Aren't Farmers wonderful?

[fairplay]

Originally Posted by RobinP

Thanks Kayleigh.

Steve, I wasn't looking to condemn ALL farmers, only to recount my experience in the hope that some may take note, I certainly wasn't trying to drum up some sort of hate campaign on here. This particular footpath is used constantly by dog walkers from a pet charity amongst others so to obliterate it is out of order, and to hold a pheasant shoot across it is probably illegal to say the least.

That said, there are a lot of abuses of our countryside, I drove for half an hour to a favourite birdwatching spot of mine today only to discover it had been taken over by youths on trail bikes. *sigh*

Robin

I wouldn't want to be accused of taking Robin's thread off topic, so Robin, in your opening post you mention of shooting taking place 20 metres from a PROW, but do not say if they were shooting away from or across the PROW.
Now you say "across" the PROW which is far more serious.
Problem is, in this respect, the law really is an ass as it was drawn up in favour of the landed gentry and is suitably vague to allow them to take liberty's with the peasants.
So we are stuck with a 'code of conduct' which 'advises' the shooting fraternity on how to behave, but there is the law to fall back on in the way of obstruction (of a PROW) This can be by way of a physical barrier, a misleading notice, a bull in a field (allowed in certain conditions) intimidation from another person or any activity likely to cause the person to genuinely fear and want to turn around.

On a properly organised shoot, the gamekeeper or syndicate should always have a person looking out for the public when shooting anywhere near a PROW.
You do not make clear if shooting ceased as you approached because you appear to have made your detour before getting close enough to give them the opportunity to hold fire or ask you to kindly wait.
Remember, on a shoot where beaters drive the birds towards the guns, it would be impractical to stop shooting at the moment the birds are flying up towards you, this is why there should be a man on the ground to ask any approaching members of the pubic to wait until the current round of shooting has finished. Ideally, no shoot should ever take place near a PROW, but sometimes it can't be helped.

I'm not sure why you used the word 'obliterate' in your sentence as nobody seems to be trying to remove anything.

Regarding the nearby wood with Reserved for Wildlife notices and your not seeing any wildlife, (just pheasant feeders) I can't see what this has to do with your shooting complaint ?
But in general, any wood where grey squirrels, stoats, weasels, and corvids are controlled, you will normally have a higher concentration of song birds, but personally, I like to see stoats and weasels and jays (and of course song birds)

Finally, you mention these paths regularly being used by a pet charity.
My experience of Pet Charities (and professional dog wakers) is that the person tends to take a whole group of dogs into the open countryside and then allows them to rampage everywhere (in my case, over heathland) completely disturbing any wildlife that happens to be around.
Does this particular charity ensure the dogs DO NOT venture from the footpath ?

Neil.

[The Woodman]

Fairplay - whilst I do not want to fuel a debate about rights and wrongs, I must reply to your comment about the law being drawn in favour of landed gentry. As a member of a shooting syndicate and a wildfowling association that shoots over ground with public footpaths I'll say that the law was drawn up regardless of class. A shot can be fired across a public footpath as long as a person on that footpath is not obstructed, harrassed, intimidated etc. (refer to ealier links from RA and BASC) and as long as the projectile falls within the boundary of the ownership of the sporting rights.

I don't know what "taking liberty's with pheasants" means. You make some good valid points but as one of two groups of working and retired men and women who enjoy a legal pastime, are personally insured to the tune of £10m, read, understand and sign a comprehensive risk assessment and comply with firearm legislation, I fail to see where class enters the equation.

From the other side, I was out with the gun on the estuary yesterday afternoon at high water tucked away from the eye watering wind about 50m from the Cumbria Coastal way footpath. A group of seven walkers approached and seeing me, turned and walked back the other way. To this minute I've no idea if they did this out of respect for my situation, were concerned for their safety or felt threatened. I doubt I'll never find out but there might be a post on a forum some where bemoaning the behaviour of a shooter. What next?

[fairplay]

Hi Woodsman,

I wrote peasants not pheasants ! but come, come, you know full well the 'laws' on shooting were drawn up many years ago when it really was an 'us' and 'them' with only the well off (including Barristers) being able to afford to go shooting and the law was kept very vague to allow the better off to continue their privileged sport without any hindrance from the lower classes.

Times are very different now and I know many 'from the working class' who pay and belong to shooting syndicates and good luck to them, but we still have the very vague laws.

I am sure most walkers would be more concerned when approaching a shoot taking place, to discover the shots were being fired across the footpath than away from the footpath - legal or not. But we do not know the full circumstances in this case.

Quote: From the other side, I was out with the gun on the estuary yesterday afternoon at high water tucked away from the eye watering wind about 50m from the Cumbria Coastal way footpath. A group of seven walkers approached and seeing me, turned and walked back the other way. To this minute I've no idea if they did this out of respect for my situation, were concerned for their safety or felt threatened. I doubt I'll never find out but there might be a post on a forum some where bemoaning the behaviour of a shooter. What next? end quote.

I expect they went back to fetch you a hot mug of Bovril.

Neil.

[JoulesH]

Originally Posted by RobinP

There was faint mark made by tractor wheels but it was difficult to follow and did not go the length of the path.

