On 3 Nov 2015 at 8:15pm Walker wrote:
Out walking dog on the Downs last weekend - not on the gallops. Idiot who I see often with horses from the stables starts yelling at me to get off his land (not his land) and calls me an effing twat. He's been rude before.
Tw*t.
On 3 Nov 2015 at 8:33pm Tw*t wrote:
and perhaps you might like to tell everyone why?
On 3 Nov 2015 at 8:58pm Downsdogwalker wrote:
Hmmm, I think, Walker; you may be leaving part of the story, out. Was, perhaps; your dog hanging around his horse?
We all want to walk on the downs and feel free to do so at any time.
Horses, like people; sometimes like dogs and sometimes hate them. Race horses are slightly higher strung and if they don't like dogs it means they really freggeken hate them.
If a friendly dog wants to hang out with, "a BIG brother". The horse may respond in a similar manner to a human big brother would to a younger sibling hanging with him. He will go effin' berserk! Which is a danger to the rider and anyone near.
I don't know what really happened here, but I'm just saying.
And, I think the horses have greater rights to the downs than people with dogs. I don't know why, but I feel that is horse territory. We are Privileged that we can take our dogs there.
BUT NOBODY, should EVER, EVER be DRIVING their dogs to the downs during RUSH HOUR! The dogs would be happier walking there anyway. The dogs are not happy they are getting into the car; they just know they are going for a walk. Just take them for a walk!
On 3 Nov 2015 at 9:02pm Plumber wrote:
Walker, I am curious why you signed off with, "Tw*t".
Are you happy to accept that you are a Twat but protesting at being called an "effing twat"?
On 3 Nov 2015 at 9:15pm Dan wrote:
Walker are you sure you weren't dogging ?
On 4 Nov 2015 at 12:46am F#cked off with know all DFL's wrote:
Contrary to what you may think , you are not free to roam over 'the downs' with dog or not . You are however, free to keep to the footpaths.
For example, Lanport Bottom has a footpath that runs through it which pretty much follows the culvert
Deviating from this constitutes trespass. That fact that you are very unlikely to be confronted over this is neither here nor there. I'd have shot your dog on the spot so count yourself lucky
On 4 Nov 2015 at 2:31am Lewes Lady wrote:
Well, aren't you a prize bell-end? A wannabe dog murderer, no less. How impressive.
And the jerk higher up who claims to know my dogs' views on car journeys better than I do? You too are a bell-end.
On 4 Nov 2015 at 4:44am Campanologist wrote:
.and you ain't no Lewes Lady.
On 4 Nov 2015 at 6:09am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
Contrary to what the poster above seems to believe, Landport Bottom, including the field that runs alongside the gallops, was bought with funds from several organisations and is held in perpetuity for the enjoyment and benefit of the people of Lewes.
The purchase was made back in the 90s, when a previous owner of the land wanted to fence the fields and restrict access, and was prevented after lengthy evidence gathering established that people had been allowed access for over 25 years. This meant that rights of way were established and he couldn't legally prevent access.
Access is permitted to all parts for walkers, cyclists and horse riders, although they seldom use the field to the north of the motor road.
As long as everyone respects other users, that should be fine, but sadly, not everyone does.
On 4 Nov 2015 at 6:42am Curate wrote:
I am reminded of the hymn " Lead us Heavenly Father, lead us " and if I was a betting man I would bet on the dog not being on a lead.
On 4 Nov 2015 at 7:14am And Now The Facts wrote:
Nice post ACT. Completely incorrect though.
I had a very similar conversation very recently with one of LDCs rangers at Landport Bottom
The above poster is correct, you have no 'right' to the field other than the footpath
Same with most of The Downs
On 4 Nov 2015 at 9:08am fifi wrote:
Just wondering exactly where Walker was with his dog - he hasn't said Landport Bottom ?
On 4 Nov 2015 at 9:56am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
That's interesting ANTF. That is completely contrary to what I was told by the county council's rights of way officer.
Is it not access land under CROW?
On 4 Nov 2015 at 10:00am Grafter wrote:
Isn't it Access land?
On 4 Nov 2015 at 10:42am and now the REAL facts wrote:
ACT - dunno where you get your info! Landport bott was bought jointly by the District and Town councils, and Norman Baker was keen to say it was to prevent housing. there are bridle paths ,Rights of way, and the general use of the fields is because the owners allow it.
On 4 Nov 2015 at 11:01am John Smith wrote:
The paths which run alongside the prison up to the stile near the southern end of the gallops are marked as Access Land on the maps, but not the three big fields which are owned by LDC and managed by LTC as far as I can tell. There's a little video on the LDC website which seems to confirm this. There is more access land above Offham and around Mount Harry as well.
Check it out here »
On 4 Nov 2015 at 1:12pm Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
ANTRF, I got my info from the rights of way officer, you know, the bod who is the authority on rights of way all over the county.
I enquired whether horseriders and cyclists were permitted to go anywhere in those three fields, or whether they had to stick to the bridleways. I was told they could go anywhere, as could anyone else.
I was also told that the land was bought with funds from the 3 councils, plus some from the then South Downs AONB, and that it is held in trust. The lead body for managing it is the district council, but in partnership with others.
Of course, he may have been a loony and just making it up.
On 4 Nov 2015 at 2:19pm Gerroffmyland wrote:
Arrgh 'tis full moon afore Bonfire. I have the god given right to be a glans.
On 4 Nov 2015 at 4:30pm Old Bloke wrote:
Always struck me as a bit of a shame the horse riders don't clear up the sh*t their horses drop on the patch that runs alongside Halland School
Very nice for the kids and Mums with prams who have to plough through it
Dog owners are expected to pick up their dog sh*t so why not the horse owners
On 5 Nov 2015 at 12:37pm Belladonna wrote:
Because, OB, horse poo is good muck and feeds the land. Dog poo is revolting and can carry a nasty worm thing that can cause blindness in children.
On 6 Nov 2015 at 9:23am it's open access lans wrote:
Landport bottom is open access land. you can go anywhere. And yes the riders from the stables are sweary low life. I have been sworn at, and I mean sworn at in an incredible homophobic rant, by one of them while unloading a van on my own drive because his horse reared. IF they are that unpredictable they should keep to their own land not use the Nevill estate as a taming ground.
On 6 Nov 2015 at 1:08pm Surprised wrote:
Are you a homo then ?
Seems harsh if you're not
On 6 Nov 2015 at 2:06pm open access glans wrote:
aka bellend
On 7 Nov 2015 at 10:10pm Plumber wrote:
This is such a sad middleclass argument. We are all from Lewes. Some dogs do unanticipated actions as do some horses. The horses are generally race horses, so are bread to have fast (if unanticipated) reactions.
We can all use the land together. I have a dog who is very friendly, but I put her on a lead if there are nearby horses. It is not because I think she may be funny, it is because I don't know what the horses are like.
I don't claim I have a moral right because my dog is better behaved than a racehorse. And horse poo is all herbivore - so can't cause the same infections as dog poo.
I have never had a problem with the trainers, but maybe it is because I give them (and horses) the respect they deserve.
On 8 Nov 2015 at 11:28pm Spicey T wrote:
If anyone shouts at me and my dogs I will set my dogs on them!