Cows killed another poor dog walker

[Pippetypoppity]

I’ve just seen on the BBC news that a lady has been killed in a field by cows. She was walking her chihuahua. This is absolutely tragic. She possibly ran with dog and was chased. That would be my guess as the same happened to me on our farm when I was very young. Your instinct is to save your dog and run. I remember I had a sheep dog puppy in my arms and I’d gone into the field to play. I was about 6 I think. The cows noticed the puppy from quite a distance away and the whole herd started moving in. Luckily I was close enough to the gate to get out, but it was terrifying. I remember my father on the yard yelling ‘Drop the puppy’ at the top of his lungs. I didn’t but I’d have been a gonner if I was another 50 yards in. I just want to tell everyone what my father said to me that day. It’s stuck in my mind ever since and it’s important anyone who dog walks in the country knows it too

1. If you see cows with calves leave the field by the nearest exit immediately. Cows often charge to protect their young
2. If you see cows without calves and they start moving quickly towards you they are being inquisitive. If you have a dog with you the cows will want to know if it is a threat. They see dogs instinctively as predators. If you cannot get to a gate and they are approaching- startle them by shouting jumping, waving your arms and making yourself appear as loud, big and threatening as possible. This will frighten them and make them stop or bypass you.
3. If they persevere it will be because they want to force your dog out of the field. Let the dog go! This is critical. Your dog can run faster than cows and much much faster than you. The cows will then focus on the dog and you can get away.
4. Never ever pick up the dog if cows are refusing to back off. This is the hardest thing in the world to do as all your instincts will compel you to try and protect it. It stands a better chance running and dodging them however than it does in your arms. You will then avoid becoming a target yourself and being trampled.
5. When cows move quickly in a large group the ones at the front get pushed by the ones at the back even if they themselves try to slow down. They will not be trying to mow you down but the sheer force from behind might mean they do. For this reason if cows approach in a group and your initial efforts to threaten and scare them failed, make that momentum go in a different direction ie after your dog.

I am so so dreadfully sorry to hear that this has happened again. The lady in question was inevitably a devoted extremely responsible and loving pet owner. She must have been to have been giving her chihuahua a country walk. I expect for this very reason she picked her dog up when she saw the cows getting near. Poor poor lady.

The poster has already said she chose to stay there. It helps to read the thread before jumping in.

"Civilised countries" don't have public rights of way through farmland.

but then where do you draw the line between being aware for your own safety and where do you draw the line that the farmer should do x to protect the right of way ?

when ive had to walk though fields i always presumed it was my responsibility to make sure i was safe to walk through the field, i never tried to put myself in harms way just to make the point of saying i should be able to walk through a field without risks from farm animals etc

Interesting thread. Just on the subject of animal intelligence, I’ve seen cows described by pps multiple times as stupid/idiots, incapable of rational thought or ability to ‘wonder’. Whereas dogs, say, are thought of as intelligent. Having spent some time with cows, though not a farmer, but much less time with dogs, I would have said they’re not much less intelligent than dogs. Or rather, dogs are just as ‘stupid’ as cows. It’s just a perception based of size and familiarity with dogs as pets.

You’re right. Pigs (who have also been known to attack humans) have an intelligence equal at least to a 3 year old child..

The abusive way we treat animals in the farming industry is going to have consequences.

She also said that she was staying there short-term, not living there, that she couldn't afford anywhere nearer to her course, and she didn't know about the cattle when she rented the place.

It helps to read the thread before jumping in. It also helps if you recognise that I'm talking about rural dwellers generally and not just one poster.

You think it's more civilised to cut hamlets and farmsteads off from main roads by turning what was public commons into private land without providing access rights over that private land?

Tell me that you live in a country where land was stolen via genocide without telling me that you live in a country where land was stolen by genocide. I refer you back to the poster who talked about indigenous land rights being extinguished in Canada, if you are thinking "what is Maid on about genocide for?" When the original communal owners and users of land are conveniently dead with no descendants, or so few descendants that they cannot meaningfully resist a law imposed on them by gun-wielding invaders, you don't have to respect their centuries-old rights over that land. When the original communal owners and users have left descendants who are numerous enough to defend their land use rights, you do have to respect those rights.

