- there aren't all that many rights of way, compared to the number of fields. Its not as if this applies to every field, ffs, just a very few.
Yes, so what's the fuss then?
- people who work in the countryside also live in the countryside. It's not just annoying townies who need to get around - unless you want to drive absolutely everyone into a car for every journey, and extinguish ancient rights. (And some people living in the countryside will also have dogs - leashed, or course, if they aren't working dogs)
I don't care. Anyone who uses a facility has the responsibility to know what they are doing before they get there. Countryside Code films are needed again, it seems. Good old Howard and Petunia!
- sometimes the leisure opportunities are part of what makes the countryside a working landscape. Tourism is an essential part of many rural areas. There will be people hiking and using rights of way, whether you like it or not. Some of them will have (leashed) dogs, too.
Again, if you can know your 'rights' you can also learn your responsibilities. Which is what many horse, sheep, other livestock owners ask for year in year out!
These all-or-nothing declarations help nobody. It remains silly to suggest that keeping large dangerous animals away from the general public is to kill all of the large dangerous animals.
As silly as it is to suggest that animals should be kept off grazing fields, or asking for fenced corridors?
So much of these 25 pages of comments have emphasised how dangerous horses can be if interacted with. I believe you all! That's why I was asking questions on what the solutions are. My solution - as many of you also seem keen on - is not to have horses and the general public share a field, without a fence or two between them.
And the law is otherwise for simple reasons. The practical solution for you is not to walk over a right of way of it contains an animal you don't like the look of. Same for anyone else using a right of way. If it is an onconvenience then that is sad. But better that than harm to you or the livestock.
It really does boil down to the fact that the countryside is a workplace. One where leisure pursuits come into close contact with farming. And whilst farmers make as many concessions as they deem fit, practical. necessary, cost effective, there will always be times when a hiker, walker, stroller through the fields doesn't undertsand what is actually happening. That's when the problems start. It's an empty field of grass - have a picnic in the middle, walk your dogs, play with your kids? I've seen that happen too often. That's one farmer's winter feed fucked. Thousands of pounds worth of grass destroyed, flattened, contaminated.
The balance between leisure tourism and farming economics is not for the leisure industry/individual users to decide., It is for the farmer to make their cost benefit analysis and accommodate what they can. Including statutory rights of way!
So when someone using agricultural land for agircultral purposes says "Stop doing that" just stop!