Archived Topic
Topic ID 1696
12/07/2006 by Peter
The Meads
I was born in Hertford, and lived on the Ware Road until my twenties. Just about every day we would walk with a dog over the Meads, crossing the railway, to the New River. From there we might continue to the Lea, or walk beside the New River to another point where you could cross the railway. It was common land, and you were free to wander over it as you chose.
I went back there yesterday. Two of the places where you used to be able to cross the railway have been fenced off; and another, close to the viaduct, looked as if it soon will be. (I don't know about the old crossing-points the Ware side of the viaduct, but I will go and see soon.) On one of the attractive little brick bridges over the New River someone had placed a mesh fence to stop you using it. Happily someone has knocked it over, but it is still unsightly. On another it tells you that there is no right of way across, but the owner permits you to use it at your own risk for the time being.
The owner? We, the people, own the Meads! How has someone managed to get ownership of public land? It's ironic that we hear about the "right to roam", and we're told great swathes of land are being opened up for walkers, when places you used to walk along in your chilhood become fenced off.
They trumpet the fact that they have made the Lea path a cycle route. True, it is pleasant to ride a bike along it - I do myself from time to time. But it always was a right of way. We haven't got a new one; we've just lost several traditional ones.
Peter.
0 replies
Archived Replies
Reply ID 20846
12/07/2006 by Steve
quote:
Originally posted by Peter
The owner? We, the people, own the Meads! How has someone managed to get ownership of public land?
It's a mis-conception that's it's public land.
The meads are actually owned by a number of companies and individuals, including GlaxoSmithKline, Thames Water, East Herts District Council and The Environment Agency.
http://www.hertford.net/meads.asp Reply ID 20847
12/07/2006 by SMT
If you are concerned about rights of way, try contacting the Rights of Way unit at County Hall on 01992 555262. They will be able to confirm where rights of way exist and they also investigate where rights of way have been closed off to the public and work to get them re-opened. However, it may not be relevant in this case given Steve's information.
Reply ID 20848
12/07/2006 by Peter
The Meads (The King's Meads) always were common land. Somehow, some time, I suspect a particularly bit of underhand dealing took place whereby we lost them.
Peter.
Reply ID 20849
12/07/2006 by Peter
Sorry, a particularly sinister bit of underhand dealing, was what that should have said. Thank you for the county hall number, and I certainly will ring it.
Reply ID 20853
12/07/2006 by Peter
I rang the County Hall number and they will ring me back. Thank you, Steve, for your information - the first article would appear to bear me out. The last paragraph says something like the commoner lost his right to grazing on the King's Meads in 1972. I was 10 at the time, so I wouldn't be able to say if the fact was widely known then or not. But certainly no one started fencing accepted rights of way off.
The second article is confusing. (They warned me at County Hall that laws concerning common land are.) But I think the Meads would quaify for legislation, where it says the land must have been used for sport and recreation for 20 years. When I knew them, the Meads were used every day for dog-walking, and you would often see someone flying a kite, or children out for a walk with their parents.
I've lived away from Hertford for 16 years now, although for the last 11 of those I've only been a few miles away in Hoddesdon, and I don't know when it was they started closing the paths. Was there any opposition at the time? I can't imagine everyone just meekly accepting such a loss.
Peter.
Reply ID 20941
14/07/2006 by Andrew
Where were the railway crossings, as a matter of interest. There are two west of the A10 one from Broadmeads and one by the pools where the New River passes under the railway. There is one just east of the A10 which AFAIK is not a public right of way but is where the path to the bridge over the New River that is mentioned above crosses the railway. There are locked gates but with Stop/Look/Listen signs etc. The next one east that I know of is Mead Lane crossing. I am not aware that any part of the Meads is barred to public access, apart from by drainage ditches and sometimes mud (not this year though).
Reply ID 20947
14/07/2006 by NI-Lad
Hertford's best kept secret.. Shall be buying a pair of wellies and having a look see...!
Chris
Reply ID 20989
17/07/2006 by Stephen
Don't think you'll need wellies at the moment - saw them from the viaduct this morning and they're looking pretty dry!
Reply ID 20994
17/07/2006 by Peter
Hello Andrew,
The two crossings that have gone are west of the A10, (Hertford side). The first one still has two bridges opposite where it used to be, over the New River and the ditch. The second crossing was in what we used to call the paddock. That, too, still has two bridges opposite where it used to be. My contention is that if these weren't rights of way, why were there bridges over the rivers connecting with them? The bridge opposite the paddock, by the way, is the one they have tried to fence off.
Reply ID 21005
17/07/2006 by Andrew
Hi Peter
I know where you mean by the Paddock and the crossing over the railway that I referred to is only about 50metres to the east of it, so that is not really a great loss. The bridge over the New River has had that battered old bit of fencing layiong about on it for most of this year, no idea why it is there but to the best of my knowledge the bridge has never been blocked, though the bridge itself has looked in better condition than it does now. I'm not sure that any of these crossings of the Meads west of the A10 have ever been public rights of way, are they not agricultural accomodation crossings?
Reply ID 21015
17/07/2006 by Peter
Hello Andrew,
Wouldn't agricultural accommodation cossings be rights of way, especially seeing the Meads were common land, and everyone had the right of grazing? The other crossing I mention is about a quarter of a mile (I hate metric measurements, by the way!) up river of the Paddock crossing, nearly opposite where the New River bends at a right-angle down from the Lea.
At this point you used to be able to walk along both banks of the New River. There was always a swing gate on the bank nearer the railway, only now it is locked. I was talking to a man walking his dog there the other day, and he told me someone had told him he was trespassing when he walked along it. (You can still get to it, because some nice person has removed the top rung of the metal fence.) Then the jobsworth told him his dog shouldn't be swimming in the river either. I've just come back from there, having had a swim myself. Very pleasant it was, too!
Reply ID 21049
18/07/2006 by Andrew
Peter
I know where you mean. I don't think an accommodation crossing has to be a public right of way as it is not a highway dedicated to public use, commoners are not the general public, but a specific group of people in a specific location as I understand it. The New River path is permissive rather than public, but you are certainly not trespassing by using it as Thames water have given permission for its use, though they could withdraw it at any time. As it is an open watercourse I cannot see any problem with dogs/people swimming in it, after all the water is filtered etc before entering London's water supply and plenty of wildlife swims in it. Interestingly ,and a bit OT, I was reading in a recent book about the New River that in the 18th century the owners had to employ patrol men in the more urban parts of the river to prevent bodies both human and animal being disposed of in it.
Reply ID 21079
18/07/2006 by Peter
Hello Andew,
Thank you for that snippet. It reminds me of the episode from "Three Men in a Boat" when they have run out of drinking water, and decide to make their tea from river water. It's many years since I read it, but I think they are all saying it's probably richer in minerals anyway, and if there are any impurities they will have been killed by the boiling. The tea made, one of them presently asks, "What's that?" The others follow his gaze and see a very bloated, dead dog floating downstream.
Reply ID 21084
19/07/2006 by jez_p
quote:
Originally posted by Andrew
The bridge over the New River has had that battered old bit of fencing layiong about on it for most of this year, no idea why it is there but to the best of my knowledge the bridge has never been blocked,
There are some nasty holes in the fabric of that bridge - could cause some nasty injuries.
Looking at the OS map of the area - there is no public right of way at that crossing so therefore no real need for it
Reply ID 21111
19/07/2006 by Peter
For more than 20 years it never occured to us to use an OS map when we walked along paths that had been there in our parents' and grand-parents' times.
16 replies