Thought this might interest a few of you with foot paths crossing grazzing fields.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8114529.stm

It would seem that even those who, one would think, should know better can be caught out when it comes to walking their dogs among livestock. Here a vet was saddly trampled to death whilst walking her dog in a field full of cows and calves. She didn't let go of the lead it seems. And David Blunkett was injured in a similar incident... he wisely let go of his guide dog and she drew the herd away from him as she fled.

Anyway, thought some of you might like to read it.

Firstly I am sure we all join together in offering our condolences to Liz Crowsley family and friends for their tragic loss in her untimely death. Whatever her motivations for not letting the dogs go and giving herself a chance; I was wondering what if any are the rules about signs informing people that cows and calves are grazing in a field and that the safety risks are heightened under these circumstances. I have never seen any signs specifically for cows with calves when walking on public footpaths across fields with livestock, regularly see general stock grazing signs and bull grazing signs though.

Having been 'midwife' to a herd of 500 charolais cows in my time I know the dangers involved in handling cows with calves and we were well known to the cows but still never, ever took any chances when checking calves in the field or stock pens.

Deepest sympathy to all concerned, including the landowner/cattle owner.  In the reports I've seen, Liz Crowsley was seen entering the field with the dogs on leads, and a little later was found dead with the dogs running free and uninjured.  She may, or may not, have let the dogs go.

Here's another one. The land owner appears to have settled out of court on this occasion.

http://www.fwi.co.uk/Articles/2009/06/30/116394/police-officer-attacked-by-cattle-receives-payout.html

if you had any sense you wouldent take a dog into a field full of cows and espesily if they have calf with then they attack dogs and people if there calf is at risk.but im sorry to  hear about the vet.

It saddens me to think that our cattle herds are deemed as dangerous to the public due to the recent spate of injuries caused to walkers using public footpaths and rights of ways though fields.  Cattle are only animals at the end of the day and are naturally protective towards their young due to their "herding" nature.  However it is noted that the incidences generally only occur when dogs are present.  Therfore why do dog walkers choose to put themselves at risk?  The cattle seeing the dogs as a threat will naturally be protective due to instinct.  I therfore believe that common sense should prevail and the dog owner should opt for a different route especially at calving time where maternal behaviour from the cows could trigger higher levels of agression.

Dog owners should consider carefully these risks before entering any field containing farm livestock.  However if I was faced with an angry cow or a raging agressive dog....well I certainly know which one I would choose!

advert edited out

advert edited out

Yeah.  When I let go of my dogs, hoping they would run off, taking a very threatening Highland cow away from me, they got behind my legs.  They made no effort to flee whatsoever.  I opted for shouting at the cow, whilst making frantic kicking motions at my dogs, who persisted in sticking to me like glue.  The cow was certainly after them - but i couldn't get rid of them - as far as they were concerned, I was their best defence! I had my ten year old daughter with me when the Highland rushed down the field, bellowing at us.  I pushed her into a patch of bracken, told her to get into the 'bear' position and then I ran the other way - tightly followed by my cowardly dogs.  Luckily, the cow, despite its foot long horns, proved to be merely inquisitive and not up for a 'shoo-ing match'.  It was a good job.  I was stuck in the middle of a 100 acre moor, with no trees and no hiding places.   If she had attacked me, that would have been it.  And my dogs?  I guess they would have run round barking while she gored me.  And my daughter?  I hope she would have had the sense to run away while the cow killed me. 

How do we know this poor woman didn't let go of her dogs?  Were the leads still wrapped round her hands or something?  I mean - perhaps she did, but the dogs wouldn't leave her.  Frankly, I actually think that the government should pay for farmers who want to graze cows on footpaths to have the path fenced off for safety.  We couldn't see there were cows in the field when we entered, due to the shape of the land.  I won't walk in fields with any large stock in them - but you often do get caught out, especially on the high moors, where there can be cows grazing across miles and miles of high moor.  You have nowhere to run to, and you can't see them until you are on top of them.  I sympathise with the needs of farmers - but speaking personally, I would never graze my own horses or cows anywhere where the public might cross a field - unless I had at least electric fencing up to protect people.  What if the vet had been walking with children, or worst of all, a toddler in a back-pack?  Many people do.  Speaking for myself, I couldn't live with it.  Blaming the walkers just wouldn't cut it for me.  I'd rather no-one got hurt, even if that meant some inconvenience to me in my land use. 

