Walking Forum

Main Boards => General Walking Discussion => Topic started by: barewirewalker on 11:34:17, 05/07/19

Title: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: barewirewalker on 11:34:17, 05/07/19
"That field's been shut off for hay, even we won't walk in it till after mowing". Anyone else come across this statement from a farmer? If a right of way crosses a field the way must be made good within a week or two (can't remember the exact no. of days). So why does this excuse seem an infallible reason amongs't some farmers to deter walkers from crossing their land. Perhaps I talk to farmers more than some others.

Is this a reason to cite obstruction? In another topic I asked if I should complain to the Local Authority (http://www.walkingforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=38623.0), but it is difficult to pin a reason on the a particular obstruction, when to whole area is devoid of fingerposts and waymarks and I am reluctant to be accusing that local authority of dereliction, because to do such a good job when they do get around to furnishing an area and their older areas the walk furnishings are in decline.

This leads to another line of thought; That there are two types of obstruction, the physical blockage of a right of way and a sort that is not so tangible as we are now encouraged to understand the difference between actual and virtual reality.

What is the source of this virtual obstruction, it manifested itself in the attitudes of two property owners on the back stretch of that Dolfor walk, though friendly enough encounters, we encountered strong persuasion to deviate our planned route. In the first instance, a non farmer, we ignored his advice and discovered ourselves walking through a fairy tale wood with a carpet of yellow, cow wheat, lit by sunlight streaks piercing the tree canopy as stunning as any bluebell wood.

The second encounter did lead to our deviating our original course, the irony was we had already walked through the hay field concerned on our out stretch. So the damage was already done if any was done. When we walked that field to keep to the RoW would have taken us across the middle of the field, but the rise of the ground and the crop masked the objective, which when was apparent, no way through the hedge, was obvious. This meant a right angle change in direction to a field gate. Again not fully visible, for the same reasons as before, until we had walked through the crop looking for this alternative.

To walk the field boundary would have increased the damage to the crop, but was there likelihood of damage. This myth of shutting of for hay seems common in central Wales, does it over rule the obligation to spray out the line of a crop, such as cereals, rape or even potatoes. In the days of the cutterbar, it would have needed some adjustments of pitch and forward speed to overcome a laid crop. Modern mowers are far less susceptible and I think you have to go back to hand scything, where trodden or tussocked grass would turn the point of the blade into the ground.
We walkers are encouraged to observe the countryside code, the acceptance of this is the norm yet an age old tradition of hospitality among country people is being slowly diminished.

Whenever I read of public footpaths etc, in the farming press the tone is to tell occupiers of our countryside to obey their legal obligation, and that is as far as it goes. Never going further to explore the value of producer and visitor meeting through a fair share of the countryside. How magnanimous are those, who have farm visits etc, etc but are they encourage to supply additional directions or ways to mitigate seasonal obstructions?

Perhaps by writing this I am starting to flesh out my complaint to Powys CC. Would it go beyond the RoW Officer and be scrutinized by their Local Access Forum, because it is more directed at the landowners on that body, perhaps even the chairman (could he be a landowner).



Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: fernman on 13:50:35, 05/07/19
My reply would be, "OK, so I'll walk around the edges of the field, then" and see how the farmer responds to that.
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: BuzyG on 14:17:56, 05/07/19
My reply may have been, on who's authority. Followed with thanks for the warning, I should be fine though and off you go. Similar to a single red flag on a guarded beach.  You can still swim/surf there, if you are daft, I meant experienced enough. 
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: Jac on 14:44:14, 05/07/19
Maybe a diplomatic 'Would you prefer me to walk round the edge or follow the right of way?' If the answer 'prefer you not to do either' then just stick to the PRoW . If he/she then wanted to physically obstruct you in any way they would have be on the hay themselves.
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: fernman on 19:32:56, 05/07/19
If he/she then wanted to physically obstruct you in any way they would have be on the hay themselves.

