footpath width

[cowslippers]

@cowslippers . I always ty to be neutral on this Forum. However, You are still having a very onesided view. You are using ''Public Footpaths'', not Public Paw Paths.
The fact you have a dog when walking (or thinking of walking) through a field with cattle will massively heighten your risk of Danger.
Cattle should not be restricted by fences just to suit you and your dog. If you were to walk through a field in a gentle and quiet manner without a dog. There would be very little risk to you. If you keep your eyes on the cattle at all times and give them the respect you are asking other on here to give you. You will be fine. However, walk with your puppy and the story will be different.
Would you walk your dog off the lead through the centre of the town on a quiet day?

As stated above, dogs are natural accompaniments and I think there are lots of examples of onesided thinking (as I'd expect on a farming forum!) from your side of the fence. It obviously depends on individual circumstances, but putting cows with calves in a field where the public (the majority of cow issues occur when dogs are present, but not all) are present seems risky IF there is a way to put them in another field, or add a permissive path to detour around them. Sometimes I've walked miles on footpaths and bridle ways only to find that the last field before exiting that PROW has cows in it. So do I then stop and go back 3 miles to avoid them or do I try to detour around them?

No, I wouldn't walk my dog in the centre of town on any day off lead. I don't walk him off lead though a field with cows or other livestock in it though. Where there is a path without livestock, he's off the lead.

 

[DrWazzock]

I still think there should be more made of getting paid to put up with and look after these paths and the accompanying intrusion and nuisance. Dogs breaking crops down and aggravating livestock comes as a cost. Public funds for public goods. Public footpath. The clues in the name. Public. So where’s the cash?

 

[cowslippers]

I'll spin this around and use your point of view... If you walk across FARM land, and you expect to not encounter FARM ANIMALS. Thats really not going to happen. No matter how many times you mention that walkers out number farmers and that farmers will just have to get used to it. The FARM animals will vastly out number public dogs on footpaths so I suggest you get used to the fact.

So why did that herd of highland cattle in the Peak district get turfed out of that PROW recently? Because they were endangering the public and the landowner would not undertake to make adjustments to stop that happening. They'd been there 40 years. It's ridiculous to get to that situation when the council could have worked with the farmer to build a simple flipping fence or put in temporary fencing whilst a serious hedge grew. Not all, but many, farmers have already ripped out historic hedgerows to create megafields, so losing a 10ft strip of land is not that serious an issue in *all* cases. Some, maybe, but if the alternative is losing your herd like happened above, then what would you rather do?

 

[betweenthelines]

The point to remember is that it's farmland first and foremost, any RoW is secondary.

Therefore the question should not be "is it safe to put cows with calves in a field where people take their dogs?" but "Should people take their dogs into fields where there are cows with calves?"

 

[cowslippers]

The point to remember is that it's farmland first and foremost, any RoW is secondary.

Therefore the question should not be "is it safe to put cows with calves in a field where people take their dogs?" but "Should people take their dogs into fields where there are cows with calves?"

That's not the legal position. Also if there is no other way through, what alternatives do people have? As above, if people have walked a fair distance and then encounter a cow field, what do you expect them to do? Levitate? Abandon the dog?

 

[DrWazzock]

Well if the public want enhancements over and above a basic path through a cattle field which is what the path always was, then let’s see the cash. Or are we expected to do the work for free? The people who want the enhancements should pay up. If the footpath was drawn through a cattle field then it’s hardly the farmers fault so why should he be liable to sort out problems arising from new types of usage including leisure activities involving dog walking.

 

[cowslippers]

Well if the public want enhancements over and above a basic path through a cattle field which is what the path always was, then let’s see the cash. Or are we expected to do the work for free? The people who want the enhancements should pay up. If the footpath was drawn through a cattle field then it’s hardly the farmers fault so why should he be liable to sort out problems arising from new types of usage including leisure activities involving dog walking.

I suspect - although I confess I don't know - that the vast majority of footpaths were there before it became a cow field (or sheep field, or wheat field, whatever). The dog is secondary to this debate. Walkers walk without dogs. They also have the same issues, albeit not to the same extent. If some genius could invent a barrier system that gave the public access to fields/footpaths for an annual subscription (e.g. a key) then I'd happily pay to use the footpaths and contribute to their upkeep. Whether enough others would do to make it economically viable or not, I've no idea.

