glanced down below & know he was correct. Could this have any leaning on the increased attacks?


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (19 May 2013)

Dizzydancer said:



			Slightly off topic but how come dairy bulls aren't allowed in prow but beef bulls are?
		
Click to expand...

Dairy bulls have been bred purely for milk yield over and above all other characteristics. So temperament has gone by the board, and most are very dangerous. There aren't that many of them as a lot of dairy farmers don't want to deal with them and also they can just do AI (even better using sexed semen, so that they minimise the welfare issue of all the unwanted dairy bull calves).

Beef cattle are generally better temperaments, because historically they have been handled more. However with the advent of the pickup and quad cow men, to an extent this has reduced. In addition, certain continental breeds are (I) much bigger than uk trad breeds - eg the Charolais, or (ii) of allegedly wild temperaments eg Simmental. However when with calves, some of the UK breeds can be the most protective, eg Galloway so any cow with calves should be steered well clear of.  

Note that beef bulls are only allowed to be out in a right of way field if accompanied by cows. A field that isn't crossed by a ROW can have a bull alone in it. Makes for tricky farming in Scotland where people can go in any field that doesn't have crops growing (NB crops do include hayfields so you need to check with owner if unsure).


----------



## MurphysMinder (19 May 2013)

Before I rented the field adjoining my place, the farmer had a charolais bull in there with with some friesian heifers (PROW thro field).  He did warn me that the bull could be a bit frisky , but there was no sign to warn the general public.  This bull used to terrify me by standing bellowing and pawing the ground whenever I had the dogs in my own field. The one day it attacked one of the farm workers who came to check the cattle, he managed to crawl under his vehicle but it still broke quite a few ribs and he had some internal bleeding, he was in hospital for quite a while.  The bull disappeared shortly afterwards thank heavens.


----------



## Clodagh (19 May 2013)

Love the idea of buying a farm without a PROW! Where do we start looking!?
Cattle scare me and when I am up at Mums (Co Durham) every walk has cattle or sheep out. We always walk round the edge keeping a close eye on them and always knowing how to get out if they notice us. When they are calving we don't risk any of those walks. Mum knows the farmers and they tell her if it is best to avoid any areas.
Slightly funny story - years ago we had a neurotic labrador whose defence mechanism was to lie down. Once approached by a herd of bullocks, who to be fair were only curious, the dog duly lay down so we had to carry her out of the field. Trust me, a dead weight labrador is no fun!


----------



## Dunlin (19 May 2013)

Just to add to the "cow debate" side of things. I was driving on a country road through Dorset yesterday and a large bull was in the middle of the road. I usually wouldn't attempt to "herd" such a beast as it was angry and panicked but he was heading straight for the main road in rush hour!

I tried my best to get around the bull and herd him back down the country lane and into a field but he had a filthy temper and was enormous and I was pretty scared. Unfortunately he went straight onto the main road and I ran up in horror as all I could hear were tyres screeching. Absolute miracle no-one was injured or hurt, least the bull.

Now then, this bull then casually hedge hopped into a field which was an utter joke when it came to security, a very thin hedge all of 3ft high with some thin plain wire running through the hedge but not attached to posts. As I was about to leave a guy in a 4x4 turned up. I asked if it was his bull and if he was back in the right field as it had been on the road and he said "did it damage your car"? I said no to which he replied "did it damage anyone elses"? Again I said no and his final response was "yes, he's mine, thanks for getting him back to the right field" and then just drove off.

Clearly he had absolutely NO intention of admitting liability if there had been any damage. Absolutely disgusting behaviour. If you can't be bothered to fence your animals in properly then don't bloody well keep them and put others at risk.

I've got his reg number and he has been reported to the police for not securing his animal(s) properly which they were pretty furious about as they said they had a flurry of phone calls from panicked drivers who had narrowly avoided a collision.

With regards to PROW's then as a land/animal owner you have to be responsible and know that not all people know the difference between a cow and a bull or what's a "nice cow" and what's a "not so nice cow", best thing is to just cover every single base and stick a sign up that says "CAUTION: LIVESTOCK CAN KILL". Very over the top but it covers all animals, costs a few quid and could save lives and/or a lawsuit. Unfortunately not everyone knows it's not very clever/safe to walk into a field and stroke a cow/bull/killer shetland.


----------



## Dizzydancer (19 May 2013)

Thanks alec and landm- the reason i ask is i grew up next to a dairy farm and parents still live there now, they have a massive bull who is out in fields nearly all time, sometimes in fields with paths all be it electric fenced away from the path. But they have had this bull and its previously its father since i was little- i would never have been given inclination that they were much more dangerous than the average bull. 
In actual fact the earlier one the farmer used to sit on! I guess it is a very rare occasion for that. 
Thanks for answering.


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (19 May 2013)

Dunlin said:



			Just to add to the "cow debate" side of things. I was driving on a country road through Dorset yesterday and a large bull was in the middle of the road. I usually wouldn't attempt to "herd" such a beast as it was angry and panicked but he was heading straight for the main road in rush hour!

I tried my best to get around the bull and herd him back down the country lane and into a field but he had a filthy temper and was enormous and I was pretty scared. Unfortunately he went straight onto the main road and I ran up in horror as all I could hear were tyres screeching. Absolute miracle no-one was injured or hurt, least the bull.

Now then, this bull then casually hedge hopped into a field which was an utter joke when it came to security, a very thin hedge all of 3ft high with some thin plain wire running through the hedge but not attached to posts. As I was about to leave a guy in a 4x4 turned up. I asked if it was his bull and if he was back in the right field as it had been on the road and he said "did it damage your car"? I said no to which he replied "did it damage anyone elses"? Again I said no and his final response was "yes, he's mine, thanks for getting him back to the right field" and then just drove off.

Clearly he had absolutely NO intention of admitting liability if there had been any damage. Absolutely disgusting behaviour. If you can't be bothered to fence your animals in properly then don't bloody well keep them and put others at risk.

I've got his reg number and he has been reported to the police for not securing his animal(s) properly which they were pretty furious about as they said they had a flurry of phone calls from panicked drivers who had narrowly avoided a collision.

With regards to PROW's then as a land/animal owner you have to be responsible and know that not all people know the difference between a cow and a bull or what's a "nice cow" and what's a "not so nice cow", best thing is to just cover every single base and stick a sign up that says "CAUTION: LIVESTOCK CAN KILL". Very over the top but it covers all animals, costs a few quid and could save lives and/or a lawsuit. Unfortunately not everyone knows it's not very clever/safe to walk into a field and stroke a cow/bull/killer shetland.
		
Click to expand...

Plenty of farmers would be happy to put up signs, unfortunately if they do their insurance says they aren't covered as they are suggesting their animals are dangerous and walkers won't let them do it as they say it is a deliberate attempt to put them off exercising their rights to use the ROW.....also signs would not work in Scotland as there aren't defined routes of ROWs, people can go where they like pretty much, the sign would have to extend the full length of every fence which might result in fairly stretched writing....


----------



## Spook (19 May 2013)

Of course here in Scotland access has to be taken "reponsibly" and the land manager/owner has to act "responsibly"....... the problem is that both parties, so often, have trouble understanding the meaning of responsible!!


----------



## hnmisty (19 May 2013)

Booboos said:



			Also why not use 'common sense' and buy a farm with no PROW?
		
Click to expand...

Because most farmers inherit their farm from their parents, who inherited it from their parents, who inherited it from their parents...


----------



## Luci07 (19 May 2013)

I don't know what the answer is. Years ago my uncle managed a number of dairy and cereal farms. It was almost par for the course for some of herd to be let out by walkers. I have also been out rides only to find  the gate nailed shut.  Couple of years ago when on safari, we all had the warning about not wandering off piste to look at the animals. Now to me, we were looking at wild animals and I would never have dreamt about going off the road to look more closely. However only 2 weeks previously, a couple had driven up to get a closer look at the elephants who had then charged the car killing them. With rights comes responsibility but people often seem to forget this!


----------



## g3mm4 (19 May 2013)

It is not just cows with calves who are a danger - recently calved dairy cows who have had their calves taken away are prone to being decidedly grumpy... understandably!


----------



## Sussexbythesea (20 May 2013)

Coming back to our yard after a hack the other day my friend and I could see two walkers with a dog on lead on the footpath crossing the field with the Highland cattle with calves which is part of the farm where our horses are kept. We were on the lane.

The field is split in two with a hedge running through it with a gap so they can wander between the two halves. One lone mother with calf was in the half by the footpath. You could see she was really agitated by the people as they were quite near her calf who had wandered a little way from her. We both stopped to watch nervously expecting something bad to happen but luckily the calf came back to the mother and they joined the rest of the herd. I reckon it was a close call but  the walkers seemed oblivious. 

I hate walking through fields of cattle and usually skirt around the edge constantly scanning for emergency escape routes


----------



## Jools2345 (20 May 2013)

just as an aside, all the cattle men i know reckon cows are more dangerous than bulls as a bull looks at you drops his head and charges-meaning he cannot see when he is charging, but a cow keeps her eye on you whilst she comes at you.

DD we had 3 hereford and one charolais bull on the farm in the yrs i was there that one of the workers (my brothe-in-law) used to sit on, obviously we had lots that you could not too. we had the tallest hereford (HITECH) bull in the UK on the farm for a year and he was very aggressive, he went for the JCB on a number of occasions when they were putting round bales out. he had bulging eyes which i commented on a few times when he left our farm and went to another he attacked a worker and i believe he killed him, he was shot and an examination done and it turned out he had a brain tumour so would have been in a lot of pain.

from what i understand dairy bulls are in a league of their own when it comes to being testy


----------



## MerrySherryRider (20 May 2013)

Who remembers the 1971 Follow The Country Code ads with Joe and Petunia ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNRU9rxHfB8



Absolute classic, very funny, as was their coastguard advert in 1968.


----------



## Zero00000 (20 May 2013)

Some dog owners should not walk their dogs, we have a fence down i our garden, well did, was fixed today, so have been walking the dogs on an extra walk during the day,
We chose a golf course with a footpath right next to the stables, I have 2 staffs and they are not very good at recalling so we keep them on 8m stretchy leads, both Saturday and Sunday my dogs were attacked by dogs off the lead,

Luckily both my girls are submissive and did not attack back, but you can betcha bottom dollar who would have got the blame if they have fought back!!!

MY STAFFORDSHIRE BULL TERRIERS!!!

