Aibu to think I should be ok to exercise my well behaved dog wherever I like in fields

[Scrowy]

I'm not BU because my dog is a farm dog and the fields are my fields.

Sadly however the local dog owners seem to think that our fields (some with footpaths, some without) are fair game and that they have an equal right to use them as they see fit.

This week we have politely asked 6 people with loose dogs to remove themselves from the pasture we have just separated some lambs into. There is no footpath in that field but it has a nice view.

During lambing time this year we lost 4 lambs and 1 sheep to sheep worrying. About 5 years ago one dog killed 24 lambs in one go. Every week we are aware of minor incidents of sheep worrying, fortunatly most don't result in death but do always result in stress on the animals.

Also this week we have sent some older sheep to slaughter. Out of 30 of them 24 of them were condemned due to Echinococcosis, a disease passed on to sheep from dog poo and only identifiable at slaughter.

Neosporosis is another disease passed on from dog poo do cattle. It causes the cattle to abort their calves.

Letting your dogs poo on farmland is directly putting farms out of business.

Letting your dogs 'play' with sheep causes death, even if your dog doesn't actually maul something at the time.

You wouldn't walk into a shop, knock down a display and break stuff without expecting to have to pay for damages. Why do people think that the countryside is fair game?

I'm all for live and let live, I want people to enjoy the countryside and support it. I also want people to realise that it's not just there for their amusement, that some people are trying to make (an increasingly small and desperate) living from it.

Counterpoint as much as I know it is futile I shall just direct you to the following document
publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/612038
Which is one of many detailing the conservation and biodiversity benefits from rotational grazing by native stock (as the OP has outlined)
But you know what, I've a feeling that you'll just ignore it, and me and my masters degree in ecology and land use, and the OP who has been very patient with you. Because it seems you really can't educate mince.

Please define what you mean by "massive scale" Counterpoint? 10 sheep? 20 sheep? 50 sheep? 500 sheep? Over how much acreage - 50 or 500 or 5,000 acres?

I will let Fantastic argue the ecology and biodiversity points as she is clearly much better qualified than me (or you for that matter).

Fantasticmissfoxy you're right there - I was discussing Common Land and Commoners rights with Counterpoint earlier in the thread and the .gov.uk links I supplied were completely ignored in favour of the agenda that all meat is bad, only vegan is good and all non-arable farmers are rich greedy cruel bastards by definition.

Cattle are NOT doing anyone any favours by grazing on any plants/crops/grasses, except the profit-seeking farmers.
Huh? It's beautiful here where I live. Clear air, beautiful views, hundreds of birds. It's been a dairy farm area for hundreds of years. You are talking shite.

"But you know what, I've a feeling that you'll just ignore it, and me and my masters degree in ecology and land use, and the OP who has been very patient with you. Because it seems you really can't educate mince."

I find it really "common" to try and ridicule the opinion of others with half-baked degrees like a 'masters'.

If everybody became vegetarian, people will still starve.

Some people will control the food supply, the same as they do now. It is irrelevant if the planet could support everyone by growing crops.

Interesting. And so is this. And this.

Seems a good number of people feel a vegan diet isn't the most sustainable diet at all.

"It's been a dairy farm area for hundreds of years. You are talking shite."

It's all relative. You know no better!

"Counter I'm fairly confident that the Forestry Commission would be on top of any rainforests popping up in the North of England so you can probably rest assured that there won't be any being cleared to graze my livestock on."

Idiot.

"The gov.uk links I supplied were completely ignored"

You'll find that I posted the hm.gov.uk links to counter some 'wikipedia' half-truths.

You know no better!

There is no better imo. Lots of small sustainable businesses, helpful and happy community, beautiful surroundings full of wildlife. Farmers who look after the countryside. Not sure what could be better tbh. Not sure where you live, in a town full of pollution probably.

