To just ask you all to either wear some proper wellies and walk on the footpath, or stick to the sodding pavements

[flamingflamingos]

This is my field. It's winter wheat - it's been ploughed and pressed and drilled and rolled and just as it's starting to grow into what will be harvested for flour to produce bread, the general public have trampled it into the ground.

I understand the need to get outside, absolutely I support this country's network of footpaths - we have 6km of footpaths on this farm which are maintained so that everyone can enjoy the countryside.

But this is taking the piss. If you don't want to walk in the mud, don't walk in the countryside in January. Please, stop this. We are all accountable for how we behave.

if the pavement is messy in your street do you think you have a right to cross someone's garden?

Big difference between "messy" and "unuseable". If a roadside path is unuseable I would walk in the road, like I'm sure you do.

@Mysterian

I'm not talking about surfacing the footpath. I'm talking about making it level, and adding a sprinkle of gravel on top to give the surface some grip so people don't slide about making it even muddier.

Footpath looks level to me in that pic. Also a "sprinkle of gravel" would be lost in that mud in minutes.

It's the countryside @Mysterian - the natural environment. Whilst this is a fairly boring example, it is a path, in a field. Can you imagine how stupid it would be to suggest levelling up Kinder Scout and putting a smattering a gravel up there for some grip?

Honestly, it's a rural footpath in a field, if you wish to traverse a gravelled, level surface, can I kindly suggest you try somewhere a little more appropriate than the great outdoors.

I don't get the problem here. I see the trampled seedlings, but the trampled area mainly extends to the line of little shurbs. Why are there shrubs planted in the middle of a field? And is it really surprising that people, especially in these muddy conditions, assume that the path extends to the line of shrubs? Just put something down to mark the boundary - surely a few poles and wire doesn't cost much. Or just re-plant those shrubs and stick some signs up. It is very easy for paths such as these to become confusing. It's enough for just a few people to stray off the path for all others to assume that the path is wider than it is.

@SoupDragon

*soup I can't see any poster who's said obstruct the way? You have quoted me where I've said "sorry you do realise the farmer is more bothered about their income from the crop rather than ease of access for walkers? You don't have to walk there, they have to plant their crop!" That's not suggesting obstruction!*

Yes it is. A poster said that a landowner planted over a footpath that ran across a field. You said they have the right to plant over the footpath. They don't. How is planting a crop over a footpath not obstructing it?

(This does not apply to the OP who has not done anything wrong and has said that they spray the crop along the footpath)

Nope I didn't say that 'they have a right to plant over the footpath' perhaps you have inferred wrongly? My post was about location. The farmer has to plant their crops in that location of their field. There are other locations that walkers can walk.

@JinglingHellsBells

I absolutely agree with you OP, but the solution is to fence it off and ideally put some hardcore down with the local authority paying for it!

Totally unrealistic @GreenlandTheMovie!

Have you any idea of the cost of fencing? far more than the £700 a wheat lost.

Have you actually been in the countryside? Most fields have hedges as a boundary - some have dry stone walls- and few have wooden stock fences where there are animals.

Many people access a field via the hedge if there are gaps. hedges support wildlife and are part of the food chain and ecology. Fences are not.

It's hard to imagine how there can be a fence on a field used for crops when huge combines have to turn right round to harvest.

As a walker, one issue I have is that agricultural machines often over step the farm boundary and churn up a public footpath- has happened to me - where the PF is now impassable because of deep water-filled tyre tracks.

It works both ways and as for the council paying for hardcore- nope! Farmers get enough subsidies which other private businesses don;t.

Presumably you missed the bit where I said I fenced my own land?

You must have also missed the part of my post where I commented on how most of the hedgerows have been ripped out by agricultural contractors to make access for large machinery either.

God, how patronising. Here are photos of the fences we put in to separate the PROW from the fields and rest of the PROW as ploughed over by the contractors. Sadly, hardly anyone uses these rights of way any longer because they are unusable.

Obviously not all farmers are like that, but because there's a lot of machinery rings, it's easier to get contractors to go round the area with a large combine and a lot of small, awkwardly shaped bits of productive land aren't even farmed any more.

But fencing is good value in the long run. It solves the problem - just use sheep netting if you think people will climb through it fgs, it's not rocket science. We did about half a mile of fencing over 4 weekends while holding down full time jobs with a couple of post knockers and posts from the local sawmill. It's certainly cheaper than being sued if someone has an accident. It just makes sense to delineate boundaries.

