How rude.
BWW has been a member here many years and, while it is true he has one main agenda, his interest lies in the opening of the countryside for access for us all, which is to be applauded. He also makes some very valid points regarding the availability of the access network via public rather than private transport. Perhaps if you read BWW's posts you might understand a little better.
I have not taken any offense at Shortwalker's response to my post and I appreciate the sentiment behind yours. It makes me feel honoured to debate our common interest on a forum in such good company.
I think Shortwalker took the whole sentence as a criticism of his post, whereas the criticism was aimed at the authorities, who are custodians of our network and the information they publish in stating their objectives to provide that, which they think we need.By these standards, SW's walk would have been a long walk even difficult.
With apologies to the OP for this mild fracas;
FWIW I sometimes struggle with some of BWW's posts too. When I can understand them, I try to contribute because I also have an interest in the origins of footpaths and lost ways but I often I fail to comprehend him sufficiently. Hope this is not rude - not meant to be.
The point - having a network of short walks can generate other walks by pure serendipity.
I sometimes struggle with my own posts
. The craft of Barewirewalking grew out of search for a Forum name elsewhere, when I had found myself
in an area, where the tactics of WW1 trench warfare were used to express the local opinion that reestablishing the footpath network had ruffled a few local ego's.
The means to find those objectives that that create the serendipity in the various forms described need ways, so I apologise for suggesting that field margins may create some of the ways to shortcut and reduce a walk to a more acceptable length. But sincerely hope that any disrespect I show for the institution of land occupation, will give others the will to explore and find the means of experiencing serendipity.
I would like to add to Bigfoot's list, a golden raft of marsh marigolds reflected against the soft filtered light of willow catkins, an endless haze of yellow flag or a waist high horse chestnut flowers making a daylight candle lit avenue. Do these objectives linked by the quality of way of a springtime field margin find parity with the objectives of Crib Goch linked to Crib y Ddisdl by a slightly different quality of way? Or is that too obtuse an analogy?