A professional take on this with f' y'all with some mythbusting a thrown in
Is it a rule that if a farmer has to put a crop sprayer out that they have to put it in such a place as the water pipe must cross the bridleway & that they have to position it in such a way it's not possible to pass the water spray on the bridleway without getting wet?
It would be classed as an illegal obstruction similar to a fallen tree, knackered stile or gate blocking a PRoW . A proper and proportionate response in most cases like this would be to give the landowner reasonable time to remove the obstruction before enforcement would be considered... within14 days would normally be deemed as fair. Obviously busy paths would need a more immediate response. However there is no legal duty placed on landowners or highway authorities to facilitate the use of pedal cycles on bridleways, so I'd doubt if any action would be taken as both horse and walker would be able to step over the pipe without too trouble (same as a small fallen tree). 14 days would be ample for the issue to resolve itself.
That would likely classify as an obstruction, but you've two hopes of your local County Council taking enforcement action, and one of those is Bob.
Not so, as a member of the public you can serve notice on a highway authority if you feel they are not taking the issue seriously enough or acting within reasonable time.
Yes they have a lawful duty to keep lawful rights of way on their land clear of obstruction, and those who persistently don't face enforcement. Their obligation to obey laws is the same as everyone else's.
Correct - they can also lose subsidy and stewardship payments under cross-compliance legislation. The threat of hitting them in the pocket can reap quick results.
Maybe it is, in ways a bit sad, but there's plenty out there that wouldn't be bothered about blocking a Right of Way. Seen as an intrusion at best, at worst a loss of land usage.
It's actually illegal to grow on crop on a public right of way, so they are not losing use of the land, as they are not able to use it in the first place. Pasture/silage is is classed as natural vegetation so growing that on a PRoW is permissible, as long as they've destroyed a surfaced route to do so.
A bridleway is not necessarily a public highway.
All PRoWs are classed as 'highways maintained at public expense' and much of the governing legislation relating to asserting and protecting the public's right to use them is via the Highways Act 1980. The major difference between a highway and public right of way is the differing level of legal vested interest the Highway Authority has on particular routes. There is no definite map for highways
Rights of ways can be temporarily blocked or diverted. I don’t think having an irrigator running for a few days a year is going to pass the test of a ‘persistent obstruction’, which you rightly note is effectively the test.
Without an in-force legal order or notice (Temporary Traffic Regulation Order) any temporary obstruction (aka closure) would be illegal. There's no such thing as 'temporary diversion' on a PROW, as any alternative route would either use an existing PRoW, or a permissive path to bypass the closure, and the permissive path has no protectable legal status.
Yeah I wasn't sure what they were called, I understand they need to water the crops, but a little thought for the trespassers legally crossing their land would be nice
You can't be a trespasser on a PRoW as you have a legal right to pass and repass, assuming your method of crossing the land is commensurate with it's legal status.
They can indeed, but it requires a lawful closure or diversion order. These are granted by the County Council and have to be advertised in advance of the Carncil making a decision so people have the opportunities to lodge a complaint. Simply doing it unilaterally is rather naughty.
It's actually the public that decide whether a route can be diverted or extinguished and all the HA do is manage the process of public consultation and order making. Whilst a HA can make a legal order, it can only be confirmed if there are no objections. Should there be unresolvable objections, the matter must be refereed to the SoS and the decision will then be made by the Planning Inspectorate.
Temporary closures for planned works don't need public consultation, just a valid reason to do so and money to process the application. Emergency closures (legal notice) don't need to be advertised
Footpaths across crops have to be reinstated as soon as possible, but that doesn't mean the same day unfortunately.
The surface must be restored within 2 weeks of the first surface disturbance and within 24 hours of any subsequent disturbance. Crops must be removed for the surface of the path when they exceed about 100mm high and not allowed to regrow, so spraying off is the usual option. Incidentally paths across (or around arable fields) are the only times where widths are defined in legislation.
Right I'm off for me tea
