Cows with calves on a bridleway

[AdorableAlice]

If your horse is frightened of cows whose fault is it ?

1. The owner of the cows who are frightening your horse.
2. The owner of the land that you are riding on, for allowing the cattle to be on the land who are then frightening your horse
3. The owner/rider of the horse.
4 The horse.
5 The cows.

Lets think of differing situations that may frighten your horse.

1. A busy road
2. A railway track
3. A motorway bridge
4. A flight path.

There is one common (sense) denominator here. It is your choice where you ride your horse, how you educate it and what you expose it to, and no one else's.

 

[spotty_pony2]

I don't see the issue here, I really don't. A rider is not going to be trampled by a herd of cows, because they're on a horse. It they're on a horse which can't deal with cows then they need to teach the horse to deal with cows or find another route.

The fact that the path is not safe for walkers doesn't make it unsafe for riders.
.

you don’t know that though. my horse is very good with cows but the most bombproof horse in the world could go in the field but not many would like being charged at. cows are unpredictable - particularly mothers with their calves.

 

[spotty_pony2]

If your horse is frightened of cows whose fault is it ?

1. The owner of the cows who are frightening your horse.
2. The owner of the land that you are riding on, for allowing the cattle to be on the land who are then frightening your horse
3. The owner/rider of the horse.
4 The horse.
5 The cows.

Lets think of differing situations that may frighten your horse.

1. A busy road
2. A railway track
3. A motorway bridge
4. A flight path.

There is one common (sense) denominator here. It is your choice where you ride your horse, how you educate it and what you expose it to, and no one else's.

difference is this is a public right of way. when you buy land you are given documents about the right of way crossing your land and the laws you must abide by. no he is not frightened but as I said many times already not many horses wouldn’t be frightened if they were charged at.

 

[spotty_pony2]

what issue? I can't see any issue or incident has been mentioned. What known risk? I can't see any more than any other herd of cattle in a field with a path through.

A risk to dog walkers perhaps and there are plenty of warnings about that but not with horses.

farmer has posted a temporary alternative route for dogs and walkers as the cows are out with their calves and are ‘very inquisitive’. If this was a footpath - problem solved. As it is a bridleway if they are admitting they need to divert it for walkers why not horses and riders too? Or does our safety not matter too? this is more my point here - many of you are missing it.

 

[spotty_pony2]

I'm not sure they have. If they know there is an issue and have provided an alternative route for some users but not others, those others then have an issue and report it and they say tough, then if there is a further issue and it ends in a death or serious injury HSE will get involved at the least, but they could well be looking at criminal charges. Other cases haven't been prosecuted as farmers have tried to mitigate risks and tried to divert paths and not been allowed etc. In this instance there's a known risk and there's already been an incident.

you’ve hit the nail on the head. If something was to happen now they have openly admitted there is an issue with the cows being ‘nosey’ and so they can’t disregard some people’s safety and not others.

 

[Roasted Chestnuts]

farmer has posted a temporary alternative route for dogs and walkers as the cows are out with their calves and are ‘very inquisitive’. If this was a footpath - problem solved. As it is a bridleway if they are admitting they need to divert it for walkers why not horses and riders too? Or does our safety not matter too? this is more my point here - many of you are missing it.

But our point is that you’re not entitled to it. You aren’t at as much of a risk being on horse back. If you don’t want to risk being in with the cows then ride elsewhere. It’s a choice. A landowner shouldn’t be getting hassle for this. There is nothing the ROW or local authority can do. If the landowner doesn’t want horses in that particular field then in England you can’t force the issue.

 

[spotty_pony2]

So if my horse was to chase a dog walker in his field when they were walking through on the footpath and I said ‘I’m not under any obligation to make it safer for you, crack on he won’t hurt you!’ I’d be well within my rights then? because it’s exactly the same!

 

[Roasted Chestnuts]

So if my horse was to chase a dog walker in his field when they were walking through on the footpath and I said ‘I’m not under any obligation to make it safer for you, crack on he won’t hurt you!’ I’d be well within my rights then? because it’s exactly the same!

Cows are not as easily deterred however from a dog or an human especially with calves in the field.

Horses aren’t as brave.

