Things you have recently learnt

Pross

I had to do a walking route survey where a farmer had put his electric fence across the path. The only way through was to duck under it (luckily it wasn't powered up). I've got no problem with the path being fenced, I think that's better for all as long as it isn't covered in barbed wire.

It doesn't help that a lot of people treat land accessed by PROWs as a free for all though. There's a field near me that attracts sledgers from the whole area when it snows, the farmer can't fully secure it as it is crossed by a PROW and at the end of the day all those who have brought makeshift sledges such as plastic bags just leave them there. Born again dog owners also seem to think they have a god given right to let their animals run free in the field too. I prefer the proper countryside that the lazy lot don't go to as it is too much hard work.

TheBigBean

Those dogs also sh!t in the fields which isn't great if it is arable land.

rick_chasey

briantrumpet said:

orraloon said:

Bzzzt. Object. As per the Rt Hon member for upskirting.

This was an aggressive use of full barbed wire fencing, all strands not just the top one, constricting and inhibiting public rights of way usage. Example where the Thames Path, a national trail with access rights negotiated and agreed with landowners to reinstate the old towing path from the times of barges on the river.

A specific line of this unnecessary barbed barrier narrowed the path to make it difficult as well as unfriendly to continue to walk a rel short distance, couple hundred metres or so, to get to a river crossing across a lock. Assume it was the legal boundary but with historical bank erosion etc... Just make it difficult for normal people, just be a total Wayneker. Maybe the EA or whoever is responsible for trail maintenance supervision had a go at him, maybe not. Local villagers def did.

And of course he didn't clear back overhang and encroaching growth into previously fenced 5m bridleway sections. Which is a responsibility, largely unenforced, of the landowner.

Good riddance. 'kin Wayneker.

The trouble is, of course, that obstructive farmers like this make the headlines, while all the farmers who do look after ROW at least passably aren't headline news, and rarely get any thanks.

Thanks for what exactly?

Well done for not being a massive pr!ck?

When the farmers round my way stop selling add space on their land to UKIP and Brexit I might stop taking their complaints with total contempt.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

briantrumpet said:

orraloon said:

Bzzzt. Object. As per the Rt Hon member for upskirting.

This was an aggressive use of full barbed wire fencing, all strands not just the top one, constricting and inhibiting public rights of way usage. Example where the Thames Path, a national trail with access rights negotiated and agreed with landowners to reinstate the old towing path from the times of barges on the river.

A specific line of this unnecessary barbed barrier narrowed the path to make it difficult as well as unfriendly to continue to walk a rel short distance, couple hundred metres or so, to get to a river crossing across a lock. Assume it was the legal boundary but with historical bank erosion etc... Just make it difficult for normal people, just be a total Wayneker. Maybe the EA or whoever is responsible for trail maintenance supervision had a go at him, maybe not. Local villagers def did.

And of course he didn't clear back overhang and encroaching growth into previously fenced 5m bridleway sections. Which is a responsibility, largely unenforced, of the landowner.

Good riddance. 'kin Wayneker.

The trouble is, of course, that obstructive farmers like this make the headlines, while all the farmers who do look after ROW at least passably aren't headline news, and rarely get any thanks.

Thanks for what exactly?

Well done for not being a massive pr!ck?

When the farmers round my way stop selling add space on their land to UKIP and Brexit I might stop taking their complaints with total contempt.

You come across as very bigoted sometimes.

briantrumpet

rick_chasey said:

briantrumpet said:

orraloon said:

Bzzzt. Object. As per the Rt Hon member for upskirting.

This was an aggressive use of full barbed wire fencing, all strands not just the top one, constricting and inhibiting public rights of way usage. Example where the Thames Path, a national trail with access rights negotiated and agreed with landowners to reinstate the old towing path from the times of barges on the river.

A specific line of this unnecessary barbed barrier narrowed the path to make it difficult as well as unfriendly to continue to walk a rel short distance, couple hundred metres or so, to get to a river crossing across a lock. Assume it was the legal boundary but with historical bank erosion etc... Just make it difficult for normal people, just be a total Wayneker. Maybe the EA or whoever is responsible for trail maintenance supervision had a go at him, maybe not. Local villagers def did.

And of course he didn't clear back overhang and encroaching growth into previously fenced 5m bridleway sections. Which is a responsibility, largely unenforced, of the landowner.

Good riddance. 'kin Wayneker.

The trouble is, of course, that obstructive farmers like this make the headlines, while all the farmers who do look after ROW at least passably aren't headline news, and rarely get any thanks.

Thanks for what exactly?

Well done for not being a massive pr!ck?

When the farmers round my way stop selling add space on their land to UKIP and Brexit I might stop taking their complaints with total contempt.

Maintaining PROWs for no reward? A 'thank you', as I'm sure you've been told, costs nothing. Would you thank your neighbour if they cleared the pavement in front of their house and yours, even if you disagreed with their politics?

