Cows trample, man dies

[Thunderbird]

Yeah but just because I had a right of way down a path I wouldn't walk down there if the trees were on fire.

[al4x]

Do you have any right to take a dog on a footpath? I know you have a legal right but does your canine companion?

[crosshair]

The clue is in the term 'right of way'.

 

Members of the public have a legal right to use these pathways and can reasonably expect to use them without suffering bodily harm. To suggest they should take a different path is ridiculous, there's rarely a choice of paths and you have no right to deny their passing just because you find it inconvenient.

 

To suggest they need to carry out risk assessments is laughable when it's clear that the farmer who put the stock in the field and knows the aminals far better than a given rambler hasn't himself carried out risk assessments and had the good sense to act accordingly.

 

It's not always even obvious what is in the field until it's too late to do anything about it, and this is another reason why any risk assessment why it should come down to the farmer.

 

It's no different to shooting over a footpath apart from if you did that without due care you would quickly find yourself without any guns to shoot.

 

 

You say it's ridiculous to take a different path, country folk would'nt even look for an alternative path, they would just go around

the field with cattle in, that is the advice given by people that know.

Probably the guy that died thought the same as you, "you have no right to deny their passing".

Farmers put cattle in fields after handling them probably from birth and finding them quiet and docile, it's a different kettle of

fish when a stranger comes along with a dog, as has been said the majority of these deaths have involved a dog.

Everyone has the right to go mountaineering, but just look at the death rate and the ammount that have to be rescued by

mountain rescue helicopter, obviously they took no heed of the need for safety. I've said it before some of the quacks on this forum should'nt be allowed into the countryside.

[ben0850]

 

 

You say it's ridiculous to take a different path, country folk would'nt even look for an alternative path, they would just go around

the field with cattle in, that is the advice given by people that know.

Probably the guy that died thought the same as you, "you have no right to deny their passing".

Farmers put cattle in fields after handling them probably from birth and finding them quiet and docile, it's a different kettle of

fish when a stranger comes along with a dog, as has been said the majority of these deaths have involved a dog.

Everyone has the right to go mountaineering, but just look at the death rate and the ammount that have to be rescued by

mountain rescue helicopter, obviously they took no heed of the need for safety. I've said it before some of the quacks on this forum should'nt be allowed into the countryside.

Argh!! I've resisted commenting on this thread all day but I've cracked.

We have out own farm, we have sheep as well as arable and Beef. My old mans a dairy farmer.

I am also a qualified ML and my main hobby is winter mountaineering...So....

 

Mountaineers in the main and acutely aware of the dangers they face, most of us carry BMC Insurance (pretty much mandatory in Europe). All of the mountain rescue teams are indeed themselves climbers who do it for the love of the sport and the wider outdoors.

I have met very few climbers who would blindly put themselves at risk.

 

Anyhow, back on topic. Would we put a bull or cow and calves in an area that's busy with ramblers, if I'm honest probably not but we may have too if the situation with grass needed us too. I don't agree with some of sitsinhedges posts and on previous topics have strongly disagreed with his views but the gist of what he says is logical sense.

We have a number of footpaths through our pastures and we manage our stock accordingly, the Mrs even moves sheep batches on a Friday before the weekend just to prepare for when all the gates are left open!! In an ideal world we shouldn't have too but we all work and live in a world that's now congested and not easy to manage so we have to try and account for people in trainers plodding through knee deep mud!!

[sitsinhedges]

You say it's ridiculous to take a different path, country folk would'nt even look for an alternative path, they would just go around

the field with cattle in, that is the advice given by people that know.

Probably the guy that died thought the same as you, "you have no right to deny their passing".

Farmers put cattle in fields after handling them probably from birth and finding them quiet and docile, it's a different kettle of

fish when a stranger comes along with a dog, as has been said the majority of these deaths have involved a dog.

Everyone has the right to go mountaineering, but just look at the death rate and the ammount that have to be rescued by

mountain rescue helicopter, obviously they took no heed of the need for safety. I've said it before some of the quacks on this forum should'nt be allowed into the countryside.

 

You're just waffling now because you have no real argument.

[-Mongrel-]

Argh!! I've resisted commenting on this thread all day but I've cracked.

 

 

Would we put a bull or cow and calves in an area that's busy with ramblers, if I'm honest probably not but we may have too if the situation with grass needed us too. I don't agree with some of sitsinhedges posts and on previous topics have strongly disagreed with his views but the gist of what he says is logical sense.

We have a number of footpaths through our pastures and we manage our stock accordingly, the Mrs even moves sheep batches on a Friday before the weekend just to prepare for when all the gates are left open!! In an ideal world we shouldn't have too but we all work and live in a world that's now congested and not easy to manage so we have to try and account for people in trainers plodding through knee deep mud!!

 

And therein lies the answer! I shoot over a very busy farm. By busy I mean it has a lot of footpaths through it, and it's on the outskirts of Brighton, a major city. At weekends it can get real busy.