Isn't it called nature.  Weren't cows once prey to packs of wolves.  Therefore they are now programmed to protect themselves against dogs.

I'm sure there are not more of these attacks than there used to be, it's more likely that dog owners are less responsible than they used to be.  Also in today's litigous society people think they can do what they rhink is right by suing.   People think that public footpaths are rights of way no matter what they are doing.  They are Public footpaths not Dog footpaths.

My uncle had a cow that was a little protective of it's calf.  It was never on a footpath but when you went round to do you checks it would come towards you and not be very keen.  I used to take a stick with me and when she got close enough I would lunge at her and wave the stick.  That would make her back off a little.  But I would never turn my back on her.  If she was in a bad mood I would almost walk out the field backwards so that i always had I contact and if she got too close could lunge at her again. 

I seem to remember when I was a child that there used to be a countryside code for walkers.  Must look thaat up.

In addition to the above it must be stated that where an unfenced right of way crosses or runs along the edge of privately owned farmland it is trespass if both of, or either of, a member of the public and their dog(s) leave the line of the right of way without the landowner's/farmer's permission. The various "Codes" that are bandied around are only applicable to public access land, "right to roam" land, common land, public parklands, hence the requirement, for example, for the public to keep their dogs on a lead during the breeding season for ground nesting birds.

Your local County Council Highways Department does not assist in the enforcement of rights of way over private land - as mine has said to us, it is for us to enforce the proper use of rights of way over our land.

It must also, surely, be a requirement for any member of the public who wishes to use such rights of way over private land to assess whether there is anything along the route that causes risk. If there is then they should take an alternative route and report the issue to their Rights of Way officer/Highway Department/County Council.

To blindly assume it is safe to go along a right of way where there is obviously the possibility of risk or danger, and consider yourself protected by your "rights" is an assumption that can lead to death.

craman:

To blindly assume it is safe to go along a right of way where there is obviously the possibility of risk or danger, and consider yourself protected by your "rights" is an assumption that can lead to death.

Quite.  Just as any pedestrian crossing the road (a public right of way) would be liable for their own injuries if they stepped into the path of a bus because they didn't look first.  However, everybody knows busses are dangerous, but many people don't appreciate that farm livestock may be too.

Under common law, the landowner/occupier of land with a public footpath has a duty of care to those using it, but there is no 'strict liability'.  In other words for a claim for damages to be successful, the plaintiff must prove that the occupier was aware of a real risk but did nothing to ameliorate it. 

To put that into context, the occupier may be aware that trees get struck by lightning, but could have no foreknowledge that a tree under which a walker was sheltering in a storm would be struck - therefore no liability.  If, however, he knew that there was a dead branch in the tree which could fall in a storm, and it did so on the head of a sheltering walker, he could be liable.  With livestock it would be less clear cut, but if you were aware that a cow, or group of cows were in the habit of menacing walkers, surely the very least you should do would be to put up a warning sign.

The reports of the '£1m' case seem to indicate that was the issue at stake.  Without access to the court transcript it is impossible to say, but maybe there had been previous incidents involving the cattle, who knows, but if the farmer admitted that he was aware of a risk but did not consider it appropriately he was sunk. 

You can not put up warning signs for cows if thay are in the habit of menacing walkers thay should not be there.

I think signs that inform are ok eg cattle in field or bull in field.

I whould like to no if a sign cows in field no dogs is ok as thay are the problem in this case?

henarar:

You can not put up warning signs for cows if thay are in the habit of menacing walkers thay should not be there

Quite so.  What I really meant was an informative sign according to the circumstances.  Often walkers will feel 'menaced' by young stock, heifers or bullocks, which are really just inquisitive not bent on destruction and it is always a factor as to how familiar they are with dogs as to how much notice they will take.  It's also a factor whether the footpath runs across a field, possibly straight through the herd, or just cuts across a corner.