If the dog is not safe, muzzle it or keep it on a lead


----------



## CorvusCorax (20 May 2013)

I won't go in a field with cows if I can help it, to do so with a dog would be lunacy IMO. Not worth a nice dander through the countryside. They're big, they're powerful and they're dangerous and it's not my job to deal with them.
Too many family members injured (my grandmother pretty much had her shin snapped in half and my father was badly trampled a couple of times doing tests, and a friend was badly crushed at a show a few weeks ago and had all his camera gear wrecked) and too many inquests attended to make me change my mind.


----------



## Flame_ (20 May 2013)

I've not read the whole thread, but IMO rights of way have to be safe for all users. If a farmer puts stock in a field through which a footpath or bridleway runs knowing there could be a potential accident and doesn't fence off the right of way, they should be completely liable if (when!) an accident happens.


----------



## RunToEarth (20 May 2013)

Flame_ said:



			I've not read the whole thread, but IMO rights of way have to be safe for all users. If a farmer puts stock in a field through which a footpath or bridleway runs knowing there could be a potential accident and doesn't fence off the right of way, they should be completely liable if (when!) an accident happens.
		
Click to expand...

do you honestly think it is reasonable for no farmer to ever put stock in a field with a PROW through it because someone with a dog might not have enough brains not to walk in there? 

just because you have a right to do something doesn't mean you should pig headedly do it even though it might cause you harm. Like I said earlier I have a right to hack down the a15 but if doesn't mean im stupid enough to do it. 

Perhaps PROWs dont work quite as well now because people dont seem to regard their safety as highly as they once did, because if they get injured there will be someone held liable, usually the person who owns it and works hard to make a living from it. 

It would be a completely different response if the general public were suggesting horses couldn't be in fields with PROWs through them, guarentee.


----------



## Flame_ (20 May 2013)

RunToEarth said:



			do you honestly think it is reasonable for no farmer to ever put stock in a field with a PROW through it because someone with a dog might not have enough brains not to walk in there?
		
Click to expand...

Of course. Right of way means right of way and shouldn't be obstructed by potentially dangerous animals. To me that totally includes horses. Rights of way should be safely passable at all times and that means either making alternative use of the land or fencing off rights of way. It's just as out of order to block a public ROW as it is to block a public highway.


----------



## Alec Swan (20 May 2013)

Flame_ said:



			I've not read the whole thread, but IMO rights of way have to be safe for all users. If a farmer puts stock in a field through which a footpath or bridleway runs knowing there could be a potential accident and doesn't fence off the right of way, they should be completely liable if (when!) an accident happens.
		
Click to expand...

During the last F&M crisis,  every PROW in the country was closed to access.  It would be a simple matter to give preference to those who wish to graze livestock on land,  and have PROW CLOSED notices at each end of a field.

To dog walkers,  a PROW is a convenience,  to the land owner,  the grazing is vital.  There's no question as to who should have precedence,  and it isn't the idiots who take dogs,  on leads,  in with cows and calves.

Alec.


----------



## Clodagh (20 May 2013)

I think what people miss is that it is a Public Right of Way - the farmer still OWNS it. To that end it is the farmers land to earn money with if he can - or to utilise it in whichever way he wants. As he/ she OWNS it. The public have a right of way to walk on a narrow path, sensibly, with their dog under close control, over someone elses land, but no right to decree what the owner can do with that land.


----------



## MurphysMinder (20 May 2013)

^^^^ This!  I am not a farmer, and I do like to use PROWs but can't believe that some people think they have a right over the farmer who owns the land.

That was actually aimed at Alecs post but applies just as much to Clodaghs.


----------



## paddy555 (20 May 2013)

Flame_ said:



			I've not read the whole thread, but IMO rights of way have to be safe for all users. If a farmer puts stock in a field through which a footpath or bridleway runs knowing there could be a potential accident and doesn't fence off the right of way, they should be completely liable if (when!) an accident happens.
		
Click to expand...

no cow, or horse for that matter in a field can ever be anything other than an accident waiting to happen if there is the right irritation or circumstances. They can never be guarenteed to be 100% safe. Anyone who has been around horses is perfectly well aware of that and cows are no different. 
So, following your argument farmers (or horse owners) cannot therefore put stock in a field that has a footpath or bridlepath. 
So, what use is the farmer supposed to make of that land? Often it is only suitable for grazing. 

The only alternatives are not to use the field. ie the farmer is paying for land he is totally ever unable to use. Alternatively someone should pay to fence it safely. Who is going to do that? you  the walker? the taxpayer? 
BTW if it is not grazed who is going to cut the grass and hedges for the walkers? 

along with rights to use  footpaths etc also come responsibilties. I thnk it is high time that walkers started to realse this.


----------



## Flame_ (20 May 2013)

paddy555 said:



			no cow, or horse for that matter in a field can ever be anything other than an accident waiting to happen if there is the right irritation or circumstances. They can never be guarenteed to be 100% safe. Anyone who has been around horses is perfectly well aware of that and cows are no different. 
So, following your argument farmers (or horse owners) cannot therefore put stock in a field that has a footpath or bridlepath. 
So, what use is the farmer supposed to make of that land? Often it is only suitable for grazing.
		
Click to expand...

Sheep? Turf? Or fencing them off. I would never be comfortable with the risk to the public walking through my horses in that situation, it just screams danger. The ROW will have been there longer than any farmer or horse owner has even been alive and they know when accepting the land that they have an obligation to always enable safe passage of public ROW. It would be a dreadfully arrogant, inconsiderate arse who knew that their animals might well hurt someone and did nothing about it except blame the "idiots" for walking where they are legally permitted to walk.


----------



## Clodagh (20 May 2013)

Fencing them off would be fine but would cost a fortune, who is going to pay for that? Maybe the Ramblers Association, they seem to have plenty of money.
I still object to owning land and not being able to use it, what is the point? If you had a footpath through your garden would you be OK not to let your dog out in it?


----------



## RunToEarth (20 May 2013)

Flame_ said:



			Of course. Right of way means right of way and shouldn't be obstructed by potentially dangerous animals. To me that totally includes horses. Rights of way should be safely passable at all times and that means either making alternative use of the land or fencing off rights of way. It's just as out of order to block a public ROW as it is to block a public highway.
		
Click to expand...

wow, ignorance really is bliss. I didn't know we were here for you to (literally) walk all over, at least people with your view are in the minority.


----------



## ClobellsandBaubles (20 May 2013)

There are lots of signs where I used to live particularly the national trust land and around lambing season. When I was doing duke of ed we came across several fields one with a beware bull sign and one with a yellow triangle and a snorting bull pic in the middle. On helped as we were able to detour and take care the other not so much as we crossed the gate in the opposite direction and only noticed when we were leaving  

The only time I have had a problem crossing a cow field was when I entered a field that we crossed regularly out hacking a a couple had their labs loose and they were chasing the herd of cows, the couple didn't seem at all bothered by this and we ended up having to jump a small brook at which point the cows stopped. I have been much more cautious ever since! A friend of mine got ganged up on by a field of sheep too :S

 I think a nice sign just stating what is in the field would help as quite often fields are large and weirdly shaped so you can' always see whats in them. I mean not all horses appreciate cows/ alpacas etc. and my mum for one will turn tail as soon as she sees a cow/horse so it makes for an interesting walk  A bit of warning would save the anxiety attacks


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (20 May 2013)

So what would would you propose in Scotland then, those who would force fencing off? There are not set footpath routes there? Should farmers not be able to use any of any of their fields? Should they also fence off all rabbit holes. Getting up early to check for any new ones? 

I also dont think those suggesting it appreciate just how much land would be lost in this way, it is amazing when you look at a block of land on a farm how big an area is taken up by tracks etc, it is acres and acres. 

Finally, be careful what you wish for. Once fenced off, there will be no easy way for the route to be eaten down and kept readily navigable. The farmers mowers will be far too wide to mow them and you've stopped the natural alternative doing it. So now there is the cost of fencing and the cost of specialist machinery to mow them, assuming they can reach all parts of the routes. 

No thanks.


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (20 May 2013)

Flame_ said:



			Of course. Right of way means right of way and shouldn't be obstructed by potentially dangerous animals. To me that totally includes horses. Rights of way should be safely passable at all times and that means either making alternative use of the land or fencing off rights of way. It's just as out of order to block a public ROW as it is to block a public highway.
		
Click to expand...

It is safely navigable, unless you take a dog in there. You can still walk it and the risk of doing so without a dog is extremely low. Add the dog and the risk rises. 

I suggest you give up driving, until you find a way to ban those unreasonable other drivers who use the road, since they present a statistically much higher risk than the cows. No? Ok maybe it's just cos you think your rights trump the farmers, when in fact both have rights and have to exercise common sense, them not to put their maddest cows in PROW fields and yours not to insist on taking a dog through when there are cattle out. And it would help if farmers were able to sign fields without risking liabilitty just by trying to help.


----------



## RunToEarth (20 May 2013)

Well when farmers can't put any stock in their fields for fear of being prosecuted, and they sell to Barratt homes for development, you will have nowhere to walk, will you?


----------



## Clodagh (20 May 2013)

RunToEarth said:



			Well when farmers can't put any stock in their fields for fear of being prosecuted, and they sell to Barratt homes for development, you will have nowhere to walk, will you?
		
Click to expand...

I was thinking the other day, reading about how people are worried that with the easing of planning restrictions farmers may build on their land. TBH if this forum is representative of how people think about farmers they will be delighted. Lots of houses, no cows and no PROW, except for nice safe little concrete alleys between gardens.


----------



## hayley.t (20 May 2013)

Clodagh said:



			I was thinking the other day, reading about how people are worried that with the easing of planning restrictions farmers may build on their land. TBH if this forum is representative of how people think about farmers they will be delighted. Lots of houses, no cows and no PROW, except for nice safe little concrete alleys between gardens.
		
Click to expand...

Agree with you both. There is another post on here moaning about farmers getting subsidies so can't win really, there will be a lot of jobless farmers if they can't have subsidies but can't stock the land either.


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (20 May 2013)

RunToEarth said:



			Well when farmers can't put any stock in their fields for fear of being prosecuted, and they sell to Barratt homes for development, you will have nowhere to walk, will you?
		
Click to expand...