 

The farm is a mixed farm including beef cattle, the cattle are not in the fields crossed by footpaths, sheep are and even a few horses, but not cattle. The gates are all self closing. The farmer has had to learn to deal with the rampaging hordes as he has no legal right to stop them. I don't see that as unreasonable. It's exactly the same as when we shoot it. Some areas we won't even consider at the weekend due to the amount of 'traffic', instead, we shoot a quieter area of the farm.

[Reece]

No-one using a footpath should be having to wonder when they enter a field whether they will be exiting it in one piece. If stock can't be reasonably trusted it should be put elsewhere or the path fenced off. We all have a right to use footpaths however inconvenient that might be to the landowner.

 

Cases of cows killing people are very rare, people have no reason to worry about cows in fields, at least not more than anything else. Vending machines can kill people.

 

And cases of cows killing people are almost always provoked, albeit usually unintentionally. Provided that people keep dogs on short leads and act sensibly, there should be no problem. Many of these incidents involve dogs running loose among cattle, you very rarely hear of dogs on leads causing problems.

 

And as has already been said, what about paths that go through the middle of fields? They would be much too difficult to fence off, it would cut fields up and make moving through the farm a lot more difficult. That isn't just an inconvenience, it's ridiculous and unnecessary.

[crosshair]

You're just waffling now because you have no real argument.

 

You say it's waffling because you are unable to understand what was said about farm life, you seem like a very pro rambler,

quoting their rights, and anti farmer.

The sort of people that farmers with ROW's on their land avoid like the plague.

[yates]

I think i'll have to sit on the fence on this one. I agree with sides in this case. The public should respect the countryside and those whose livelihood is dependent upon it. On the other hand we have the right of access to 'our' environment and rightly so. My daughter and i were almost crushed by a stampeeding herd of fresians a few years ago. What caused them to chase us i don't know but they were all adult cows and we were at the opposite side of the field(without a dog) at the time. We should all be self aware and treat all livestock as potentially dangerous

[Floating Chamber]

A good sign:

 

'RAMBERS GO HOME AND DO SOMETHING USEFUL!'

Edited May 16, 2013 by Floating Chamber

[al4x]

yates odds are they were being playful get a field of 18 month old heifers together and they are inquisitive. Really no livestock is entirely safe ewes with lambs will butt children causing damage and any age of cow can be an issue simply by the fact they are large and move together and when spooked just go over things. Horses very similar they can get playful and kick out so really what the townies want is the countryside for their leisure rather than the owners to earn a living from it. just employ common sense you can walk round inside the fence if there are cows in a field so you can get over the fence if threatened farmers won't mind but the laws as they stand can't let them suggest the obvious as the militant rambler brigade would then start making a point and ignoring the advice for their "rights"

[Scully]

A few years ago now a local woman was severly injured while using a public footpath while walking her dog.I seem to remember she picked up her dog when cattle came to investigate and in the ensuing tussle she was severly injured and is now in a wheelchair.The legal wrangling went on for years and was finally settled when the courts decided the landowner was liable as there were no signs to warn of the possible dangers regarding the cattle in his field.

The compensation was huge.

On an aside,I also know of a farmer who was threatened with legal action for leaving a sign up in a field through which passed a public footpath,saying 'beware of the bull' even when the bull was no longer in the field.He now has to remove it when the bull is removed.

Landowners have to be so alert.

[Floating Chamber]

My shooting mate is forever putting up signs on his shoot, only to find they have been taken down, destroyed and thrown in the hedge.

[CharlieT]

The clue is in the term 'right of way'.

 

Members of the public have a legal right to use these pathways and can reasonably expect to use them without suffering bodily harm. To suggest they should take a different path is ridiculous, there's rarely a choice of paths and you have no right to deny their passing just because you find it inconvenient.

 

To suggest they need to carry out risk assessments is laughable when it's clear that the farmer who put the stock in the field and knows the aminals far better than a given rambler hasn't himself carried out risk assessments and had the good sense to act accordingly.

 

It's not always even obvious what is in the field until it's too late to do anything about it, and this is another reason why any risk assessment why it should come down to the farmer.

 

It's no different to shooting over a footpath apart from if you did that without due care you would quickly find yourself without any guns to shoot.

 

I wholeheartedly agree with you

 

Do you have any right to take a dog on a footpath? I know you have a legal right but does your canine companion?

Yes they do Alex. The stipulation being under close control.

 

Folkes, we must remember that a footpath is a public right of way, along which the public has a legal right to pass and repass at will. Landowners have certain obligations regarding footpaths which they are compelled to observe. That includes keeping them in good order, not growing a crop on them, maintaining stiles and gates and not stocking the field through which they pass with certain types of stock.

Dogs under close control are permitted, by law, to be on a footpath.

In my view it is completely irresponsible, under normal circumstances, to keep cows with young calves at foot in a field with a footpath particularly some of the continental breeds and their crosses.

 

I never graze cows with calves at foot or bullocks in fields with a footpath, they can never be trusted with the general public. To suggest or argue otherwise is irresponsible and foolish.