From my own experience I find that many people are scared of sheep, especially if they have horns (they assume any sheep with horns are rams - or goats!).  One of our paths comes off the road by our farm gate.  It runs across a small paddock to the side of  the buildings and then passes between two fields fenced either side.  Several times if there are sheep, even lambs, in the first paddock I have seen people standing around at the gate and if I speak to them they say they are wary of going in with the rams.  Along the fenced off bit, the paddock on the one side usually has the show team plus some cades.  If walkers come along the path they are followed by a group of the friendliest lambs, the other side of the fence.  They like this but go into a panic if these friendly ones are in a paddock the path follows without a fence.

Jacobus:

Along the fenced off bit, the paddock on the one side usually has the show team plus some cades.  If walkers come along the path they are followed by a group of the friendliest lambs, the other side of the fence.  They like this but go into a panic if these friendly ones are in a paddock the path follows without a fence.

That's called an Afternoon of Entertainment where I come from.  Ha Ha

It's true that people will be worried unnecessarily - but this is not a good reason to expose them to dangers that they 'should' recognize.  Even to those that know them, I do think cows are dangerous - by which I do not mean aggressive. The nearest a member of my family has come to death at the hooves of the bovine was when my husband was almost crushed to death by a calf that tried to show him some 'good lovin' while he was mending the fence near the trough.  Of course, his loving family thought it was absolutely hysterical; but the fact remains: cows are dangerous, even when they mean no harm.  I was myself almost killed by a sweet little foal, that suddenly spun round and knocked me into a deep water butt as I was worming its mum - I nearly drowned!  And, the truth is, that people who don't really know animals are even more vulnerable, like foreign tourists with no idea of the language or culture. They are often weirdly terrified of harmless youngstock, while remaining unperturbed in the face of the most obvious threats from larger animals.  I once had to rescue people at a petting zoo, who had failed to observe the laid back ears and rolling eyes of a pony they were accosting.  It bit someone who approached it as I was talking to others I had stopped from patting it.  To me, it looked utterly terrifying - but the none horsey folk around me didn't understand the signs at all, and were fearless in patting it, as it was in a 'safe' place.

And this is where I want to draw the line.  I know that a lot of people who walk over farmland are not at all savvy in the ways of the country animals they will meet there.  But I don't wish to judge these people - the fact that they want to be there at all means that they want to learn about the countryside and nature of Britain.  So kudos to them.  I would not want them to be hurt or frightened in any way.  So i would rather fence off the path than risk it.  If their children were killed by an innocent kick from one of my calves, I would feel pretty much as bad as if they had been killed after their parents had let their dogs worry my calves.  It wouldn't make much difference to me - the fact would be that a child had died, and I hadn't done my best to prevent it.  Of course - they might climb my footpath fence to deliberately trespass; and I would still feel terrible - but this event would be really be quite unlikely, and my guilt would be mitigated by the knowledge I had done my best. 

We can't ever be 100% safe anywhere, but we can do everything possible to mitigate the risk.  If we do that, we can't be held to blame.  To me, grazing cows on common land, and grazing cows on footpaths which are not fenced off, is NOT doing everything possible to mitigate risk to the public.  Cows are DANGEROUS, and the more so to the uninitiated.  If I ever get attacked in earnest by cows grazing on common land, I will do my best to sue the owner.  The same for cows grazing on private land without an unprotected right of way (although I would personally NEVER enter a field with cows in it - or youngstock above 2 years old - so if I ever end up being attacked by cows in a private field, people will know that I didn't see them until it was too late).  And, if my own cows ever attacked and injured passers-by on a footpath, I would be ashamed, and feel that I deserved to get sued. The self righteous 'get orrff moi land' attitude is morally and spiritually disgusting - and I wonder if its proponents would be able to sustain it after their stock had killed someone's child.  I doubt it. 

viewfromthehill:

We can't ever be 100% safe anywhere, but we can do everything possible to mitigate the risk.

I agree with the first phrase, but can't agree with the second.  We can, and should, take all reasonable steps to mitigate the risks but that has to be commensurate with the level of risk and the practicalities on the ground.  Where public footpaths are concerned we also have to bow to the opinions of the County Footpaths Officer.