Why is walking a "new type of usage"? It's clearly demonstrable that cattle cause walkers problems even when they don't have a dog.

 

[Fendt516profi]

I suspect - although I confess I don't know - that the vast majority of footpaths were there before it became a cow field (or sheep field, or wheat field, whatever). The dog is secondary to this debate. Walkers walk without dogs. They also have the same issues, albeit not to the same extent. If some genius could invent a barrier system that gave the public access to fields/footpaths for an annual subscription (e.g. a key) then I'd happily pay to use the footpaths and contribute to their upkeep. Whether enough others would do to make it economically viable or not, I've no idea.

Why is walking a "new type of usage"? It's clearly demonstrable that cattle cause walkers problems even when they don't have a dog.

Who were these people and where did they walk too? Cause I suspect but don't know that the people who walked these paths were farmers and farmworkers who walked from their houses to their jobs or into towns for their supplies. One bit of evidence I do have is a path locally that people claim is a footpath stops at the front door of the house that would of farmed the land at the time they're now claiming the house is blocking the right of way even though the house predates the definitive map

 

[Highland Mule]

As for the claim that a RoW devalues property, I would love to see any evidence to support this.

Read back a couple of pages on this very thread - I asked the question and that was the answer given. It makes sense to me, as I would think very carefully before paying full price for something that I could only partially use/ enjoy.

 

[7610 super q]

I suspect - although I confess I don't know - that the vast majority of footpaths were there before it became a cow field (or sheep field, or wheat field, whatever). The dog is secondary to this debate. Walkers walk without dogs. They also have the same issues, albeit not to the same extent. If some genius could invent a barrier system that gave the public access to fields/footpaths for an annual subscription (e.g. a key) then I'd happily pay to use the footpaths and contribute to their upkeep. Whether enough others would do to make it economically viable or not, I've no idea.

Why is walking a "new type of usage"? It's clearly demonstrable that cattle cause walkers problems even when they don't have a dog.

Highly unlikely. Most paths follow hedgelines which suggest hedges were laid out first. Hedges were the original method of livestock enclosure. My troublesome footpath goes around the perimeter of my medieval farmstead, but not unfortunately around the 1960's " modern " farm buildings. Lunacy took hold sometime in the early 20th Century.
As said, paths were laid out for locals to move between farms, to the nearest village & church. They were not laid out for recreational use.
The idea that someone's living should be curtailed because of someone else's hobby is ridiculous.

THE COUNTRYSIDE IS NOT A FREE AMUSEMENT PARK.

 

[Robt]

As stated above, dogs are natural accompaniments and I think there are lots of examples of onesided thinking (as I'd expect on a farming forum!) from your side of the fence. It obviously depends on individual circumstances, but putting cows with calves in a field where the public (the majority of cow issues occur when dogs are present, but not all) are present seems risky IF there is a way to put them in another field, or add a permissive path to detour around them. Sometimes I've walked miles on footpaths and bridle ways only to find that the last field before exiting that PROW has cows in it. So do I then stop and go back 3 miles to avoid them or do I try to detour around them?

No, I wouldn't walk my dog in the centre of town on any day off lead. I don't walk him off lead though a field with cows or other livestock in it though. Where there is a path without livestock, he's off the lead.

Again, lets debate and play devils advocate. What do you class as livestock? what about ground nesting birds, other wildlife. Can you honeslty say if a hare or similar got up in front of your dog and ran, That your dog wouldnt run away? Very few if any on here are attacking you or being onesided. Farmers move cows on a rotational rather than decide where is best to suit footpaths. They do this to encourage sustainable use of THEIR grazing fields. So its not always possible to NOT put cows on a field with a footpath.
You are being just as one sided as the few on here that arent as friendly as youd like. We activly encourage good debate on here. 99% are very good and happy to hear your side. But to debate you too must be happy to hear the other side.

 

[Robt]

So why did that herd of highland cattle in the Peak district get turfed out of that PROW recently? Because they were endangering the public and the landowner would not undertake to make adjustments to stop that happening. They'd been there 40 years. It's ridiculous to get to that situation when the council could have worked with the farmer to build a simple flipping fence or put in temporary fencing whilst a serious hedge grew. Not all, but many, farmers have already ripped out historic hedgerows to create megafields, so losing a 10ft strip of land is not that serious an issue in *all* cases. Some, maybe, but if the alternative is losing your herd like happened above, then what would you rather do?

