Cows trample, man dies

[sitsinhedges]

My last word on this is that regardless how much I disagree with some on this thread I would still take any opportunity to help the same people out if the situation arises in the future.

 

We're just blabbing on an internet forum let's keep some perspective

[crosshair]

Another local council has banned dogs on a local beach, the reason being the fouling by the dogs. Walkers dogs do the same thing on farmland, plus the added danger of the dogs meeting cattle and causing them to become aggressive, it would certainly save lives if dogs were banned from farmland. When the farmers on here say they do not use the farm dogs to herd cattle,it is done for good reason, and have the experience of how cattle can react when confronted by a dog. A dog to a cow can be seen as a predator, so why does'nt everyone use a bit of common sense and walk the dog where there are no cattle.

[AVB]

it would certainly save lives if dogs were banned from farmland.

 

Er might make it a bit hard 'picking up' without dogs!

[crosshair]

AVB, The excercise will do us good.

[Thunderbird]

 

Er might make it a bit hard 'picking up' without dogs!

 

Hmm. I'm not sure that's exactly what he meant. You don't usually wade through herds of cattle whilst shooting pheasants as a rule.

[crosshair]

Charlie's first peg is in the cowshed.

[Thunderbird]

[crosshair]

 

I hope he is reading this, he is petrified of cows.

[Thunderbird]

 

I hope he is reading this, he is petrified of cows.

 

Can I be by the sheep, I've got some new wellies to try out?

[crosshair]

Yep, they are in the leisure centre, where you left them.

[NickS]

Why shouldn't people exercise their rights to walk on farmland? It isn't actually "owned" by the farmer - like any land in this country it is owned by the Crown but occupied under licence. Anyhow, it is the townies who pay all that tax to give money to the EU so that farmers can grow rich on CAP subsidies. ...ducks and runs!

 

More seriously, it is up to everyone to behave in a responsible way, respecting each others' way of life and being mindful of the potential risks. When I was a kid I had to lean the Country Code - I wonder how many people have even heard of it? Unfortunately, on both sides you get people aggressively trying to enforce their rights, forgetting that with those rights come responsibilities.

 

Nick

[crosshair]

NickS, I don't know where you get the idea from that farmers don't own their land, it's not correct. And every farmer will tell you the same regarding subsidies, if they get them. They are a subsidised food policy, ensuring that cheap food is available for the public, take them away and the price of food would double.

[RED BEARD]

Why shouldn't people exercise their rights to walk on farmland? It isn't actually "owned" by the farmer - like any land in this country it is owned by the Crown but occupied under licence. Anyhow, it is the townies who pay all that tax to give money to the EU so that farmers can grow rich on CAP subsidies. ...ducks and runs!

 

More seriously, it is up to everyone to behave in a responsible way, respecting each others' way of life and being mindful of the potential risks. When I was a kid I had to lean the Country Code - I wonder how many people have even heard of it? Unfortunately, on both sides you get people aggressively trying to enforce their rights, forgetting that with those rights come responsibilities.

 

Nick

so your saying that you don't actually own the land your house is on? (thats if you do actually own your home,which really is non of my business,plus i'm not interested either)................so we really should have the right to take a wander around your garden?

 

if you think the above sentence sounds a bit stupid to you...............your just the type of person i thought you was.

 

footpaths should be used for getting from point to point,there not for standing about enjoying the fresh air and lovely view.i could well be wrong,but it might be illegal to linger/lurk on a ROW?

[CharlieT]

NickS, I don't know where you get the idea from that farmers don't own their land, it's not correct. And every farmer will tell you the same regarding subsidies, if they get them. They are a subsidised food policy, ensuring that cheap food is available for the public, take them away and the price of food would double.

 

 

so your saying that you don't actually own the land your house is on? (thats if you do actually own your home,which really is non of my business,plus i'm not interested either)................so we really should have the right to take a wander around your garden?

 

if you think the above sentence sounds a bit stupid to you...............your just the type of person i thought you was.

 

footpaths should be used for getting from point to point,there not for standing about enjoying the fresh air and lovely view.i could well be wrong,but it might be illegal to linger/lurk on a ROW?

I presume NickS is referring to the little known fact that freehold ownership is in fact a tenancy.

 

I quote:

In a written response to a question by Andrew George MP in February 2009, Bridget Prentice, a parliamentary undersecretary at the Ministry of Justice, replied, "The Crown is the ultimate owner of all land in England and Wales (including the Isles of Scilly): all other owners hold an estate in land.

 

Prentice omitted to add that, as the preamble to the Land Registration Act 2002 put it, "the concepts of leasehold and freehold derive from medieval forms of tenure and are not ownership". What this means is that, in relation to land in the UK, we are all tenants on the basis of the feudal superiority of the Crown, a superiority created in 1066 and founded on legal norms that were created to uphold that same feudal superiority.