I can only speak as I find from personal experience.  We have two footpaths running across our farm.  Of a total of ten fields/paddocks, five have a footpath.  One runs entirely down the edge of two fields and is often used by people walking small dogs (owners of larger dogs tend to be put off by the fact that every field boundary on this path has a stile).  If we had cattle I would be tempted to fence this path along its whole length.  When I mentioned this to the County Footpath Officer, although he admitted that he couldn't stop us doing it, he didn't like paths to be fenced off unless there was a very good reason for it.  It spoilt the 'experience' of walkers.  Given his attitude (you don't really want to upset officialdom unnecessarily) and that it would also make hedge trimming more difficult, we have left this one alone.  Incidentally someone has suggested electric fencing.  This would get our Footpath Officer very excited indeed!

The second path, as I have said earlier, runs across a small paddock and within six feet of the front of our barn - obviously this cannot be fenced off.  Then it goes along a field boundary which we have fenced off then in a dog leg across a small 3 acre field.  The reason for this dog leg is not obvious as the field was the same shape in the earliest map in our deeds (1885), but older residents do say that many years ago there was a small stream down the field which has disappeared underground, so maybe the path crossed the stream at the shallowest place.  A previous owner of this field created a manège at the point where the path enters and tried, unsuccessfully, to have the path diverted round the edge of the field.  To fence this path off would create two virtually useless enclosures.

Both these paths then continue to cross neighbours' land.  In the one instance, a mixed beef, sheep and arable farm, which like us reckon almost half their fields a have paths or bridleways.  About half of these run along field boundaries some of which have been fenced, most of the rest run diagonally across fields which are used in rotation for barley, beans, grass.  When down to grass they are grazed by the suckler herd, the pedigree Lims and sheep.  To take these fields out of the grass element of the rotation would be very restrictive for the farm.  The other path runs diagonally across a very oddly shaped 10 acre field on a slope and fencing it off would really render the whole field virtually useless.  This farm is dairy only.  The size, shape and location of the field mean that it is not suitable for cows in milk, silage grass or maize so is used mainly for summer grazing Holstein heifers.  This is the only footpath on this farm but there is quite a long bridle path (also used by walkers) which runs mainly along field boundaries, and also straight through the farm yard.  This is unfenced.

We are on the edge of a dormitory village in the greenbelt south of Birmingham.  These paths are used frequently by local residents, urban visitors and by the scouts and guides from a nearby camping and activity centre.  The stock in these fields have grown up with walkers and riders as a fact of life and mostly take no notice of them at all.  There have certainly never been any incidents and I'm sure the bush telegraph would have been punctilious in reporting anything remotely scandalous.

If our neighbours are wise they will, in the light of recent publicity, have jotted down a written risk assessment, but I am sure that they would both be perfectly justified in concluding that the risk level is so extremely low that they need to to take little or no action to mitigate it.

Very good article in today's FW, including the reasons why the court felt the farmer was liable.

But it's not only cattle waiting to savage those enjoying the countryside as this story on the BBC illustrates!

The countryside is a workplace, and although a beautiful place which should be enjoyed by everyone it does not come without its dangers. The way in which these dangers/risks are managed in my opinion is the responsibility of everyone; land owners, farmers, walkers, dog walkers and anyone else who wishes to use the countryside.

In an ideal world all paths would be fenced so that cows could not come into contact with walkers and so dogs couldn't upset herds of cows. The fenced off paths (which would not be grazed) would be mown regularly to provide a nice path free of trip hazards. And all of this would be paid for by the government who haven't got anything better to spend their money on!!!

NOT!!!!

Firstly what sort of fences would you like to see? To stop cows the best/ most common type of fence is posts, wire netting and a strand of barbed wire. Well barbed wire on the side of a public footpath looks like another opportunity for sueing to me. As stated earlier in this forum electric fencing is not a good idea either.

If an area is fenced off who is responsible for mowing the path?

Who is going to pay for the fence because i'm sure farmers wouldn't?

And as an earlier thread suggests, it is not practical to erect fences alongside all footpaths in fields which contain stock.

At the end of the day people want to see cows in the countryside and not kept indoors all year. In my opinion, the best solution is for farmers to put signs up warning that there are cows with calves/bull/youngstock in a field which a path crosses. This then gives the public the choice whether or not they choose to take the path of pick an altarenative route.

 Hmm.  Well.