If an off leash dog was in my field Faran would have it, Kia was the same. Both nearly had the farmers dogs on occasion, Kia would even go for my dog when he was loose despite the fact that Ben came on hacks with us and he never even tried to kick him under saddle, same when we went hunting but in his own field a loose dog was fair game, I would never have discouraged him either.

So it’s not an accurate comparison.

 

[JenJ]

farmer has posted a temporary alternative route for dogs and walkers as the cows are out with their calves and are ‘very inquisitive’. If this was a footpath - problem solved. As it is a bridleway if they are admitting they need to divert it for walkers why not horses and riders too? Or does our safety not matter too? this is more my point here - many of you are missing it.

Well, if you're talking specifically about safety around cows, then walkers and dogs are far less safe in a field with cows and calves than horses and riders. It can be argued that there is no need to divert horses and riders from the original path. That is many people's point.

 

[spotty_pony2]

That's a bit unfair. Often people enter a field that is L-shaped or with an exit you can't see. Most fields are not a perfect square with good visibility. Once you've crossed 10 acres and see the cattle at the exit gate there's not a cat in hell's chance you'd make it back to the entry. On my run last night I entered an empty field, but 2/3 way across (walking - it was very rutted clay!), I heard rustling behind me to find about 50 nosy steers cantering up behind me. There are multiple gated fields connecting to that one, all hedged. I am good with cows, so no biggie for me, and some mad arm spreading and an 'Eff off!' was enough to hold them off until I reached the stile, but anyone scared of cows would have thought they were entering an empty field.

OP, is there any way the temp route could be horse friendly - have you actually checked that out or asked on the FB post? Maybe there's a local bridleway group that could help make it so, if labour is needed? I think the fact they've provided a temp route at all means they're going above and beyond - you wouldn't get that round here!

I’ve walked the temporary route before as it’s a permissive path - it literally is about 200m long and there is open access from the road end. There is a kissing gate for walkers and two big wooden double gates which are old and tied with string. All they would have to do is open these two gates and it would be accessible for riders. No cost, no extra time.

 

[spotty_pony2]

Cows are not as easily deterred however from a dog or an human especially with calves in the field.

Horses aren’t as brave.

If an off leash dog was in my field Faran would have it, Kia was the same. Both nearly had the farmers dogs on occasion, Kia would even go for my dog when he was loose despite the fact that Ben came on hacks with us and he never even tried to kick him under saddle, same when we went hunting but in his own field a loose dog was fair game, I would never have discouraged him either.

So it’s not an accurate comparison.

Not really as both can cause accidents in different degrees.

 

[spotty_pony2]

Well, if you're talking specifically about safety around cows, then walkers and dogs are far less safe in a field with cows and calves than horses and riders. It can be argued that there is no need to divert horses and riders from the original path. That is many people's point.

it can be argued yes but if an accident was then to happen after they had decided there was no need, I’m not sure who would be liable as they have admitted the cows are bothering dog walkers.

 

[spotty_pony2]

I don't think so. It reads to me that the farmer owns the field the cows are in and the woman who is allowing dog walkers to use an alternative route, owns the neighbouring route but doesn't want horses on it. OP would like to be able to use the alternative route, if you read on. And is complaining about the woman's character.

The farmer doesn’t own the field he rents it off the landowner. It’s the total disregard for safety that has got me. I don’t want to be able to use the other route necessarily, I just want to be able to get from A to B safely however this may be achieved.

 

[Roasted Chestnuts]

I’ve walked the temporary route before as it’s a permissive path - it literally is about 200m long and there is open access from the road end. There is a kissing gate for walkers and two big wooden double gates which are old and tied with string. All they would have to do is open these two gates and it would be accessible for riders. No cost, no extra time.

Not really as both can cause accidents in different degrees.

You just aren’t going to understand that you have no skin in This game with the land owner are you?

You can reason it all out to yourself and try to persuade us however it’s the landowners choice whether or not to let horse riders use the alternative they have kindly given to dog walkers. If she’s not for it then you cannot force her.

 

[spotty_pony2]

I’m not berating the op I’m responding to a post about me. It’s natural to laugh at someone thinking they can pull you up on a bloody internet forum when this person would not even open their mouth in real life. If you have the bottle to actually type ‘to pull you up’ then I’m afraid I’m going to laugh and type to that effect.

