Putting a bull in a feild with a public footpath isnt very sportsperson like

[DyslexicScientist]

I spend time planning a circular route so that my walks are interesting. 90% of the way through there is a feild with a bull, there is a sign up saying "caution bull in field", well thanks!

I'm going to try to do it but it is annoying. Its bad enough a field of cows who start to run towards you, that scares me shirtless.

If you don't hear from me again

Poppy I said to to MNHQ when I reported and I will say it again.

Your post, It's just not Cricket, is it.

We know these thing happen, but really? Graphic images?

Unfortunately aramynta that's the reality, i did state that I would understand deletion so as before MNHQ if you wish please do so.

I looked at that photo after deciding not to initally. Its not really that bad IMO, then again we've had dead children on the front covers of newspapers recently and my social media regularly gets PETA type stuff.

That photo probably should have had a better warning... I know your post before mentions it, but it needs to be in the post that accompanies the image.

It probably is the reality, and that's horrendous, but it's not a pleasant image. I think we're probably all adult enough to accept that this happens without needing an image like that.

"Not many people who demand rights of access, which in fact the vast majority of farmers accept, actually would agree to allow random people to walk across the front lawn of their urban residence."

Not a reasonable comparison. Garden curtilages around homes do not have public rights of access. There is nothing to stop farmers having reasonable private curtilages around their homes, but it's not reasonable for them to consider large swathes of the countryside as private.

"A good friend who is a farmer lost livestock not so long ago due to inconsiderate behaviour from walkers. This is his way of life and his business. How do you think the average business owner would take it if I walked into his office and trashed it, then said "well you got a good deal on the building and some other business people behave badly, so what are you complaining about?"."

Sorry to hear that. Can't farmers insure against losses, like other businesses? Or if those walkers were identifiable seek to have the losses reimbursed?

Erm... they do though, Lord.

My last home did, for example.

Because much of the countryside is open to all.

Just the bits that are used to grow food and livestock have restrictions.

And if you really want to live in a communist utopia you are going to have to move... not on this planet though! They all turn into dicatorships!

PoppieD I don't object to you posting that image actually. I have seen a sheep in a field that had been savaged and it was horrible and I can understand your anger at the stupid bastards who don't keep their dogs on a lead and under control around livestock.

However, I don't understand why you say "an 'inconvenienced' walk can result in dead livestock and loss of income". Surely this has nothing to do with whether the walk was "inconvenienced" or not?

My comment further up the thread suggested that when farmers obstructed or obscured paths then this was more likely to result in walkers being where they shouldn't than if the paths were clearly marked and easy to follow. Not that this would ever be any defence for having out of control dogs or doing any other damage.

Sorry Blanche, you've lost me.

OK, once again, but slowly:

Garden curtilages around homes do not have public rights of access. Some do. I have lived in one, recently. Many houses in that ham had public footpaths through their gardens. It isn't all that unusual.

There is nothing to stop farmers having reasonable private curtilages around their homes, but it's not reasonable for them to consider large swathes of the countryside as private. Yes there is. It is referred to as growing crops, keeping livestock, aka farming.

Vast swathes of the countryside is open access. Much that is not has designated rights of way.

Also Can't farmers insure against losses, like other businesses? they can, but and do. But the loss of an individual animal is compensated at a price set using recent prices. Should you own a rarebreed or have bred your own pedigree you will not be compensated fully.

A lot of the arguments, in real life and on this page, stem from the fact that some people view the countryside as an amenity to be enjoyed, and others see it as their workplace/business premises.
Like it or not, farming is a business, just as manufacturing or service industries are, yet farmers also have to contend with people using their workplace as a leisure facility. Given that it's amazing that there aren't more confrontations.

Thanks for the info on cows, I never knew. This is a really interesting thread.

Often young cows - whether heifers or bullocks - have a fondness for Grandmother's Footsteps: they are nosy buggers!

If I was a dog owner (I'm not: I work long hours and don't have any land) I'd think twice about walking them on footpaths (see above comment re: lack of land) - I really wouldn't consider ever taking a dog into a field of cows, though it doesn't bother me to walk through one on my own. Farmers don't use their fields for shits and giggles, you know - it's much easier for a farmer not to have any hassle with litter (at best) etc but what are they supposed to do? Not use any of their fields that have footpaths on?

At the end of the day, rights of way or not, the countryside is also a place of industry: I don't know any farmers (and I have farmers down both sides) who have issues with the fact people can access their land (or the land they rent) - they do have access with people who interfere with their livelihoods whether through ignorance, carelessness or entitlement.

"Yes there is. It is referred to as growing crops, keeping livestock, aka farming."

But this is not how land ownership works, at least not in Scotland. People are entitled to walk through fields, responsibly.

Along with all the benefits of owning land, such as the economic output of that land, comes responsibility. Among these responsibilities is that you do not impede or interfere with responsible public access.

Locked gates are still very common though (despite being illegal), yet poorly maintained fences which animals can easy get through are left to rot.

I still haven't heard a good reason for farmers to be allowed guns.