So yes, I think paths across fields and large agricultural machinery are probably a bit incompatible, but it's a legal right to use them. Depends whether you think the countryside should also be for people to access, or whether it's purely for farming. I don't think large scale machinery and agricultural contractors are particularly good for the countryside. The contractors are arrogant arse holes round our way and don't even live here but in nearby towns!

I don't have any problem with walkers using rights of way over my (family's land)

@flamingflamingos

It's the countryside *@Mysterian* - the natural environment. Whilst this is a fairly boring example, it is a path, in a field. Can you imagine how stupid it would be to suggest levelling up Kinder Scout and putting a smattering a gravel up there for some grip?

Honestly, it's a rural footpath in a field, if you wish to traverse a gravelled, level surface, can I kindly suggest you try somewhere a little more appropriate than the great outdoors.

Wow, serious straw-manning here!

I'm talking about somebody with a spade spending a couple of hours digging, and a layer of gravel thin enough for the grass to grow through so you can't really see it.

Not done Kinder Scout but the photo is of a repaired path up it with a level surface. Stone in this case but it's a high traffic area.

It's a field that gets ploughed @Mysterian. It's for planting crops in. Putting a bed of gravel down will foul the machinery and ruin the soil for planting.

You cannot compare a path across a national park with a footpath along the side of a privately owned field (well you can, because you just did, but it's an idiotic thing to do).

Beyond clear signage and gates/access for agreed footpaths , Farmers should not have to incur additional costs because people trample through fields. People should not trample through fields

I blame the spec savers ad ... not totally silly, if that's what people see that's what they will do

They are not shrubs, they are some weeds.

poles and wire. you need a pole every 3 meters. Thats 2000 posts for OPs 6km of footpath assuming its all in one straight run. You need strainers, and corners and possibly gates.

plus the cost of the contractors to put it in which is a ball park figure of about £5 per meter to supply and fit

You are probably looking at about £30k right there at a minimum. Plus any environmental subsidies are going to be recalculated to remove the area now fenced, so lets say a 2m wide strip for 6km - thats 12,000 meters square or 1.2 hectares of subsidy which, depending upon what option the fields fall into, could be several hundred pounds per year.

I agree that teaching of the countryside code needs to improve or parents need to pass it down to their children.

A friend's horse died last week when fed bread by walkers despite signs saying not to feed the animals. We are farmers. During the last lockdown we had people walking over several of our fields that are nowhere near a public right of way. I think they just saw the track for machinery and thought they'd go for a walk there, but didn't even check if the track is actually right of way. Litter left behind too.

Those suggesting that paths are gravelled - not only is this expensive and would soon sink into the mud, the hedgerows are habitats for wildlife and this is not in keeping with our stewardship. Fencing is also expensive and makes it difficult for machinery to turn, you lose part of the crop. Thankfully most people around us are respectful and enjoy the countryside properly but it is a shame that the minority spoil it.

@Clymene

It's a field that gets ploughed *@Mysterian*. It's for planting crops in. Putting a bed of gravel down will foul the machinery and ruin the soil for planting.

You cannot compare a path across a national park with a footpath along the side of a privately owned field (well you can, because you just did, but it's an idiotic thing to do).

It's not a field that gets ploughed. It's a one and a half metre strip around the edge of a field.

It was the OP who tried to draw a comparison between her field and a national park. You can't avoid reading chunks of the thread then just guess how the conversation went. (Well, you can because you just did but it's an idiotic thing to do.)

I don't think OP's problem is about people dodging mud -- I think it's about keeping 1-2m distant from other walkers. I don't know how much extra fencing it would take, but creating little 'passing spaces' with the fencing every 50-100m might reduce some of OP's crop trample.

6km Gravel paths in crop-planted fields is absurd suggestion (!!)

A lot of the fields I notice now have a 3-4m wide strip running down at least one edge. I saw one sign which explained it's a DeptofEnv subsidy thing. This wide strip is handy if it can be in same area where footpath is.

You clearly don't understand soil or farming @Mysterian. And I've been on the thread since last night and have read every single one of your I'll-informed posts

We just fence off our footpaths nowadays if they’re at the edge of a field. You just can’t trust people to do the right thing nowadays (ie, stick to paths, keep dogs on leads, not feed horses etc).