This is already happening in many areas, fed up with strident litter dropping gate leaving open walkers and their out of control dogs chasing stock or ******** in the crops: and fly tipping land trashing temporary inhabitants who leave the land contaminated and rubbish strewn but who they are unable to keep out despite using large rock, tree trunks etc, they end up thinking 'why bother when people only care about how cheap they can buy imported crap food' - and sell up to the developers. 

a lot of times they don't initially jump at it, they want to carry on farming but it gets to the point it's just too hard to farm it any more. Even crop farms get vehicles driving all over the crops either for 'fun' to cos they are out hare coursing or poaching, armed and not to be approached.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (20 May 2013)

RunToEarth said:



			wow, ignorance really is bliss. I didn't know we were here for you to (literally) walk all over, at least people with your view are in the minority.
		
Click to expand...

 I think you should read this and find out what your responsibilities are; http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&lr=lang_en|lang_de

Then maybe reflect on this recent death.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...seriously-injured-herd-cows-walking-dogs.html Note the same herd has seriously attacked 4 times in 5 years, including times when no dogs or calves were present. The farmer's insurance company has and is currently finding paying the number compensation claims very expensive.
 The police and HSE are investigating this farmer. 
 If this herd were dogs, they'd be shot. Incidentally, Defra's and NFU advice is that dangerous cattle should be culled.


----------



## Spook (20 May 2013)

Flame_ said:



			Sheep? Turf? Or fencing them off. I would never be comfortable with the risk to the public walking through my horses in that situation, it just screams danger. The ROW will have been there longer than any farmer or horse owner has even been alive and they know when accepting the land that they have an obligation to always enable safe passage of public ROW. It would be a dreadfully arrogant, inconsiderate arse who knew that their animals might well hurt someone and did nothing about it except blame the "idiots" for walking where they are legally permitted to walk.
		
Click to expand...

Just as well you live in England then!!!!!! Here in Scotland we have "The Right to Roam".. responsibly though....... walking, riding, cycling, wild camping and to access water with canoes etc...... "RESPONSIBLY ANYWHERE!" not just on tracks etc.

Do not all land owners/managers carry a public liability insurance??

Flame, you are being daft thinking that land managers/owners should not be able to manage their land as they think fit and responsible. It sounds as if you would access land irresponsibly and take silly risks.....and you might be considered a NIMBY here.

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander


----------



## Flame_ (20 May 2013)

Can't quote as I'm on phone now... In Scotland you have the obvious option to walk through the empty field next to the field full of cows, so any sane person would go for that, here in England we have to stick to roads and designated ROW. So by doing that one is being irresponsible? How do you work that one out?


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (20 May 2013)

Honestly Im over this completely. Those who are more up for their rights you honestly need to take a good hard look at what you eat. How much of it comes from these animals you are saying shouldnt be grazing in fields naturally incase you want to walk across the land.

I think you need to think about that and many of you maybe need to volunteer on a farm and have an average week in the ploughing/harvesting/lambing/calving seasons and see the 20hr days some of these farmers pull to put the food on your plate and the milk in your cuppa.

Some people are just selfish bleeding @r$e$.


----------



## Alec Swan (20 May 2013)

horserider said:



			.......

........ Incidentally, Defra's and NFU advice is that dangerous cattle should be culled.
		
Click to expand...

All cattle have the potential to be dangerous.  Dangerous cattle today,  will be peaceful and amenable animals tomorrow.  Would you have all cattle,  contained within buildings?

No farmer,  in their right mind's would turn out dairy breed bulls, PROW or not.  Beef bulls are generally only interested in their herd responsibilities,  but again,  no one would turn out the bulls on a public thoroughfare.

One point,  or more a question perhaps,  why is it horserider,  that you seem to be devoid of any experience,  preferring to rely upon your abilities to research conditions which were promulgated,  long before the HSE were involved,  and by those who farm livestock?

Alec.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (20 May 2013)

What is so sad about some attitudes on this thread is that you seem to have forgotten what life was like before the Kinder Scout protest trespass 80 years ago. 
 Thanks to the courage of those people, the countryside which previously,had been kept for the upper classes, was opened up to the working class.


  For those of you who aren't familiar with our heritage, here's the recent report to commemorate the anniversary.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17796665


----------



## MerrySherryRider (20 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			All cattle have the potential to be dangerous.  Dangerous cattle today,  will be peaceful and amenable animals tomorrow.  Would you have all cattle,  contained within buildings?

No farmer,  in their right mind's would turn out dairy breed bulls, PROW or not.  Beef bulls are generally only interested in their herd responsibilities,  but again,  no one would turn out the bulls on a public thoroughfare.

One point,  or more a question perhaps,  why is it horserider,  that you seem to be devoid of any experience,  preferring to rely upon your abilities to research conditions which were promulgated,  long before the HSE were involved,  and by those who farm livestock?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I'd be concerned about a farmer who couldn't tell the temperament of his livestock. My grandfather probably knew his cattle and horses better than he knew his wife.
 I'm sure you are aware without me stating the obvious, that any animal has the potential in certain circumstances to be aggressive. However, the farmer is expected to know this. The law does not expect the public to have the same level of knowledge.
 I have already posted about experiences of mine on this thread, refer back if you're interested. I use links usually because such rubbish is often spouted on here as fact, when its just misinformation. 

Anyway, another incident I personally encountered whilst out riding. The bridlepath ran through the centre of a field. It was full of cows and a dairy bull, busy with his ladies. 

The farmer was by the gate, so I asked if it was ok to go through. Yes, came the reply, he's a good lad. 
 He was. Even though some of the cows followed me and my mare, the bull stayed put. This was a local farmer who knew his stock and kept them well.


----------



## Dizzydancer (20 May 2013)

Here i am again with another question-aimed at the farmers among you! 
If i walked through field a which is empty, get to field b spot cows in far corner, but have dog with me. Walk away from field b and subsequently off the PRow to field c which has a gap in hedge and free of animals, i cross this field and return to field d animal free and back onto PROW. 
Would this be acceptable for majority of farmers? I understand you will always get the odd one who is not happy.


----------



## Spook (20 May 2013)

horserider you are so very wrong in this respect..... most ROWs are/were the way to work for the working classes....... it's the middle classes who lost their way!!!!!!


----------



## MerrySherryRider (20 May 2013)

Spook said:



			horserider you are so very wrong in this respect..... most ROWs are/were the way to work for the working classes....... it's the middle classes who lost their way!!!!!!
		
Click to expand...

Ah yes, that's true. However, the working classes were only allowed to use routes that would enable them to reach their place of work for their betters benefit.


Funny old world where ramblers/horseriders are accused of bringing farming to its knees by walking on ROWs, while the hunts are somehow devoid of upsetting livestock and studs.


----------



## Orangehorse (20 May 2013)

OK, I am a farmer, we have beef cattle, I  had a horse that was terrfied of cattle (one reason why I sold her), and now horse that will put his ears back and drive cattle away, and I am a dog walker!

A dog is regarded as a "normal accompanient" from the CC's point of view, but it doesn't have a Right to be on a footpath as such.  I am afraid that I really do not have any answers to the "dangers of cattle."

I am not too keen on entering a field with cattle on my horse if they are crowded round the gate, ditto with the dog, as they tend to run over to see what it is - note, I do not call it "charging" as lots of people do.  I know how intimidating it is, and how people can be frightened.  The cattle are being curious, but with no malicious intent.  If you run away, they will follow you, to see where you are going.  The way I deal with a group of cattle running towards me is to put my arms up and shout "shoo" and this, to date, has always worked. Sometimes cattle do panic, and in that mood there is nothing to be done except to leave them alone and let them settle down.  If they are in a panic then they can jump hedges, and just crash about - like a bolting horse really.  (The bull that was loose was probably really frightened and wanted to get back to its herd as quickly as possible).

With the horse that was nervous of cattle, I tried to avoid close confrontation, if I was by myself I used to go a long way round them, or if with another horse, hide behind them.  My current horse is OK, but if a herd galloped towards him he might well decide to buck and join in.  Again, luckily it hasn't happened (yet).

There are reasons why there are more cow/calf/dog incidents.  There are a lot more suckler herds now, whereas in the past most calves came from the dairy herd and the young calves saw a lot more of humans as they were taken away from the cow to be reared.  Some calves will now be born in the field and hardly see humans close to which makes them naturally more skittish, even when they fully grown and breeding, or fattening in turn. We buy weaned store cattle whose only experience of humans is to be put into a cattle crush and be wormed and have injections - no wonder that they are a bit nervous.   It is true that the larger, continental breeds tend to have a more flighty temperament, although farmers realise this and attention is paid to breeding for a quiet temperament - after all, it is the farmers who have to handle them for TB testing, worming, feeding, etc.  Large cattle play-fight amongst themselves and they sometimes don't like being bossed around by humans, which is what we find when we are TB testing, we have to be aware of those that are likely to be more troublesome.

Cattle tend to settle down as the summer progresses.  So now all the cattle have only recently been turned out, they are feeling the spring grass and seeing humans walking in fields can frighten them, or make them curious.  Any newly calved cow is going to be very protective of their calf.  As they get used to the sight of walkers and are used to being turned out they become quieter.


----------



## mon (20 May 2013)

Cattle sometimes can be unpredictable in temperaments just like human beings can be, more people will be harmed by humans than farm stock I bet.


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (20 May 2013)

Dizzydancer said:



			Here i am again with another question-aimed at the farmers among you! 
If i walked through field a which is empty, get to field b spot cows in far corner, but have dog with me. Walk away from field b and subsequently off the PRow to field c which has a gap in hedge and free of animals, i cross this field and return to field d animal free and back onto PROW. 
Would this be acceptable for majority of farmers? I understand you will always get the odd one who is not happy.
		
Click to expand...

They would probably be more happy if allowing it didnt then result in a legal claim to an additional new PROW on the new route as well as the old one.....if they don't challenge it, that's what happens. 

A lot of farmers would dearly like to divert footpaths eg through the middle of fields to safer routes. But they are pretty much always stopped from doing so.


----------



## Spook (21 May 2013)

lachlanandmarcus said:



			They would probably be more happy if allowing it didnt then result in a legal claim to an additional new PROW on the new route as well as the old one.....if they don't challenge it, that's what happens. 

A lot of farmers would dearly like to divert footpaths eg through the middle of fields to safer routes. But they are pretty much always stopped from doing so.
		
Click to expand...

