SpottedCat
Well-Known Member
I have recently had an interesting conversation with a local council about a bridleway near me. The bridleway has both low hanging branches and pigs immediately adjacent to it. On the other side is public open space consisting of public amenity land. This is through a hedgerow.
I was informed that:
1. It is acceptable and normal to have to repeatedly duck to avoid branches along a narrow wooded bridleway. They won't be cutting any more back.
2. That in order to avoid the pigs (which have caused several local riders to be thrown) I should unofficially, and without permission, ride on the public amenity land - they have no interest in providing a diversion onto the land (which is in public ownership), nor in creating a safe access onto and off it. I should do this until someone complains.
I feel I have highlighted a danger and provided a workable solution. They said 'we'd have to do all kinds of paperwork to divert the bridleway' - well yes, is that not their job?! I appreciate that it is up to the farmer where he keeps his pigs - but this bridleway is now unusable - you can't get your horse past the pigs because you have to lean forward and duck to avoid the branches.
If anyone says I should get the horse used to pigs, do feel free to come and desensitise him - I had a horse on a pig farm for 6 years, nothing worked, he never got over it. I am more than happy for any HHO smart-arse to come and ride him past the pigs in order to get him used to them - serious offer.
In any case, this is NOT about whether or not the pigs should be there, it is about whether or not the council have a duty of care with respect to a) providing us with a bridleway we can ride along without ducking, and b) diverting the bridleway where a clear hazard exists, an alternative route is available and the costs would be minimal (two posts with signs on, and a days labour to create access at either end).
Thoughts?
(PS I await the three million posts which will now tell me I a) clearly can't ride at all because of the pig issue and b) it's my problem and I should get over it because the farmer can keep what he likes there. I do know that, which is why I'm not going down the 'move the pigs' course of action!!)
I was informed that:
1. It is acceptable and normal to have to repeatedly duck to avoid branches along a narrow wooded bridleway. They won't be cutting any more back.
2. That in order to avoid the pigs (which have caused several local riders to be thrown) I should unofficially, and without permission, ride on the public amenity land - they have no interest in providing a diversion onto the land (which is in public ownership), nor in creating a safe access onto and off it. I should do this until someone complains.
I feel I have highlighted a danger and provided a workable solution. They said 'we'd have to do all kinds of paperwork to divert the bridleway' - well yes, is that not their job?! I appreciate that it is up to the farmer where he keeps his pigs - but this bridleway is now unusable - you can't get your horse past the pigs because you have to lean forward and duck to avoid the branches.
If anyone says I should get the horse used to pigs, do feel free to come and desensitise him - I had a horse on a pig farm for 6 years, nothing worked, he never got over it. I am more than happy for any HHO smart-arse to come and ride him past the pigs in order to get him used to them - serious offer.
In any case, this is NOT about whether or not the pigs should be there, it is about whether or not the council have a duty of care with respect to a) providing us with a bridleway we can ride along without ducking, and b) diverting the bridleway where a clear hazard exists, an alternative route is available and the costs would be minimal (two posts with signs on, and a days labour to create access at either end).
Thoughts?
(PS I await the three million posts which will now tell me I a) clearly can't ride at all because of the pig issue and b) it's my problem and I should get over it because the farmer can keep what he likes there. I do know that, which is why I'm not going down the 'move the pigs' course of action!!)