"All over England in the late 18th century, fences were going up. The Enclosure Act of 1773 had given landowners the right to close off common land from the public. The areas that had once been free for ordinary people to use for farming, fishing, grazing livestock, gathering firewood, or hunting, were sectioned off. Commoners were barred from land that had been, by law, theirs.
Poverty grew rampant. The natural resources of the land and water that had protected rural labourers from the constant threat of starvation were no longer freely available to them.
Smaller landowners were also badly affected by the Enclosure Act. Often unable to afford the legal costs of enclosure, they were forced out, and wealthier individuals moved in, hoovering up swathes of land. Ownership of English land shrank into a yet smaller circle of hands. Between 1786 and 1816, the number of independent landowners dropped dramatically from 250,000 to 32,000.
With no right to appeal enclosures, more and more people were forcibly displaced into swelling city slums. In the 19th century alone, the rural population of England dived by 40% as a share of the country’s total population. Chillingly for these new urban arrivals, the Industrial Revolution was under way. They would soon form the workforce powering the country’s “dark, Satanic mills”."

www.idler.co.uk/article/we-must-protect-our-right-to-roam/

This is why we are in the situation of restricted access in the countryside and why we are forced to use routes that may by dangerous instead of being allowed to choose our own safer pathways.

Love how some people would have all footpaths removed 🤣

Not quite sure people would understand the consequences of that… People would all be rushing to the very few national parks (Dartmoor, Lake District) to get any kind of time outside. Those places can be busy now, imagine what they’d turn into! Plus of course, if there are cows grazing apparently no one should use them either…

Plus most kids round here have to use footpaths to get to school - they would have to be driven otherwise. The increase on the roads would be astonishing. Add in those trying to walk along the roads (with no footpaths because most country roads don’t) the number of accidents would be horrendous..

Getting into the countryside is a massive boost for people’s mental health. Blocking that would add to the already creaking mental health services.

Farmers have a responsibility. End of. They know the footpaths are there, they knew when they acquired the land. Work with it.

(Oh, and if the field with the path in has the cows with calves in, don’t moan when walkers use the empty field next door - it’s better than the walker going through your cows and causing a problem!)

Well said!

I had a look on an old mid 1800s map the other day (via maps.nls.uk/) (choose Georeferenced if you want to have a look) and there were many, many footpaths and named roads actually that haven't made it to the Definitive Map records.
This was apparently due to the flawed procedures by local Parish councils during the 1950s
See www.oss.org.uk/need-to-know-more/information-hub/parish-role-in-preparing-the-definitive-map/

If these were reopened properly, there would be many more paths for people especially in rural areas to get from A to B as well as for recreation (which means a healthier population and less need to rely on cars).
Some villages were totally cut off by these closures and the only way you can access another town or village is by walking along an A road or NSL country lane without a pathway. Or take the ONE Public Right of way through the cow field...

Try that National Library Scotland maps link again:

maps.nls.uk/

Well, you were incorrect in that assumption. Technically, it is the farmer's responsibility to make sure that a public footpath across their land is safe to walk.

Let us not forget that this happened because the UK needed food, having become unable to feed itself and unwilling to eat horse - high or otherwise.

"Farmers don't protect the countryside, they exploit it. It's a necessary exploitation, but it's exploitation all the same" said I, only yesterday. The clue that I recognise that farms are needed in enclosed form is the phrase "necessary exploitation". No one is saying that the farms should be turned back into commons. Some of us are saying that existing access rights need to be maintained for the public good.

Well if we wanted to concentrate on maximising the amount of home grown food we have in the uk , beef and dairy ( NO!) would be mostly off the menu

Totally agree

Well no, not really. Before the enclosure of the commons most people in the countryside were partially or wholly self sufficient. They would have their own cow, pig, etc that they would graze on the common land, together with a right to forage wood for fuel, and grow their own vegetables ,raise chickens etc in their cottage gardens.

Enclosure was, in part, a cynical move to impoverish country people to the point that they would become docile labour- either for the big landowners or for the mills and factories of the Industrial Revolution. It was also, of course, spearheaded by rich landowners to make themselves richer.

A lot of these derided "townies" are descendants of people forcibly slung off the land during enclosure. It's a bit rich really to accuse them of being ignorant of the countryside and its ways.

Exactly. There's a lot of maize growing around here, none of it for human consumption, but for animal feed. If we reduced animal agriculture, we'd be able to grow crops for direct human consumption instead.

Thanks for the information. Have a great day.

So they would be with their rights to restrict access if they felt a route was unsafe ( not because of live stock) or put warning notices up, as many do if cattle are in fields.

They do not have rights to restrict access. A footpath can only be closed in agreement with the council (I believe) for a very specific timed reason. I.e. the footbridge is being replaced, or other such works.

It was also stated that the alcohol and medicine in her system was unlikely to have had an effect on her behaviour.

Yes sadly @crackofdoom re the enclosures 😞
The English countryside would be a very different place if it hadn't happened.
I'm currently reading The Lost Paths by Jack Cornish. Great book!

Yes correct. They would have to apply for a closure each and every time they put their cows on as the public right of way is effectively a highway.

Wow, it is truly mind blowing to me that some posters think farmers shouldn't put cattle in a field if it has a footpath through it.

A truly incredible attitude to have towards working farms.