Interestingly we have 3 "diverted" and fenced routes here to divert access users away from the farmyards (the original routes went right through the buildings), they are provided with good easy horse gates too. One of the lengths of ancient track does go throgh an un-fenced "Hill" field and we see no reason that we should have to fence it, and, yes we do run beef breeding cattle on it. This particular route is ancient, an old turn pike, preceeding the the main roads and the railway locally.

If you want to divert a route for either safety or privacy reasons contact your local "Access Officer" at your council offices..... they are more than happy to accommodate diversions where they make sense. I expect this will only apply in Scotland. 

Access users should remember that they are using other peoples property and act accordingly! Respect signs with requests/instructions etc..... they are there for your, the farms stock and in some cases crop or wildlifes benefit and safety....

With rights comes responsibility.


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (21 May 2013)

Spook said:



			Interestingly we have 3 "diverted" and fenced routes here to divert access users away from the farmyards (the original routes went right through the buildings), they are provided with good easy horse gates too. One of the lengths of ancient track does go throgh an un-fenced "Hill" field and we see no reason that we should have to fence it, and, yes we do run beef breeding cattle on it. This particular route is ancient, an old turn pike, preceeding the the main roads and the railway locally.

If you want to divert a route for either safety or privacy reasons contact your local "Access Officer" at your council offices..... they are more than happy to accommodate diversions where they make sense. I expect this will only apply in Scotland. 

Access users should remember that they are using other peoples property and act accordingly! Respect signs with requests/instructions etc..... they are there for your, the farms stock and in some cases crop or wildlifes benefit and safety....
		
Click to expand...

Agree, much easier in Scotland in this respect, it was really England that the issues really arise in, there even when the diversion is more scenic, or avoids some risk factor its very very hard to get it changed (unless you are a big property developer in which case strangely it's fine!)


----------



## Jools2345 (21 May 2013)

Black Beastie said:



			Honestly Im over this completely. Those who are more up for their rights you honestly need to take a good hard look at what you eat. How much of it comes from these animals you are saying shouldnt be grazing in fields naturally incase you want to walk across the land.

I think you need to think about that and many of you maybe need to volunteer on a farm and have an average week in the ploughing/harvesting/lambing/calving seasons and see the 20hr days some of these farmers pull to put the food on your plate and the milk in your cuppa.

Some people are just selfish bleeding @r$e$.
		
Click to expand...

i dont think people are selfish and i dont think how many hrs farmers/farm workers put in has anything to do with where the cattle are or if i feel safe walking across a field.

livestock (including horses) that have access to PROW should be ones that have shown themselves to be steady and safe when people walk through with or without dogs.

i know of no farmers that HAVE to put cows with calves or bulls in fields with PROW, most are sensible and use alternative fields when cattle are thought to be more dangerous/spooky.

and if indeed they did, i think it reasonable to provide and alternative route or be polite when people seek an alternative route.

as for those saying an alternative route leaves them liable for accidents that happen when the route is used-so do the cattle when they have flattened someone the difference is YOU have to live with the death or serious injury on your conscience that happened just because you were making the point that the field is currently in your care and you can put what you want in it


----------



## Alec Swan (21 May 2013)

As a boy,  I read somewhere that Public Footpaths were first granted their legal status,  because they were the shortest route for a coffin to be carried,  for burial.  Presumably they were short-cuts across the land of others.  All a bit odd,  because the weight of a coffin,  and a body would have needed horse drawn transport,  I'd have thought.

Does anyone know how a "Public" right of way came about?

Alec.


----------



## Alec Swan (21 May 2013)

Spook said:



			.......

Access users should remember that they are using other peoples property and act accordingly! Respect signs with requests/instructions etc..... they are there for your, the farms stock and in some cases crop or wildlifes benefit and safety....

With rights comes responsibility.
		
Click to expand...

Well said.  There are those who wont be told,  I fear! 

Alec.


----------



## RunToEarth (21 May 2013)

horserider said:



			I think you should read this and find out what your responsibilities are; http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&lr=lang_en|lang_de

Then maybe reflect on this recent death.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...seriously-injured-herd-cows-walking-dogs.html Note the same herd has seriously attacked 4 times in 5 years, including times when no dogs or calves were present. The farmer's insurance company has and is currently finding paying the number compensation claims very expensive.
 The police and HSE are investigating this farmer. 
 If this herd were dogs, they'd be shot. Incidentally, Defra's and NFU advice is that dangerous cattle should be culled.
		
Click to expand...

most cattle in the news are not dangerous by definition, no more dangerous than any other cattle, they are simply acting as herd animals, protecting their young. If dog walkers cannot appriciate their behaviour IMO they shouldn't be walking through the middle of them. I am well aware of our responsibilities and I have always felt we have gone above and beyond our requirements for PROWs, we even have mounting blocks next to (new, user friendly) gates because some of the smaller users prefer to get off their ponies. Most farmers have looked after their PROWs well for generations, they are just ever fearful of the blame/claim generation.


----------



## paddy555 (21 May 2013)

Jools2345 said:



			livestock (including horses) that have access to PROW should be ones that have shown themselves to be steady and safe when people walk through with or without dogs.

i know of no farmers that HAVE to put cows with calves or bulls in fields with PROW, most are sensible and use alternative fields when cattle are thought to be more dangerous/spooky.
		
Click to expand...

and precisely what test are you going to devise before horses and cattle pass their "human contact proficiency badge"??

Horses, many of which are handled daily from birth, can never be considered fully safe especially when spooked, cattle who have little handling even less so. 

Many farmers have no choice but to use fields with ROWs, they often don't have sufficient alternative fields.


----------



## Meowy Catkin (21 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			As a boy,  I read somewhere that Public Footpaths were first granted their legal status,  because they were the shortest route for a coffin to be carried,  for burial.  Presumably they were short-cuts across the land of others.  All a bit odd,  because the weight of a coffin,  and a body would have needed horse drawn transport,  I'd have thought.

Does anyone know how a "Public" right of way came about?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

As mentioned in one of the posts above, a lot of PROW go right past houses or into farmyards because they developed from the way that people used to walk to visit their neighbours. Then postmen used them too, again going from house to house or farm to farm.

We had a Right of way officer come to see us at our place because he was going round the whole area and he definitely mentioned 'old postal routes'.


----------



## Alec Swan (21 May 2013)

Jools2345 said:



			.......

i know of no farmers that HAVE to put cows with calves or bulls in fields with PROW, most are sensible and use alternative fields when cattle are thought to be more dangerous/spooky.

.......
		
Click to expand...

I rather suspect the truth to be that you "know of no farmers"! 

Alec.


----------



## RunToEarth (21 May 2013)

I watched countryfile a few weeks ago, it was the last time I watched it. It featured a disabled woman in a wheelchair complaining that she couldn't use the footpath because it had stiles and kissing gates that her wheelchair couldn't get through, and the mud made it impossible for her to move - IMO that is accessability gone mad, and whilst she maintained she had the right to pass and repass, where is the line drawn. 

PROWs never used to be a problem, there was just the sporadic Captain Cagoule with his OS map and vague aggression that caused any problems, for the most part people used the PROWs as they should do without causing anyone any grief. Before it was commonplace to sue the hell out of anyone for anything landowners were actually quite bendy - I remeber six or seven summers spent with our dinghy in the neighbour's weir with absolutely no problems. 

This weekend as I was stood in the boys' paddock on the top of the hillside I looked down on the low fields. The network of small lanes leading to nowhere and clearly marked footpaths through fields is incredibly handy and well used by everyone in the village, myself included. OH doesn't mind spraying his full 42" strip through his fields because we can all see they are well used and much appriciated, by the most. 

And then there are people with moto cross bikes hammering past the "no motorised vehicles" signs, terrorising the horse riders who are later seen cantering up the footpath, but I suppose you have to be grateful that they are at least on some form of PROW because apparently there are a whole gaggle of riders that seem to think any grass margin/stubble is fair game. There are the ever mounting number of Julia Bradburys yomping aimlessly across plough that they shouldn't be in but nevertheless why the hell would you want to walk through heavy plough anywhere. On those occasions when you do decide to point out that actually they might be lost you are more often than not presented with an OS/1880s map/GPS which is so far wrong you can't even imagine how it got there, and evidently these people have never read the small disclaimer on the bottom of an OS map which reads: "The representation on this map of any other road, track or path is no evidence of the existence of a right of way."

The rights of way small print is a throwback to the days when food production was a priority, and farmers could be more assertive about privacy. Nowadays, we all suffer from a sort of post-grain-mountain guilt that makes us uneasy about saying: "No, you can't walk here." Perhaps when food shortages become less than a little known secret and more of a national issue there may be a few more food producers who are willing to point out that actually, the primary source of this land is for food production and how unfunny would it be if you found traces of labrador poo in your loaf of Kingsmill? 

Jools - I agree with Alec in that you probably feel that way because you don't know a great many farmers. On my parents farm there are 7.2 miles of "The Penine Way" through their farm, to have the luxury of being able to turn cows out without a PROW in the field would mean a great commute for everyone before and after milking.


----------



## JustKickOn (21 May 2013)

I haven't read all of the posts in the thread, but have read quite a few of them and skimmed others.

I have to say I am shocked at the ignorance of some people. 

A public right of way may be marked out but that does not necessarily mean they should always be used. The farm opposite my house has a huge network of footpaths through them, and I can look across the main one from my bedroom. It makes me so mad to see somebody clamber over the style and instantly let their dog off the lead, without realising there are cows with calves at foot round the corner of the field, and then fail to recall their dog as it runs riot through the herd. 

First off, if you cannot control your dog when it is off the lead, don't let it off and train the damn thing to respond to you!

Second of all, have some common sense, if you cannot see a clear path between the two entry/exit points and you don't feel confident walking through the field, then don't do so. 

It would save a lot of worry on the behalf of farmers and the public if people were to stop and think for a minute or two and make the safe decision.

A friend and I once went on a country walk round the field by my house. We'd done about 5 miles and came to the final field to cross where we could see the bull lying down by the exit. We could have walked through, and climbed the fence at the other side of the field. But instead of walking the 100m to the other side of the field, we backtracked the whole five miles. Somethings are just not worth risking, in particular that of a human life. Have people lost a sense of self preservation these days??


----------



## Orangehorse (21 May 2013)

We recently had to replace a stile with a kissing gate "to improve access."  Considering that there was a stile at either end of the footpath, I thought that was a bit strange.  As it happens, one field is arable, so the large field gate is often left open, but right beside it is a stile.

