Right to roam
- Thread starter BenBhoy
- Start date
Noted. As you say its an 'unfortunate' existence for a dog, if their owner won't exercise their dog properly.
Good
Scotland has another great concept called core paths. These are light touch suggested routes to exercise the right of responsible access without the negatives for the landowner - they do not create any extra legal 'rights' and the landowner doesn't have an obligation to maintain or repair them. Landowners can get funding for various things like those gates that swing shut via gravity and are impossible to leave open.
Sounds like "permissive paths" in Wales (and presumably England?). These are created with the permission of the landowner, working in conjunction with the local council and NRW, usually for the purpose of linking routes together or for access to special areas such as nature reserves. They do not result in the formation of a permanent right of way.
Footpaths are fine...its the idiots who use the that are the problem.
I despair when someone carries a full bottle of water up a hill or mountain then cant carry it back when its empty...or thinks they can have a barbecue in a farmers field (happened 1/2 mile from us until the farmer caught them) ....
I despair when someone carries a full bottle of water up a hill or mountain then cant carry it back when its empty...or thinks they can have a barbecue in a farmers field (happened 1/2 mile from us until the farmer caught them) ....
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
Nonsense.
It takes me about 18 months to train a dog to range out and still pay attention to drop and recall, I couldn’t do it at all without letting it off the leash.
That's not what I said? But anyway we digress, I'm sure it wasn't your dog that has been worrying my deer and sheep.
Freeforester
Well-Known Member
…the rare stuff’s scarce because they need
Some secret, quiet space,
But gi’en ow’r tae mankind’s greed,
It’s sure, they’ll quit - at pace;
An’ replicate this ow’r the land
And surely, will ye see,
The loss to ALL by ‘graspin’ hand’
And wildlife poverty…
In Austrian alpine areas there are designated “no-go” areas where it is forbidden to enter, for the better seclusion and benefit of wildlife; here in the UK it’s a ‘tragedy of the commons’ scenario.
Better the wild lands and its creatures be protected by better legislation before it is too late. Lack of education, as demonstrated by the strident access takers and as demonstrably promoted by the Grauniad will not prevent it from recurring until all of worth is lost, for everyone.
Despite the Austrian no go areas, people still go in them.
We don't need more legislation. We need enforcement of the stuff we already have. This obsession that we need new legislation for every problem under the sun is what is restricting our freedoms. Upholding what we have should be the first resort.
Bo Diddley
Well-Known Member
That's just it.. the owners think they are doing a great thing for their dogs by letting them roam free on the village green, it has perimeter hedges and a ditch, but that's it, we often see loose dogs come through the hedge onto the field at the bottom of our garden, at the minute they chase the brown hares that are chasing each other like only Mad March hares do... different when they put sheep on the bottom field. Some owners are as thick as mince.
Doesn't help much if the snowboarder or mountain biker has thundered through though.
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
I think not, I trust my dogs as far as I can see them and not one inch further and I dont let them out of my sight.
The problem is that there has never been a resource available to everyone that some people have not abused, nowadays the cure is not to deal with the problem by targeting the abusers, but to ban access for everyone.
And thats the way the wind is blowing for dog owners.
67 breeds is just the beginning.
HonestJohn
Well-Known Member
Public should be allowed on public land, an adhere to codes of standards or face prosecution. Private land, should be private..unless the land has heritage sites or other areas of heritage interest members of the public should be allowed to visit and view, in such circumstances this should be drawn into ownership clauses a bit like listed buildings.
Just my view, but, others will disagree, and that’s ok
Just my view, but, others will disagree, and that’s ok
Last edited:
I managed public land for a large part of my working life and believe me we got more than our share of non responsible access takers.Public should be allowed on public land, an adhere to codes of standards or face prosecution. Private land, should be private..unless the land has heritage sites or other areas of heritage interest members of the public should be allowed to visit and view, in such circumstances this should be drawn into ownership clauses a bit like listed buildings.
Just my view, but, others will disagree, and that’s ok
I managed farmland belonging to a Edinburgh City Council that was slap bang between two housing estates and if it wasn't by drug couriers on motorbikes it was a travellers encampment. We had to drive in front of the combine to stop neds throwing stuff into the header and bales had to be lifted as soon as they hit the ground or they were troched.
I then spent 12 years with Forestry and Land Scotland. The level of public expectation was off the scale and if you sneezed in the wrong direction there were vexatious formal complaints to both FKS and politicians.
Many have the view that because its public land they have even more right to use and abuse it. 4x4's and cross bikes going where they want and demanding that areas are provided for them to play are just one aspect. Commercial dog walkers by the thousand. If there perhaps a parallel with the section of the deer stalking world that think they should be provided with access for their pastime??
Public access -laws or no laws its going to happen more and more - wether you agree with ot or not your just going to have to learn to live with it.
Reading this thread, all I can say is that the UK seems to have some strange notions about property rights. Maybe that is because you have less public land(?). Maybe because the Monarchy used to own all of it(?). Regardless, strange.
As to an easy solution for the 1,000's of dog walkers and other idiots tearing up the forests and woods...introduce some actual predators. Wolves, bears, mountain lions/cougars, etc.
People tend to respect what they fear. Especially when they're not at the top of the food chain.
After a few get mauled, they'll be a bit more observant and respectful. If they die, then Darwinism wins in the end. You're just weeding out the dumb ones. Problem solved.
HonestJohn
Well-Known Member
We have cougars here aplenty, but that’s a different kettle of fishReading this thread, all I can say is that the UK seems to have some strange notions about property rights. Maybe that is because you have less public land(?). Maybe because the Monarchy used to own all of it(?). Regardless, strange.
As to an easy solution for the 1,000's of dog walkers and other idiots tearing up the forests and woods...introduce some actual predators. Wolves, bears, mountain lions/cougars, etc.
People tend to respect what they fear. Especially when they're not at the top of the food chain.
After a few get mauled, they'll be a bit more observant and respectful. If they die, then Darwinism wins in the end. You're just weeding out the dumb ones. Problem solved.
Bo Diddley
Well-Known Member
I'm sure the idiots that walk on the village green would think that sign is some joke...
I'll give you an idea of what they are like.. I took a young Cocker spaniel on there, she was on a lead, a Border terrier belonging to one of the trusties came rushing over and started to set about by dog, I sort of gave the Border a flick off with my boot... not maliciously, just got the top of my boot under it's belly and lifted it off a few yards with a flick, the guy didn't quite know what to say... he never apologised for his dogs aweful behaviour, just wandered off in a daze around the green
Similar threads
