Obstructed Footpaths

Rooney said:

(Gary) said:

Rooney said:

On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 12:08:43 +0100, Mike Clark <[email hidden]> wrote:

>In east anglia I find a pair of binoculars usually helps you identify
>the next stile when it is a long way across arable fields.

I often use the binoculars for this sort of thing. A couple of days
ago I was walking in an area where the footpaths aren't marked, and
are often partly overgrown and hard to follow on the ground - which I
don't object to at all, as it's more fun and gives the feeling of
being somewhere a bit wild. I used the binoculars at almost every
twist, turn, field and clearing to try to identify where the path went
(or used to go!). Reasonably successful too. Some of the paths we
walked were well hidden to the naked eye.

Do the signs that we do see not point in the absolute direction the
paths should go? I presume so as it usually works for me and on
principle I'll stomp through the field with my size twelves even if
the farmer hasnt made the path good, he should have. My world is black
and white....lol

Sad git.

No - the signs all point to Llwybr Cyhoeddus. Don't go there - there's
no pub.

Ought'nt be alllowed.

In article said:

Sam Salt said:

Anyone planning a walk around these parts beware ,what is a path on
the OS sheet has a good chance of not being there.

The OS sheets always say "The representation on this map of any other road,
track or path is no evidence of the existence of a right of way." Threat
them as guides and not absolutes.

I have always interpreted that as referring to any paths that may be marked
on a map, but not explicitly marked as been a right of way.

I have always assumed that if a path is marked as a Right of Way then there
is no ambiguity about your right to walk on that path. Am I wrong ?

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: The Standard Oil Company of the 21st century

[email hidden] said...

Quoted message said:

No - the signs all point to Llwybr Cyhoeddus. Don't go there - there's
no pub.

Sometimes there is... :-)
--
/
Fran O(<|={
\

The message <[email hidden]>
from clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP (Simon Clubley)
contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Anyone planning a walk around these parts beware ,what is a path on
the OS sheet has a good chance of not being there.

The OS sheets always say "The representation on this map of any
other road,
track or path is no evidence of the existence of a right of way." Threat
them as guides and not absolutes.

Quoted message said:

I have always interpreted that as referring to any paths that may be marked
on a map, but not explicitly marked as been a right of way.

Quoted message said:

I have always assumed that if a path is marked as a Right of Way then there
is no ambiguity about your right to walk on that path. Am I wrong ?

In principle you are right but there have been claims in the past that
many of the PROWs the OS display on their maps differ (sometimes
markedly) from the routes said PROWs take as shown on the Definitive
map. And that is in addition to the carelessness that has resulting in a
good many PROWs not actually following the line of the path to which
they supposedly relate.

--
Roger Chapman so far this year 34 summits
New - 15 (Marilyns 4, Sweats 1, Outlying Fells 10)
Repeats - 19 (Marilyns 5, Sweats 10, Wainwrights 12, Outlying Fells 0)

Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes

Quoted message said:

I have always interpreted that as referring to any paths that may be marked
on a map, but not explicitly marked as been a right of way.

I have always assumed that if a path is marked as a Right of Way then there
is no ambiguity about your right to walk on that path. Am I wrong ?

Maps can get out of date, as we found out when I got a new copy of a
Dales map after we had struggled through an almost impenetrable forest
of nettles and brambles on a long-diverted "Right of Way". :-)
--
Gordon Harris

Bitstring <[email hidden]>, from the wonderful
person Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> said

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, "Rob Overfield"

Quoted message said:

Sam Salt said:

Anyone planning a walk around these parts beware ,what is a path on
the OS sheet has a good chance of not being there.

The OS sheets always say "The representation on this map of any other road,

The key word is OTHER.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

track or path is no evidence of the existence of a right of way." Threat
them as guides and not absolutes.

I have always interpreted that as referring to any paths that may be marked
on a map, but not explicitly marked as been a right of way.

Correct.

Quoted message said:

I have always assumed that if a path is marked as a Right of Way then there
is no ambiguity about your right to walk on that path. Am I wrong ?

You are right, except for a few of glitches ..

a) The OS data is typically out of date compared to the council
definitive maps, and the ROW may have been moved or extinguished since
the OS map was set up. Around here about 2% of ROWs are gone, or moved,
compared to the latest 1:25k mapping data.

b) The OS maps frequently show ROWs in some place that was convenient
for the mapmaker, rather than where it really was .. 'the wrong side of
the hedge' is a common problem (on 1:25k maps), especially where there
are parish boundaries, streams, contours, or other items clamouring to
be fitted in to the same 5 pixel width as the hedge and the ROW..

c) The OS maps do not show ROWs on anything that looks like a road.
There are several 'yellow' roads around here which are actually NOT
'county roads', and are private, with no ROW up them. Impossible to know
until someone yells at you. For all I know there may actually be no ROW
up the M1 or the A6, although I guess 'if it has a number assigned it's
probably a public road'.. 8>.

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.

In article <[email hidden]>, Rooney
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

No - the signs all point to Llwybr Cyhoeddus. Don't go there - there's
no pub.
--

ROTFL
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

Fran said:

[email hidden] said...

Quoted message said:

No - the signs all point to Llwybr Cyhoeddus. Don't go there - there's
no pub.

Sometimes there is... :-)

Yes, but it's closed!
--
R
o
o
n
e
y

"I always knew the entire Green party were nutters" - Ken Livingstone

On 2 Jun 2005 14:49:24 -0700, "PaddyPaws" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

the tort of trespass

I lie awake at nights worrying about this. It fills my days with
disquiet. I must speak to a priest!
--
R
o
o
n
e
y

"I always knew the entire Green party were nutters" - Ken Livingstone

And when you come across a farmer who has bothered to spray the path
across a field, you are filled with a warm fuzzy feeling of
appreciation for the hard work these guys put into their work and the
countryside. Looking after lawful (and law-abiding) users of ROWs is
good PR for the countryside and provides opportunities for farmers to
showcase their work. Mind you, the same argument could explain the
bu**ers who don't want anyone to see what they are up to!

Bitstring <[email hidden]>, from
the wonderful person PaddyPaws <[email hidden]> said

Quoted message said:

And when you come across a farmer who has bothered to spray the path
across a field, you are filled with a warm fuzzy feeling of
appreciation for the hard work these guys put into their work and the
countryside.

Last one I met (mowing his verges at the time) I shook warmly by the
hand and congratulated him. This particular FP had covered 6 fields in 2
parishes and his was the only wheat field with a sprayed-out route.

As someone said, it depends on the walker density - with 20 or 30 people
stomping by, the farmer loses less crop by marking a real path. Before
that, he probably loses less (and has less work to do) by ignoring the
problem.

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.

I remember seeing a path across a field of cabbages in the South Downs
once that had been ploughed and seeded, so you couldn't really see it.
Cabbages being awkward things to walk over, people had staggered, lost
direction, not gone quite straight etc - and by the middle of the field
the bruised (and probably unsalable) cabbages covered a path maybe 15 ft
wide. He'd have lost less crop by plaing to the rules.

Andy