Just remember that there is NO benefit for any farmer/landowner in having rights of way across their land, so many do  tend to discourage their use, particularly when walkers or riders cause a nuisance or cause damage, or wander about not on the path.

But I would also say that many farmers, living and working in the countryside, do not appreciate how much people love to walk and ride in the open air and across fields and ancient tracks.

The key to everything is understanding both how the farmers are making a living from their land.  Our local council used to run courses for the general public to give them advice on farming matters and use of the public rights of way and would lead some walks for beginners - but I expect they have been discontinued with the budget cuts.


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (21 May 2013)

Jools2345 said:



			i dont think people are selfish and i dont think how many hrs farmers/farm workers put in has anything to do with where the cattle are or if i feel safe walking across a field.

livestock (including horses) that have access to PROW should be ones that have shown themselves to be steady and safe when people walk through with or without dogs.

i know of no farmers that HAVE to put cows with calves or bulls in fields with PROW, most are sensible and use alternative fields when cattle are thought to be more dangerous/spooky.

and if indeed they did, i think it reasonable to provide and alternative route or be polite when people seek an alternative route.

as for those saying an alternative route leaves them liable for accidents that happen when the route is used-so do the cattle when they have flattened someone the difference is YOU have to live with the death or serious injury on your conscience that happened just because you were making the point that the field is currently in your care and you can put what you want in it
		
Click to expand...

Theyre not 'making a point', writing that clearly illustrates the fact that you are coming at this with the viewpoint that farmers using cattle fields for cattle are just doing so to try to make life difficult for you! 

Oddly, they are not! and their day doesn't actually revolve around your daily walk, they are using their own land to grow crops, to raise livestock, to feed people in the UK with good quality food which is well cared for and gets to be outside and eat grass. 

Not being able to use any PROW fields for cows and calves or any bulls would make many farms have to give up livestock farming altogether (since they are only left with steers to turnout) or alternatively keep the cattle in 365 days a year..... 

To me, neither are attractive options for this country. I like to see a countryside with animals in it that aren't solely dogs ******** on the crops.....


----------



## Jools2345 (21 May 2013)

paddy555 said:



			and precisely what test are you going to devise before horses and cattle pass their "human contact proficiency badge"??

Horses, many of which are handled daily from birth, can never be considered fully safe especially when spooked, cattle who have little handling even less so. 

Many farmers have no choice but to use fields with ROWs, they often don't have sufficient alternative fields.
		
Click to expand...

being married into a farming family and raised in the countryside i have lived for 10yr on a beef and arable farm, one brother-in-law worked for many yrs with dairy cattle. 90% of the family i married into are either farmers or farm workers. all farmers know which of their livestock are calm and which are not, the difference is good farmers will cull these out as heifers as they are a pain in the neck for everyone, as they can set off the whole herd.

the farm i lived on ran 3 separate herds, one of which was a very docile herd and i would walk out there daily with the kids and the dogs with a bull, cows and calves out there, another was a a calm herd but i was never as happy walking through those so the kids never came out there, the third were a nightmare-spooky and reactive but this was a more transient herd so to be expected.

all of these herds were kept in by means of a single strand of electric wire as are the majority of the cattle i see, often there is a boundary fence and the cattle or kept off different bits by the wire-if you have a PROW just temporary fence it off or supply an alternative route whilst it is grazed.

there is a saying you NEVER own the land you are just a temporary guardian, the PROW are already there farmers just need to stop being so pig headed about its mine so i can


----------



## Alec Swan (21 May 2013)

The answer,  I've decided,  is simple.  Close down all Public Footpaths,  and deny  to those walkers the freedom which they are offered and (mostly) enjoy.  

Why is it that there are those who have a "Right",  and ignoring for a moment that they may be grateful for that freedom,  they then decide upon their own agenda,  which impinges on the equal "Rights" of the person who actually owns the land?  Back to Par 1;  If walkers can't be respectful of,  and grateful for their freedom,  then it should be removed.  They'll whinge a bit,  but who cares,  they were doing that anyway.

Alec.


----------



## Alec Swan (21 May 2013)

Jools2345 said:



			.......

there is a saying you NEVER own the land you are just a temporary guardian, the PROW are already there farmers just need to stop being so pig headed about its mine so i can
		
Click to expand...

See my previous post.  Your level of ignorance is astounding.

Alec.


----------



## Flame_ (21 May 2013)

Alec, I fully understand why you would like things to be the way that you see them, but thankfully for most of us none-landowning commoners, they aren't. The law's on the side of the walkers and their safety, even that of the idiots. That is the answer, you just don't like it because it puts you out and costs you money.


----------



## JustKickOn (21 May 2013)

Flame_ said:



			Alec, I fully understand why you would like things to be the way that you see them, but thankfully for most of us none-landowning commoners, they aren't. The law's on the side of the walkers and their safety, even that of the idiots. That is the answer, you just don't like it because it puts you out and costs you money. 

Click to expand...

What a close minded opinion to have.

Why should a hard working individual have to pay out for the stupidity of another.

The dangers of cows with youngsters and bulls is publicized enough each year, it should be clear that the sensible thing to do is STEER CLEAR. With most walking routes there are alternatives - use them.


----------



## Flame_ (21 May 2013)

RiderLizzie said:



			Why should a hard working individual have to pay out for the stupidity of another.
.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think it is stupid to expect to be able to safely pass through a PROW. Whether a person is stupid or not is beside the point, the law grants them permission to do this (*not the land owners to whom some think they should be grateful*). It *is not* irresponsible or stupid to walk on a PROW, it is, however, irresponsible of a landowner to cause a PROW to be dangerous for users.


----------



## Clodagh (21 May 2013)

I do think that cattle that are dangerous should be culled, I used to work at a livery yard and they had a suckler herd and any cow that became a lunatic when she calved headed off for pies. The farmer himself had no wish to deal with them. I don't know how reasonable that would be on a real farm, he was a man who had made money in the city so could play farming. (He was a very nice person, mind!).

Having lived in Australia for years - no PROW - it would be an poorer country without them so hopefully both sides could use a bit of common sense? This debate is very polarised between farmers and people who think there should be no livestock out in fields. There must be some form of compromise that may even mean we need to think a little bit for ourselves? Those of you against animals in the countryside, do you have any suggstions other than 'ban them' or for fencing thousands of miles of footpaths? Ditto you livestock farmers.


----------



## Jools2345 (21 May 2013)

RiderLizzie said:



			What a close minded opinion to have.

Why should a hard working individual have to pay out for the stupidity of another.

The dangers of cows with youngsters and bulls is publicized enough each year, it should be clear that the sensible thing to do is STEER CLEAR. With most walking routes there are alternatives - use them.
		
Click to expand...

as others have said it would be easier to avoid the fields with livestock in if there was something at the PROW entrances to the field-most PROW dont have an alternative route in the areas i have walked in but as already suggested maybe the farmers could offer one when livestock are in a field that is a has a PROW through it.

give and take makes things work so much better


----------



## RunToEarth (21 May 2013)

Flame_ said:



			Alec, I fully understand why you would like things to be the way that you see them, but thankfully for most of us none-landowning commoners, they aren't. The law's on the side of the walkers and their safety, even that of the idiots. That is the answer, you just don't like it because it puts you out and costs you money. 

Click to expand...

Actually, it isn't. I went to a HSE confrence earlier this year as part of my job and there were several political figures there highlighting some issues that will, I believe, come to the forefront in the not too distant future. 

Firstly debated - The safety of the public during times when machinery is in the field. Not just harvest time, but during cultivations and spraying. Basically as part of most farmer's risk assessment they have opted to have a procedure of hi viz for workers/visitors on the ground whilst machinery is being operated, and those operating machinery are informed of people on the ground. This is not exclusive to the yards and farmstead but also to the wider farm, including fields. It undermines every farmer's health and safety risk assessment for there then to be members of the general public without having undertaken any risk assessment to be walking through a busy field with four or five big bits of machinery operating, without any hi viz, often during harvest time when it is (usually) dry and there is a large amount of dust kicking about just to further challenge visibility. 

Secondly debated - The disease control measures available. It is not just good practice but these days more of a necessity for all boots to be dipped prior to entering someone's farm, you would never dream of arriving on someone's farm with dirty boots, it just facilitates the transfer of all kinds of bacteria and disease - you just have to look at F&M spreads. How is it that I (as part of my job and out of basic coutesy/common sense) have to spend time cleaning my boots to an acceptable level, when joe public can wander down a PROW through farm after farm with his dirt? How is that fair to the industry. 

Lastly debated - The ever growing blame/claim culture and the cost of insuring a farm for PLI. People falling over their own feet can have a go at getting some compo, you daren't put a fence up with anything so much as a splinter risk on it because seemingly a percentage of the general public have stopped looking for their own health and safety risks in favour that if they do get hurt there is a claim for that. 




			there is a saying you NEVER own the land you are just a temporary guardian, the PROW are already there farmers just need to stop being so pig headed about its mine so i can
		
Click to expand...

What a lovely saying, completely incorrect as most farmers' title deeds will demonstrate, but don't let facts get in the way of a bitter rant.


----------



## Jools2345 (21 May 2013)

lachlanandmarcus said:



			Theyre not 'making a point', writing that clearly illustrates the fact that you are coming at this with the viewpoint that farmers using cattle fields for cattle are just doing so to try to make life difficult for you!
		
Click to expand...

of course not i was referring to cattle that have a reputation (and some do) or at times they are known to be more reactive. cows with older calves are not generally a problem it is usually only when calves are v young that the cows are very protective (unless they are stressed).

i have a few friends with cattle on the sea wall and they fence of the footpath with single strand electric wire for a few weeks then move it away from the sea wall and indicate for users to walk round the fence line out into the field so the cattle can graze the footpath and up to the sea wall edge.

i just dont get why it is such a problem for the farmers who are expecting the walkers to be sensible and courteous to be the same in return. it can prevent such heartache for all concerned and maybe start to breakdown the 'its my land and i shall do what i like with it' and the 'i have a right of way' barriers and make life easier for everyone


----------



## Jools2345 (21 May 2013)

RunToEarth
What a lovely saying said:
			
		


			thankyou

Click to expand...


----------



## JustKickOn (21 May 2013)

Flame_ said:



			I don't think it is stupid to expect to be able to safely pass through a PROW. Whether a person is stupid or not is beside the point, the law grants them permission to do this (*not the land owners to whom some think they should be grateful*). It *is not* irresponsible or stupid to walk on a PROW, it is, however, irresponsible of a landowner to cause a PROW to be dangerous for users.
		
