I remember crossing fields with all sorts of livestock, including Bulls, when I was younger, both walking and Riding, I don't remember Farmers bothering to put up extra signage...
Same here, I'm only in my 30's but crossing a field with a bull in was almost a rite of passage and something that had to be done when I was younger 😆
I suppose these days with the decline in common sense, over the top health & safety, and being liable for other people's stupidity things like this are going to happen!
Molgrips, if you really want that level of certainty regarding livestock's Mood, then outdoors probably isn't for you...
Yeah thanks for the lifestyle tip.
The point is that the farmer has gone to the trouble of typing out a sign. Why the hell didn't he put anything useful on it? It wouldn't have taken any more time or effort, and would clear up the ambiguity. Is the bull dangerous in the farmer's opinion, or not?
I work for an organisation that owns hundreds of sites in remote locations. We are no way required, either by law, guidance or policy to make the countryside an extension of a kids soft play area. HOWEVER, when we leave a site, we put out clear, visible and appropriate measures to allow people make decisions to protect themselves, it's fairly simple.
This sort of pointless behaviour is just childish. If you've gone to the bother of printing the sign, why not just put some useful info on it rather than a sense of entitlement in print.
Is the bull dangerous in the farmer's opinion, or not?
Its an animal that weighs over a ton and can run at 20mph+ - all bulls are potentially dangerous
why not just put some useful info on it
'There is a bull in this field! It could be in a good mood, it could be in a bad mood, who knows? You're welcome to use the footpath if you want to, he's never hurt anyone before but you never know if or when that could change... good luck!'
[url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/a-little-white-bull-ride-country-lad-rep-in-tatters ]this old thread reveals my shame[/url]
Run at it, shouting!!!
And shut that gate!!!!
Only in the vaguest possible sense. He's not really said anything useful. He needs to say either "Keep out this bull is dangerous"
If the bull was dangerous then it would be illegal to keep it in a field with a public right of way so it's pretty simple really.
It's like people who have dogs in their yards, they might not be dangerous or prone to biting but visitors might just have a phobia of them so it's nice to pre warn them.
don't be daft, might be the only field he can use at that time.
Really?
What Farmer doesn't have enough acreage to keep a Bull well away from a PROW? If the Bull has to go in a field with a PROW then there are simple solutions, such as a temporary electric fence maybe?
Sorry, no excuse for it really.
Marko
Which breeds of bull are legally not allowed in fields crossed by footpaths?The general rule set out in statute is that it is an offence to allow a bull in a field crossed by a public right of way, but there are exceptions to this.
No offence will be committed if either: the bull in question is under 10 months old or it does not belong to a recognised dairy breed and is at large in any field or enclosure in which cows or heifers are also at large. A dairy breed defined by the act is one of the following: Ayrshire, British Friesian, British Holstein, Dairy Shorthorn, Guernsey, Jersey and Kerry.
Do farmers have to put up warning signs for walkers?It is good practice to display signs informing the public that there is a bull in the field.
Well then molgrips is correct IMOIf the bull was dangerous then it would be illegal to keep it in a field with a public right of way so it's pretty simple really.
In order to be of any help, the sign should therefore say "there is a bull in here but it is not known to be dangerous" (after all, anything else would be illegal, you're saying). I also think the bollocks/rubber band advice is probably worth adding.
The existing sing is likely there purely to intimidate "townies" - the unlikely alternative is that the farmer is trying to be helpful and welcoming but is a very poor communicator
The Farmer's simply trying to make people aware of a potential risk, nowhere in the sign does He try to prohibit entry, re-route/block the ROW or threaten certain injury/death...
so we all agree he has introduced a potential risk to a ROW and hos minimisation of this risk its to leave it up to others to decide to "risk it or not"
Not even close to best practice
Treating ROW user's like grown-ups, inform them of a risk, let them make up their own minds how to proceed.
Is not how it works - what makes you think they know the first thing about RA around bulls? Have they been trained 😉
Farmers responsibility and they should not do it for obvious reasons
All RA is remove the risk - ie put it in another field
There is no issue having a bull in a field, if it's on a list of ones you can't or known to be dangerous you wouldn't put it in the field. It's advised to tell people there is a bull in the field - it probably saves people hysterically complaining there is a bull in a field and no sign.
All RA is remove the risk - ie put it in another field
There is nothing that says Bulls are a risk, just some people are have a lot of perceptions and no experience.
