To think parents should take responsibility if children chase sheep on country walk?

[Firethorn]

Recently went for a country walk (public right of way across farmland) with SIL, my 2 nieces, and another couple and their 3 kids. Crossing a sheep-field, the 5 kids started chasing sheep, trying to 'round them up' in a flock like they'd seen sheepdogs do on TV. I asked SIL if we should stop them, she said no they always do this it's not doing any harm. Other couple agreed and said the kids are having fun, let them play with the sheep. I was a bit concerned as one child was carrying a stick and waving it around, but respected the parents' decision.
Shortly afterwards an irate farmer marched towards us shouting and swearing! She was really aggressive and had a snarling dog (off the lead), dog was circling us but not approaching. For about 5 minutes mins she yelled and swore at the kids for chasing her sheep. All 3 parents then turned on their kids and told them off, lying that they'd been telling them to stop but they'd disobeyed! (They hadn't told them to stop at any point). My niece burst into tears and hid behind me and I lost my temper with farmer for swearing at kids, told her to back off and stop shouting, and to get dog under control. The dad of one of other kids then threatened to kick the dog if it came near his kids, and after some more shouting we decided to go back way we'd come. She shouted abuse after us until we were out of sight!

I'm annoyed with other parents for letting their kids chase sheep then lying about trying to stop them! Also with farmer for being so intimidating and rude. SIL says we should just have apologised and carried on walking. AIBU?

I think the trouble is, OP, that you are focusing on the feelings of the members of your party instead of the feelings of the farmer, whose feelings (to any impartial person) have most validity in this situation. For all the reasons already given, she had a complete right to be angry and to express it strongly. It was an urgent situation that had to be addressed and halted immediately. It was not a debating club with the emphasis on good manners and making points politely. You are concentrating on the wrong people and the wrong elements of this scenario.

Whether or not they knew the sheep were pregnant, they WERE allowing their children to chase animals. They were letting them use the animals as living toys - on what planet is that acceptable, Firethorn?

And yes, you have said on here that they shouldn't have been chasing the sheep, but I haven't seen you say anything to suggest that you said anything the parents at the time - that is why a previous poster said that you didn't have the courage of your convictions!

Have you spoken to your SIL yet?

The farmer was furious because of the bad behaviour of the children, the parents and yourself. She had every bloody right to be furious!

And, once again, when you move somewhere new, it is YOUR responsibility to learn the customs and laws of your new home - farmers, who already work harder than you can possibly imagine, from dawn to dusk, for very little reward have not got the time, the energy or the resources to put up notices all over the place, to spoon feed idiots information they ought to be able to work out for themselves (ie. that it is cruel to chase animals for fun), or that they could take the time to learn (like the Countryside Code).

Ok so the farmer shouldn't have been rude because the children were on her land and chasing her livestock.......

So if the children jumped into the back of an electricians white van, jumped all over his tools, potentially damaging some of them. And if his dog in the front seat growled at this behaviour. Would it be ok to threaten to kick his dog in the head and complain that the potential damage of his livelihood caused him to be rude!

No different.

Have you ANY idea how much a sheep costs or how long it takes to train a dog?

UptheChimney, I'm not digging out of a hole at all, because I don't feel I'm in one. I was not the one allowing my children to chase sheep, and I openly admit I should have challenged SIL further at the time.
However, I'm interested in why so many posters feel 'townies' should have in-depth knowledge of sheep farming, simply because they use a public right of way, yet farmers do not feel it would be useful to put up a sign eg 'these sheep are pregnant, please keep dogs on leads and do not approach'. Isn't it worth their while if stress can kill sheep/lambs and impact livelihood?
And do people really think shouting abuse, swearing, behaving aggressively and using a dog to intimidate children will help solve this problem??

When sheep have lambs isn't some secret that you'd need to read up on OP.
Spring - Easter cards etc- lambs ... it's preschool stuff!

The dog wasn't being used to intimidate children - it was doing its job and protecting the flock.

I'm all for "mutual respect and tolerance" but you didn't show the farmer any respect.

I'm staggered at the level of ignorance displayed by not knowing that lambs are born in the spring.

Should there be signs that bears shit in the woods?

That Bloody

No, the farmer shouldn't have had her dog on a lead. It was doing its job.

I think it's common knowledge that ewes can miscarry if they are chased. It annoys me too to see the way people tramp across crops - I saw it last week, there's wheat or something near me, obviously a crop, and people marching across the field, throwing a ball for their dog. And don't get me started on people who rampage through bluebells and let their dogs go frolicking, instead of being kept to the path.

Rights of way over people's land are a right but with rights come responsibility.

Anyone who stepped off the path was trespassing.
The children were trespassing and the parents were permitting it and you were tacitly condoning it by not putting a stop to what you seem to semi-acknowledge was unreasonable behaviour.
Anyone, whether they live in the town or in the countryside, should know that you do not chase animals. It is ridiculous to maintain that an adult should need to be told this unless they have SNs. It is the responsibility of those in charge of children to ensure they behave properly, not like little hooligans chasing sheep. And yes, you should know that sheep are likely to be pregnant at this time of year because this is when you see lambs! On TV, in magazines, the Internet etc. in fact it is hard to imagine how you could get to adulthood and not know when lambs are born because of the connection with Easter.
It is most certainly it the fRmers job to educate the stupid people who are wilfully ignorant, allow their children to trespass and possibly cause huge damage. Her job is to ensure the safety of her animals. Your job is to ensure you don't allow anyone whose company you are in to behave like this again or to walk away.
That hole is so deep you must nearly be in Australia by now.

