Council request not to use fields....

DosyMare

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 April 2011
Messages
777
Location
Essex
Visit site
Our stables yard has a footpath that runs through it. Recently a walker fell in the water (small river) when they lost their footing walking on the edge of the bridge to avoid the mud. Next there was a man on a mobility scooter that got stuck in the mud and how to turn round.
Yesterday we had a lady from the Council turn up and request that the horses (30 off them) be bought in from the fields. She was told that this was not possible because not all owners were available. She said the horses walking down the path to the fields was ruining the footpath.
Does anyone know if the council can actually stop horses going down the fields.
The majority of the 70 acres that belong to the yard are down over the bridge.
 
What a request! Silly Council lady. The thing she might be able to insist on is fencing off the footpath, but she has no power to make you take the horses of the field. It would be like asking a farmer to take his cattle out of field with a bridlepath going through it.
 
Common sense if muddy don't go there! Why take a scooter in muddy areas won't do scooter any good either, good luck to you.
 
I'm not sure there is anything the council can do. My understanding is that the Landowner is responsible for maintaining the path, but I could be completely wrong on that. I don't think there is any rule about horses being in a field with a public footpath running through it and churning up the path that a council officer could refer to and use to stop the horses running in the field.
 
It's the council's responsibility to maintain the surface of the footpath but there is no requirement for the footpath to be suitable for mobility scooters. It's generally accepted that footpaths maybe muddy particularly in rural areas.
The problem maybe, if the footpath on the bridge is hazardous, then the council needs to ensure it is useable for walkers. I'd be suggesting that they put a suitable surface down where the path meets the bridge to avoid accidents.
Speak to the County Council's Rights Of Way officer for advice and if that isn't helpful and the council continues to request the horses are removed, contact the BHS for legal advice.
 
I don't think the Council have a right to make you remove the horses, but that doesn't mean they won't try! If I were you I would employ a planning consultant asap to write to the council, outlining you position regarding the council's obligations and asking them to provide evidence for their demands. They will soon stop.
 
As people have stated a foot path is for walkers if people take other things meant to push them and they are also poaching surface expect mud on footpaths
 
It's the council's responsibility to maintain the surface of the footpath but there is no requirement for the footpath to be suitable for mobility scooters. It's generally accepted that footpaths maybe muddy particularly in rural areas.
The problem maybe, if the footpath on the bridge is hazardous, then the council needs to ensure it is useable for walkers. I'd be suggesting that they put a suitable surface down where the path meets the bridge to avoid accidents.
Speak to the County Council's Rights Of Way officer for advice and if that isn't helpful and the council continues to request the horses are removed, contact the BHS for legal advice.

Yes, the council around us looks after the footpaths across our land nowadays (they used to insist owners did years ago). They put floating footpaths over muddy bits of the paths (like wooden walkways). We fence most of our footpaths off to avoid the horses mingling with walkers and causing accidents. Our paths mainly go round the edges of the land, so its easy.

Perhaps in this case, the path could be fenced, with various points along the way that have hardcore crossings for the horses to cross over?


Re the electric wheelchair, yes technically it is not allowed on a footpath, but nowadays the councils will probably get sued for discrimination for that, so its a non-winner!
 
I cant imagine that it is legal for a mobility scooter to go down a footpath or a bridleway as it is motorised!
 
A mobility scooter is not an electric wheelchair. People who use them do so by choice unlike people like my mum who cannot walk at all.
She would not expect to be able to cross a field and also does not expect a ramp or easy access to old buildings.
The council here only maintain paths or ROWs that they own otherwise it is down to the landowner to keep them passable.
Last year I had a walker moan that we hadn't cleared the snow from our drive (bridleway along it). The council hadn't cleared the snow from pavements.
Mud on fields falls into the same category - a natural, seasonal, event.
 
No I know its illeagal for a motorized wheelchair to go on a path or bridleway, it ought to be common sense too! I'm just saying that the way the world is going, someone will try and sue for discrimination sooner than later because they can't use a footpath...

The council around us has changed all the stiles to kissing gates to make them more accessible for children/dogwalkers etc. They drive me mad as our dogs know that you just push them to open them, and if you put a rope catch on them nobody bothers to use it.
 
Horses are not meant to use footpaths - they are for pedestrian use only. If the footpath is your only means of access to the fields then you have a problem. If the footpath is simply the more convenient way (like straight across an open field) then the horses should be taken across without using the footpath itself.