Of course there is nothing to say they are a risk..its not like they have been know to kill or maim
Anwyay I have these knifes for you to juggle with and good news - they have never ever stabbed anyone so they are safe 😉
I assume we both get each others point
Its best to avoid doing this IMHO
If you have to it is best to put a sign up
This just sounds like someone who wants to be a pain in the arse for no particular reason. If the bull in the field is in line with the rules regarding what livestock can be kept where there is a PROW then what is the problem? The farmer has put up a warning about said bull for members of the public who might be wary of large farm animals and obviously made a vague attempt to be humerous about it.
There is no law stating they have to provide a sign.
so we all agree he has introduced a potential risk to a ROW and hos minimisation of this risk its to leave it up to others to decide to "risk it or not" Not even close to best practice
Except, erm, it is - there's pretty extensive advice published by the HSE that says its perfectly acceptable to put Bulls in fields with rights of way crossing them, and to put a sign warning walkers of their presence.
Seem to be a lot of opinionated people on this thread completely ignoring the legal and H&S guidance being quoted by people working in the field (sorry!) as it does not suit their point of view.
Gets coat - I admit I did not read all the thread
😳
What sign should a farmer erect to warn the public that there may be STW forum members in his field..?
[img] 
[/img]
As ninfan correctly says earlier, it is illegal to display a sign which is ‘offputting’ (anything to deter lawful use of the path). As an aside there is a separate offence of displaying misleading signs (if there were no bulls in the field).
The FWI article is very good actually and mirrors my, ninfans and others issue with the use of the word ‘beware’. “Bull in field” is now generally accepted (by the HSE, NFU, etc) as being the preferred wording – as the website rightly states, ‘beware’ infers that the farmer / occupier is aware that the animal’s behaviour might sufficiently be dangerous enough to necessitate use of the word ‘beware’, which again, is a separate offence from the whole ‘bulls not older than 10 months / not of a recognised dairy breed / with a heiffer’ thing.
“Bull in field” implies no danger or necessitates prior experience of walking in fields with bulls, but merely lets path users know that there is a bull in the field. The reason being is that walkers who don’t like bulls or other large animals would rather find another way around than find themselves in a field with a bull staring at them. Over the years I’d have to say a majority of walkers would agree and prefer they have the choice.
I think the sign is OK, but if I were being hyper-critical I’d ask the farmer to scribble out ‘Beware’ (and the excessive exclamation marks TBH). I wouldn’t class it as an obstruction.
What sign should a farmer erect to warn the public that there may be STW forum members in his field..?
I think annoyances - filth / offensive matter [url= http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66/section/161 ] would cover that[/url] 🙂
So you're Real complaint molgrips is not that the farmer has highlighted a potential risk to ROW users, but that he hasn't then put some quantifiable measure of that risk that can be understood by someone completely unfamiliar with farming and it's risks...
Could this help:
[img] 
[/img]
cookeaa You set em up I'll knock em down
Do we need some sort of agreed wording for "beware bullshit" on forum threads?
[i]"To be fair, it doesn't say don't enter it just says be aware"[/i]
I ate a pear, but what will i wear
ive got no spare, only a pair
It's not about Health and Safety or what's legal or not, it's about doing the right thing.
The Farmer should really be considering users of the PROW who [i]may[/i] be intimidated by a Bull in a field - even when the Farmer knows old Billy the Bull is deaf, half blind and has a wooden leg.
Marko
The Farmer should really be considering users of the PROW who may be intimidated by a Bull in a field - even when the Farmer knows old Billy the Bull is deaf, half blind and has a wooden leg.
Which would in the case of my families farm mean restricting the use of 15-20% of their land and about 30% of their permanent pasture that could not be used to keep a Bull which poses no greater threat to the public as cows.
Would you consider putting that sort of inflexibility on your workplace?
Bull which poses no greater threat to the public as cows.
No threat - no sign required in that case perhaps? Or how about a temporary diversion then? Segregate the PROW with a temporary electric fence?
Would you consider putting that sort of inflexibility on your workplace?
Don't get me started . . . 😥
Marko
No threat - no sign required in that case perhaps?
Well that would be a lot of the point, there is a perception among the public that there is a problem then that leads to people wanting signs, then complaining about the signs. Also splitting a field in half sounds great, you going to pay for that?