[CharlieT]

A few years ago now a local woman was severly injured while using a public footpath while walking her dog.I seem to remember she picked up her dog when cattle came to investigate and in the ensuing tussle she was severly injured and is now in a wheelchair.The legal wrangling went on for years and was finally settled when the courts decided the landowner was liable as there were no signs to warn of the possible dangers regarding the cattle in his field.

The compensation was huge.

On an aside,I also know of a farmer who was threatened with legal action for leaving a sign up in a field through which passed a public footpath,saying 'beware of the bull' even when the bull was no longer in the field.He now has to remove it when the bull is removed.

Landowners have to be so alert.

yes, that is correct. It is illegal to errect misssleading signs to deter people.

It is also illegal to graze dairy bulls over 10 months in such a field and beef bulls without attendant cows.

[Kes]

Did people never walk footpaths before the war?

Of course they did - when we went out we in the 60's 70's and 80's used to check what stock was in the field and act accordingly - I have been chased by bulls and heifers and all manner in between but I take it as my responsibility to be aware and not take risks. I understand the legal position may be different and I also appreciate some people have been injured but the current blame culture is making us all rely on others not ourselves.

People have walked footpaths and drove ways for millenia so why should we now put up notices, have farmers sued etc - no one forces people to use paths and having the alertness to assess hazards and know what they are and how to deal with them is fundamental.

I am not suggesting the extraordinarily dangerous bull or cows should not be controlled by notices etc but struth society is mad and getting madder (IMHO).

[sitsinhedges]

You say it's waffling because you are unable to understand what was said about farm life, you seem like a very pro rambler,

quoting their rights, and anti farmer.

The sort of people that farmers with ROW's on their land avoid like the plague.

 

Get 'orf moi laaaand.

 

[crosshair]

Get 'orf moi laaaand.

 

 

Glad to see you are still reading Enid Blyton. There have been many sensible replies to this topic, and town and country folk

will never always agree. But one thing that annoys farmers is the militant rambler brigade that always belch their rights, thankfully

the one's I see around here are all entitled to a free bus pass, so hopefully they are a dying breed.

Ramblers contribute nothing to the countryside, like cyclists on the main roads, it's all free.

[Gordon R]

sitsinhedges is correct.

 

When livestock are put in a field, with a right of way through it, the farmer would be liable for any injury caused by that action in my opinion. Whether farmers like it or not, if there is a right of way across the land, it would be naïve of farmers not to consider there might be an accident.

[rocksaplenty]

I was once cornered in a field by a horse; kept rearing up and wouldn't let me get past (windy day or something). I had my shotgun with me and i realised that if it got any closer then i would have to shoot it! Imagine trying to explain that to the owner/police? Luckily it calmed down and let me get past.

 

I've also been attached by roe bucks on two occasions (out of season) - one ended up with me having to kill it with a knife - a very surreal exeperience and not one i would want to repeat!

 

The countryside can be a very dangerous place!

[RED BEARD]

You're just waffling now because you have no real argument.

i've not really noticed your posts in other topics before,but your posts in this thread are in my opinion very blinkered and quite moronic.its obvious that you don't understand anything about how rural life works,but i'm in no doubt that you think you do.

 

and just remember.......................this is only MY opinion,so you can't tell me i'm wrong.

[Gimlet]

i've not really noticed your posts in other topics before,but your posts in this thread are in my opinion very blinkered and quite moronic.its obvious that you don't understand anything about how rural life works,but i'm in no doubt that you think you do.

 

and just remember.......................this is only MY opinion,so you can't tell me i'm wrong.

 

My opinion also.

 

He should go for a walk in the African countryside. I'd give him 200 yards.

[harpoonlouis]

Right on queue 4 ramblers turned up in my field of pregnant mares this afternoon because they were following an inaccurate map from the parish magazine. Having shown them where the path was they told me they had seen it but were following their little map anyway. Oh no you're not!

 

A few miles further on this footpath crosses 4 lanes of the A46. I do hope they exercised some responsibity when they get to that bit....

[crosshair]

Topics of this nature always seem to attract the townies with their anti landowner agenda, how do they manage to get any shooting.

There are quite a few members of this forum that shoot on my patch, and I have'nt heard one saying a good word in favour of rambliars.

[sitsinhedges]

Topics of this nature always seem to attract the townies with their anti landowner agenda, how do they manage to get any shooting.

There are quite a few members of this forum that shoot on my patch, and I have'nt heard one saying a good word in favour of rambliars.

 

Your obsessive notion that anyone who wants to go for a walk in the countryside must be a landowner hating townie out for a freebie is irrelevant, not to mention so far off the mark.

 

Humans of any variety and from anywhere can walk on the footpaths on your land whenever they feel like it and you have a duty of care towards them regardless of how bitter you feel about them being there. If they get hurt as a consequence of your actions you will be held responsible and you will be liable for damages.

 

Blabbing on about 'cundry loife' makes no difference, they have a right to be there and you have a duty to allow them to pass safely. Everything else is hot air.