Calling me childish honestly doesn’t bother me as it’s your opinion, I’m just as entitled to mine and you don’t know me so water off a ducks back I’ve been playing the internet forum game for close to thirty years I’m well versed

oh I’d have no problem saying anything I’ve said on here in real life I can assure you.

 

[spotty_pony2]

You just aren’t going to understand that you have no skin in This game with the land owner are you?

You can reason it all out to yourself and try to persuade us however it’s the landowners choice whether or not to let horse riders use the alternative they have kindly given to dog walkers. If she’s not for it then you cannot force her.

I’m merely debating it here which is what a public forum is for. It’s about time we had a good old debate on here as the forum used to be more like this is the old days. I’m not trying to force the landowner to do anything - the farmers are on my side and agree something should be done but need her permission to do it. I’m just trying to keep everybody safe.

 

[JenJ]

it can be argued yes but if an accident was then to happen after they had decided there was no need, I’m not sure who would be liable as they have admitted the cows are bothering dog walkers.

They have said the cows are 'inquisitive'. I'm not sure where liability falls in any case, but I don't see that statement as admission of guilt or recklessness.

They have kindly allowed people to use an alternative route if they are not comfortable going through the field. They are under no obligation to do so, but they are trying to be helpful. That it doesn't extend to horses is not a sign of their negligence, it's just that it's not on offer.

 

[Roasted Chestnuts]

I’m merely debating it here which is what a public forum is for. It’s about time we had a good old debate on here as the forum used to be more like this is the old days. I’m not trying to force the landowner to do anything - the farmers are on my side and agree something should be done but need her permission to do it. I’m just trying to keep everybody safe.

Exactly and others like myself are also debating the reason why the landowner is under no obligation to even offer the dog walkers an alternative route. As previous debaters have also pointed out this was a kindness given to the dog walkers that you feel you are rightly or wrongly entitled to have as well.

If you want to keep safe then go another until the cows are gone if you don’t feel safe just riding through them.

 

[Pearlsacarolsinger]

I’ve walked the temporary route before as it’s a permissive path - it literally is about 200m long and there is open access from the road end. There is a kissing gate for walkers and two big wooden double gates which are old and tied with string. All they would have to do is open these two gates and it would be accessible for riders. No cost, no extra time.

That sounds as if the permissive route leads to a kissing gate which horses cannot negotiate, so horses would have to leave the route to be able to use the bigger gate. If the LO agreed to allow horses to use the alternative route, how would riders open/close the gate? Would they need to dismount? Does the gate have to be lifted to open it (very common round here)?

 

[paddy555]

I’m merely debating it here which is what a public forum is for. It’s about time we had a good old debate on here as the forum used to be more like this is the old days. I’m not trying to force the landowner to do anything - the farmers are on my side and agree something should be done but need her permission to do it. I’m just trying to keep everybody safe.

You just seem to be arguing for the sake of it. landowner has said no. End of. Up to riders to decide if they feel safe riding through the cows. If they don’t feel safe don’t do it. People keep explaining horses and riders are not,like dogs and walkers.

Are you expecting to leave the wooden gate open all the time. Perhaps the land owner is concerned riders won’t close the gate .

What happens if a rider gets hurt opening old gates.

 

[spotty_pony2]

That sounds as if the permissive route leads to a kissing gate which horses cannot negotiate, so horses would have to leave the route to be able to use the bigger gate. If the LO agreed to allow horses to use the alternative route, how would riders open/close the gate? Would they need to dismount? Does the gate have to be lifted to open it (very common round here)?

No, the gates are right next to the kissing gate so they wouldn’t have to leave the route. They would have to dismount if the gates were closed yes because I think one has dropped off its hinges because they are old but if they were open, obviously not.

 

[spotty_pony2]

You just seem to be arguing for the sake of it. landowner has said no. End of. Up to riders to decide if they feel safe riding through the cows. If they don’t feel safe don’t do it. People keep explaining horses and riders are not,like dogs and walkers.

Are you expecting to leave the wooden gate open all the time. Perhaps the land owner is concerned riders won’t close the gate .

What happens if a rider gets hurt opening old gates.

I’m not arguing for the sake of it. It’s not all about the alternative route - it’s about people being able to cross it safely. Not just me - there’s no signs so a rider who isn’t from the area could come along completely unaware and get charged at. I’m just trying to keep everyone safe.

