FoghornLeghorn
AreWeThereYet
Our friend is a local dairy farmer. One of the fields where his herd grazes has a public right of way through it. To protect both his cattle and the public he diverted the right of way around the field and fenced it in. The new path is about 100 yards from the original path. He put up a polite sign explaining the diversion of the path. Three times walkers have broken the new fence down because 'it's their right to walk the original path as it's a public right of way'. Common sense? Not so common it seems.
So these idiots would put themselves in danger to enable them to exercise their ‘right’? Absolute fools.
A public footpath, marked on the definitive map, is a legal right of way. A footpath diversion has no legal status unless the landowner has gone through the full legal process for diverting a footpath. This is an expensive process. This is why the farmer cited hasn't done it.
'Rights' have to be continually asserted else they tend to be lost. The walkers who insist on taking the original footpath are protecting everyone's legal right to use it as a footpath. No such 'right' attaches to the unofficial 'diversion' the farmer has made.
You clearly have no idea about the problems associated with maintaining (in the sense of keeping them open) legal public rights of way.