Click to expand...

I may be wrong, but from what our farmer has said, the landowner has the option to no longer allow a PROW to go through their land. By them allowing them to stay open, yes it does say to people "Use the walk ways", but there must be some sort of respect shown to them. 

Some people seem to lack the judgement of situations which may be unsafe. It could be down to a lack of education about agriculture and livestock in which case a national campaign about the do's and don't may be beneficial to everyone. But with some people it is sheer bloody-mindedness and ignorance to an animal's natural response when feeling threatened. I also don't think stupidity is beside the point at all, the inability to maintain a sense of personal preservation is dangerous in any situation. 



Jools2345 said:



			as others have said it would be easier to avoid the fields with livestock in if there was something at the PROW entrances to the field-most PROW dont have an alternative route in the areas i have walked in but as already suggested maybe the farmers could offer one when livestock are in a field that is a has a PROW through it.

give and take makes things work so much better
		
Click to expand...

I don't quite understand what you mean by "something at the PROW entrances...". Do you mean a blockage caused by livestock, or signs warning people of the dangers?

It is very much a give and take situation, but from experiences of the farms by me, the public seems to be the ones doing all of the taking and rarely adhere to the requests made by the farmer. The requests are nothing unreasonable; leave gates as you find them (ie. shut), keep dogs on leads in fields with livestock, clear up your dog mess and avoid routes if a sign indicates so.

When foot and mouth was about, all the routes round here were closed, and the drive down to the farm and the end of our road had wheel and foot washes. There was one woman who continued to walk her dog in the fields, despite the signs, warnings, the farmer and us residents asking and then telling her not to. It took the involvement of the police to stop her!!
When they were reopened, the farmer remarked all of the paths out, trimmed hedges and revamped a lot of the entrances. For what?? He was shocked nobody said thank you when he announced the reopening of his fields and then had to go round a close a load of gates when some fool let the cows into another field!
Now I know this is just one farm and one example, but it is incidents like this where I think people need to understand the problems which farmers encounter, and why they tend to hold certain opinions about people coming on their land.

Following 'providing an alternative' and somebody suggested earlier fencing off a path for people to follow, who will fund this? The people who want to walk the path or the farmer. I personally think that if somebody is not willing to contribute (not even financially) to an area that they use, then they should not be using it at all.


----------



## Spudlet (21 May 2013)

It would be a sad day if we lost PROWs in this country. It would do nothing for anyone - either users of these paths, or farmers who would lose a massive amount of public goodwill. When farmers want us all to buy local and buy British then it would seem daft to alienate people with the sorts of opinions some have expressed on here - I'd be boycotting a few farm shops if I thought their owners despised me as much as some on here seem to. And then nobody wins, do they?

I for one would hate to be confined to the suburbanised, sterile, neatly pathed 'country parks' that give no sense of connection to the real life of the country.

ETA RiderLizzie I'd like to thank the farmers who keep their paths well around here because it is noticed - it's so unBritish though isn't it? I'd be too embarrassed to do it in person! So local farmers to me - thanks for the lovely paths  We do appreciate them!


----------



## Jools2345 (21 May 2013)

RiderLizzie said:



			I may be wrong, but from what our farmer has said, the landowner has the option to no longer allow a PROW to go through their land. By them allowing them to stay open, yes it does say to people "Use the walk ways", but there must be some sort of respect shown to them.

if that was the case they would all have closed yrs ago, a land owner cannot close a public right of way, it is the law that dictates its existence, to have one re-routed permanently requires the land owner to jump through many hoops   


I don't quite understand what you mean by "something at the PROW entrances...". Do you mean a blockage caused by livestock, or signs warning people of the dangers?

i meant something to say livestock are in the field

It is very much a give and take situation, but from experiences of the farms by me, the public seems to be the ones doing all of the taking and rarely adhere to the requests made by the farmer. The requests are nothing unreasonable; leave gates as you find them (ie. shut), keep dogs on leads in fields with livestock, clear up your dog mess and avoid routes if a sign indicates so.

When foot and mouth was about, all the routes round here were closed, and the drive down to the farm and the end of our road had wheel and foot washes. There was one woman who continued to walk her dog in the fields, despite the signs, warnings, the farmer and us residents asking and then telling her not to. It took the involvement of the police to stop her!!
When they were reopened, the farmer remarked all of the paths out, trimmed hedges and revamped a lot of the entrances. For what?? He was shocked nobody said thank you when he announced the reopening of his fields and then had to go round a close a load of gates when some fool let the cows into another field!

it would have been nice if people said thank you and i for onewould but i suppose many people see it as part of his job which by law as the owner o land with a PROW he is required to keep routes accesible

Now I know this is just one farm and one example, but it is incidents like this where I think people need to understand the problems which farmers encounter, and why they tend to hold certain opinions about people coming on their land.

Following 'providing an alternative' and somebody suggested earlier fencing off a path for people to follow, who will fund this? The people who want to walk the path or the farmer. I personally think that if somebody is not willing to contribute (not even financially) to an area that they use, then they should not be using it at all.
		
Click to expand...

pig tail stakes and electric wire are normally found on every farm so cost would notbe an issue


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (21 May 2013)

Jools2345 said:



			pig tail stakes and electric wire are normally found on every farm so cost would notbe an issue
		
Click to expand...

Um no they aren't!! I don't know any cattle farmers who use that, they use permanent fencing. and to keep cattle in away from dogs you would need mains electric connection power not a leisure battery and energiser (both of which which would be nicked from beside footpaths anyway). You are talking 000s!


----------



## RunToEarth (21 May 2013)

Jools2345 said:



			pig tail stakes and electric wire are normally found on every farm so cost would notbe an issue
		
Click to expand...

I have never seen anyone successfully fencing cattle with electric fencing and stakes, it just does not work, cattle have a LOT higher pain threshold than horses and have no respect for such fencing. 




			I may be wrong, but from what our farmer has said, the landowner has the option to no longer allow a PROW to go through their land. By them allowing them to stay open, yes it does say to people "Use the walk ways", but there must be some sort of respect shown to them.

if that was the case they would all have closed yrs ago, a land owner cannot close a public right of way, it is the law that dictates its existence, to have one re-routed permanently requires the land owner to jump through many hoops
		
Click to expand...

Permissive PROWs and alterations can be ended/amended by the landowner. We have four premissive PROWs and 6 alterations, they make everyone's life easier and we would hate to close them. 
The first permissive access was opened because people kept straying through a gap in the wall to walk along the bankings and admire the view. It is the most amazing view in the world, but it was incredibly annoying that people were pushing the wall down to get to it, so we added a permissive PROW that links up with the definitive PROW further up the track, and this view is too good not to share 





Regardless of WHO dictates the access rights in this country, I don't think it is too much to ask to be grateful you are allowed access over other people's land, business, livelihood. The vast majority are, but the people who believe they have a divine right and don't have to be thankful to us just annoy me.


----------



## Ranyhyn (21 May 2013)

We have had stock mauled.  We constantly see people in our field, using the footpath or rather using the field at liberty  It's a footPATH not a free for all parcel of land!


----------



## Jools2345 (21 May 2013)

lachlanandmarcus said:



			Um no they aren't!! I don't know any cattle farmers who use that, they use permanent fencing. and to keep cattle in away from dogs you would need mains electric connection power not a leisure battery and energiser (both of which which would be nicked from beside footpaths anyway). You are talking 000s!
		
Click to expand...


then the cattle i have been involved with over the years have been very very unusual as that have mostly had permanent boundary fencing and then been strip grazed using a single strand of electric wire


----------



## Jools2345 (21 May 2013)

ok just to clear some stuff up the following is from www.gov.uk website.

Public rights of way

Public rights of way are open to everyone. They can be roads, paths or tracks, and can run through towns, countryside or private property.

You have the right to walk along them. Some rights of way are also open to horse riders, cyclists or motorists:

    footpaths - let you go by foot only
    bridleways - let you go by foot, horse or bike
    restricted byways - let you travel by any form of transport that doesnt have a motor
    byways open to all traffic - let you travel by any form of transport, including cars (though theyre mainly used by walkers and horse riders)

Rights of way in England, Wales and Northern Ireland

You can find rights of way:

    on Ordnance Survey (OS) maps
    in guide books
    on local council websites
    while walking  rights of way are often marked with coloured arrows

Problems in using a right of way

The people who own or maintain the land must keep public rights of way open and useable.

If you have a problem using a right of way - eg an obstruction, poor maintenance or a misleading sign  you should report it to:

    the National Park Authority if its in a national park
    the local highway authority  you can contact them through your local council
    the Forestry Commission in woodland

Changing a public right of way

Local councils can:

    make new routes - where they think theres a need
    get rid of a route - if it can be shown that theres no longer a need for it, or to prevent crime (eg if it is allowing robbery or drug dealing to take place)
    change the route temporarily or permanently - but only if the new route is just as convenient

Apply to your council if you think a public right of way should be changed or removed.

If you dont agree with a decision, you can appeal to the Secretary of State.

 Part 4: Landowner rights and responsibilities

If your land has a public right of way (PROW) on it, you must:

    provide and maintain stiles and gates
    cut back overhanging vegetation that may obstruct the PROW
    ensure that field-edge paths are left free from cultivation for the legal minimum width of 1.5 metres for a public footpath and 3 metres for a public bridleway

You can disturb the surface of a footpath or bridleway across a field in order to plough the land. However, if you do this you must:

    make good the surface of the path - within 14 days if youre sowing a crop, or within 24 hours in all other circumstances
    return the surface to at least the minimum width - a cross-field footpath must be at least 1 metre wide, a bridleway must be at least 2 metres wide
    use signs to show the route

Obstructions

Obstructing a PROW is a criminal offence. Local councils can tell you to remove an obstruction. If you dont do it, they can remove the obstruction and charge you for the work.
Pesticides

You should only use pesticides approved for use on PROWs, and follow the product instructions carefully.
Animals

No dairy bull over 10 months of age may be allowed to roam freely in a field crossed by a PROW.

Bulls of all other breeds must be accompanied by cows or heifers when in fields which have public access.

Horses may be kept loose in fields crossed by PROWs, as long as they are not known to be dangerous.

You can be prosecuted if you keep a potentially dangerous animal on land crossed by a PROW.