Marko - can you confirm what experience or qualifications you have to tell farmers, ROW officers and HSE that they are wrong?
Would you consider putting that sort of inflexibility on your workplace?
Don't get me started . . .
My point would be more would you put that in to allow members of the public to meander through and be protected from what they think is dangerous rather than what is actually a danger.
can you confirm what experience or qualifications you have to tell farmers, ROW officers and HSE that they are wrong?
Where did I say they were wrong?
I'm just suggesting a sensible approach based on a little consideration. Don't put a Bull in a field with PROW. If you have to, then make a temporary alternative path or use an electric fence. It's not hard really.
@ Mike
It has nothing to do with 'meandering' and perceived danger. It is a PROW that happens to go through a field. The PROW will have been there way before any Bull was ever in the field - more than likely the PROW existed before it was even a field.
splitting a field in half sounds great, you going to pay for that?
That will just be the cost to the Farmer of their course of action.
I simply suggesting that with a little consideration there will never be a need for Bull to be in a field that has PROW passing through it. That's all
Marko
then complaining about the signs.
I complain about stupid pointless signs, yes - that's not unreasonable.
Marko - Member
If the Bull has to go in a field with a PROW then there are simple solutions, such as a temporary electric fence maybe?
Or a sign with a few exclamation marks advising that there's a bull in the field, the inferance being, give the animal a wide berth.
Ohh wait.
Marko - MemberI rip these down and remove them.
What if the field's flooded? Should the owner come out with his boat to ferry users across to appease those with a sense of entitlement to use that right of way regardless?Marko - MemberIt's not about Health and Safety or what's legal or not, it's about doing the right thing.
The Farmer should really be considering users of the PROW who may be intimidated by a Bull in a field - even when the Farmer knows old Billy the Bull is deaf, half blind and has a wooden leg.
p.s. your suggestion of an electric fence is about as usefull as a toothpick at a gunfight, a ton of bull at a gentle amble will knock it over before it even shocks him. The method of keeping bulls in one place is a nose ring, chain and a stake in the ground.
Your version of the "doing the right thing" is (fairly minor) criminal damage, unless someone goes into the field with a dog not knowing the bulls in there.
Keep to the edge of the field, away from livestock, don't take a dog in and be prepared to climb the wall/fence if it takes an unfriendly interest in you.
Should the owner come out with his boat to ferry users across to appease those with a sense of entitlement to use that right of way regardless?
We all know what water does, and we can see the risk immediately.
If the farmer wants you to keep out, then the sign should say 'keep out'. If the farmer wants to to be careful, the sign should say 'be careful'. etc.
Countryside not coming with an instruction book shocker! I doubt many people would see a sign with "bull!!!!!" on it and assume it was a free of charge petting zoo.If the farmer wants you to keep out, then the sign should say 'keep out'. If the farmer wants to to be careful, the sign should say 'be careful'. etc.
Do woods have instructions saying do not approach the badgers, they bite? A copy of the working at heights directive at the top of the Snowdon Ranger path?
There is some twaddle here. Its a simple note. There is a bull there. If you are scared of bulls go somewhere else. Easy.
In no way confrontational or anything. If anything its a courtesy to let you know rather than find out in advance.
As for the language, that's a traditional phrase.
I know that nowadays it should be more gender neutral but maybe that's a bit pc for some.
Molegrips. The farmer doesn't have to say anything at all.
Beef bulls are dozy things. Heifers can be pushy but a good slap sorts that. Yes people have been killed but not as many as those falling down the stairs. Shall we have notices on the steps in town?
[img] 
[/img]
Countryside not coming with an instruction book shocker
Give it a rest, I was out in the countryside all day when you were in nappies. I've never demanded signs in the countryside in my life. The point is that he has gone to the trouble of putting up a sign that tells us nothing. Why? What's the point? I can see a sodding great bull thanks, didn't really need a sign for that. So what was he trying to say? Is it a particularly dangerous one? If so, why not say that?
restricting access to a PROW is the issue with the sign even if the restriction is implicit rather than explicit
however if the PROW user has a dog there is a fundamental problem with cattle which has led to the death of a small number of people
as usual there are shades of grey but IMHO the sign is unnecessary, if it is necessary the livestock shouldn't be in the field, and people with dogs should have a plan or avoid livestock and take alternative routes the PROW user not the dog has the right of access, the dog is there accompanying the user
