Right to Roam: CROW Act turns 20
- Thread starter PeteHall
- Start date
Judi Durber
Member
On a similar theme, a pressure group has been established by Nick Hayes (author of The Book of Trespass), George Monbiot and others, to campaign for CROW to be extended to rivers, woodland and green belt. Those who would like to see caving included might find find it worthwhile to put their views across at https://www.righttoroam.org.uk/.
It is utterly idiotic to give right to roam over cultivated farmland. There are a vast number of excellent reasons that is excluded from CRoW. We have a very dense network of public footpaths in England that works just fine.
Also not very clear what is the difference between a wheat field in green belt and one not in green belt. Maybe our man in Islington can enlighten us? He?s an expert.
Also not very clear what is the difference between a wheat field in green belt and one not in green belt. Maybe our man in Islington can enlighten us? He?s an expert.
aricooperdavis
Moderator
Fjell said:
In the last month I've encountered footpaths that are unpassable due to years worth of overgrowth, styles that have rolls of barbed wire put over them, bridges that have been demolished, gates that are padlocked shut, and footpath signs that have been removed. Just today I had an argument with a landowner who refused to acknowledge that he had a public footpath through his field despite me entering it over a style with a public footpath sign on it and it being marked on my OS map. I must submit issue reports to the council on an almost weekly basis!
Footpaths might work just fine in some places, but not here...
aricooperdavis
Moderator
Fjell said:
Cornwall - it's embarrassing, quite honestly.
Fjell said:
Why is it 'utterly idiotic'? The right to roam in Scotland gives a right of responsible access to almost all land and water and works very well. The key word here is 'responsible' (the Scottish Outdoor Access code gives a very comprehensive explanation as to what exactly constitutes responsible behaviour). As long as people stick to field margins where crops are growing, leave gates as they find them, don't leave litter or dog mess, etc, why shouldn't they access cultivated farmland?
Roger W
Well-known member
The problem is probably with those who, rejoicing in their "right to roam," do trample on crops, walk across cultivated fields to get to the stile on the other side instead of going round the edge, allow their dogs to run wild and leave gates open...
I mean, we have people round our way who - obviously - have the right to walk up and down our road, but then leave their empty polystyrene food boxes in the street, their beer cans in people's hedges and their dog muck all over the pavement. Such folk aren't in the majority, of course - but the few who do behave like that are a perishing nuisance. I don't suppose they would act any differently in the country.
I mean, we have people round our way who - obviously - have the right to walk up and down our road, but then leave their empty polystyrene food boxes in the street, their beer cans in people's hedges and their dog muck all over the pavement. Such folk aren't in the majority, of course - but the few who do behave like that are a perishing nuisance. I don't suppose they would act any differently in the country.
I went to school and uni in Scotland and it is the first place I ever went hill walking as a teenager. There are very few paths and you pretty much just decided to get on with it in terms of access. In the past that led to confrontations, but that has changed now. You end up walking round fields where in England there would be a public footpath. The truth really is that Scotland has been catching up with England, not the other way round.
Greenbelt in England by definition rings cities and towns. Farmers are already under a lot of pressure from peoples behaviour and telling them all they have a right to have a BBQ in the middle of crops is not going to be helpful. And they will, believe me, because they already do.
Don?t get me started on dog owners. I can see from my house people letting their dogs loose on the fell who promptly start chasing sheep whilst their owners clearly think that is jolly good exercise. Farmers threaten to shoot them, and I know a few who have, but it?s ridiculous. And it?s also just lovely when people throw bags of shit in your garden as it?s clearly just too much effort to take it home. Thanks.
Greenbelt in England by definition rings cities and towns. Farmers are already under a lot of pressure from peoples behaviour and telling them all they have a right to have a BBQ in the middle of crops is not going to be helpful. And they will, believe me, because they already do.