 :o

You are clearly not a person to be messed with, Jac!
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: barewirewalker on 09:26:33, 06/07/19
Good contributions from experienced walkers. Diplomacy was the order of the day. We listened but the sub text of the directions is revealing. Having taken the advice on our second encounter, we were still forced back towards that field of hay by the available gates. Though from a different direction. Staying on the right of way was difficult as normal walk furnishings were non existent.

Bear in mind that this is difficult terrain to navigate through, steep wooded ravines, convex slopes so that field shapes are almost impossible to recognize. Throughout the day I had managed to know pretty well where I was in relation to the map and the righteous way. Someone using a sat nav would be directed towards a field boundary and non existent style, if waymarks were there then the walker would be committed to walking in that direction. (Practical advice that should be offered in land management periodicals on the wellbeing of visitors to the countryside)

In talking I am listening to for the underlying motives, I get the distinct impression that these locals know precisely where the rights of way are, but are reluctant to admit that they are there. They are using the hay field and the innuendo that a bull is in the field to discourage us from walking their land.

What was more telling; there is a track through a wood that would have given us the perfect byepass for this field of hay and another. It would have avoided a more more dangerous alternative of being forced out of this attractive walking area onto a busy and fast A road.

But this track is locked, barbed wire wrapped top bar and is not a right of way. We walked this track in 2007, too far back to remember it well, but by a check back on old photographs, I now realize that it would have been the perfect route to satisfy both the occupiers wishes and our needs as return route to Dolfor.

Where is this reluctance, on the part of the occupier of the countryside, to admit to actual rights of way and more telling, offer a safe alternative coming from? 


The person directing us away from the hay field, had herself just returned from doing a 26 mile charity walk, not too far away at Staylittle.
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: Dyffryn Ardudwy on 11:03:08, 06/07/19
Right of Way, or not, a farmers way of life is hard by average standards, and if they have kindly placed a notice asking walkers not to use a right of way during his all important hay collection, then i would respect his wishes.
Once the hay has been collected, then there should be no issues.
What i dislike, are those gun ho types, who trample through a field of corn, as if its their God given right to do so.

Few if any famers will place a sign asking walkers not to use a recognised by law, public right of way, simply because they are not allowed legally to obstruct a public footpath on their land.

The only issue is that if the farmer continues to use this excuse long after the corn has been cut, then i would use his field to continue my journey.


Just put yourself, in his position, the hay field is his income, and lively hood, and seeing walkers trampling through his crops, knowing there is nothing legally he can do to stop them, that is a hard position to be in.

The walk will be there for another day, give the farmer his due respect for asking the public not to trample through his hay field full of corn.


Find an alternative route, if its at all possible.

Respect his wishes, for only as long as the hay remains in his field.
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: barewirewalker on 13:34:56, 06/07/19
I not only can put myself into the 'Farmers Position', I was a farmer for 19 years. What I was not; A Landowner. The farmer and landowner are required like all other businessmen to be professional.

Is farming harder than any other profession? I applied myself just as hard to my later business. The farmer uses the asset of the land for production, primarily food. The landowner occupies a space within our country, which creates additional asset value, by the use of the countryside. This resource is supporting many businesses beyond the actual boundaries of one particular freeholder.

The reason we have to have 'Rights of Way' is due to the reluctance of the landowners to share the countryside. Are farmers using as excuses, the complaints that the profession body and main lobby group for landowners use, to avoid their responsibilities in land management?

If a walker deviate off the right of way by 2 meters, either side he is trespassing, grassland, so hence a haycrop is managed without a headland, so walking around the crop would damage more hay, by trespass so incur a loss.

In this case the landowner/farmer has positioned 'Private Land' notice in such a position as to suggest that a RoW should not be used elsewhere. Probably one that can be bought in an agricultural store.

I would suggest that the farmer in this case has been obstructing the rightful way for more than 10 years by ignoring the fact that the Powys Rights of Way dept of the CC have yet to furnish the routes in this area.

That is unprofessional be he farmer, owner occupier or landowner.
If farmers were to embrace, even welcome the access network they could be getting paid to do much of the work county councils have to do, this work would be increasing employment in their areas.


Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: Mel on 20:43:40, 06/07/19
DA, I totally, wholeheartedly agree with everything you wrote  O0


(and no, I'm not being sarcastic or "dark-humoured")



Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: barewirewalker on 06:52:27, 07/07/19
Thanks Mel.
You have just demonstrated why The Ramblers', the British Mountaineering Council, Open Spaces Society and any other lobby group interested in improving our access to the countryside will fail.
Until these groups learn to differentiate between the identity of the landowner and the farmer and persuade their grass roots membership to do likewise, then no progress will ever be made.

Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: Doddy on 11:37:15, 07/07/19
I have a parks and countryside management background and a stint in Young Farmers and would find such a note to avoid a path spurious.
To avoid conflict if it was small diversion I would probably agree to do it.
There are liability issues for both parties varying away from the PROW. Keep to the Path is often seen and should be done. An often used path usually does not have enough grass on it to make decent hay; probably talking about a bales worth.

"The temporary closure of a public right of way is a legal process, and is done only where it is absolutely necessary and there is a danger to public safety that cannot be designed out. Once any work is completed, the legal, definitive line of the public right of way must be available for use on the ground."
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: Dyffryn Ardudwy on 18:42:45, 07/07/19
A nice walk in the countryside, is just that, a walk, designed for those of us who take our health and love of the outdoors seriously.
Public Rights of Way, are fiercely protected by the various walking groups, and rightly so, it allows us access to the great outdoors, and the countryside which is owned by private individuals, as well as public bodies.

With that right to roam, comes a great responsibility, a responsibility that a lot of so called walkers, fail to recognise or ignore.

The despoiling of the countryside, by dropping litter, causing damage to gates and fences, as well as allowing their pets to run riot amongst livestock.

Respect nature, leave only footprints, and great memories behind, and if you encounter a notice left by the land owner, to try and avoid trampling through his crops, at one of his busiest times of year, then respect his wishes.

You may even encounter the farmer or land owner during your walk, as i have done, on numerous occasions.

Most of them are pleasant enough individuals, who if they have enough time, will talk to you, probably asking you where you have come from, and other small talk.

Lets not forget, its the farmers and landowners who are custodians of the great outdoors, their managing the countryside for future generations, why make their lives more difficult.

If they are preparing for the cutting of corn, let them do it in peace, and its only a person or persons, who do not respect nature or a farmers way of life, who would wilfully trample crops, when they have been politely asked not to do so.


The cutting of crops, only happens for a short period in the farming calander, surely most of us can find an alternative route, to a walk.
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: pauldawes on 19:14:29, 07/07/19
A nice walk in the countryside, is just that, a walk, designed for those of us who take our health and love of the outdoors seriously.
Public Rights of Way, are fiercely protected by the various walking groups, and rightly so, it allows us access to the great outdoors, and the countryside which is owned by private individuals, as well as public bodies.

With that right to roam, comes a great responsibility, a responsibility that a lot of so called walkers, fail to recognise or ignore.

The despoiling of the countryside, by dropping litter, causing damage to gates and fences, as well as allowing their pets to run riot amongst livestock.

Respect nature, leave only footprints, and great memories behind, and if you encounter a notice left by the land owner, to try and avoid trampling through his crops, at one of his busiest times of year, then respect his wishes.

You may even encounter the farmer or land owner during your walk, as i have done, on numerous occasions.

Most of them are pleasant enough individuals, who if they have enough time, will talk to you, probably asking you where you have come from, and other small talk.

Lets not forget, its the farmers and landowners who are custodians of the great outdoors, their managing the countryside for future generations, why make their lives more difficult.

If they are preparing for the cutting of corn, let them do it in peace, and its only a person or persons, who do not respect nature or a farmers way of life, who would wilfully trample crops, when they have been politely asked not to do so.


The cutting of crops, only happens for a short period in the farming calander, surely most of us can find an alternative route, to a walk.