Me, I have always fenced off with electric fencing - it's temporary and cheap.  I moved it when I moved my stock.  No-one ever got on my case about it - despite a young Londoner once being simultaneously electrocuted by my fence and terrorized by my horses, who were sniffing him over the fence (as I had not fenced a wide enough swathe). When I had stopped laughing, i went and apologised, and had a good chat with him.  Admittedly, I suppose, he might have sued me if I hadn't been about to chat to him.  For what I don't know, as he was only sniffed.  It's only dogs that have a sort of 'terror' clause attached to them, as far as I know, anyway.  BUT in any case I was willing to take that chance. The fence couldn't hurt him - my horses could.  And he could hurt them.  With the fence between them, everyone was safe.

Yes - if I could afford it, i would fence off all footpaths with post and rail plus wire.  I do think the UK government should pay for it.  If they stopped wasting money on bombing foreign countries, and MP's expenses, they could certainly afford to fence our paths and deliver decent education and health care.  Sorry - but I have spent five years in Scandinavia, where the government does a LOT more with a LOT LESS tax dollars.  I think the UK government are swindling gits.  They need to think again about where the money is spent.  It should be spent on Britain and the British (and all the foreign nationals who have settled here) in my opinion.

As for mowing, why mow?  Hikers will wear a path.  It's good for them to struggle with it.  There is no reason for them to complain - indeed - what would they complain about??  And to whom??  And anyway, the rest of the swathe acts as good set-aside - a butterfly and bee haven. I have NEVER seen such fenced paths mown - and there are a fair few that I have walked - both in Pembrokeshire and in the Home Counties.

I DO AGREE that signs are a good measure, however.  As a libertarian, I wouldn't want to dictate anything to anyone.  If any farmer feels that signs are a safe enough measure, then that is between them and their conscience.  It would work for me, as a walker - I wouldn't use that path if I had my kids with me (I MIGHT chance it if it was just me, though - but then I wouldn't sue if I got gored). But what about some townie with a baby in a back pack?  I am quite proud to say, that, as a landowner, I would HAVE to feel I had made my path safe enough for them...

Anyway - I do hope that the UK government makes some decision about cows and paths that suits our intense 'rural' tourism bent, while supporting the farmers who are the guardians of the British countryside.  For me, that would be a fenced path scheme, where those of us who felt we had to graze potentially dangerous OR endangered stock on a field with a path in it, would have the right to get said path fenced off at government expense. I can't see why not.  It would cost nothing in comparison to the cost of flying weapons to Afghanistan.

 Damn!!  Who would have seen that one coming??

 There was a myth in South Wales, where I used to live, that a seagull had once carried some-one's chihuahua out to sea... I have had my chips stolen by such a gull, and I reckon it's possible...  Bird attacks are real!  Alfred Hitchcock lives!!!

nice big stick me thinks.

Jacobus:

article in today's FW, including the reasons why the court felt the farmer was liable.

The HSE updated its advice on Friday:

http://news.hse.gov.uk/2009/07/17/cattle-and-public-access-information-and-advice/?rss 

I have read all the links, etc. and wind up very confused.  I am having a hard time figuring out what a cattle farmer should do in light of this judgement.  Having been around cattle my entire life, I am also puzzled about these whole herd attacks. To be honest, I would probably not worry much about setting off across a pasture with cows and calves in it with a dog on a leash.  Most of the cattle I have ever seen would give you wide clearance.  My first thought was your cattle ought to be more likely to do that because they see more dogs and people, but maybe the opposite is true, familiarity breeds contempt?  We know here that dairy bulls are much more dangerous than beef bulls, I have always been told that is because of the close personal handling most receive from birth, they are used to people so they have no fear of them.  Maybe many of the British cows are the same way?  I don't know if there is any scientific backing to this theory, but what I learned from the time one of my cows did try to kill me(and nearly got it done) was fighting back makes things worse.  What saved me is I decided I was going to get killed and might as well get it over with, so I quit fighting.  As soon as I was just motionless on the ground, she lost interest.  I was in a confined space in that case, I figured at the time and still do had we been in the open that attack would have never happened.

The question at hand still is, how does one run cattle in a field with a footpath and avoid liability if they attack?  Is there insurance for such things, and can you afford it?