Hedges were historically removed on large arable fields to increase food production after the war. Those same farmer have now repalnted thousands and thousands of miles of hedges. Tradtionally livestock farmers have never removed hedges.

 

[Robt]

That's not the legal position. Also if there is no other way through, what alternatives do people have? As above, if people have walked a fair distance and then encounter a cow field, what do you expect them to do? Levitate? Abandon the dog?

If you drive your legal car on the legal highways while complying with the law. You will on ocassion have to take a diversion when a road is legally closed for road works etc.... So your reply can be questioned.

 

[Robt]

I suspect - although I confess I don't know - that the vast majority of footpaths were there before it became a cow field (or sheep field, or wheat field, whatever). The dog is secondary to this debate. Walkers walk without dogs. They also have the same issues, albeit not to the same extent. If some genius could invent a barrier system that gave the public access to fields/footpaths for an annual subscription (e.g. a key) then I'd happily pay to use the footpaths and contribute to their upkeep. Whether enough others would do to make it economically viable or not, I've no idea.

Why is walking a "new type of usage"? It's clearly demonstrable that cattle cause walkers problems even when they don't have a dog.

Footpaths were orginally the route of farm workers going from their house to their place of work or church. So if farm workers were using them, there is a high chance there was a farm there first... We have been farming animals as long as we have been farming crops.

 

[cowslippers]

Who were these people and where did they walk too? Cause I suspect but don't know that the people who walked these paths were farmers and farmworkers who walked from their houses to their jobs or into towns for their supplies. One bit of evidence I do have is a path locally that people claim is a footpath stops at the front door of the house that would of farmed the land at the time they're now claiming the house is blocking the right of way even though the house predates the definitive map

IT doesn't matter. No one knows definitively. You're perpetuating a supposition as a fact and that isn't supported by law. It really doesn't matter what things originated as, only what they are now defined as under law and there is nothing stopping walkers (accompanied or unaccompanied by dogs) using these paths!

 

[cowslippers]

Highly unlikely. Most paths follow hedgelines which suggest hedges were laid out first. Hedges were the original method of livestock enclosure. My troublesome footpath goes around the perimeter of my medieval farmstead, but not unfortunately around the 1960's " modern " farm buildings. Lunacy took hold sometime in the early 20th Century.
As said, paths were laid out for locals to move between farms, to the nearest village & church. They were not laid out for recreational use.
The idea that someone's living should be curtailed because of someone else's hobby is ridiculous.

THE COUNTRYSIDE IS NOT A FREE AMUSEMENT PARK.

Doesn't matter, they are legal to be used by the Great British Public and their dogs, should they choose to. Attempting to shout about how it's unfair, etc. is not going to get you anywhere. Surely you realise this? The government isn't going to suddenly stop the public walking on footpaths "unless they are going somewhere" is it?

 

[cowslippers]

If you drive your legal car on the legal highways while complying with the law. You will on ocassion have to take a diversion when a road is legally closed for road works etc.... So your reply can be questioned.

You're preaching to the choir. I fully support temporary permissive paths to stop walkers encountering cattle. It's my whole point.

 

[cowslippers]

Footpaths were orginally the route of farm workers going from their house to their place of work or church. So if farm workers were using them, there is a high chance there was a farm there first... We have been farming animals as long as we have been farming crops.

No they weren't. Not everyone was a farm worker that used them. There are mass paths, corpse roads, pilgrim roads. You cannot rely on farmer urban myth to support an argument and expect it to be taken seriously. So is a farm worker from another farm allowed to use your paths without raising your ire?

 

[7610 super q]

I give up. I'm oooot. Life is bad enough putting up with real life dog walkers without having to put up with internet dog walkers too.

 

[Robt]

No they weren't. Not everyone was a farm worker that used them. There are mass paths, corpse roads, pilgrim roads. You cannot rely on farmer urban myth to support an argument and expect it to be taken seriously. So is a farm worker from another farm allowed to use your paths without raising your ire?

Yes, I'll give you that. But go back to when these parts started to be used. The vast majority of users were farm workers going to and from work. Yes originally pilgrims used paths to go about their business. Go back far enough and wild dogs made their own paths before being made domestic and using them alongside humans.
Ps an urban myth is generally proved untrue. Farm workers being the majority that used foot paths is true and not an urban myth.