Do you know any farmers?

rick_chasey

But the farmers don’t?

Are we back into sympathy for
“jobs in children’s books” again?

My house growing up backed onto a farm. He was an absolute sh!t.

Liked to climb fences, knock on the back door and have a go at families for all sorts of things.

Then he sold up and made some comment in the local parish newsletter that the local community weren’t supportive. Tw@t.

focuszing723

Ummm, what, are some of you air plants or something?

briantrumpet

rick_chasey said:

But the farmers don’t?

Are we back into sympathy for
“jobs in children’s books” again?

My house growing up backed onto a farm. He was an absolute sh!t.

Liked to climb fences, knock on the back door and have a go at families for all sorts of things.

Ah, so you've known one, who was a sh!t. And you've extrapolated.

My point is you've spotted the sh!t, not all the ones who just quietly aren't sh!ts.

rick_chasey

It’s an outdated industry that’s been propped up by oversized subsidies for a while and all they do is moan about it.

I took great pleasure in watching all the Brexit voting farmer vox pops whine that they’re having it rough in 2020 post-Brexit. Very deserving of all our scorn.

There’s a food growing industry across the North Sea that’s world beating and they are innovative, hard working, profitable internationalists.


This lot should pay attention to what they could do to be competitive and be profitable rather than whining about anything that intrudes on their recluse-like habits.

I’m sure the contempt is mutual, but only one is noble and one isn’t, right?

orraloon

There is an obligation on landowners to maintain PRoWs, though many do next to zilch. And e.g. some will plough across footpaths as a matter of choice, I guess as a long term means of discouraging public use.

My original 'rant' (wow, was that a rant? Maybe I'm not a snowflake then) was the fencing off of an area of riverbank popular with visitors. Footbridge over, small village one side, large village about 1/2 mile away the other side, across the fields by bridleway and footpath, just downstream of a lock, lockkeeper's cottage by the bridge. Small grass meadow, previously farmer would have cattle on it, open onto the river bank. Ideal for people to sit, enjoy the outdoors, watch the river traffic. And even, how double dare they?, have a picnic.

Plonker barb fenced it right at the river edge. Local community started a campaign to have the area declared (whatever the correct term is) an area of community access common land, given previous ownership had allowed such access for decades. Local council useless of course. Of course there would have been times when litter might have been left, some people etc, but as you have to actually walk or boat to reach the spot, it meant the trad lardy faterses couldn't just chuck their fastfood wrappers out of the car window, as normal.

Good riddance to the ersehole. The locals Took Back Control, and he didn't like it much. Isn't it ironic, don't you think?

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

It’s an outdated industry that’s been propped up by oversized subsidies for a while and all they do is moan about it.

I took great pleasure in watching all the Brexit voting farmer vox pops whine that they’re having it rough in 2020 post-Brexit. Very deserving of all our scorn.

There’s a food growing industry across the North Sea that’s world beating and they are innovative, hard working, profitable internationalists.


This lot should pay attention to what they could do to be competitive and be profitable rather than whining about anything that intrudes on their recluse-like habits.

I’m sure the contempt is mutual, but only one is noble and one isn’t, right?

Do farmers in the Netherlands decline EU subsidies then?

I'm not following the reasoning here.

rick_chasey

No they got off their arse and made them per capita one of the world’s biggest food producer and world leader on efficient food production (something to become materially more important with global warming)

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

No they got off their censored and made them per capita one of the world’s biggest food producer and world leader on efficient food production (something to become materially more important with global warming)

How are you defining efficiency? Yields per acre or some factor that includes energy consumption? I'd guess they are good the former and bad on the latter.

briantrumpet

rick_chasey said:

It’s an outdated industry that’s been propped up by oversized subsidies for a while and all they do is moan about it.

I took great pleasure in watching all the Brexit voting farmer vox pops whine that they’re having it rough in 2020 post-Brexit. Very deserving of all our scorn.

There’s a food growing industry across the North Sea that’s world beating and they are innovative, hard working, profitable internationalists.


This lot should pay attention to what they could do to be competitive and be profitable rather than whining about anything that intrudes on their recluse-like habits.

I’m sure the contempt is mutual, but only one is noble and one isn’t, right?

I've no problem in berating the farming population as a whole for their political choices. But as a historian, you could do worse than look at how farming subsidies post WW2 have been used to try to steer agriculture to a point where UK farms could feed its population. I'd argue that that's been a success story, on the whole. And if you look at the proportion of wages spent on food, I'd suggest it's not been bad value for taxpayers either, even with the distortions and iniquities of the EU's CAP.

But it's coming across loud and clear that you hate all British farmers and farming, and that Dutch farmers and farming are great, so I guess you're not ready to be persuaded otherwise, or would take the time to get to know all the British farmers who just get on with the job without being sh!ts.