 

[Pearlsacarolsinger]

I’m not arguing for the sake of it. It’s not all about the alternative route - it’s about people being able to cross it safely. Not just me - there’s no signs so a rider who isn’t from the area could come along completely unaware and get charged at. I’m just trying to keep everyone safe

Signs would be a good idea, I think HSE and NFU would recommend them.

 

[paddy555]

No, the gates are right next to the kissing gate so they wouldn’t have to leave the route. They would have to dismount if the gates were closed yes because I think one has dropped off its hinges because they are old but if they were open, obviously not.

Maybe they don’t want the gates open all the time

People do ride along paths through cows all the time.

 

[spotty_pony2]

Maybe they don’t want the gates open all the time

People do ride along paths through cows all the time

I have ridden through loads of cows over the years and never had a problem. Any cows known to be an issue were fenced off. I have also had a problem before with these cows when walking my dog up a narrow footpath along one of their other fields. The cows (again with calves last summer) came that close to the fence I thought they were going to run through it and my dog was so scared he bit me.

 

[Exasperated]

I’ve walked the temporary route before as it’s a permissive path - it literally is about 200m long and there is open access from the road end. There is a kissing gate for walkers and two big wooden double gates which are old and tied with string. All they would have to do is open these two gates and it would be accessible for riders. No cost, no extra time.

Well, that would be ideal (assuming it’s a wide enough corridor to safely accommodate horses passing bicycles and pedestrians?) - and provided that the owner of this fresh strip of land agrees.
My understanding is that the original bridleway has not been diverted at all, it remains open, but that an additional, concessionary path has been offered to walkers only (who have more issues with cows and calves than riders), across another piece of land??
Because that route is only permissive, it can be instantly closed to ALL users, at whim of the landowner; and a permissive route can be reserved specifically to exclude certain users - eg offering a permissive bridleway ONLY to riders, but not to walkers or cyclists.
Rather than antagonising by complaints against someone who is behaving entirely legally, your best bet might be developing rapport with this landowner, and offer to pay for signage, bridlegate, whatever the landowner might deem necessary - BUT - sorry, only a compulsory Creation Order from the highways authority could COMPEL her to allow horses through.
(And take forever, with objections, appeals, even if your Council could be persuaded)

 

[paddy555]

I have ridden through loads of cows over the years and never had a problem. Any cows known to be an issue were fenced off. I have also had a problem before with these cows when walking my dog up a narrow footpath along one of their other fields. The cows (again with calves last summer) came that close to the fence I thought they were going to run through it and my dog was so scared he bit me.

but your problem was with your dog and the possible dangers of dogs and cows and walkers are well known. why can’t you just ride past the cows. If they move towards you just turn your horse and drive them away. Just because they have been problem with your dog doesn’t mean they will be with horses.

If people want to ride over the landowners land have they offered to pay, to put new gates up etc

 

[Roasted Chestnuts]

I’m not arguing for the sake of it. It’s not all about the alternative route - it’s about people being able to cross it safely. Not just me - there’s no signs so a rider who isn’t from the area could come along completely unaware and get charged at. I’m just trying to keep everyone safe.

Maybe you can’t see it but you are. It’s not coming across that you want people to be safe. It’s coming across that you want access to land that you have on right to cross because you don’t want to use the ROW that’s the farmer legally has cows on.

If you’re not from an area you should naturally be cautious when entering fields. Many trails up here have stock on them, come with the whole right to roam part. You can come round the corner and be in the middle of a herd of sheep or cattle. I did an endurance ride last year and we had to cross fields full of sheep opening and closing gates at both sides.

It’s not a debate now tbh as it’s been said time and time again that there is nothing to be done other than wait for the cows to be moved or just hack through the field.

 

[spotty_pony2]

I don’t want to ride on the land that’s not a bridleway particularly. That is just one solution to the problem. Anyway all I can say is WOW. I asked a simple question and it’s opened up a can worms! I wasn’t expecting that tbh!

 

[paddy555]

I don’t want to ride on the land that’s not a bridleway particularly. That is just one solution to the problem. Anyway all I can say is WOW. I asked a simple question and it’s opened up a can worms! I wasn’t expecting that tbh!

To answer your original question is it legal then yes, is this something that needs addressing then no. There is no problem. You could ask the farmer to put signs up.