Right of Way

[GrumpyPhart]

I don't normally get too worked up about Rights of Way but whilst I was out on the hills on Thursday I got to a gate on the path I was walking along.The path is clearly indicated on the map as a RoW. There was a latch at the top which I opened but I was unable to open the gate itself. Looking down I noticed a chain wrapped around the gate and the gatepost. This chain was secured with a padlock and I suspect that its position at the bottom of the gate was to ensure that it was concealed by undergrowth. As I said I don't usually get too fussed about these things but I'd been walking all day and was a bit knackered by now. The alternative to climbing over the gate would have been a one mile detour.
Do any forum members report such matters and, if so, to whom?

[ninthace]

I do if I am sufficiently motivated/annoyed.


Useful info here:
https://www.ramblers.org.uk/advice/pathwatch-report-path-features-and-problems.aspx

Take a picture as evidence.  Most councils have a website where obstructions can be reported. e.g. https://www.devon.gov.uk/roadsandtransport/report-a-problem/     Google is your friend.


If you have to climb over a gate - climb over by the hinge.

[rambling minster]

If I have a camera and can take a photo, then I always report such instances, as I don't see why folk should think they can get away with this sort of thing


reported a similar thing in east yorkshire today

[Little Foot]

People whose land has a PROW going through it are even supposed to make it passable when it comes to thick mud etc, so a locked gate is definitely a no-no.

[barewirewalker]

To obstruct a Public Right of way is a criminal act.
Whereas Trespass is a civil matter.

[Eyelet]

Agree with all comments - it is also helpful to record the grid reference too. I have reported a number of obstructions, broken stiles and dangerous gates etc recently.

[GrumpyPhart]

Thanks for all the replies. The matter has been reported to the Highways Dept of the local authority

[PatrickJ]

I was out walking the other day and following a route published by the national trust.


The footpath in the guide was shown to go through the middle of a field ( this was also marked on the OS explorer map I checked later ). However at that point in reality  there was no clear or obvious foot path.  However a sign had been put up that pointed to the track around the edge of the field that said something along the lines of permissive path.


I'm new to walking but it felt to me like the farmer was trying to redraw the PROW around his field rather than through it.  It didn't disrupt my walk particularly and I wasn't armed with enough knowledge to attempt to cross the field estimating where the foot path should have been and to be able to challenge the farmer should he have said something ( he was working in the next field in his tractor) so I followed the sign.

Thoughts on this?  Was the farmer OK to do what he did or is he trying to pull a fast one?

[ninthace]

I do not think the answer is clear cut.  There are procedures to divert a PROW and the farmer may have followed them, though the finger post suggests not.  Normally if a PROW is newly diverted there will be a notice.  The answer would lie within County Hall - most have an online map of footpaths in their area of responsibility, often with information of work being done, closures and diversions.  Something like this
https://map.devon.gov.uk/dccviewer/MyLocalPaths/

However, my guess is  it is likely that in this case the farmer was asking for consideration for his crop rather than trying to "pull a fast one"

[PatrickJ]

I do not think the answer is clear cut.  There are procedures to divert a PROW and the farmer may have followed them, though the finger post suggests not.  Normally if a PROW is newly diverted there will be a notice.  The answer would lie within County Hall - most have an online map of footpaths in their area of responsibility, often with information of work being done, closures and diversions.  Something like this
https://map.devon.gov.uk/dccviewer/MyLocalPaths/

However, my guess is  it is likely that in this case the farmer was asking for consideration for his crop rather than trying to "pull a fast one"

Thanks for the information.


I took a look at my digital OS map and have compared it to the map on prow.buckscc.gov.uk.  both show the footpath going through the field and not diverting along the track you can see on the OS explorer map.   The FP to the north of the track was sign posted but there was no such signage going to the south just the permissive path notification.


OS Landrager





Bucks CC PROW Map





So although I appreciate the farmer maybe looking to maximise the crops in his field does he not have a legal obligation to maintain the footpath through his field rather than actively divert walkers?  I'm asking from a point of interest not because I have a particular issue with the diversion I took.


Update to my own question, the official goverment stance is pretty clear on this topic.

[jimbob]

Maybe the answer is that the farmer has 14 days to reinstate the path after cultivation. Had he actually cultivated that field? Or is there a possibility that he was going to cultivate it as soon as he finished on the adjoining field. He may have laid out the alternative route in readiness for cultivation.
What I'm saying is may not he pulling a fast one and even if he was it doesn't look as if it could possibly be too onerous to walk the boundary, which I tend to do anyway ROW or no ROW.

[PatrickJ]

Maybe the answer is that the farmer has 14 days to reinstate the path after cultivation. Had he actually cultivated that field? Or is there a possibility that he was going to cultivate it as soon as he finished on the adjoining field. He may have laid out the alternative route in readiness for cultivation.
What I'm saying is may not he pulling a fast one and even if he was it doesn't look as if it could possibly be too onerous to walk the boundary, which I tend to do anyway ROW or no ROW.

Since I'm now curious perhaps I'll go back this Sunday and take another look.  I wanted to explore the area a bit more anyway so could be a good excuse to get the boots on.   It will be beyond the 14 days.