No solving the problem would be for people to educate themselves before rambling along ignorantly and allowing damaging behaviour.

I suspect you're not the first people to do it, nor the last.

Lambing season is not some arcane knowledge only farming folk have. The term 'spring lambs' kind of gives you a hint about what time of year lambs arrive.

Couldn't resist Miranda.

But you have a point, TBW

Yes,and one thats been thoroughly ignored!

But, OP, it's not 'in-depth knowledge of sheep farming', it's Primary 1 stuff. Sheep have their young in the spring time - like PPs have said, springtime - Easter - cards with little lambs on!

And how can anyone - you and your party included - not have some innate sense that to chase animals brandishing a stick would cause them alarm. If I had been in your position, after the others did not listen, I would have said that I was not happy with the way they were behaving and that I would make my way home/back to the car rather than be associated with their awful behaviour. In that way, at least, you would be making a stand for what you say you believe to be the appropriate behaviour in the circumstances.

If you really think it's acceptable to deliberately put yourselves in an area where there are livestock and the countryside code should be observed, then it is YOUR and NO ONE ELSE'S RESPONSIBILITY to make sure you know how to behave and to inform the behaviour of those too young to be able to judge.

Firethorn - EVEN IF THE SHEEP WERE NOT PREGNANT, IT WOULD NOT BE OK FOR THE CHILDREN TO CHASE THEM, TO USE THEM AS LIVING TOYS, TO SCARE ANIMALS FOR 'FUN'!!

It is relevant that they might have been pregnant, because of the very real damage that might have been caused, but pregnant or not, surely it is just common decency not to chase animals?

'The dog wasn't being used to intimidate children - it was doing its job and protecting the flock'

How was it doing its job when the children were nowhere near sheep at this point? They ran to adults as soon as farmer and dog appeared so were on footpath by time dog reached us. Either the farmer had lost control of it (unlikely since it's a working dog) or she wanted it to intimidate and threaten.

OP, you are in a hole, not because of what you did on the day, when although you were ineffective, you knew that kids chasing sheep was wrong.You are getting told YABU because you will not accept that a)any person with a normal level of common sense and even the most basic knowledge of the countryside would not have allowed children to chase sheep; b)that it is not the responsibility of farmers to educate all and sundry in the most basic rules of country behaviour; c)that the dog was perfectly entitled to be off a lead and to do its job defending the flock; d) that the farmer was entitled to be very angry and direct that anger at the immediate cause of the problem - the children - rather than spending precious minutes negotiating with your "intelligent" friends. Why should she worry about the little darlings' finer feelings?

Your friends live in a village, unless they moved there 5 mins ago and have never before left their house, there is no excuse for their level of ignorance.

I'm intrigued about a farmer who has managed to train a dog as both a sheepdog and a protection dog. Amazing skillz.

Why can you not (or will you not) see that nobody agrees with you on this? You asked for opinions, and you have received them, and there is virtually unanimous consensus that you and your party were completely in the wrong.

What is the point of posting here if you won't listen to any of the huge number of posters who have tried to point out that you are wrong and why you are wrong?!

Exactly Staying don't chase animals with sticks. It's not so hard really. It shouldn't require signs.

My granddad had signs on the gates on his farm asking people to leave gates as they find them as he was fed up of helpful people closing

It was making sure the danger was contained and not close to its flock.

'I suspect you're not the first people to do it, nor the last.'

Which is why signs warning about pregnant sheep and risk of miscarriage would be useful. It's not just chasing, I've seen many people approach sheep in fields, let dogs loose in sheep-fields, make a lot of noise or stray from footpaths. Saying 'well they should know better' won't solve that. Education is far more useful than shouting abuse or using dog as a threat.

"IMO there is no excuse for intimidating, aggressive, threatening behaviour."

That's probably what the farmer thought about the way the children were behaving.

The sheep wouldn't understand that the children were 'playing with them', so would have been frightened.

The children's age is no excuse, as they were with adults who should have the sense to know that a group of kids pretending to be dogs and chasing sheep with sticks is a bad idea.

And the excuse that your SIL and her friends are not country people, so thought it was a nice fun game for the children, doesn't hold up. As you said, there is no excuse for that sort of behaviour.

And the lack of signs you insist that the farmer should have put up to educate you all is also no excuse for the behaviour of your group.

The parents should have taken responsibility for the children, as you say in your thread title. Either by stopping them from chasing the sheep or admitting to the farmer that they had thought it was okay.

They didn't do either, in fact they lied about trying to stop them, so it's their fault the farmer was angry and their fault the children were shouted at.

The dog recognised the children as a threat to the sheep, therefore it was ensuring they could not go back and harass the sheep again.

Not exactly rocket science. Pretty obvious, actually. Almost as obvious as the fact that there are lambs around at springtime/Easter.

You and the rest of your group were the trouble makers - not the farmer and not her dog. They were both doing their job in protecting the flock that your group were endangering through ignorant stupidity. If you'd had the children under control, the dog would not have been guarding them.

the dog is not to blame, nor is the farmer.

It's not their fault a group of idiots were harassing the sheep. but it was their job to make sure they didn't repeat the offense