Author Topic: Wandering off-piste  (Read 1013 times)

pleb

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1544
Re: Wandering off-piste
« Reply #15 on: 21:10:54, 22/10/17 »
Controversial!
I saw countryfile too, and have sympathy with said farmers.
Been walking a few years, I never had any stick from anybody, eg farmers.
In the interests of fairness, there was a fp in Calderdale that was also a track, the bod who lived at the house (?) had a few tonnes of gravel trying to block the path, didnt stop me though.

John Murphy

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: Wandering off-piste
« Reply #16 on: 21:25:59, 22/10/17 »
Why don't you all write to your MPs and get them to put a Bill onto the statute book like the one we have in Scotland........
we can walk, camp, ride horses almost anywhere as long as we do it responsibly! We get very little of 'this is my ground - keep off!' Get the petition started!


Not much hope of that idea being passed by the morons in Westminster ;D ;D ;D ;D


As for Scotland since the new legislation came in a few years ago. Restrictions are being brought now curtailing the right to roam ect. Whereas before political interference surfaced Scotland was an haven to wilderness walkers not nowadays because of legislation. :( :( :(




barewirewalker

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2560
Re: Wandering off-pistetreating the
« Reply #17 on: 19:19:40, 24/10/17 »
Did not see countryfile, but I do not mix access issues with public misbehaviour or criminal behaviour. Also there is a clear demarcation between between landowner and farmer. The NFU does not publish a policy on access, whereas the landowners as represented by the CLA do, and their policy is to reduce the access network although they keep this document behind closed doors.
As a working farm manager I spent a week treating horrendous wounds in a flock of sheep caused by three Alsations, and many months bringing the flock back to health. The dogs did not belong to visitors to the countryside, but were owned by a neighbouring farmer.
Why blame the majority of walkers for the misbehaviour of a minority, it just gives the landowner an excuse to continue the excesses of the past.


Like a good poacher, a good trespasser should leave no trail, no signs, perhaps a few wild campers should follow this example.


 ;)
BWW
Their Land is in Our Country.

Andies

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 429
Re: Wandering off-piste
« Reply #18 on: 11:25:20, 27/10/17 »
I have become ever more inclined to stray from the "righteous way" as the years have passed. The attitude of many landowners is hostile; no doubt fuelled by the CLA. In Suffolk there is very little access land so walkers are reliant on ROW, which are all to often obstructed, and suffer from broken or missing signage. It is quite interesting to see the lengths some will go to stop lawful access to ROW. The Council ROW department seems to be reluctant in many cases to deal with these issues, albeit funding is limited.

My experience is that in areas with access land the attitude is somewhat different, but there are still some that resent any form of access.

The corruption of the definitive map over the years by these same landowning classes denies us many legitimate rights of way. In Suffolk this corruption lead to many villages not having a single right of way recorded on the definitive map when it was set up. This has then meant an up hill battle thereafter to get these added, and without the incredible work of John Andrews (Ramblers Association) over the years, the situation would be even worse now. That said an examination of any OS map immediately points out more missing ROW. I fear most will be lost for ever.

I for one will continue to walk these lost ways and deal with the challenges when they come, as they surely do in Suffolk ;)

barewirewalker

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2560
Re: Wandering off-piste
« Reply #19 on: 11:29:56, 30/10/17 »
The corruption of the definitive map over the years by these same landowning classes denies us many legitimate rights of way. In Suffolk this corruption lead to many villages not having a single right of way recorded on the definitive map when it was set up.

I for one will continue to walk these lost ways and deal with the challenges when they come, as they surely do in Suffolk ;)


Delighted that you use the term 'Corruption of the Definitive Map', the more who use it and understand what it says may help to encourage more in  a pre 2026 study of the difference between those OS map editions pre-1940, which gave a snaps shot in time of how our ancestors walked about the countryside. The more, who can draw on the example I posted here, the better the understanding of the situation Andies is in. It is the most contemptuous distortion of fact, when the then President of the CLA, when they published the policy on access, writes off lostways as being of little importance when his own estate is surrounded by several parishes stripped of old ways, as is the case in Suffolk.


As my examples have been stripped of the pictorial content by the grasping Photobucket, these posts lose some of the their impact, but as with those, who wanted full size files then, I am happy to pass on the images to any, who might wish understand this problem.


In the example of Church Hill, the indications are that there was once a public place there. A wish to access it is understandable, when I stood there I realised that it was an unusual place, perhaps that is why a church once stood there. But it struck me to be a wonderful place to instruct young map readers the relationship of map to terrain. The nearby main feature hill, might be thought to be the obvious place to go, but this knoll gives more than the dominant view of that higher place.


Just one of the anomalies between Scottish and English access, which I am sad to read is being curbed by landowners. I think the lowland walkers there have been slow to explore and publish walks, which demonstrate the value of the freedom the 2003 act gave them.
BWW
Their Land is in Our Country.