to object to people going on to private farming land whenever they feel like it?

[whatcheekyfuckery]

There's a field behind our house, owned and farmed by a local farmer who I know slightly. Because of our location, we can't help seeing what's going on in this field. We also appreciate the privacy it generally gives us, as our garden looks out onto this field. Equally, anyone who's in it can clearly look into our private garden. I contacted the farmer a couple of years ago to let him know that some people had started increasingly coming to stroll in it, let their dogs run free on it etc and that I often saw his growing crops being trampled on, etc. (There's no public right of way on this land and we live in a village that is very well supplied with plenty of alternative areas eg. a huge recreation ground, many country lanes and a lovely community meadow where most people take their dogs).

Farmer was grateful to me and confirmed to me, then, that indeed he didn't want members of the public on his land, and said he'd be glad if I'd politely mention this to anyone I saw on it if they came near our property. (AFAIK he hasn't yet put up 'No Trespassing' signs though). Today there was a whole family, kids and several adults, playing on this field, right near our fence and able to look straight into our garden. They probably weren't doing any 'damage' (field has just been harvested) but it concerned me that, if not challenged, they'll go on doing this, assuming this field is free for them to access, also thereby advertising it as a supposedly accessible area for anyone else who fancies going on to it. As I see it, over time this could become a real nuisance for the farmer as well as for us, and things would have to get a lot worse, both for him and for us, before he'd be forced to put up 'no trespassing' or 'Private' signs.

WWYD? I don't want to be an interfering busybody, but equally, shouldn't most people realise that farmland is private land and not just another space they can go all over whenever they feel like it? It's the brazen entitledness of it that especially irks me. I'd be grateful to know what others think. Should I just let this happen or should I be bold enough to challenge these people, even though it's not actually my own land? Farmers, I'd be particularly interested in your take on this.

AIBU to politely challenge them about the fact that they are on private land?

No, I think a sad attitude is feeling 'narked' at people walking across a stubble field.

I think it's good of you OP but really think it's something the farmer should enforce with it being their land.

I'm just wondering about any legal implications should a helpful 'this isn't public property' off you turn into something nasty. Even if most people are okay with it.

We used to do a lot of walking and always stuck to the footpaths. Never on any land that wasn't clearly marked (as it usually meant private).

Shouldn't have to make it clear it's private land. It's trespassing and bloody annoying.
Farmland is an industrial area just like any other business and people wouldn't go and play at a factory. There is no respect for the countryside of the farmers livelihood by these people. Report them.

It's not your land so I wouldn't challenge anyone who you see on the field.

People do tend to see the countryside as everyone's land and seem to forget that someone does own it.

I think the only way to stop people going on the field is to put up No Trespassing/Private Field signs. If I was you, I would contact the farmer with this idea and highlight how you see people trespassing on his land reguarly and this also causes a nuisance for you and your family.

But they're trespassing, and they don't know whether or not the field is in use, do they? They OP only knows, if I understand rightly, because she's spoken to the farmer.

Would you also think it's perfectly fine to wander into someone's garden and use their swings, so long as their children weren't there? Or to nick someone's bike so long as you returned it before they missed it?

If not, then maybe don't act as if it's so lovely and bucolic to mess around on someone's land.

If the farmer is not putting signs up because he is too busy, why don't you offer to do it yourselves (and pay for them). Don't do it without his consent though.

Incredible that some PP think it's the farmer's responsibility to put up signs - do your offices and gardens have signs telling people they are private property?!

But it IS his. It's HIS land. A neighbour has CCTV after one too many burglaries. They have signs warning its private property and also that they have CCTV. Both are the neighbours responsibility, nor mine because I might be in on the odd chance one say and see someone acting dodgy. Same principle here - only the farmer has a larger garden or possible multiple ones to monitor.

LRD it is private land so who goes on it is up to the landowner not the OP. Do you not get that? Why would someone feel 'narked' about someone walking across a field?

It's up to the farmer to do whatever they see fit to prevent people coming onto their land. If they can't be arsed to put up a sign, or secure fencing, or do anything other than ask you to have a word, then they can't be that bothered about it.

You don't have any right to privacy here because your land backs onto someone else's land. Whatever goes on on that land is none of your business - they are not trespassing on your property. If you are concerned, you should put up a fence to prevent people seeing into your garden. The farmer or his workers can already see into your garden whenever they like.

You are free to challenge people but must accept their reactions might not be that friendly. If you tell the truth that the land is not yours, but you are concerned on behalf of the landowner, some people will be rather short with their reply. Given the fact they are willing to trespass on someone else's land, they might be unreceptive to what they see as a busybody, and some idiots will make a point of deliberately choosing the spot in front of your garden to have their picnic, play football or walk the dog.

OP, you're not in Scotland, are you, where there is a right to roam? Because if you are, none of the previous posts' advice applies.

Thanks to everyone who has commented - it all helps to get a feel for whether AIBU, plus a wider sense of perspective on it. Lots of common sense in these replies - for which I'm very grateful .
I agree that it's up to the farmer, not me, but he's busy and has many other fields, is really only here when he's actually doing the ploughing/sowing/harvesting etc - so unless someone like me lets him know when people are trespassing, he'd probably not find out about it otherwise (until/ unless he finds signs of damage to his crops etc). But I do see the risks in my being over-zealous here and I don't personally relish approaching the trespassers, though there are times when I have (politely) done so.

Dog faeces are a real health hazard and I'm staggered by how many people still don't clean up after their dogs - even right outside my son's primary school etc - unbelievably selfish! Not enough dog owners are actually fined/named and shamed, IMO - more examples need to be made of offenders for the relevant laws to have any real effect.