----------



## Jools2345 (21 May 2013)

BoolavogueDC said:



			We have had stock mauled.  We constantly see people in our field, using the footpath or rather using the field at liberty  It's a footPATH not a free for all parcel of land!
		
Click to expand...

its terrible that people even think of mauling animals


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (21 May 2013)

Jools2345 said:



			its terrible that people even think of mauling animals
		
Click to expand...

Strangely those of us who have lost sheep and lambs to dog attacks find it hard to find any humour, even in typos / grammar....:-(


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (21 May 2013)

Jools2345 said:



			ok just to clear some stuff up the following is from www.gov.uk website.

Public rights of way

Public rights of way are open to everyone. They can be roads, paths or tracks, and can run through towns, countryside or private property.

You have the right to walk along them. Some rights of way are also open to horse riders, cyclists or motorists:

    footpaths - let you go by foot only
    bridleways - let you go by foot, horse or bike
    restricted byways - let you travel by any form of transport that doesnt have a motor
    byways open to all traffic - let you travel by any form of transport, including cars (though theyre mainly used by walkers and horse riders)

Rights of way in England, Wales and Northern Ireland

You can find rights of way:

    on Ordnance Survey (OS) maps
    in guide books
    on local council websites
    while walking  rights of way are often marked with coloured arrows

Problems in using a right of way

The people who own or maintain the land must keep public rights of way open and useable.

If you have a problem using a right of way - eg an obstruction, poor maintenance or a misleading sign  you should report it to:

    the National Park Authority if its in a national park
    the local highway authority  you can contact them through your local council
    the Forestry Commission in woodland

Changing a public right of way

Local councils can:

    make new routes - where they think theres a need
    get rid of a route - if it can be shown that theres no longer a need for it, or to prevent crime (eg if it is allowing robbery or drug dealing to take place)
    change the route temporarily or permanently - but only if the new route is just as convenient

Apply to your council if you think a public right of way should be changed or removed.

If you dont agree with a decision, you can appeal to the Secretary of State.

 Part 4: Landowner rights and responsibilities

If your land has a public right of way (PROW) on it, you must:

    provide and maintain stiles and gates
    cut back overhanging vegetation that may obstruct the PROW
    ensure that field-edge paths are left free from cultivation for the legal minimum width of 1.5 metres for a public footpath and 3 metres for a public bridleway

You can disturb the surface of a footpath or bridleway across a field in order to plough the land. However, if you do this you must:

    make good the surface of the path - within 14 days if youre sowing a crop, or within 24 hours in all other circumstances
    return the surface to at least the minimum width - a cross-field footpath must be at least 1 metre wide, a bridleway must be at least 2 metres wide
    use signs to show the route

Obstructions

Obstructing a PROW is a criminal offence. Local councils can tell you to remove an obstruction. If you dont do it, they can remove the obstruction and charge you for the work.
Pesticides

You should only use pesticides approved for use on PROWs, and follow the product instructions carefully.
Animals

No dairy bull over 10 months of age may be allowed to roam freely in a field crossed by a PROW.

Bulls of all other breeds must be accompanied by cows or heifers when in fields which have public access.

Horses may be kept loose in fields crossed by PROWs, as long as they are not known to be dangerous.

You can be prosecuted if you keep a potentially dangerous animal on land crossed by a PROW.

Click to expand...

Quite, which is why the exclusions that are not permitted to be kept are specified, and those not specified are NOT regarded as inherently dangerous and are perfectly legally kept in PROW fields.

Not dangerous provided one isn't arrogant enough and daft enough to take a dog through between cows and calves etc.....but that is an avoidable risk. You will notice that taking a dog with you is not positively specified as a right, it is something that those with a right make a decision to take with them and they need to exercise common sense about where and how they do this


----------



## Alec Swan (21 May 2013)

Jools2345 said:



			its terrible that people even think of mauling animals
		
Click to expand...

You may well find that BoolavogueDC meant sheep being mauled by dogs,  rather than by people. 

Alec.


----------



## Jools2345 (21 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			You may well find that BoolavogueDC meant sheep being mauled by dogs,  rather than by people. 

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

duh yes i see that now


----------



## Alec Swan (21 May 2013)

Jools2345 said:



			.......

You can be prosecuted if you keep a potentially dangerous animal on land crossed by a PROW.

Click to expand...

Every single living animal which could be classed as farm livestock,  has the potential to be dangerous.  Every single one.  Would you care to be a little more specific,  from your quotations,  or would you prefer that no grassland is grazed?

Alec.


----------



## Jools2345 (21 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			Every single living animal which could be classed as farm livestock,  has the potential to be dangerous.  Every single one.  Would you care to be a little more specific,  from your quotations,  or would you prefer that no grassland is grazed?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...


it would not be a quote if i did that it would be a quote with my owns views added to it

the whole thing I posted is a direct quote-you have outlined one of my points really it is all down to interpretation


----------



## Alec Swan (21 May 2013)

Jools,

that doesn't answer the question.  

What does answer the general quandary though,  is that if walkers are going to insist upon putting themselves at risk,  when livestock keepers are exercising their rights of usage,  and if those who are exercising a "convenience"  as opposed to  a "need" are going to insist upon their "Rights",  then in consultation with all stakeholders,  there will need to be a ruling which gives one,  or the other side of the equation a ruling.  Either those who farm,  and those who keep horses,  will be barred from grazing land which has a PROW going through it,  because of the perceived danger,  or,  when livestock are present,  then there will be the right to shut down those PROW,  which are affected.

The problem with the above paragraph will be that there will undoubtably be those farmers,  so irate with the lack of general courtesy shown by many "walkers",  that they'll keep livestock in place,  virtually permanently,  and so to keep their boundaries secure.

Is that what the pro users would want,  or are they prepared to consider a common sense approach,  and keep out when livestock are present?  By and large,  I'd suggest that the Farming community assist with the recreational aspect of their land,  but there are those,  a couple on here for certain,  who being the most vociferous minority,  want to spoil it for the majority.

Alec.


----------



## mon (21 May 2013)

We have a footpath going through the middle of our home field where horses graze, won't put heavy in calf or freshly calved cows in there, had no trouble but it then goes into a fenced off bit of someone elses horse field which is overgrown and full of rabbit holes then over three lines of very busy and fast rail track, rail way wanted to divert path to closer to our house so they don't go over track but we can fore see problems so won't allow it to bediverted.


----------



## Pebble101 (21 May 2013)

BoolavogueDC said:



			We have had stock mauled.  We constantly see people in our field, using the footpath or rather using the field at liberty  It's a footPATH not a free for all parcel of land!
		
Click to expand...

Our drive is a public bridleway and therefore we get a lot of walkers and cyclists along here too.  We have had people having a picnic on our front lawn before!


----------



## Flame_ (21 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			those who are exercising a "convenience"  as opposed to  a "need"

Nobody "needs" a field, most of us survive perfectly well without one, you "want" to use your field for good reasons, as do others. 

Is that what the pro users would want,  or are they prepared to consider a common sense approach,  and keep out when livestock are present?
		
Click to expand...

That is not a common sense approach, that is admitting the ROW is obstructed.


----------



## hayley.t (21 May 2013)

I don't think there are many farmers who would keep proven aggressive cattle at all, and especially not on PROW. One of our bulls put my OH through a post and rail fence last year and went the very same day. The problem is that any cow could have the potential to hurt somebody, they are large, unpredictable animals. My problem with all this is that i fail to see how a farmer be held responsible for an accident if there had never been any prior warning/ incident and he had not taken risks or is each case dealt with individually? I just feel relieved reading this that we have a very small section of footpath and that the dairy girls are usually in that field.


----------



## Alec Swan (21 May 2013)

Alec Swan said:



			.......,  but there are those,  a couple on here for certain,  who being the most vociferous minority,  want to spoil it for the majority.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

flame,  I'd suggest that you are part of a minority.  Though being a minority,  your views will be ignored!! 

Alec.


----------



## mon (21 May 2013)

Where does it say on Jools quote dogs are allowed on footpaths?


----------



## Ranyhyn (21 May 2013)

WARNING GRAPHIC PICS!


Sorry I don't see what was so dreadfully incoherant about my post lol 

Anyway yes, I mean our sheep got mauled by two dogs.  I certainly did not find it funny when I found this, at some 4 months pregnant (me) and her


----------



## hayley.t (21 May 2013)

Boolavogue- that is devestating .


----------



## Goldenstar (21 May 2013)

hayley.t said:



			I don't think there are many farmers who would keep proven aggressive cattle at all, and especially not on PROW. One of our bulls put my OH through a post and rail fence last year and went the very same day. The problem is that any cow could have the potential to hurt somebody, they are large, unpredictable animals. My problem with all this is that i fail to see how a farmer be held responsible for an accident if there had never been any prior warning/ incident and he had not taken risks or is each case dealt with individually? I just feel relieved reading this that we have a very small section of footpath and that the dairy girls are usually in that field.
		
Click to expand...

But are farmers blamed when these unfortunate and sad  incidents occur, I don't think they are and they will hold liability insurance if they are .
Proven aggressive cattle are got rid of but unfortunatly awful accidents happen I easily could have been killed the incident that I posted at the beginning of the thread .
The farmer in that incident was horrified when he arrived he saw the horse rear and go over but did not see I was on my feet until he got to the field he thought they had killed me they easily could have it would not have been the farmers fault he could not have foreseen it .
It is thought that bot flys had wound the bullocks up I don't know if that's possible I was too busy being grateful  that the horse and I had escaped in one piece.in this case the farmer was lovely and had my horse and a pony to stay so the horse could graze with cows .


----------



## Goldenstar (21 May 2013)

BoolavogueDC that's is just awful .


----------



## Ranyhyn (21 May 2013)

Well the good news is she lived and gave birth to lovely twin lambs.

The bad news is nothing ever came of it, the police felt the evidence of finding the dogs in the field wasn't strong enough to prosecute the owners.  

And Helga popped her clogs this year 

What was worse than the injuries was the fear, you can see it in her.  She was totally prepared to be eaten alive really.


----------



## mon (21 May 2013)

How many dog owners have PL insurance for them? A lot would but not all then hassle of claiming.


----------



## Ibblebibble (22 May 2013)

http://www.wiltshiretimes.co.uk/new...s_and_fencing_go_up_at_tragic_Turleigh_field/


----------



## Honey08 (24 May 2013)

Phew!  Epic thread.

