Footpaths that lead across farmers' fields

[classic33]

[QUOTE 3664592, member: 9609"]If a farmer has made a slight detour to the path then that is fine, we all must try and help each other out, but if a path has been ploughed and planted then please make a fuss about it with the local council, they have a duty to ensure these ROW are kept open. Don't let this right of access to our countryside be lost.

Here is one I reported last December, as part of a planned tour in north northumbrland I had intended to push the bike for half a mile along a path that crosses the center of this field, the farmer had in effect illegally closed the path by blocking it with his crops, as a result I had to take a 8 mile detour that involved cycling along a major trunk road. If it is a public right of way then you should expect that it is open for use.

A fortnight later the farmer had reinstated the path.

[/QUOTE]
I'd have crossed it, not taken the detour. A lesson learned the hard way for the person planting.

 

[Svendo]

Another useful contact is the local Ramblers group. In many areas they make recorded passings of paths to keep them in use and open and also find any blockages etc. They also are likely to have a relationship with the local ROW council people and know how to get paths sorted.

 

[TVC]

Going back to the OP, most of the time the path will be clearly trodden. If not, go in a straight line to the marker on the other side of the field. If you have no idea then follow the field margin. Don't over complicate it.

 

[classic33]

Going back to the OP, most of the time the path will be clearly trodden. If not, go in a straight line to the marker on the other side of the field. If you have no idea then follow the field margin. Don't over complicate it.

Then you'd be in the wrong, and trespassing which is illegal.

 

[classic33]

[QUOTE 3664612, member: 9609"]sometimes I would but not on this occasion, it had been very wet, I suspect I would have been up to my knees in mud heave hoeing the bike over that, plus there was a further field to cross that I could not see, I decided to go round and not through on this occasion - but the point is, farmers get well rewarded from the tax payer to be guardians of the countryside, and that payment includes looking after rights of ways.[/QUOTE]
Farmer in this country doesn't always mean landowner though. One local landowner blocked the Pennine Way off from crossing his land. All materials had to be flown in when they were repairing the path as he refused entry, as the land owner. The farmers just had to put up with people crossing "their land".

 

[Profpointy]

Then you'd be in the wrong, and trespassing which is illegal.

Don't quite follow your point. If you follow what appears to be be the path in good faith but stray off it as the route isn't clear, all the farmer can reasonably do is put you on the right path. By "trespassing is illegal" - you do realise it's a civilm matter, and all the farmer can do is ask you to leave.

 

[classic33]

Don't quite follow your point. If you follow what appears to be be the path in good faith but stray off it as the route isn't clear, all the farmer can reasonably do is put you on the right path. By "trespassing is illegal" - you do realise it's a civilm matter, and all the farmer can do is ask you to leave.

And make a claim for any damage caused. The onus would be on you to prove that you hadn't caused the damage.

 

[Profpointy]

And make a claim for any damage caused.

well that would be about 50p then .... but seriously - if footpath is not obvious, or has been covered by crops, farmer's got a pretty thin case. And if you've obligingly walked around the edge - well?

 

[classic33]

well that would be about 50p then .... but seriously - if footpath is not obvious, or has been covered by crops, farmer's got a pretty thin case. And if you've obligingly walked around the edge - well?

The straight line theory doesn't always hold true. You venture off that path, either to keep to as straight a line as possible and cause any damage how do you prove what damage you did & didn't cause?
Venture round a planted field in order to prevent causing any damage to what has been planted, prove it wasn't you that caused any damage. Planted fields usually have two ends with slightly more room. Two with less.

 

[Profpointy]

The straight line theory doesn't always hold true. You venture off that path, either to keep to as straight a line as possible and cause any damage how do you prove what damage you did & didn't cause?
Venture round a planted field in order to prevent causing any damage to what has been planted, prove it wasn't you that caused any damage. Planted fields usually have two ends with slightly more room. Two with less.

Not very likely though is it?\
Farmer sues walker for trying not to trample crops

 

[classic33]

Not very likely though is it?\
Farmer sues walker for trying not to trample crops

What isn't? That the PROW doesn't follow the shortest line or that you risk causing damage going off it?

 

[Cush]

The law regarding ROWs is a minefield to understand and they can be a blessing or a nightmare that varies vastly from County to County and even Parish to Parish. Where the landowners and local council get on and there is no problem but you only need one awkward landowner or one awkward walker to upset the apple-cart and create havoc. I have seen cyclists crossing a local path over a golf course and when I pointed out to them that it was a path and not a bridleway I got a load of cheek off them. Happily they got bogged down in the field next to the golf course (never played golf but have jogged over our local one before the golfers come out to play). In reality all it needs is a little common sense and civility to enjoy our ROW net work.

 

[Drago]

Although it's obviously not to be encouraged, there is no specific offence of cycling on such a footpath unless there is a local by law prohibiting it. It's cycling on the footway which is unlawful.

 

[Cush]

Although it's obviously not to be encouraged, there is no specific offence of cycling on such a footpath unless there is a local by law prohibiting it. It's cycling on the footway which is unlawful.

My knowledge of the law relating to ROW's is slightly out of date, but I think Drago's assumption could be challenged, mainly on the difference between the types of ROW's i.e. footpath and bridleway.

 

[Drago]

It's not an assumption. I teach that shizzle.

The problem is the public at large have no understanding of the law in this regard, and use the term 'footpath' incorrectly and interchangeably. Most thus believe that any path is unlawful to cycle upon, when it is only the footway that is subject to specific legislation. Even the Highway Code and some of the Governments own literature, including the .gov website, fail to correctly highlight the legal distinction between footpath and footway.

The CTC explain it far more coherently I could, and also explain that while it may not be an offence it's an undesirable thing to be doing...

http://www.ctc.org.uk/article/campaigns-guide/cycling-on-footpath-trespass