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

No they got off their censored and made them per capita one of the world’s biggest food producer and world leader on efficient food production (something to become materially more important with global warming)

Reclaimed swamps are quite fertile.

briantrumpet

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

No they got off their censored and made them per capita one of the world’s biggest food producer and world leader on efficient food production (something to become materially more important with global warming)

Reclaimed swamps are quite fertile.

Norfolk, for instance.

Pross

rick_chasey said:

No they got off their censored and made them per capita one of the world’s biggest food producer and world leader on efficient food production (something to become materially more important with global warming)

As eluded to above, it's far easier to be efficient on fertile reclaimed land than hill farming in Mid Wales or the North Yorkshire Moors. I suspect the big farms owned by corporations in the likes of Lincolnshire are just as efficient as are the year round polytunnels I pass in Herefordshire.

kingstongraham

If they don't want public rights of way on their land, they should just move.

TheBigBean

kingstongraham said:

If they don't want public rights of way on their land, they should just move.

That's quite a strawman.

rjsterry

I don't recall 'Loon mentioning that the land owner was a farmer. He may have just rented the pasture (it wouldn't be arable if it was being used as an unofficial picnic site) to farmers. That he was only there a few years suggests not.

But don't let me stop you.

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

I don't recall 'Loon mentioning that the land owner was a farmer. He may have just rented the pasture (it wouldn't be arable if it was being used as an unofficial picnic site) to farmers. That he was only there a few years suggests not.

"Farm got sold" suggested it is a farm being discussed. Whether tenant farmers or landowner famers doesn't really matter. Whether it is arable or not also doesn't matter. Dogs attack lifestock and sh!t on land. Neither is desirable to a farmer.

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

I don't recall 'Loon mentioning that the land owner was a farmer. He may have just rented the pasture (it wouldn't be arable if it was being used as an unofficial picnic site) to farmers. That he was only there a few years suggests not.

"Farm got sold" suggested it is a farm being discussed. Whether tenant farmers or landowner famers doesn't really matter. Whether it is arable or not also doesn't matter. Dogs attack lifestock and sh!t on land. Neither is desirable to a farmer.

Obviously. Just feels like you are trying to crowbar quite a lot of other issues into a story about a landowner somewhat over zealously reinforcing the boundaries of their land. Which is not really anything to do with farming. Plenty of PROW run through urban or suburban private land.

orraloon

Just to keep the pot stirring.

The landowner directly opposite this land I've described above, briefly owned by the 'kipper b3llend barbed wire enthusiast, on the other bank of the river lives in the manor house. There is a public footpath that runs across his lawn quite close to the house. He has never tried to block it off or intimidate people from using it.

He is a nice guy not a nasty guy.

mrb123

Flower of Scotland was written in the 60s by a group called The Corries. Would have assumed it was much older.

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

I don't recall 'Loon mentioning that the land owner was a farmer. He may have just rented the pasture (it wouldn't be arable if it was being used as an unofficial picnic site) to farmers. That he was only there a few years suggests not.

"Farm got sold" suggested it is a farm being discussed. Whether tenant farmers or landowner famers doesn't really matter. Whether it is arable or not also doesn't matter. Dogs attack lifestock and sh!t on land. Neither is desirable to a farmer.

Obviously. Just feels like you are trying to crowbar quite a lot of other issues into a story about a landowner somewhat over zealously reinforcing the boundaries of their land. Which is not really anything to do with farming. Plenty of PROW run through urban or suburban private land.

Not sure my point is particularly controversial. No one should block or try to prevent anyone from using a public right of way. However, the existence of a public right of way doesn't make all connecting land a public park in which people have carte blanche to do as they like. The animals don't suddenly become pets so feeding horses, for example, isn't acceptable.

Furthermore, dogs should be on leads (going off subject now), but especially if there are signs asking for it given the presence of livestock. Believing your dog doesn't like tasty meat on the bone is not really an acceptable excuse. These are things many farmers have to put up with.

pblakeney

What I've learned over the past few pages is that there are knobs in all walks of life.
Scrub that. I already knew.

orraloon

TheBigBean said:

Believing your dog doesn't like tasty meat on the bone is not really an acceptable excuse. These are things many farmers have to put up with.

Nah they don't. Shoot the dog. No worries.

TheBigBean

orraloon said:

TheBigBean said:

Believing your dog doesn't like tasty meat on the bone is not really an acceptable excuse. These are things many farmers have to put up with.

Nah they don't. Shoot the dog. No worries.

Still a hassle and I suspect lifestock deaths by dogs far exceed the number of dogs shot.

kingstongraham

I get offended by those signs that say "Even your dog can scare or kill livestock ".

Even? Of course he could.

rick_chasey

Pig farmer on 10 o’clock news today complaining Brexit has caused so many small and medium sized abattoirs shutting down he’s got no one to sell to.

“Rural economy” taking a beating was the story.

Stop whining, you were told this. Have you only just learned?