Author Topic: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?  (Read 1078 times)

barewirewalker

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3246
Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« on: 11:44:35, 14/04/20 »
Since lockdown, which Mrs BWW and I entered at least 2wks prior to the official start, in order to protect a 101 yr old, my mother in law, who is dependant on her daughter for care, my walking has been directly from home. We are fortunate to have 60 acres farmland behind the house, though access is from a main road and and 2/3 of a mile of pavement gives access to footpaths, which gives good countryside walking.

As others have noticed more people are going out for walks,  and even runs to excercise, as opposed to the ubiquitous gym.


This has caused me scrutinize my immediate local area in more detail. How many of us are tempted to follow a trail that leads off the Righteous Way, sometimes it is a well trod badger route or sometimes it leads to a den local kids have constructed, even occasionally it leads somewhere that discloses a meaning that human need has forged a new route.

Edgelands was a term created by Marion Shoard, Author of This Land, Our Land @ 1990, she explores the historical theft of the countryside from the common people by wealth and privilege very ably, but much of her interpretation led on into opinions on factory farming and conservation, whereas the  current need exposes an immediate weakness in the share of the countryside, as focused on Edgelands, where Countryside meets the Urban Fringe.

A term I have used, having a tendency to follow mysterious trails is Peripheral Urban Trespass P.U.T., the bane of the landowner of urban fringe Estates, yet a curious social protest that does not seem to earn the recognition it maybe should?

Can those,  who ague the merits of public access, learn from PUT. What do the starting points and destinations of unofficial trails tell us about an inadequate access network?

Does anyone else have any thoughts along these lines?
BWW
Their Land is in Our Country.

barewirewalker

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3246
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #1 on: 09:09:36, 16/04/20 »
It is perhaps a mischievous observation, but if all those who a using P.U.T. in my immediate area were forced onto the Righteous Way, would there be enough space for safety? Would in fact the Council be forced to close these Rights of Way because they are attracting crowds?

PUT started before Covid emergencies, tentative routes breaking out from housing estates, mostly by dog walkers, but the PUT routes have integrated with the official path network. It seems to me that the PUT network has expanded in the last few weeks, and a wider group of users are finding those field margins that yeild the reward of leisure walking.

One walker I spoke to had not started from the main town urban fringe but from a dormitory village four miles out, but his destination was a feature, a particularly beautiful pool, normally obscured from view by the nature of the Righteous Way. The pool or it could almost be called a lake is but one of a cluster of pearls of nature's wonders, lost to the public under the title of private ownership.

I wonder if more will be discovered, will the tentative trod, I observe, push out further! I can almost hear those gasps of wonder, still hanging in the air as I see crushed grass, broken twig or scuffed earth, where once there would be untroden ground.
BWW
Their Land is in Our Country.

ninthace

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6522
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #2 on: 12:36:51, 16/04/20 »
Is PUT the same thing as estate dwelling dog walkers demonstrating their pooches toilets needs are more important than a farmer's crop, said he, controversially.
Solvitur Ambulando

pauldawes

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1342
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #3 on: 12:55:50, 16/04/20 »
Is PUT the same thing as estate dwelling dog walkers demonstrating their pooches toilets needs are more important than a farmer's crop, said he, controversially.


No. Do you really believe that?


Itís about increasing the right to roam, one creative way to do it. Always surprised that ways of improving walking rights often seems to be met with indifference on our forum.


Iíve said before that for many years Chatsworth Estate has shown that large areas of land can be made available to the public, with massive benefits not only to the public, but the landowner as well.


Successive dukes have made walkers welcome. And the walkers (the massive majority) have repaid that faith by treating the land with respect.