Am not sure about the mobility scooter. I seem to remember from a bridleways case around here that they are allowed on footpaths at the Council's discretion.

Why don't you approach the Public Rights of Way Department (PROW) of your local counil for guidance. You may find them more helpful than you expect!
 
Horses are not meant to use footpaths - they are for pedestrian use only. If the footpath is your only means of access to the fields then you have a problem. If the footpath is simply the more convenient way (like straight across an open field) then the horses should be taken across without using the footpath itself.

Am not sure about the mobility scooter. I seem to remember from a bridleways case around here that they are allowed on footpaths at the Council's discretion.

Why don't you approach the Public Rights of Way Department (PROW) of your local counil for guidance. You may find them more helpful than you expect!

The landowners horses ARE allowed on their footpaths.
 
Most farmers around us totally ignore the footpaths, if they run through their fields they get ploughed and planted with cabbages etc!!

I don't think the council has any right to tell you to remove the horses, that would be like telling you you couldn't use your own land. If they want to maintain the pathway then that is up to them. I suspect they have the responsibility in law for anyone who suffers injury because of mud etc. It is ridiculous to try to drive a disability scooter through a muddy field. I hope the driver learned their lesson.
 
Its winter, we've had a really wet january - what do these people expect? Its a field not a tarmacked car park ffs - is there more than one idiot in your village? :p

Its your land, and as long as the horses are not aggressive or a danger to the public you can put them where you want. :)
 
I cant imagine that it is legal for a mobility scooter to go down a footpath or a bridleway as it is motorised!

The footpaths are for people on foot, however, the councils do accomodate wheelchairs and scooters on some footpaths where they have a hard surface but if they were to be required by law to put a suitable surface down on every section of footpath in the country, the costs would be massive.
Footpaths are muddy in wet weather, however I think the concern here, is because a walker has slipped into the river and complained. Therefore the council as a duty to see how they can improve the risk.
I think the lady was trying it on, by requesting the horses are removed quite honestly.

However, don't forget, the council are not always the bad guys. We've had massive improvements in some areas for assessibility on bridleways by improving surfaces, cutting back hedges on roads to improve visibility and installing rider-friendly gates on council land. We even had a horse crossing to help us across a dual carriage way.
 
Another example where idiot public have to be saved from themselves.

How stupid do you have to be to ride a mobility scooter along a path you can see is churned up and boggy ?

I have a footpath running along the boundary of my field and I have never been asked to remove my horses, fence it off etc etc. I would be happy to fence it and will do but no-way would I remove my horses.

I think if someone makes a complaint the council are obliged to investigate but they can say what they'd like to happen but whether its legally enforceable I very much doubt.
 
Legally it is the landowner's responsibility to maintain the right of way in a passable condition, the public can sue if they have an accident on churned up ground. The council cannot ask you to remove horses but can ask for the way to be made good. We have fenced off several of our footpaths - would highly recommend it. The walkers who believe they have a right to walk where they want hate it because they cannot get into the other fields but it does stop the way being churned up and nervous people having to walk through the horses (minimising the risk of injury by horse too). Most landowners would just ignore the request as being ridiculous (which it is) but it may be worth looking into fencing off if it is practical to avoid liability claims.
 
Another example where idiot public have to be saved from themselves.

How stupid do you have to be to ride a mobility scooter along a path you can see is churned up and boggy ?

With apologies to the OP here for veering off topic.

My mother now uses a mobility scooter as she can't walk more than a few yards, with sticks. She has bought the '4WD ruffty tuffty version' (it's called a Tramper) and it's given her back her freedom. She's been up hills and down dales on it, and has accompanied me around the Wyre Forest bridlepaths (I was on Rosie) a couple of years ago. A couple of times when with me, we've 'tested' the Tramper to see how rough the terrain gets before it gets stuck, and a couple of times I've had to push it out.

None of us know the circumstances that lead to this mobility scooter user getting stuck, we don't know where they'd been, whether they knew what the ground would be like. For all we know, they'd just done a 10 mile trip, and then had no choice other than to try to get across the churned up part of the footpath to get home.

To call them stupid is at the best rude, and at the worst downright insulting.

..........now, point made, back onto the original topic.