Around here, lots of fields have signs on.  Sheep fields often have "Lambing Season, please keep all dogs on leads".  Beef fields have "Warning, cows can be very protective of their young".

Personally I think that there has to be a bit of give and take on both sides.  I think its wrong to simply expect people to stay out of fields with stock in - many footpaths around here have stock in all year and some of the "less personable" farmers around here would delight in putting "dodgy"stock in that would prevent people going across paths if it became the norm.

We have two footpaths on our land.  One goes down the edge of the field, so we have fenced a 4' strip off so that the path is totally away from any stock (horses and sheep in this case).  There is an outward bound school next to the field, so the path is used almost daily by junior school children, so I prefer them safely seperated.  The second path goes across a field and can't be fenced off or the horses couldn't get to the stream to drink.  When we had a bargy livery we fenced an intermittent line of plain fence across, so the horses could get through the gaps and the people could duck under the fence if they felt threatened.  If I had cattle on that field I would probably fence the footpath, leaving gaps regularly for the cattle to get across, but meaning that the public and their dogs were safely out of the way in a path fenced on both sides.  Yes it would cost me a few hundred to do it, but to me it would be worth it for peace of mind and keeping people safe (and TBH I prefer people kept out of the field anyway, stops them deviating - we are always getting people playing on our smaller XC fences with their dogs - sometimes even half a field off the path..)   We are lucky around here in that the footpaths are maintained and stiles are replaced by the council.

I think a lot of people saying "people should walk elsewhere"  are like me, lucky enough to live on a farm and walk our dogs on our own land, never much using paths etc, or we live in areas with a big network of paths, so we don't know how important some paths are to people.  The issue becomes more difficult when the paths are few and far between and in a more urban area.


----------



## MerrySherryRider (24 May 2013)

mon said:



			Where does it say on Jools quote dogs are allowed on footpaths?
		
Click to expand...

Countryside and Rights of Way Act. 
 Dogs and prams are seen as natural accompaniments and are therefore allowed. 

Many farmers and landowners are community spirited and are really good about taking reasonable steps to ensure that the public and their livestock don't come to harm. 

However, the farmer in Turleigh where a walker was recently killed, knew he had a problem. 4 serious attacks in 5 years to walkers both with and without dogs. He choose to do nothing, until now that the police are involved, despite having paid huge compensation for the attacks.

 I do wonder if those criticising walkers for exercising their 'right' to walk on footpaths take their holidays in cities. Can't imagine them walking around the Lake District or the coast line on other landowners private land, seeing their objections to public access.


----------



## mon (24 May 2013)

I don't have holidays, we don't have problems with footpaths but would foresee problems if network rail were to force us to have it diverted that's why we wont allow it moved, if they are worried about FP going over tracks they will either have to put an over or under pass or close FP.


----------



## RunToEarth (24 May 2013)

horserider said:



			I do wonder if those criticising walkers for exercising their 'right' to walk on footpaths take their holidays in cities. Can't imagine them walking around the Lake District or the coast line on other landowners private land, seeing their objections to public access.
		
Click to expand...

I wasn't criticising walkers for exercising their rights to walk on footpaths, I was suggesting that sometimes it may require a judgement call. 

I am a great believer in PROWs if they are used considerately by both landowner and user, and after three years of university my love of them was considerately reinforced - even though I went to Ag College in the rolling Cotswolds I would have had a miserable time confined to the streets of Cirencester, they are essential and I think the vast majority of landowners agree that it would be a terrible shame to lose them. 

There does need to be a mutual respect for one another and although in the mostpart there is, when one party takes the pee out of the other it ruins it for everyone.


----------



## Alec Swan (27 May 2013)

Did anyone watch Countryfile last night?  Did you see the guy with the 20 Hereford first calvers,  with their calves at foot,  and he said that they had to be quiet cattle,  as _"walkers with dogs"_  used the public footpath which went through the field?  

Everyone with ruminants needs the grass which they have,  we all know,  but that was tempting fate.

Alec.


----------



## Honeylight (27 May 2013)

Perhaps one of the problems is the breed of cattle in the fields. Dairy & beef have always been cross bred of course, but are the continentals, limousin, charollais, simmentels & MRY's more temperamental mixed with dairy breeds? Does breeding for increased dairy yield have a factor in this too?
They said that Herefords are a quiet breed, though I have heard that Galloways are not.
Keeping males uncastrated to reduce fatty beef must be a factor too.


----------



## That old chestnut (28 May 2013)

We were walking our dog yesterday (we our young children) when the footpath we were following took us through a field of cattle.  Walkers were coming the other way through the field without a problem, but the cows were showing too much interest in our dog through the fencing and so was she. I know there was an incident last year along the same footpath were a lady was attacked by cows when walking her two rotties.   There was an alternative footpath through another gate and around a hill which we took.  We skirted around the hill and then up another one where we sat and admired the view for a while. Imagine our concern when we set off down to realise the cows appeared below us; we had mistakenly thought they were fenced off, but obviously not.  Still they walked past and ignored us and the dog was extremely well behaved.  She had been off the lead, but although I know she is fine around horses, she hasn't met too many cows and never in the same field so I did pop her lead back on.


----------



## Lizzie66 (29 May 2013)

I've been reading this with varying degrees of amusement, agreement and annoyance. To those that feel that PROW gives you rights but no responsibilities I wonder why you are on this forum at all. If you have horses then you have to know that give and take is essential to have a happy and peaceful coexistence with other riders and road users.

If you are out hacking and pootling at walk on a bridlepath and someone overtakes you at gallop without a word you would probably be more than a little annoyed, but why ? They have perfect right to do what they want when they want, they don't have any need to consider you.

Showing consideration to others is important, the farmers have a legal duty to maintain PROWS, they also have a legal right to keep stock in their fields. Sometimes they may have no option as to which field to use, they may have crops in other fields, they may have already put their more "dangerous" herds in other fields, they could have fields under flood, or pure volume of PROWs across their fields may give them no options. 

It is every persons duty to take reasonable care of their own H&S, so if your are going walking in an area you are unfamiliar with then do a quick search on the internet. This will tell you that when walking dogs in the countryside you should keep them under control and on leads around sheep, and avoid going through fields with cattle in where possible. If you must go through a field with cattle in then walk along the perimeter and be ready to loose your dog if necessary.

Or maybe farmers should tarmac all their footpaths and put in 8ft solid fences either side of the path. This would keep you perfectly safe with no risk ! The fact that you would have no countryside to view and might as well be walking through the middle of any town housing estate would just be one of those crosses you have to bear for being totally "safe".


----------



## Spook (29 May 2013)

Funnily enough Lizzie66 we did once have walkers come to the house to complain that they could not get through one of the ROW gates without getting muddy...... the gate was fastened open too, but they were wearing white trainers. Maybe tarmac would have been cleaner.


----------



## Ranyhyn (29 May 2013)

That old chestnut, I believe it would be totally safer for your family and you, if you let go your dog, in the close proximity of angry cattle. (I know in this case they weren't and you probably know this!!)
 I'm pretty sure the dog would be more of interest to them, than you.

I remember reading last year wasn't it, about that man and his 'bull dog' wasn't it, that got killed (the cows were after the dog and the man kept the lead so they both had it )  whilst I understand only too well the desire to keep your dog safe...it's likely it can outrun cattle, whereas you cannot..probbaly  unless you are very fast!


----------



## hayley.t (29 May 2013)

Lizzie66- good point very well made.


----------



## felixlight (29 May 2013)

MurphysMinder said:



			There have been a number of incidents where people (and dogs) have been killed by cattle. There was someone on here whose bulldog was killed if I recall. 
Most doggy people I know are aware of the risk, but obviously it isn't as common knowledge as I thought.
As to dogs killing stock, I have no idea how the message will ever get through to people.  I read just this morning of 2 alpaca being killed by dogs.
		
Click to expand...

But how can it not be common sense that if you take a dog, a prey animal, into a field of cows and calves, they may well defend themselves, It ib just another illustration of the menace of dogs and all the idiots who just cannot see that they are not suitable as pets.


----------



## Alec Swan (30 May 2013)

felixlight said:



			....... It ib just another illustration of the menace of dogs and all the idiots who just cannot see that they are not suitable as pets.
		
Click to expand...

Post that in AAD,  it'll go down a treat!! 

Alec.


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (30 May 2013)

felixlight said:



			But how can it not be common sense that if you take a dog, a prey animal, into a field of cows and calves, they may well defend themselves, It ib just another illustration of the menace of dogs and all the idiots who just cannot see that they are not suitable as pets.
		
Click to expand...

I think you mean predator animal.....


----------



## Lizzie66 (30 May 2013)

Spook said:



			Funnily enough Lizzie66 we did once have walkers come to the house to complain that they could not get through one of the ROW gates without getting muddy...... the gate was fastened open too, but they were wearing white trainers. Maybe tarmac would have been cleaner.
		
Click to expand...

There we go then, probelm solved, get out there tarmacing paths and fencing them in with solid 8ft panels !


----------



## windand rain (31 May 2013)

To put a  bit of perspective on this more people are killed putting their trousers on than are killed by livestock so I guess if you wear trousers and or walk in a cow field you are placing yourself at risk what ever you do
I do walk my dog on a ROW every day there are beef cattle about but I make sure she is at heel and off lead so she can run away from them. They only have mild nuisance value when they first come to the fields as they are curious about everything they soon get used to people and dogs and ignore you. So I am happy to walk my well behaved wussy dog through the cattle  and if I have an accident so be it it is so rare as to be inconsequential to me
The farmer has signs that just say cattle in the field so you can make an informed decision


----------



## windand rain (31 May 2013)

I will add she is always on a lead if I hear/see sheep as I am aware they can be very nervous and will react adversely to her running about even if she is no where near them. I can rely on her to stay with me but it is unfair with such nervous animals to take any risk what so ever. I wouldnt walk through a field of cows and calves or in fact a field of horses as I reckon they would be even more dangerous because of their curiosity. 
I am glad my rented land has no PROW as I have a pony that would need to be fences away from it so great is his hatred of children he could prove dangerous


----------



## Hann_Annie (6 June 2013)

How do I post a new thread? Anybody? Feel so stupid


----------



## catembi (6 June 2013)

Come out of this thread & click the blue 'new thread' button, top left?  It's where the 'reply to thread' button is if you're looking at this thread?

If that makes sense!

T x


----------

