I love walking my dog, but have always hated crowds (or people in general). I use an ap to find right of ways (ROWs) nearby and plan my walks accordingly. Whilst on the walk I see many things that shock me, from barbed wire on stiles to open pits within a few metres of the ROW. This has me wondering, does the owner of the land (assuming it is a work place) has a duty of care to ensure the ROW is safe? And from this I get the following questions.

1. Are crop/livestock fields a place of work?
2. Does this duty to protect the public extend off the ROW to the nearby areas
3. Is a "Beware of the Bull" sign a good enough control to stop the public being hurt, or should there be an actual barrier put in place?

More of a thought exercise than anything else. If only to move onto a different subject than COVID.

As a farm typically includes fields then yes they form part of the workspace.

Does your duty to the public extend beyond your employers curtilage?

The bull is kept in a barn, field, paddock all of which have physical barriers in the form of gates/doors, walls/fences - to use the ROW you have crossed the physical barrier - adding the signage is a proportionate control unless it is the female of the species being more deadly than the male https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-52869060

Is a sign really enough? If you had a ROW/pedestrian route across a yard with forklifts driving, would the HSE accept a beware of the forklift sign as the only control once you stepped through the gate onto the yard? Would it be acceptable to have an open pit within two metres of a pedestrian route, with no barriers around it?

https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/ais17ew.pdf

HSE consider signange "good practice".

You should not confuse the risk from an operated vehicle with the risk from livestock.

The person using the ROW has an equal duty not to put themself at risk - we really need to get away from the mentallity that any accident occurring to me is always someone elses neglect/fault.

Clouseau - "does your dog bite?"

Inn keeper -  "No"

Having been bitten Clouseau - "I thought you said your dog does not bite?

Inn keeper - "That is not my dog"

Have you asked the farmers if they are ignoring the "rules" or is it just your perception that because a bull is present they have?

If you read the document you will see it is the proverbial double edged sword for the farmer damned if they do and damned if they do not e.g. not leaving signs in place when a public hazard is no longer present can be considered obstruction. When you are moving tonnes of livestock around remembering the signs is pretty low in the conscience.

Whilst you may be a responsible dog owner there are many who behave incredibly recklessley allowing their animals to run free disturbing livestock including critical times such as lambing season.

These encounters affect the animals future behaviour and may not be noted in the framers usual daily contact.

Also consider your App's source of data - are they actual designated ROW as marked on an Ordnance Survey map or merely a route some people have walked?

The app uses ordnance survey data, I wouldn't use it otherwise.

I will highlight a few of the rules which seem to be ignored, I will ignore the livestock's temprement as this is subjective. Just because a herd of cattle behave in what I construe as aggressive, the farmer may interpret otherwise. And obviously just because a bull looks like a specific breed, doesn't mean it is.

■ Check that fences, gates, stiles etc are safe and fit for their purpose. (As I said some are covered in barbed wire)

■ Check paths are clearly marked so that users do not enter fields without public access. (often the paths go through bushes forcing the walker to go around, and often the signposts have fallen down)

■ A suitable bull sign would be triangular with a yellow background and a black band around the outside. A bull or bull’s head should be shown (black on yellow) on the sign, with supplementary text (also black on yellow) such as ‘bull in field’ if desired. Supplementary text should not suggest that the bull is aggressive, threatening or dangerous (ie avoid words such as ‘beware’ or ‘danger’). (I can supply photos if needed of "Beware, bull in field")

■ Signs should not be displayed, or should be securely covered, when the animals to which they refer are not present in the field or area. Misleading signs which deter the public from exercising their right of responsible access are likely to be regarded as obstruction and should never be used. (often there are no cattle in the fields on which these signs are displayed)

■ Electrified stock fencing used near to public rights of way will also require warning signs located at suitable intervals along its length – generally 50 to 100 m apart. (recently a whole side of the field had no signage regading an electric fence, which was a less used route, but still a ROW)

Whilst this was more of a thought experiment, I don't really think that not "remembering" to do something is a vaild defence in regards the law.

This is not a single farmer that I am singling out, it is endemic when I go roaming. Admittedly some farmers are far better than others. This is why I was interested in what the rules are. For example, we can all accept that they don't need to provide adequate lighting for those walking at night etc. but surely the basics should be covered.

A "Bull in field" notice seems a very loose control on what could be a very dangerous situation. If a person has to traverse the field and the bull attacked them, would it be deemed that the sign was suitable and sufficient? I was genuinely interested. The guidance seems to suggest it would be. I then wonder why it has such a low control allowed compared to other industries. I use the forklift analogy because it has the same implications. You will be struck by a moving object. Admittedly, the forklifts could be seen as safer as the people driving them have been trained not to hit people.

Interesting topic - I live in a semi rural area with lots of fields and farms.

Walkers have been accessing some of these fields to undertake their daily exercise and it's caused a right old debate.  The Farmers have taken to putting "Private Property" signs on all of their access points and claim that there is no such that as a "Right of Way" anymore, and are threatening members of the public who "trespass" and in the words of the farmers "infect my livestock with COVID19"!!! 

https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/business-management/health-and-safety/what-farmers-need-to-know-about-fencing-and-the-law#:~:text=The%20courts%20have%20made%20it,can%20be%20a%20criminal%20offence.&text=This%20can%20be%20an%20expensive,altered%20along%20the%20entire%20route.