It is the Landowner's responsibility to maintain a footpath so that it is passable for all legal users. Just because we all get used to dredging through muddy gateways and almost losing our wellies doesn't mean that it's okay to turn a footpath into a bog. Maybe legally the yard owner has indeed the right to walk the horses across/along the footpath but this doesn't mean to say that common sense and common courtesy shouldn't prevail. If it is possible to take the horses to their fields without continually churning up one part of the footpath, then that is what should be done.
 
Maybe an approach to the council who are so interested in the surface being pristine to help get the surface less mud-prone by using their budgets or by utilising the money they get in landfill grants by quarry companies.

For example in Herts, Lafarge Aggregates provide some funding (and materials I think) for Herts council's footpaths/bridleways.

Worth looking into.

In the meantime you dont have to keep everything mud free but you do have an obligation to keep the FP safe and useable - altho only for people on foot , so while I wouldnt remove the horses as thats not legally required and a dangerous precedent to set for yourself and other owners, I would be looking at whatever other steps you can take to stop the horses churning up the ground so much eg improvign drainage, taping off any specially bad areas etc
 
Personally what i would do if poss in run two strands of electric fence 10 ft wide so dog walks have to stay within it. otherwise you will get more moans

no only that you will get some people walking round your fields and dogs cr4ping everywhere.

thats what our neighbour does though his fence is permanent sor of like this
===============x gate=========================================
footpath>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

================x gate=========================================

so cutting field into small paddocks then they have no reason to moan
as for mobility scooter how the hell can he get it through the kissing gates??? even with just people walking in the middle like i proposed its going to get slushy and he will get stuck.:rolleyes:

you field stupid women what u supposed to do with the horses then ?????? keep them in every time it rains sheesh she should get a life and come up with a sensible solution
 
Last edited:
At this time of year I would EXPECT a footpath through a field by a river to get boggy and churned up - or maybe the council should stop it raining...

One of my local footpaths was impassable for a few days last week - the river was occupying it... Should it be passable for all users then?
 
Not rude or insulting but practical. We all have to live our lives according to our limitations and act accordingly not putting others at risk if they have to be rescued or land owners sued if they have an accident. If landowners are sued they may well cut off a lot of countryside for people to use for fear of this. not designated ROW's but land they allow people to use as good will.

There are plenty of country parks and walks designated for all to use whether able bodied or not. Until the council see fit to spend money on flat surfaces ie presumably tarmac then they are deeming it neither a legality of necessity that off the track footpaths are accessible to all.

Common sense has to prevail and I've yet to meet anyone who travels 10 miles across country terrain in a mobility scooter without checking their route is clear and safe.

I obviously touched a nerve cos your mum uses one.
 
We out winter 360 cows on fodder beat crops. This yr we've put the crops down on a field with a footpath running down the hedge. We had a complaint because we drilled over the path so we bulldozed the beat out.
I phoned the council because we strip graze the crop and the fence would cut across the footpath, so we put about 2metres of alcathene thru the wire so people could cock their legs over without getting a shock.
The mud is now ip to your knee's and you can't get down the path but the other day there was about 30 oap's trying to get over the fence and through the mud. It was hilaurias
 
Damn phone.
Not one of them complained and all commented on the depth of the mud but as the council told us if the cattle have to be on there and we don't actually block the path everything would be fine.
 
Why does everyone automaticly assume that it was the person with the mobility scooter that complained. Personaly I think that anyone who struggles to get out into the countryside despite their disability is A) someone who I would like. and B) someone who is used to battling against adversity and not a moaner.. I would be a damn site more worried about the person who fell off the bridge into the river.That is a lawsuit for failure of duty of care ,just waiting to happen.
 
Just arrange to meet with your local footpath officer and ask him to arrange for some hardcore to be laid on the track so its suitable for both uses. Mine was happy to do this.

The council are responsible for the footing on the footpath(approx. 3ft wide) but not the fencing/hedges/ditches or anything else at the side of the path.
 
Why does everyone automaticly assume that it was the person with the mobility scooter that complained. Personaly I think that anyone who struggles to get out into the countryside despite their disability is A) someone who I would like. and B) someone who is used to battling against adversity and not a moaner.. I would be a damn site more worried about the person who fell off the bridge into the river.That is a lawsuit for failure of duty of care ,just waiting to happen.

Good points.
 
Top