I always keep my dog on the lead around sheep as she wants to be their friend and obviously that's not on, I honestly did not know about the dog poo so thank you for educating me about that, just to say I do pick up after my dog

No Counterpoint, you posted at 23:06 Monday night but didn't link. I followed up with a couple of links directly from the .gov.uk site at 23:31 the same night.

Presumably my comment that you seem to think the agenda that all meat is bad, only vegan is good and all non-arable farmers are rich greedy cruel bastards by definition fits you, as you don't seem to object to that.

LOL and and at 'profit-seeking farmers'. It's OK to want to make a profit, no?

"I find it really "common" to try and ridicule the opinion of others with half-baked degrees like a 'masters'."

So turns out I was correct - you did indeed choose to ignore the information supplied because it doesn't fit with your agenda. Insult me all you like, it doesn't make your uninformed, uneducated and frankly unhinged views any more factually correct.

I can't be that much of and idiot counterpoint if i'm making my millions destroying the rainforests and making my millions from upland sheep farming. You would have to be pretty fucking clever to do either of those things in sunny Cumbria

Even though you have now resorted to insults (I assume because you don't like everyone disagreeing with you) I am glad you have posted.

You have nicely demonstrated the kind of attitude all sorts of rural industries have to challenge from people who are ignorant of how the land really works rather than what they have read on facebook or watched on Netflix (yes I have watched cowspiracy too!)

If nothing else your posts have kept the thread bumped in active convos meaning more people have had the opportunity to read the problems we have had and comment if they wish.

One of the UK farming industry's biggest challenges is reconnecting with the public to get them back onside and understand where their food comes from. With an ageing population farming isn't the most tech savvy or social media friendly business sector, and its online discussions such as this that can really help get a farming voice across to people that might not otherwise ever engage with farmers and farming.

So thanks Counterpoint for your contributions (apart from the idiot bit, that was uncalled for).

"So turns out I was correct - you did indeed choose to ignore the information supplied because it doesn't fit with your agenda."

Your "information" was ignored because it was nonsense and trying to validate it by proclaiming you have some Masters degree does not do it for me.

"I can't be that much of and idiot counterpoint if i'm making my millions destroying the rainforests and making my millions from upland sheep farming. You would have to be pretty fucking clever to do either of those things in sunny Cumbria "

You seem to lack an understanding of what was actually discussed. But I suspect you are prone to exaggeration to gain the sympathy vote.

Sorry, but you get no sympathy from me for raising animals to slaughter. Anachronistic practices such as yours have no place in a civilised society.

"No Counterpoint, you posted at 23:06 Monday night but didn't link. I followed up with a couple of links directly from the .gov.uk site at 23:31 the same night."

You need to get your facts straight. My post was two whole days before yours.

Great post scrowy. How tedious to have to constantly justify your business to the hard of thinking.

Anachronistic practices such as yours have no place in a civilised society.

I do not think those words mean what you think they mean

"Your "information" was ignored because it was nonsense and trying to validate it by proclaiming you have some Masters degree does not do it for me."

So published scientific research is 'nonsense' which will not persuade you that what I say is correct, but we are to accept that what you say is correct solely on the basis that it is YOUR opinion? I'm sorry that doesn't do it for me. All a bit too 'flat earth' for my liking.

But, I knew it was futile to try and inject any degree of reality into this discussion with you because I can see that you are truly and genuinely convinced that what you believe is correct and that no amount of rational discussion or published scientific evidence is going to sway you.

"Anachronistic practices such as yours have no place in a civilised society."

"I do not think those words mean what you think they mean"

It's most likely that you hope they do not mean what they actually mean.

"All a bit too 'flat earth' for my liking. "

Says the person who supports anachronistic practices such as 'growing' fellow mammals to slaughter and eat.

[N.B. anachronistic practices = habits of the past]

Counterpoint, I applaud your dedication to your principles (even though they differ from mine) and it's clear we are never going to come to any sort of resolution or point of commonality on this. Have a good day x

Put some signs up saying dogs on your land will be shot.

Sounds awful and I love dogs.

Human beings being omnivorous isn't something that only happened in the past counterpoint