Er...if ALL farmers, landowners, etc are wonderfully considerate folk why do various walking groups need to fight fiercely to protect rights of way??


I agree most farmers are good and generous fellows. But a minority..but not a vanishingly small minority..make it obvious by various transparent means that they want to discourage walkers from using ROW’s.


Let me list a few: signage that gets damaged or removed mysteriously quickly, putting barbed wire so close or on stiles so that slightest miscalculation results in ripped clothing, dung heaps placed to make access to stiles more difficult, fierce dogs on chains very close to footpath, re-instating line of path incredibly slowly.


 They are several more! If any veteran walker really hasn’t come up against a fair number of unfriendly land owners or farmers over the years...I think they have been incredibly lucky or habitually walk open terrain, rather than do regular walks over farmland.


In this particular case I would have assumed “Field shut off for hay” was a royal mickey take: if field has been farmed correctly why would anybody walking legitimate ROW materially effect hay yield??
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: Mel on 19:51:12, 07/07/19
I’ve just spoken to my friend (a farming family)… asked them why they might close a hay meadow near harvest because, to be honest, I do find it difficult to believe it would be done for malicious reasons as always seem to be implied by BWW.  Her answer:

“Dog muck left by irresponsible dog owners.  Gives us chance to cleanse the field of poo bags so it doesn’t get mashed up in the machinery during the harvest process or flicked about when we turn the hay.  Would you want to feed your animals someone else’s dogmuck?  Farm animals eventually end up in the human food chain themselves, be that milk or meat.  Various authorities would come down hard on us if contaminated animals or food supplies were discovered so we have to mitigate that possibility in high risk areas such as a hay meadow with a RoW through it.  Sadly, the actions of an irresponsible few affect the decent many.”

Coming from a farming background yourself BWW, I would have thought you would have more patience, compassion and understanding about the balance between the many uses and users of our green and pleasant land  O0


Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: pauldawes on 20:12:47, 07/07/19
I’ve just spoken to my friend (a farming family)… asked them why they might close a hay meadow near harvest because, to be honest, I do find it difficult to believe it would be done for malicious reasons as always seem to be implied by BWW.  Her answer:

“Dog muck left by irresponsible dog owners.  Gives us chance to cleanse the field of poo bags so it doesn’t get mashed up in the machinery during the harvest process or flicked about when we turn the hay.  Would you want to feed your animals someone else’s dogmuck?  Farm animals eventually end up in the human food chain themselves, be that milk or meat.  Various authorities would come down hard on us if contaminated animals or food supplies were discovered so we have to mitigate that possibility in high risk areas such as a hay meadow with a RoW through it.  Sadly, the actions of an irresponsible few affect the decent many.”

Coming from a farming background yourself BWW, I would have thought you would have more patience, compassion and understanding about the balance between the many uses and users of our green and pleasant land  O0


So, I’m at the field. I don’t have a dog...and I want to walk the ROW. Nobody is charging up and down ROW clearing up poo bags (and if they are I can walk round them)...how am I being inconsiderate by walking it?
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: Mel on 20:34:21, 07/07/19
YOU aren't.  The actions of inconsiderate others spoil it for everyone else  :)



Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: pauldawes on 21:12:41, 07/07/19
YOU aren't.  The actions of inconsiderate others spoil it for everyone else  :)


But if you agree I wouldn’t be inconsiderate by walking the field...I just walk it..and the actions of the inconsiderate few haven’t spoilt it for me!

No need to worry about me watching farmers clear up poo bags while I walk ROW..I have seen far worse sights.
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: Mel on 21:23:08, 07/07/19
 :)
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: barewirewalker on 07:45:31, 08/07/19
Coming from a farming background yourself BWW, I would have thought you would have more patience, compassion and understanding about the balance between the many uses and users of our green and pleasant land  O0
Sad day for the agricultural industry, when they need me to fight their battles for them. Surely the NFU represents enough of them to put pressure on the Veterinary Practices and the Pharmaceutical companies to educate dog owners.