Not all large landowners are completely enlightened...so the rest of us need to help them, maybe by campaigning for better access rights.
« Last Edit: 13:00:16, 16/04/20 by pauldawes »

ninthace

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6522
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #4 on: 13:38:21, 16/04/20 »
But Chatsworth House is not peripherally urban is it?
I was only talking about PUT.  I was thinking of dog walkers that walk as far the first field they come to and then walk round the edge of the field slowly trampling the crop and the edges and round the corners, thereby adding nothing to the route network and generating ill feeling in the process.  Over the years we have lost several permissive paths near here and in each case the reason given damage, gates left open and dogs not under control.  I like to think these are not the actions of bona fide walkers but rather those of members of the urban community on a "day out".
Solvitur Ambulando

Rigel

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #5 on: 14:07:36, 16/04/20 »
I should probably imagine, the hedgerows on well-trodden badger paths contain more porno magazines than official path networks. Whenever truanting, we would often use lesser-known as the crow flies cut-through paths, and find gazillions of these magazines en route to somewhere better than school.  Very rarely did we break the country code and take the aforementioned magazines home with us. More often than not, we'd put them back exactly where we found them. But I have known pals to take 'em home. Admittedly, it's probably not as wrong as leaving a gate open. But it's probably not a good idea to take 'em home,  and have your mom finding you "reading" it

« Last Edit: 14:19:06, 16/04/20 by Rigel »

pauldawes

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1342
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #6 on: 14:09:42, 16/04/20 »
But Chatsworth House is not peripherally urban is it?
I was only talking about PUT.  I was thinking of dog walkers that walk as far the first field they come to and then walk round the edge of the field slowly trampling the crop and the edges and round the corners, thereby adding nothing to the route network and generating ill feeling in the process.  Over the years we have lost several permissive paths near here and in each case the reason given damage, gates left open and dogs not under control.  I like to think these are not the actions of bona fide walkers but rather those of members of the urban community on a "day out".


Youíre right, about Chatsworth, of course. I was mainly quoting it as an example of how extending walkers rights creatively can benefit us all.


I think your example of some dog owners (and no doubt some other thoughtless walkers) losing permissive paths is thought provoking.


But..as you can guess..my bias is ďhow can we reduce stuff like this to such a small level that it canít be used as a valid reason to limit reasonable accessĒ.


Part of solution (I think) is for dog owners themselves to create and publicise a responsible dog owners code. Indeed Iíd like to see responsible dog owning classes taught in schools...


But beyond that I think people who allow permissive paths, should maybe receive modest grants to repair minor damage, and receive more police help in identifying culprits. And...maybe...other landowners who make access more difficult, should perhaps see a reduction in their grants.


I have to admit that itís a subject (improving walking opportunities in urban areas) is not an area Iíve given enough thought to. Once travel restrictions, Iíll do a few ďfield tripsĒ on the edges of Sheffield, and ponder the matter more.

pauldawes

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1342
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #7 on: 14:15:36, 16/04/20 »
I should probably imagine, the hedgerows on well-trodden badger paths contain more porno magazines than official path networks. Whenever truanting, we would often use lesser-known as the crow flies cut-through paths, and find gazillions of these magazines en route to somewhere better than school.


Litter makes such a (negative) difference.


Most of the walks I can do now involve stretches of Chesterfield canal (thereís an entrance to tow path about 50 yards from my door).


Thereís a reasonable number of good walks...but walks that would be much better, if it wasnít for dumped tyres, polythene bags, sweet wrappers, supermarket trolleys, etc, etc.


Seriously vexing

ninthace

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6522
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #8 on: 14:58:27, 16/04/20 »
I think we are on the same hymn sheet Paul.
Solvitur Ambulando

Rigel

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #9 on: 15:12:54, 16/04/20 »
Not wanting to be a contrarian, but I think dog walkers look less out of place walking around nearby fields, badger paths, and urban cut-through paths. If I were a fairly handsome woman, and I was cutting through my nearest field with a pup, I'd be more alarmed if a chap without a dog was cutting through the same field. I mean, what the hell is the villain up to? No good, I'll be bound. No doubt some unauthorised kite flying, or worse!  And I'd be sure to speed up my pace.  Now if the same chap had a dog, I'd be less likely to think the worst and possibly even feign a smile as he saunters by. I think this skewed logic applies a lot when dog walking in nearby fields and what have you.  I'd probably be interested to know if Marion Shoard has mentioned any of this in her wonderful  book!


