Sanctuary wrote: moss wrote:
I couldn't help but notice in the photographs that the bridleway was badly rutted beyond the ploughed-out section. If the now ploughed-out section was in the same condition prior to the ploughing has anyone given thought to the fact that it may have been done to IMPROVE the situation? I believe the farmer will have a month? to reinstate the path which would then be in a better condition than before. I take it access hasn't been denied so it may be a simple case of badly needed maintainance taking place and not destruction at all.
Although it would be nice to give the benefit of that doubt, I can't see it myself. The intention very much appears to be to plough to the field edge and then plant. The original route was well-established and appears to have been rather wider than the statutory two metres that will have to be re-instated. So even if/when it is re-instated, the farmer is likely to have gained at least a few extra feet of width, which times by however long the ploughed section is, may not be insignificant.
Anyway, if that is the case we'll soon know because he only has 14 days to reinstate at least to the two metre width.
This topic is locked | Posted by thesweetcheat 31st August 2011ce 19:07 |
Avebury footpath partly destroyed (head-first, Aug 27, 2011, 21:48)- Re: Avebury footpath partly destroyed (tjj, Aug 27, 2011, 21:08)
- Re: Avebury footpath partly destroyed (scubi63, Aug 28, 2011, 10:02)
- Re: Avebury footpath partly destroyed (tjj, Aug 30, 2011, 09:05)
- The law! (juamei, Aug 30, 2011, 09:16)
- Re: Avebury footpaths (VBB, Aug 30, 2011, 13:56)
|
|