[NickS]

Sorry if I offended anyone - it was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek although I expected to be jumped on with my comment about EU CAP subsidies, not the bit about not "owning" your land. CharlieT refers to the situation which comes to most people as a bit of a shock. It is this that forms the basis of compulsory purchase orders. An Englishman's home is anything but his castle if the government, acting on behalf of the Crown, choose otherwise. It has always struck me as unfair that land that has been cleared using CPOs can be handed over for commercial development but I guess that is to prevent one or two individuals holding a commercial company to ransom.

 

It does not give other people the right to wander - in fact I have limited rights to enter property I own but let to others.

 

Nick

[NickS]

footpaths should be used for getting from point to point,there not for standing about enjoying the fresh air and lovely view.i could well be wrong,but it might be illegal to linger/lurk on a ROW?

Absolutely correct. They are a right of way, not a right to do anything you please. It is also important that the correct path is followed. Whilst it may be considerate to walk around the edge of a field rather than following the ROW through standing crops, it is then technically trespass.

 

I had never considered it a problem that, as lessor, HMQ could, with the required statutory notice, come and wander around my garden. Should she ever to decide to do so, I shall ensure that the kettle is on and Duchy Original biscuits available.

 

Nick

[darren m]

 

Someone dies and they probably half deserved it? ?? Just how does that bit of drivel work? :no:

 

If farmers can't cope with Rights of Way, then they are probably in the wrong job. They are not going to go away and have to be dealt with.

 

why , because we are all responsible for our own actions are we not

 

anyway thats not quite what i said , it was more like ;-

 

"The silly twits who get trampled or kicked etc probably half deserve it for not respecting the footpaths , the bounderies , the countryside code of conduct , but most of all the unpredictable animal thats grazing in there with them".

 

why i say this is because , not matter how much the farmer tries to tell or advise the " rambler or whatever " , it goes in one ear and out the other as soon as you say anything , the old i have ROW argument comes out , so its there own stupid faults for getting in that situation in the first place

[Imperfection]

Taking this off on a slight tangent, my rugby club has a ROW across the 2nd team pitch. There used to be a lady that liked to exercise this right every Saturday afternoon. It was funny to watch her speed up if the "stampeding" forwards were headed her way!

 

Want another laugh...

 

Just outside Cambridge,there is a 1200mtr MOD firing range with a public footpath going right across the width.When shooting is going on you have to post sentrys at either side to stop people from walking through (this isnt a joke).I've never had to physically restrain anyone from passing,but just explain live shooting is going on and they cannot pass.

 

*This is the Barton Road range which was used for filming the range scenes in the movie 'Full Metal Jacket'.

[Gordon R]

darren m - just grow up. Think before you post - it's a bit too late after.

 

so its there own stupid faults for getting in that situation in the first place

 

First you try to qualify what you said, then repeat it - priceless. :lol:

Edited May 19, 2013 by Gordon R

[Gimlet]

the

darren m - just grow up. Think before you post - it's a bit too late after.

 

Other than the people deserving to die bit, he's spot on. Private property is sacrosanct unless that property is agricultural land and you farm it professionally. Then it is alloted the spurious status of public property and a whole new set of special laws come in that pander to the majority. You cannot protect fools from themselves but if the fools form the majority and farmers an electorally insignificant minority, it is expedient just to load the responsibility onto the latter. And that is what has happened.

Edited May 19, 2013 by Gimlet

[Gordon R]

Gimlet - you have a fair point. However, I just believe that someone's stupidity doesn't mean they deserve to die or be seriously injured.

 

I understand that Rights of Way seem to be set in stone. It's a shame they can't be looked at properly to protect paths, but show more understanding of farming.

[NickS]

It is possible to have a public footpath re-routed but you have to be ready for all sorts of objections. Our neighbours went through it to move a path about 30 metres so that it didn't run across the middle of their ménage. Fortunately the local authority took a more reasonable view than some of the nutty objectors.

 

Nick

[Gimlet]

Gimlet - you have a fair point. However, I just believe that someone's stupidity doesn't mean they deserve to die or be seriously injured.

 

I understand that Rights of Way seem to be set in stone. It's a shame they can't be looked at properly to protect paths, but show more understanding of farming.

 

You're quite right. But that kind of intellgent compromise which would involve recognising the countryside for what it is - a food factory and wildlife habitat, not a public park - is not politically convenient. It is vote grabbing that decides these matters. We are governed by a kind of mob rule. He who shouts the loudest and is most numerous wins the day and his voting allegience reinforced by painting the loser as a reactionary. That is as close to considered legislation as we get in this country, and not just on farming matters. It explains much.

[crosshair]

To often farmers are criticised for receiving subsidies. The general public receive far more subsidies than farmers in the way of benefits. An example, family allowance, unemployment benefit, the list goes on and you all know what benefits are claimed. Glass houses and stones come to mind, and remember farm subsidies are passed on to the public in the way of cheaper food.

[ballcatch]

 

That is a point! It would have to be in about 20 different languages, maybe a series of pictures would be the answer?

NO IF THEY CANT READ ENGLISH THEY SHOULD NOT BE HERE AT ALL