I do agree with the poster who said that trespassing needs to be nipped in the bud; even people taking 'harmless' exercise on a harvested field are setting a precedent for others who might come later/with dogs/ trample over a new crop/ cause damage etc. They often don't seem to realise it though. There's a security issue here too: yes, I do admit that, to an extent, seeing and hearing the trespassers 'interferes with my rural idyll', but I'm actually more bothered by the sheer cheekyfuckery of the trespassers' assumption they have the right to be there at all. Our fruit trees happen to drop some of their best fruit over our fence into his field, but we wouldn't vault our fence and enter his field to get them without asking him first. It's also about the increased security risks to our property if the public were free to come and go near our boundary (currently a minimal one, allowing the best view of the field. Yes we could put up a high fence but it would mean a sad loss of a nice view). In this situation it seems to me that the farmer's and our own interests are completely aligned, but of course it is up to him to enforce his own land. - BTW, even more irritating is the fact that sometimes the trespassers are folk who actually live in some of the houses adjoining the field, so not only are they locals, they are also well aware that there is a lovely, huge public recreation ground less than 100 m walk away from this field! ... so not as if they have nowhere else they could go for recreation..

Ah, AgentP - I was just about to say the same.

I am glad I live in Scotland in this regard.

No, Agent - not in Scotland

I agree that it's up to the farmer, not me, but he's busy and has many other fields, is really only here when he's actually doing the ploughing/sowing/harvesting etc - so unless someone like me lets him know when people are trespassing

I appreciate that but busy or no busy he needs to Monitor it or employ someone that will.

He's hardly going to be the only farmer busy at this time of year is he?

Basically it depends how bothered by it you are personally?

He would be glad if you mentioned it to anyone you saw. He's clearly not that bothered, or he'd stick up some signs.
If you don't want to challenge people, that's perfectly reasonable.
If you are bothered about it from a privacy PoV, then its up to you to mention it to them.

I wouldn't worry about them thinking you're interfering - chances are they don't know its not your land anyway?!

increasingly - yes, I get it, I just like my neighbours and don't only do the things I am required to do by law.

It's up to the farmer to do whatever they see fit to prevent people coming onto their land. If they can't be arsed to put up a sign, or secure fencing, or do anything other than ask you to have a word, then they can't be that bothered about it.

Maybe they have put up multiple signs in the past that have been binned by the trespassers? (This happens)

I doubt they could afford secure fencing.

Maybe they are really weary with all the CFs on their land and can't be there all the time to get on top of the problem?

LRD you sound lovely. I really mourn the loss of neighbourly good feeling and community spirit that seems to be rife these days.

You know. Farmers work really really hard. Supermarkets have them over a barrel. We all have to eat. Not very many of us grow our own food. We like to spend as little on our weekly shop as possible. It's nice to be nice, isn't it?

increasingly - yes, I get it, I just like my neighbours and don't only do the things I am required to do by law.

But the point is that this isn't about caring for the farmer it is because she is annoyed at people using the field behind. It's about her own privacy and trying to tell other people what to do with their own private land.

There is also a massive difference between a field with crops on it (when she spoke to him) and one that is stubble. It might be that without crops to damage he doesn't object to it being used in this way and that is up to him as it is his private land. It is not up to the OP to get cross about people being 'entitled'.

Damaging crops is different and I think then she does have a right to say something actually under the 'caring for her neighbour' umbrella.

I think England should be like Scotland. In Scotland anyone can walk on any farming land, as long as you don't cause damage. Ridiculous to have large swathes of land off limits to people.

LRD is my dream neighbour - some of the other posters not so much Don't they teach the countryside code any more?

Don't they teach the countryside code any more?

I live in an area with a large amount of corporate arable farming. Once the fields are harvested the gates are left open and people use the land. This stops immediately once they are ploughed again and only a complete fuckwit would enter a field with crops unless it had a public right of way across it (which they are really good about leaving a strip generally we have good farmers round here). What part of the 'countryside code' does using a stubble field break?

As Brasty says they manage perfectly well in Scotland with a right to roam.

It's private land and therefore a civil matter between the people and the landowners. If he isn't bothered while it's stubble then its up to him.

Don't assume the farmers "not bothered". If he's anything like my DH, he is bothered, but it's far down on his list of priorities as 1) the field is in stubble so there's unlikely to be too much damage and 2) He's so fucking busy, he doesn't have time to think about chasing trespassers for an hour and if he does, he'll be using that hour to do something more pressing.

We don't manage all that well in Scotland with a right to roam actually... we had people on our land - uninvited- who decided to take a walk around the pond.

The land around the pond is marshy and unstable- compounded with the fact that there's tonnes of slimy goose poop.

After one individual slid and hurt their back they tried to sue us because the area was 'unsafe'.

Similarly we often go rafting or tubing down our section of the river- but we have quadbikes at either end to nip back up and we are all aware of dangerous sections etc.
A couple of summers ago, complete strangers decided to give it a go and one showed up at the house needing stitches. I had a school run to do and really did not have time to have to arrange care for an uninvited person. If something awful had happened there is no way for me to know that they were there.

Why should we have to make areas 'safe' when they're not areas meant for strangers?

DD's tree swing was also broken by random roamers. There's plenty of outdoor space in Scotland- I don't think you should be able to tramp around private spaces without permission.

It's still his responsibility Quiettiger. Your Dh is bothered about someone walking across a stubble field, fine it's his land and that's up to him. Others aren't so don't assume that he is either.