"but what are they supposed to do? Not use any of their fields that have footpaths on?" They could fence along the footpaths. Stock fence is very cheap.

Cows with calves are, in my experience, much more dangerous.

The field is for farming. No one's saying you can't walk across is, just the risk is yours.

And I'm afraid the few entitled arseholes out there really do pissing farmers off.

recalls wanker walking through field through the middle pushing crops down with wanky stick as "its a footpath don't you know" WALK ROUND THE FUCKING EDGE

It was suggested that landowners should be allowed to restrict access to large swathes of the countryside simply by right of ownership. Society has thankfully moved on.

They could fence along the footpaths. Stock fence is very cheap.

Stock fence is not very cheap. It is expensive and it would be impractical to fence along both sides of a footpath, which often runs randomly diagonally across a field.

Someone said the countryside belongs to everyone. I am not up to date with the rules in Scotland, but in England and Wales, at least, it belongs to the landowner. You should stick to footpaths and always observe signs asking you to keep your dog on a lead.

lord in that case, with fencing being so cheap why not buy it for your nearest farmers? Naturally, using a tractor to put the posts in might make the footpath muddy, so I assume you wouldn't also mind whacking the posts in to a suitable depth for stock? And of course maintaining the fence year round?

walking Hardian's wall years ago me and my sister came across a field of cows with young calves. We were a bit worried. However we got half way across the field and discovered they were the most un motherly cows out there - they had left one of the calves (only a few days old) tangled up in a fence. The poor thing was in obvious distress and the rest of the herd had just buggered off to the other side of the field. We found the farmer (or a farm hand) in one of the neighbouring fields and let him know - he was very grateful as they'd lost another calf due to parental neglect the previous week (apparently they'd had a couple of mothers that had flat rejected their calves). It was very strange. We also came across the most docile bull we'd ever seen. Hope the OP got through it okay!

Can't farmers insure against losses, like other businesses? Or if those walkers were identifiable seek to have the losses reimbursed?

Well, yes you can get insurance. Most farmers have insurance of some sort. Although whether it will cover you for this sort of loss is debatable and the cost of the insurance is often so high that it costs more than you would get for the animals lost (especially when it comes to rare breeds). As with all insurance, once you've made a claim the costs sky rocket. Surely the point is that this shouldn't have happened in the first place? I suppose they could push for prosecution or sue, but that relies on being able to identify the individuals etc.

They could fence along the footpaths. Stock fence is very cheap

Stock fencing is not that cheap actually. Also, many paths cut ACROSS the field so farmers/landowners would effectively have to cut the field in two with fencing. It is not practical and interfere with the ability to use land effectively. For this idea of free access to work successfully, then both sides needs have to be taken into account.

You talk about rights and responsibilities- that goes both ways.

I agree farmers should have to keep rights of way accessible, not keep prohibited livestock on land with rights of way and upkeep fencing etc. People cross land should not cause damage, leave litter, fail to close gates behind them and should keep the dogs under control at all times. They should also stick to paths (many, many don't in my experience) and if they do chose to cross fields with livestock then they have to recognise they do this at their own risk (unless negligence by landowner/farmer- e.g. keeping prohibited livestock in a field with right of way).

Landowners who don't abide by the laws are open to prosecution or being sued for negligence if there is any damage or injury. I have rarely heard of walkers who leave gates open etc being prosecutes or the landowner/farmer being able to seek compensation for loss- because they need to prove who did it and that isn't easy. Cases where dogs have injured animals are more likely to be pursued successfully. The farmer/landowner may or may not be able to claim on insurance, but once a claim is made cost of insurance rises adding more costs onto farmers. All of which could be avoided.

Moorland and forests are not damaged to significant extent by walkers as you will find in Scotland because agriculture is very low intensity in that region. However, cultivated crops and animals in intensive agricultural systems are potentially heavily impacted by people walking through them as you will find in most of lowland England.

It can be lethally dangerous to walk in some fields when heavy machinery is operating or certain animals are present. No one would consider it safe for large numbers of members of the public to be walking randomly through a building site or in a wild life park.

Farmers by and large are very tolerant of walkers obeying footpath signs but unfortunately people don't always walk where they should or act responsibly and considerately. The attitude of some ramblers is also extremely abrasive and reflects the attitudes LordBrightside exhibits.

It is NOT your right to walk wherever you wish for very good reasons. One of which is to avoid the possibility you will be killed. Farms are dangerous places.

Christ, Poppie. What happened to the sheep, was it ok?

There was a lady killed by a herd of cows round here not so long ago. She was walking two dogs. One turned up a few days later at a nearby pub. The other one never turned up at all.

"The attitude of some ramblers is also extremely abrasive and reflects the attitudes LordBrightside exhibits."

WTF??? I only ever walk on paths , never in fields with any kind of livestock and only ever let my dog off the lead in the safest of places where there is no risk at all of livestock interference.

It does annoy me to see gates locked everywhere though. And I don't think there's any case for farmers having firearms. Does that make me a bad person?

People who walk through fields full of cows or sheep are generally idiots. There aren't very many places in the countryside though where there aren't poorly fenced sheep though and thats annoying at times.