Countryside opening hours

[mattsccm]

What is the problem with the first pic? I cannot see any mention of a RoW being restricted. It places a limit on private land which is probably sensible in that part of the world. There us a fair change that many people out late are up to no good. Not all but poaching is a major problem.
There cannot be any reasonable objection to that. Many places close in the evening. Shopping centres for one.
To assume some intention is plain silly. To suggest that it hints of something is silly. Its black and white.
Diversions are usually fair enough with some a bit daft. To walk around an orchard rather than through, for example, surely causes not problems.
Stick up for the law by all means but don't go looking for trouble.

[PH]

What is the problem with the first pic? I cannot see any mention of a RoW being restricted. It places a limit on private land which is probably sensible in that part of the world.

The sign is placed on a RoW giving the impression that it applies to it rather than the private paths that it could lead to. if you were cycling or walking along that Row and came upon that sign you would assume it applied to path you were on unless you had extensive local knowledge and knew otherwise. Whether that's intentional or not I wouldn't guess, either way it ought to be corrected as it is misleading.

There us a fair change that many people out late are up to no good.

The restrictions are before 8am and after 5pm, often the best times of the day to be out and about, not out late at all, not that there's anything wrong with that either.

[Vorpal]

Out late doesn't mean up to no good. While it's certain that those who are up to no good prefer darkness for it, there are also plenty of people who work late on the trains, at airports & stations, driving busses, hospitals, etc. and there are also plenty who are out late, doing good, looking after elderly parents or other people's children, walking dogs, collecting rubbish, going for a bike ride, having a pint with a neighbor, etc.

[pete75]

So a landowner allows virtually unrestricted access to his private land during the day. He puts up a sign saying the public are welcome to access private land between 8 and 5 but not outside these hours. It's no doubt placed at the entrance to the public footpath or bridleway which gives access. A good spot to be noticed by folk. It states the restriction is on access to the private woodland. It says nothing about restricting access to the bridle way. I notice there is a sign next to it indicating a public right of way
If people make a fuss about this sign the landowner may well take it down and put up another near by - Private Land No Public Access.
Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth - the free public access allowed to the estate is more than generous.

[pete75]

Out late doesn't mean up to no good. While it's certain that those who are up to no good prefer darkness for it, there are also plenty of people who work late on the trains, at airports & stations, driving busses, hospitals, etc. and there are also plenty who are out late, doing good, looking after elderly parents or other people's children, walking dogs, collecting rubbish, going for a bike ride, having a pint with a neighbor, etc.

Yeah but they generally don't go into woodland deep in the countryside to do such things. There's late night activity in woods and fields round here. Deer poachers, game poachers, twats who think badger baiting is fun, lampers, doggers etc .

[andrew_s]

There are no public rights of way within Cirencester Park itself, which is roughly the area bounded by the A419, the yellow road from the A419 towards Sapperton, the yellow road from Sapperton to Park Corner. the road from Park Corner towards Daglingworth as far as the 182 m spot height, and from there back to Cirencester along the narrow strip of woodland to the north of a track.
There's a bridleway from Stratton to the edge of the Park near Ivy Lodge, and another from Daglingworth to the same point (doubtless present for access to the Polo fields), but that's it for the area.

Anything in the park or the woodland marked as Oakley Wood or Overley Wood is permissive access, and the landowner is free to set his or her own rules.

The rights of way marked on the 1:25,000 OS maps for the immediate area are all correct, and complete.

The official Gloucestershire County Council PRoW map is available here (for the present; change is due):
https://gis.gloucestershire.gov.uk/Loca ... /PROW_EXT/

[PH]

I asked this question two months ago

I'm still unclear if that sign is on a PROW or a permissive bridleway, if it's on the former then is shouldn't be signed as if it were the latter and I wouldn't accept the response you've received.

and got this answer from the OP (My bold)

The sign is on a normal public access bridleway. Once in the woods there are informal tracks all over the place - I can imagine that these are permissive.
I see your point. If the land owner and the PROW officer agree that the sign is wrong, why are they still there?

Now andrew_s is saying there is no such public bridleway, though the local PROW officer seems to think there is. The maps posted don't offer much unless we know where the sign is in relation to them.
I see it as a really simple matter, it isn't about how grateful we should be for the generosity of the landowner, or whether people out after 5pm are generally up to no good - if it's a public RoW and the sign gives the impression that it's restricted, then it's wrong and should be either removed or amended to to reflect the legal position.

[mattsccm]

Impressions don't count.

[Bmblbzzz]

And they apoear to be done officially with the proper yellow (or, very occasionally, blue if a bridleway) arrows.

Are these colours/meanings standardised? I'm sure I've seen green, purple and black arrows too. I'll try to remember to take some pictures of them, but here's a green and a purple one on streetview: https://mapstreetview.com/#vdf3s_8zss_3c.s_-8e43

I think the purple circle on that sign is indicating a particular route. The sign does say "New [illegible on my screen] Way", so probably the purple dots are to enable people to follow that particular route rather than indicating legal status.

[Lance Dopestrong]

I was recently stopped by a farmer while walking across a public footpath on his land at about 2300hrs. I wasn't skulking about- i was walking home from a SAR night nav exercise so was in my hi vis regalia with head torch burning brightly. He came out with some guff about it being closed after 7pm. I laughed at that. He then tried to say I was disturbing the animals - I pointed out that he was the one shouting and swearing and creating a disturbance, not me, and, in any case, if hes that bothered then he shouldn't have placed his new barns straddling a public right of way. He then threatened to call the police, so I offered him my phone to do so, which seemed to flummox him.

I reported him to Warwickshire county council over the matter, and it would seem it's not the first time hes tried to impose non existent curfew laws. They've sent him a letter, and they tell me next time they'll prosecute him.

I appreciate farmers and landowners doubtless have trouble with people taking the Mickey when on rights of way on their land, but getting arsey and abusive with law abiding users and trying to enforce non existent laws achieves nothing other than to put themselves in the wrong.

[peetee]

About 20 years ago Kent County Council made a concerted effort to log and restore access to all the public rights of way in the county. They recruited volunteers to survey and I was one of them. As you can imagine things didn't always go smoothly and we had more than one awkward conversation. The scariest encounter however was in a farmyard where progress had been quite deliberately halted by masking and obstructing the stiles with plastic bags and containers. As we noted this down we were met by a shotgun accompanied by a farmer who was very happy to tell us we were trespassing. Once we established we were present on official business his stance changed but not his tone of superiority or contempt of rights of way. Keeping them open was all to much trouble for the poor chap. I declined to ask just how much time he had spent thinking up and creating his artificial barriers.
I make light of it now but it wasn't amusing at the time. Why, honestly would you feel the need to show a shotgun to two walking booted, rucksack carrying, map wielding skinny twenty-somethings when you know they have every right to be there?