« Last Edit: 16:41:26, 16/04/20 by Rigel »

barewirewalker

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3246
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #10 on: 16:04:22, 16/04/20 »


Itís about increasing the right to roam, one creative way to do it. Always surprised that ways of improving walking rights often seems to be met with indifference on our forum.


Iíve said before that for many years Chatsworth Estate has shown that large areas of land can be made available to the public, with massive benefits not only to the public, but the landowner as well.


Successive dukes have made walkers welcome. And the walkers (the massive majority) have repaid that faith by treating the land with respect.


Not all large landowners are completely enlightened...so the rest of us need to help them, maybe by campaigning for better access rights.
Interesting that Chatsworth Estate gets a mention with enlightened sympathies, as he is the only hereditary landowner to have apologized publicly for the part his forbears played in keeping people out of the countryside. An action the the CLA might have followed had they been honest enough to own up to the part landowners have played in the Corruption of the Definitive Map.
BWW
Their Land is in Our Country.

BuzyG

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1704
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #11 on: 17:15:00, 16/04/20 »



;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D  oh that did make me chuckle.  O0

Rigel

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #12 on: 18:16:12, 16/04/20 »
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D  oh that did make me chuckle.  O0


I guess somebody has to blaze these trails around cultivated nearby fields.

barewirewalker

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3246
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #13 on: 19:31:29, 16/04/20 »
Missed that on my previous post must have been added as I posted.  O0

 A brilliant example of ad hoc path creation, reminds me of a neighbour  from my farming days. He farmed between the two holdings we farmed and always had to do things in a big sorted way. He decided to have a dog, (he was all arable) so he decided on German Shepherds, but decided that the round number was 3. These were allowed to roam free and one day I had to perform mass surgery on my flock of 146 Pedigree Suffolks as they had been  subjected to a horrendous dog attack. The culprits, 3 German Shepherds, with minimal management were quickly identified and put down.

Being neighbouring farmers carrying grudges would be counter productive too so much, some time later I drove into my neighbour's yard on neighbourly business in my Mini and was immediately surrounded by 3 Great Danes. I took several deep breath, during which time the dog of the trio sniffed by rear wheel, cocked it's right leg and squirted about 3 pints of yellow urine over my windscreen, right in front of my face.

I can't remember if those particular dogs died of old age, but they terrorized many a incomer to the village, that farm held a strategic position over the approach. Nowadays the inhabitants have no knowledge of the rigors the early incomers had to overcome.
BWW
Their Land is in Our Country.

barewirewalker

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3246
Re: Edgelands, P.U.T. and Lockdown?
« Reply #14 on: 09:38:09, 17/04/20 »
I was only talking about PUT.  I was thinking of dog walkers that walk as far the first field they come to and then walk round the edge of the field slowly trampling the crop and the edges and round the corners, thereby adding nothing to the route network and generating ill feeling in the process.  Over the years we have lost several permissive paths near here and in each case the reason given damage, gates left open and dogs not under control.  I like to think these are not the actions of bona fide walkers but rather those of members of the urban community on a "day out".
I think the main reason many permissive paths have been lost has more to do with the CLA's attitude that landowners should be paid for allowing permissive access. The original spate of permissive ways were created by DEVRA grants, which ran for 5 years and fell as the grants were not renewed.


The landowners use public misbehaviour as the primary reason for public exclusion from the countryside, yet;
I do not leave litter.
I do not walk with a dog.
I do not damage property.

Yet I will report and bear witness to wrong doing if I come across, I do not believe I am in a minority, in fact I think I am part of a very large majority. A majority that could play a very great part in countryside security if we were respected and welcomed more openly.

I think Peripheral Urban Trespass is a measure of social need and the more I observe families using these field margins, which as tax payers they are paying the landowners to take out of agricultural production many more yards than the PUT trod takes might out, the more I think that they are doing the modern equivalent of the action of people in the past, who created the footpaths we walk on today.

Leisure has replaced the need to walk to work.


Ironically where this all happening the landowner has invested in factory produced privacy signs and demands to keep to a right of way that has not been made good across the crop. (I expect these signs can be bulk purchased through a supplier encouraged by direct marketing through the CLA)
BWW
Their Land is in Our Country.