Pauldawes hits the nail on the head, like him I do not walk with a dog, dog owners are a peripheral urban problem, not necessarily an access issue. But has the the CLA instigated any research to identify if this problem due to walkers, not pet owners walking their dogs. Has the rural landowner, cashing in on the property market helped exacerbate this issue? Between the pharmaceutical companies, veterinary practices and dog food manufactures there's enough vested interest and marketing potential to find an actual practical solution.

Did I deliberately go trampling through this hayfield to annoy the farmer? Read my posts! I am not blaming the farmer, I was asking where the motivation is coming from that causes the farmer to ignore his responsibilities as a land manager, yet use an agricultural problem as an excuse.

Both DA and Mel have fallen into the trap of appeasement, by not identifying the true culprit. There is an answer here, a perfectly good alternative route. Had the the CLA done their homework, before coming into a membership race with the NFU, we probably would not be having this argument? There are plenty of management techniques that could be used, if only they had been thought out by the bodies that represent farmers and landowners.

Do not forget that this this an area that has escaped being furnished by the RoW dept. of Powys CC, so the true effects of landowner/farmer issue is showing through. 20 or 30 years worth of the CLA trying to establish a grass roots membership, within the agricultural community, without the CLA owning up to the major part their members have played in the past to create this problem in the first place.

I came across this notion of 'shutting off a hayfield', over 10 years ago, when the only knowledge of a Nemotode that can migrate from the stomack into the bloodstream, so that it can infect the liver of a bovine was probably only in the minds of the vets specializing in rare diseases. By that time the landowners were well into the swing of converting country cottages from farm workers abodes to desirable country retreats for an expanding urban population.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48229293592_90192f2e43_c.jpg) (http://)dolfor_map_hayfield (https://flic.kr/p/2gtRJGG) by Barewirewalker (https://www.flickr.com/photos/barewirewalker/), on Flickr

We parked at a civic center by the school, top right of the map, our route had taken us through the hayfield on the out bound part of the walk, so there was no, indication that we should not walk through it apart from lack of walk furniture.

Hayfield is shaded in green. The obstructions marked are to both the RoW and viable alternatives
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: Mel on 18:39:03, 08/07/19
Dog owners don’t need educating.  They know they should pick up and take home. 
 
I don’t walk with a dog either but I still respect the wishes of a farmer’s temporary path closure sign and understand the reasons why, despite my own frustration of the situation.
 
Nobody said you was blaming the farmer!  I have simply given a farmer’s answer as to why a hay meadow might be closed to the public.  I don’t think they’re being unreasonable, given the explanation.
 
Yes, it’s frustrating for both responsible folks and workers of the land but any rational, normal person will understand and probably empathise.
 
Oh, and you’re only arguing with yourself BWW.  I’m certainly not arguing, (despite yours and PD’s attempts to draw me into one).  My opinion is different to yours.  An argument won’t change that  :)
 
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: barewirewalker on 11:59:58, 09/07/19
Mel, please do not think that I do not value your input. Any alternative view has value in debate as it tests the strength of my arguments. Having had NFU working experience, I think I know where the value of education might improve public behaviour.

I wonder if anyone has really looked at the map I have posted, as walkers if we do not learn to recognize significant features on the map, how can we form opinion on the value of ways.

Here we have a 3.2 acre field with 4 points of entry, which are rights of way, the field has 2 gates, only one that serves a RoW. The field has fairly new stock proofing fencing, yet no provision has been made to recognize the rights of way. Even if the walk furniture has not yet been provided does the fencing obstruct the RoW. We see that farmers are well able to provide simple aid to climb over a fence, where beaters might need to get through for shooting.

Why not provide these simple measures, where a legal obligation in land management is required. I do not think that the reason of 'the field being shut off for hay' is the reason for attempting to detour us away from this field. Perhaps it was more of a guilty conscience. I would have had more respect for this farmer, if he owned up to the fact there was no walk furniture and he had made no provision in his new fencing, also his hedges were overgrown and a fallen tree completed the obstructions.