Don?t get me started on dog owners. I can see from my house people letting their dogs loose on the fell who promptly start chasing sheep whilst their owners clearly think that is jolly good exercise. Farmers threaten to shoot them, and I know a few who have, but it?s ridiculous. And it?s also just lovely when people throw bags of shit in your garden as it?s clearly just too much effort to take it home. Thanks.
Duck ditch
New member
Like ari Cooper Davis. I regularly report blocked or abandoned paths. Mine are in Yorkshire and Cumbria. They tend to be not on right to roam land. Yesterday I walked a path that had been ploughed and seeded leaving no space for a path. Consequently I walked on the sowed grass. This by the was on a marked long distance footpath. This is in Cumbria. I have no desire to walked cropped fields, I doubt anyone does however I do get frustrated when access to right to roam areas are deliberately blocked off.
Plus, only c.7.5% of Scotland is planted crops, compared to 25% in England (combined with 10 times the population in only twice the land area).
Of course there is no right to have a BBQ on the land, but that doesn't stop them.
& if they have planted a footpath you are supposed to follow the route, rather than deviate around.
Of course there is no right to have a BBQ on the land, but that doesn't stop them.
& if they have planted a footpath you are supposed to follow the route, rather than deviate around.
Fjell said:
I'm not sure that having a barbecue would fall under the definition of 'responsible' access - it certainly wouldn't under the Scottish Outdoor Access Code. And the fact that this kind of behaviour happens anyway would seem to suggest that those who do it don't care whether or not they can do it legally, which won't change just because the right to roam is extended. It seems unreasonable to deny access to the majority who would use the land responsibly, simply because there is a minority who don't.
aricooperdavis
Moderator
Fjell said:
I suspect that the vast majority of dog owners would be absolutely appalled to hear that people let their dogs do that. But it's also against the law. Just like the vast majority of fell walkers are appalled by those who tuck their little under rocks instead of taking it home.
Stuart France
Active member
A load of tosh being talked here about crops:
Cultivated land is not CROW Access Land. See Schedule 1(1). A field with a crop or orchard cannot be CROW Access Land.
A load of tosh being talked here about footpaths too:
Public rights of way (PROW) are not CROW Access Land. They are Public Highway and are subject to a completely different set of legislation.
Yes a footpath may cross a cultivated field but you have no access right to the land either side of the strip which is the path. The path should not be planted over and obliterated by agriculture either.
Yes a footpath may cross CROW Access Land. You still have a right to use the public footpath year round because it is Highway regardless of any temporary access limitations to the CROW land at landowner discretion or otherwise for a few days per year. When the Access Land is not closed then you can walk the path and the land either side of it.
Yes a bridleway may cross CROW Access Land. This is more tricky. You can ride your horse on the bridleway all year round as it is Highway regardless of access limitation to the CROW land, but you can't ride your horse on the land either side of the bridleway because CROW bans horses at Schedule 2(1)(3). You can take your dog with you for a walk on CROW land but not your hamster or cat. Or horse.
Cultivated land is not CROW Access Land. See Schedule 1(1). A field with a crop or orchard cannot be CROW Access Land.
A load of tosh being talked here about footpaths too:
Public rights of way (PROW) are not CROW Access Land. They are Public Highway and are subject to a completely different set of legislation.
Yes a footpath may cross a cultivated field but you have no access right to the land either side of the strip which is the path. The path should not be planted over and obliterated by agriculture either.
Yes a footpath may cross CROW Access Land. You still have a right to use the public footpath year round because it is Highway regardless of any temporary access limitations to the CROW land at landowner discretion or otherwise for a few days per year. When the Access Land is not closed then you can walk the path and the land either side of it.
Yes a bridleway may cross CROW Access Land. This is more tricky. You can ride your horse on the bridleway all year round as it is Highway regardless of access limitation to the CROW land, but you can't ride your horse on the land either side of the bridleway because CROW bans horses at Schedule 2(1)(3). You can take your dog with you for a walk on CROW land but not your hamster or cat. Or horse.
