The Way Forward – a message for land occupiers

This is an article that was published in Farmers Weekly and written by one of COWS members, Dr Jerry Alderson, who was asked to write it after appearing on a Farmers Weekly podcast.

Imagine this. You are in your local town, about to use a footpath across a patch of grass which you have used many times before. At the path entrance is a new sign stating ‘DANGER’. There is no explanation. The path was never signposted. Neither has it been closed. No alternative route is offered. What would you do?

Surely the local council would keep you safe, if they were concerned? Is this a hoax? You may feel frustrated that your way is effectively blocked by a danger you cannot see and don’t understand. Would an alternative route take you into more danger, or on to private land? Should you risk it, or walk away?

This may seem far-fetched, but walkers in the countryside are faced with dilemmas like this every day.

Bull warning sign, but it was the other cattle that caused the trouble

Rights of way are exactly that – a RIGHT to pass. Nothing more, nothing less. These highways are often ancient, predating the enclosure act and private farmland as we know it.

I am a former farm-worker, now a GP, landowner and lifelong walker. I am a staunch supporter of British farming and the need to strengthen and improve UK food self-sufficiency. I believe that these two interests can peacefully co-exist.

Farms can be dangerous – look at the annual death toll published by HSE. Whilst a land occupier (owner or tenant) may not automatically owe a duty of care to users of a right of way crossing their land, any injury to such a user resulting from negligent or dangerous practices could lead to prosecution.

It is an OFFENCE to block or even discourage the lawful use of a right of way. Non-specific warning signs implying ‘danger’ could be used by unscrupulous occupiers to discourage use. Regularly keeping cattle in fields crossed by a right of way without any form of mitigation of the potential danger – fencing for example – seems reckless. Recent research published by killercows.co.uk shows that ALL cattle have the potential to be dangerous despite current HSE guidance.

New signs warning of dangerous cattle after the attack

Making it difficult to use a right of way so that it falls into disuse does not remove the right of way and will likely lead to walkers finding their own, less suitable, way across your land.

Most walkers do not intend to trespass, damage crops or injure livestock. But neither do they have the in-depth appreciation of the potential dangers on your farm that you have. Subconsciously, they are relying on the presumed professionalism of you, the land occupier, to keep them safe by identifying or mitigating any dangers. ONLY YOU CAN DO THIS.

Most land occupiers do not want the death or injury of a member of the public on their conscience.

Wouldn’t it be in everyone’s interests to assist walkers to move efficiently and safely along rights of way crossing farmland, by ensuring that signposting is clear, unambiguous and undamaged, paths unobstructed and gates and stiles well maintained? Clearly identifying dangers adjacent to paths, such as working machinery and slurry-pits, also makes sense. Where fields containing a right of way regularly contain livestock – the erection of a stock fence keeps livestock away from people, and dogs away from livestock. For temporary separation of livestock and people, an electric fence may be more versatile.

If you are not responsible for footpath maintenance on your land, suggesting these measures to the relevant authority would make sense. You know your land better than anyone, after all.

Returning to our original scenario – how useful do you think a sign saying ‘bull in field’ really is? It neither removes the danger nor offers an alternative. SURELY, WE CAN DO BETTER!

Yes – cattle should be respected!

We should respect cattle – the fields are their home. But how do we do this when a public right of way exists?

Written by one of Killer Cows Team.

A recent television programme on ITV infuriated one of our reporters as we were told we should “respect cattle, the field is after all, their home”. The suggestion being that walkers were doing something wrong when they walk across fields.

Here is a clip of the TV programme on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/brinkworth_dairy/reel/DCpkaAXocL-/

We have seen this sentiment with requests to not park on grass verges where sheep graze as it is “their lunch”, and similarly on fields where cattle graze. When there is no public right of way, or no right to roam, we can understand these requests and can comply with them.

But, there is a problem with introducing this concept into a field which does have a public right of way (PROW), or right to roam. We can respect the fact the cattle feel this is their space, and may feel they or their calves are threatened by walkers. Sometimes, cattle are simply inquisitive about someone in “their field”. But, we walkers have a right to walk along a public right of way, and we are unable to do anything reliable to stop cattle acting on that feeling in an aggressive or boisterous way.

Aggressive and boisterous cattle can result in serious injuries for the walker. We have many examples of walkers doing everything “right” and still getting injured.

The people who should be respecting cattle’s feeling of ownership of their field are their owners.

Farmers can either avoid placing cattle in fields with a public right of way (PROW), or provide a barrier to separate walkers from the cattle. By providing a barrier, they would be keeping walkers out of the cattle’s home. This is often done on the Continent with well applied electric fences to which the herd has been introduced.

The electric fence can be moved for grazing purposes where public footpaths cross the middle of a field.
If the path follows the edge of a field, the farmers can either fence it off, or offer a temporary alternative footpath on the other side of the hedge (accepting that this path would have to be temporary as a public right of way cannot be deliberately or permanently re-routed). If there is a long term plan to have cattle in a field with a right of way, then fencing is more appropriate than rerouting.

Image by Hedy81 from Pixabay

So, yes, let’s all respect cattle, and recognise the fact that they find walkers an intrusion into their domain. Farmers can solve this by providing fencing to separate cattle from footpaths, and so create a feeling of security for their animals.

Walkers should not have to pay the predictable price, or be blamed repeatedly, for farmers lack of respect for the security of their own cattle.