A bit careless given the number of people (huntsmen, assistants, dog walkers etc) walking all over the rest of the field.

Robin

Sometimes - esp in dry weather - it is actually extremely difficult to make a decent wheelmark to show the line of a path. Not cultivating and drilling a path that crosses a field is totally impractical (esp where you cannot see from one end of the field to the other due to the lie of the land) and nearly all farmers will drill, try and mark the line and then spray the crop out once it has grown enough. Our local authority round here is very practical and usually allows the farmers up until around the end of March to do this as in reality the number of safe spraying days over winter is often very restricted. Incidentally if it has been planted with grass seeds then the farmer does not have to spray off the path.

As regards the shooting, as long as the public are not endangered then it is allowed. Most shoots would not start a drive if they can see there is someone already on the path. However, a drive may start a long time before the pheasants start flying over the guns and common sense would usually see the walker pausing until the drive had finished.

As a farmer, I also resent the assumption here that the shoot/shooters and the farmer are the same - many shoots are let and nothing to do with the farmer.



As someone who works 365 days a year in all weathers and usually working over 10 hours a day to put food on your plate and also to manage the landscape and wildlife that so many of you enjoy, thank you to those who have said that you think that farmers are wonderful

[The Woodman]

Fair comment, Neil. I did write pheasant for peasant- my mistake! The Bovril was not forthcoming - I was fully expecting an armed response unit.


@JoulesH, "As regards the shooting, as long as the public are not endangered then it is allowed. Most shoots would not start a drive if they can see there is someone already on the path. However, a drive may start a long time before the pheasants start flying over the guns and common sense would usually see the walker pausing until the drive had finished." Agreed.

We also put up signs at each end of the footpaths across the ground. I do wonder about the mentality of those that deliberately uproot those signs and throw them into the bracken.

[Brocakat]

Originally Posted by RobinP

" Okay, I can put up with digging up a footpath across a field and planting crops along it..............," Robin

Was it a PUBLIC footpath, Robin?

Don't simply put up with it -report it to your County Council Highways Dept.

If anyone diverts (permanently OR otherwise ) - a P.F. they have to apply to the powers that be.
That path might have been there for centuries: the current farmer is only the current custodian of that land...

[JoulesH]

Digging up a footpath across a field and planting crops on it is not diverting a path, it is usual practice and is perfectly legal as long as the line of the path is reinstated and unobstructed. The only exception to this is where the path goes round the edge of a field when it is then not permitted to plough it up.

[nightshade]

Shoots are usually well publicised perhaps the OP had his head in the clouds
(or elsewhere) The shooter have too much to lose just to "scare off" the OP

[Brocakat]

Originally Posted by JoulesH

Digging up a footpath across a field and planting crops on it is not diverting a path, it is usual practice and is perfectly legal as long as the line of the path is reinstated and unobstructed. The only exception to this is where the path goes round the edge of a field when it is then not permitted to plough it up.

Would that above reinstatement have to take place after the harvesting of that planted-after-ploughed crop ?

Is there a given time period ?

If there wasn't , why couldn't it be a task that could theorectically be postponed .


And could the whole process be have to be repeated every 4 years ?

[fairplay]

As stated elsewhere in this thread, it is quite legal to 'plough up' cross field public rights of way (PROW) as long as they are reinstated by the landowner within a reasonable length of time.

Some landowners simply drive a tractor across after to mark the line, which I find unacceptable as the public are left with a choice of two narrow bumpy strips, but the public have to understand to do it properly means buying expensive machinery and takes time. If cultivated ready for potatoes, then this is a real problem to negotiate and a land owner will need to make a better job to please the walking public.

Again as stated, if grass is to be grown, the landowner need do nothing, but if waymarking posts are not clearly visible at both ends of the cross field path then he cannot expect the public to keep to the correct route and it would be in his best interests to report 'missing' finger or waymarking posts to the statutory authorities - usually the County Council Highways Dept.

When crops reach sufficient height to make walking difficult a landowner should spray the route with a quad bike attachment or simply use a roller and crush the crops along the route - it's a waste of good food, but unfortunately has to be done.
It's a darn sight easier if the path follows a vertical route up the field when you can simply follow the 'tram lines', but the farmer still has to ensure crops do not overhang and obstruct the path.

With Cross Field Compliance payments being made to farmers, footpaths are slowly improving, but as a member of a Ramblers work party who have monthly meetings to check on and erect missing waymarking or finger posts, I can say there still remain a lot of irresponsible landowners who do not give a damn for any PROW on their land and if they think they can get away with it they will.
A big problem is so much land is used by contractors now, and to get the job done on time, a man driving a huge combine harvester is not going to worry about flattening an ill placed footpath sign so we have to place them (A) where we can dig a hole ! (B) where they can be seen by the walking public, and (C) where they ain't going to be clouted by farm machinery.

Neil.

For your information: A Fingerpost is used where a footpath leaves a tarmac road, a Waymarking post is used on country routes where there is a change in direction, or where it is thought the public may need re assuring of the correct route to take. It is illegal to remove these which is why damaged or missing posts are rarely reported by landowners to the authorities - despite being in their best interests to do so.