We were given directions part way to a perfectly good alternative route, but even this was fudged. No admission to the two locked gates with barbed wrapped over their top bars, which gives a further clue to the reading of the CLA's monthly, Land & Business.




Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: pauldawes on 13:51:37, 09/07/19
Mel, please do not think that I do not value your input. Any alternative view has value in debate as it tests the strength of my arguments. Having had NFU working experience, I think I know where the value of education might improve public behaviour.

I wonder if anyone has really looked at the map I have posted, as walkers if we do not learn to recognize significant features on the map, how can we form opinion on the value of ways.

Here we have a 3.2 acre field with 4 points of entry, which are rights of way, the field has 2 gates, only one that serves a RoW. The field has fairly new stock proofing fencing, yet no provision has been made to recognize the rights of way. Even if the walk furniture has not yet been provided does the fencing obstruct the RoW. We see that farmers are well able to provide simple aid to climb over a fence, where beaters might need to get through for shooting.

Why not provide these simple measures, where a legal obligation in land management is required. I do not think that the reason of 'the field being shut off for hay' is the reason for attempting to detour us away from this field. Perhaps it was more of a guilty conscience. I would have had more respect for this farmer, if he owned up to the fact there was no walk furniture and he had made no provision in his new fencing, also his hedges were overgrown and a fallen tree completed the obstructions.


We were given directions part way to a perfectly good alternative route, but even this was fudged. No admission to the two locked gates with barbed wrapped over their top bars, which gives a further clue to the reading of the CLA's monthly, Land & Business.


Like you, I enjoyed Mel’s input to this thread. She was right to suggest I was trying to get her to argue a bit more...I was enjoying the cut and thrust.


I also agree with what I see as main thrust of your argument here: that often when walking through a particular farm a number of typical signs send out signal “walkers welcome” or “walkers unwelcome”.


Well maintained stiles, with access to stile made easy, good well maintained footpath signs...all “shout” welcome. Other signs (I mentioned several in an earlier posting) send the opposite message.


I know my own reaction to footpath issues has been driven by my reading of farmers character. The only two times I complained to local ROW officer I was convinced farmer was paid up member of anti- walkers squad.
Title: Re: Field Shut off for Hay, even we...........
Post by: barewirewalker on 21:13:25, 09/07/19
Thanks PD, your input is always welcomed as we have similar views on our allowed access to the countryside. I also value Doddy's input, very knowledgeable on the regulations, which is an area my more undisciplined view has difficulties with.

If Joe Brown and Don Whillans, in the 1950's, had not lost patience with the established view that climbing rock harder than the prewar grades, and showing them that climbing Cemetary Gates in full view of their climbing hut at Ynis Etis was possible. We may not have seen climbing so popular that most towns have artificial climbing walls.

Members of this forum go of to the continent to add to their experience of cross country routes, but how many more are there in this country. The choice morsels of countryside are hidden away in private land, those exquisite stretches of quality way have yet to be discovered and sneaky viewpoints that do not rely on overall height can reveal more about our countryside than we are allowed to know.

Perhaps there are greater revelations about out access network yet to be discovered;
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48243300897_40e203fb5d_c.jpg) (http://)dolfor-kerry rw2 (https://flic.kr/p/2gv6wzX) by Barewirewalker (https://www.flickr.com/photos/barewirewalker/), on Flickr

Before being bent off course by this land owner, I had seen a lone pine tree on a knoll and if it had been erect, plainly visible from the west.

Landowners only see footpaths as part of their own land and not part of a bigger picture. The third flag from the left is the field, which is a crossroads of historic ways. I wonder if others can see the significance of some of the other marks on the map?

Immediately to the west of the field is the lone pine tree and the next one west is a bridge over the river Severn, one that is not a major road. Going east from this field is Dolfor and the purple line is the Kerry Ridgeway, beyound that is the place I saw a significantly old pine tree in a position that could be seen clearly from the west. It got blown down in gales about 10 years ago.