The interesting part is "how wide" is the actual Right Of Way - just because a ROW follows a road through a farmyard it does not necessarily follow the public has the right of access to the full width of the road and it may be in fact be as narrow as a single foot track.

The presence of barb wire or electric livestock fences adjacent to the ROW is not inherently wrong.

Defra has the power to close public footpaths but only if there is an outbreak that affects animal health and welfare such as foot and mouth. Covid 19 does not count and so blocking RoW is illegal.

...in a bit of a counter to the list of landowners responsibilities...if you want the enjoy that persons land you have to include and ahere to the responsibilities in Schedule 2 of the Contryside and Rights of Way Act...which include but aren't limited to:  do not carry or use a metal detector feed the animals or damage any face gate or wall etc..I have been in the farming community all of my life and those that think they know the ROW laws generally are missinformed, not saying you are but step off a public footpath and you are tresspassing..so I put my bull there because that is the best for my livestock...we have lost a wee bit of this thing called respect in establishing these rights, I enjoy the walk too but I don't think it is my god geven right, it is a privilege....the act was brought in to protect farmers/ landowners not protect walkers...

I feel my clickbait-y title may be getting this topic bogged down with livestock. I was also interested in such things as the use of a plank to cross ditches, with no hand rail, or excuvation holes with no barriers near paths.

For arguments sack, lets assume that the walkers are obeying the rules and keeping to the ROW where possible. I was interested in whether the farmer also has a duty extending to the surrounding area of the ROW as well as the ROW.

As I stated, and I can find articles in the press (for what they are worth) some farmers seem to be making very questionable choices when maintaining the ROW. If the site was easier to upload photos I could show you what I mean. Let me list a few examples though.

• Electric fence around a field usually used for crops, now containing sheep. Perimeter probably 500m square. ROW runs along two edges, with one of the edges also a busy bridleway. Signs only on the bridleway edge.
• Ditch around a crop field roughly 1m in depth, crossed using two sleepers, one of which had collapsed. No handrail.
• Gate into sheep field, latch broken so it was held closed using barbed wire made into a loop and hung over one of the uprights
• Several stiles have barbed wire placed on the top edge. With no other hand holds to assist climbing the stile (great fun for those responsible dog walkers with dogs on a lead that also need to be carried over, getting a dog over safely on your own should be a Crystal Maze challenge)
• Routes through overgrown thorn bushes that haven't been trimmed back.
• Holding cattle in fields whilst waiting for them to be moved on or allowing them to congregate on ROWs, meaning that distancing from the cattle is impossible (classic example was the gate to the field was missing, allowing the cattle onto a byway (not used by motor vehicles) that was gated at each end. The cattle were congregated around one end of the byway, waiting to be fed. The only way on was through the herd, the only way around would have been 5 miles back the way I had come)

My thoughts were, if this was happening on a pedestrian route in my work place I would be (rightly)taken to task. Whilst I can appreciate that given the dangerous nature of farms, these aren't top priorities, I didn't understand why such practises seem to be allowed. It appears they are not allowed, but continue anyway.

Disclaimer, I am not saying all farmers are bad, most of my walks are on well managed paths. This is what highlighted the bad cases so much.

Why not raise these concerns with those who can influence and act upon your observations?

The open gate by example was a prosecution for one farmer (see Farmers Weekly article). 

The land owner (not necessarily the farmer) who has the duties

The local council or unitary authority

The local highways agency

Your observations may be valid - the authorities through investigation can provide clarification.

When I was at Defra, we hired some seasonal workers one of whom was an ex-stockman. I as telling the new inductees about the risks posed by livestock and one of the other newbies sniggered and this guy intervened. He told us about a prize bull he had reared from a calf and how it used to follow him around the farm. One day it decided to “play” with him and knocked him over and broke his back. He recovered but didn’t work with livestock again. He made it clear to everybody that you must treat animals with respect and realise that they might turn on you at any time for reasons that are not obvious. Even sheep (particularly larger rams) can pose a threat and do kill people.

Originally Posted by: Bigmac1

1. Yes its a place of work

2. Should you be trespassing

3. Signs yes but isny a bloody great fence and gate a barrier

1. I think we established that
2. ROW is not tresspassing, and as a side not, trespassing isn't agains the law, however it is "an essential element" of other offences (source CPS)
3. The fence/gate have to be passable if it is on a ROW, thus by themself offer no protection on the ROW. That is like arguing you don't need walkways in a factory, as the front door is a good enough barrier.

...don't disagree with anything you have said, but not once did I say blocking a ROW was legal or the right thing to do..just merely that the people using it as with all other duty of care debates have a duty to use it responsibly...and follow the rules..you can't put all of the responsibility onto the landowner for people who are stupid enough to throw a beer can at a bull...

the stats on 

So duty of care  - having a bull in a field is not prohibited so long as there are cows there as well...where there is a structure that is the repornsibility of the landowner ot should be maintained, however that should be coordinated with the highways agency as they have a responsibility there too...trespass...if you are not on a public right of way you are as you don't have a right to be there...

...agreed..and in your example if I strayed off the puiblic ROW in your site what would happen?...I am not in an area that it is agreed I can be...so yes I agree in principle, most landowners would say you don't have permission to be on thier land outside of the public ROW...besides detracting from the main comment...the requirement is that Highways maintain ROW...and in some instances that is also assisted by the landowner who can provide thier own fence gate etc...but yes is must be maintained...like everywhere 80/20 good and bad...