Well I hope all these outraged country folk remember their haughtiness when we get back to normal and they come lumbering down for a "day out in the big city". Maybe they can start reading up on things like not standing gormlessly two abreast on the escalators and spending 20 min staring slack mouthed at ticket machines while the rest of us wait politely so we can get about making OUR living

You can't surface a field side footpath without going to great expense and at detriment to the wildlife.

I'd be horrified to see this on any public right of way across farmed fields, hedges are being removed too much and paving an area would be even worse.

Those floating footpaths, as they’re known, like your pictures of Kinder Scout, cost an absolute fortune to build.

We have part of our footpaths maintained by the council as they put in wooden walkways over the boggy bits years ago. (photo) They take a lot of repairing and cost a lot.

At the end of the day it’s winter, a wet winter. There’s going to be mud in the countryside. You have to deal with it!

I’m rural and most people seem very respectful. It’s ridiculous to expect gravel paths, buggy access etc. I know there are some walks I can’t do right now near me with my 1yo. National park access is different as you’d hope there are places wheelchair users can access but there are so many thousands of miles of public access paths, you can’t expect them to be easily walkable.

There are plenty of public access routes as the OP describes near me (eg access through the middle of a field). It’s generally quite clear that the path is gate to gate

@CrotchBurn

Well I hope all these outraged country folk remember their haughtiness when we get back to normal and they come lumbering down for a "day out in the big city". Maybe they can start reading up on things like not standing gormlessly two abreast on the escalators and spending 20 min staring slack mouthed at ticket machines while the rest of us wait politely so we can get about making OUR living

If DP and I were out 'in the city' you wouldn't be able to tell us apart from anyone else.

Despite what you think you have learnt about farmers from the telly we aren't slack-jawed or gormless.

If you have to revert to lazy (and frankly insulting) stereotypes it suggests you have no where else to go with a sensible argument.

Payback for all the sodding farmers who merrily plough up footpaths running through their fields or put up "Private, no right of way" signs to stop you using them. Reporting them to the council seems to achieve nothing.
I hate it when farmers fence in the footpath too. We have a right to walk on your land, you have a right to grow your crop. Just put a sign up with an arrow and a polite request not to step on the crops. Most people will respect that.

YANBU. And please can people stop going on about "it should be fenced" - as a walker, it's much nicer to be able to walk along a path at the edge of an open field, or across an open field, than down a narrow strip of fenced off land! I live rurally and always try to stick to the actual ROW even when it's muddy, precisely because I don't want farmers to have to make a choice between having their fields trashed or putting a fence in! It's much nicer for everyone if we can be respectful of where we are and are not allowed to go, without having to be penned in with a fence.

And if walkers want a nicely surfaced path, go walk around a park, not a field FFS

A lot of the fields I notice now have a 3-4m wide strip running down at least one edge. I saw one sign which explained it's a DeptofEnv subsidy thing. This wide strip is handy if it can be in same area where footpath is.

this is called a buffer strip. It needs to keep its thick layer of grass and roots below to hold together a section of land which protects soil erosion and run off of pesticides etc into waterways. Or its a pollination thing, allowing wildflowers to establish on an unmown/uncultivated area to increase wildlife diversity. You cant walk on it - in wet weather you cant drive even an ATV on it, it cannot have a trackway on it, otherwise the whole point of it ceases to be. If it were just a muddy quagmire it wouldnt serve its purpose.

@Honeyroar

We just fence off our footpaths nowadays if they’re at the edge of a field. You just can’t trust people to do the right thing nowadays (ie, stick to paths, keep dogs on leads, not feed horses etc).

I know! It's like, there's the problem, there's the solution...

I do not understand how farmers, out of all landowners, cannot fence their own land. Its tax deductible for them too. It's just part of responsible land ownership.

@CrotchBurn

Well I hope all these outraged country folk remember their haughtiness when we get back to normal and they come lumbering down for a "day out in the big city". Maybe they can start reading up on things like not standing gormlessly two abreast on the escalators and spending 20 min staring slack mouthed at ticket machines while the rest of us wait politely so we can get about making OUR living

Don't be so ridiculous. Despite being farmers we went to universities in cities and blend in perfectly well.