How do BCAs problems impact cavers, caving, and caves?

Kenilworth

New member
droid said:
Mark Wright said:
If the BCA campaign for better access under CRoW is allowed to be derailed further there will be a lot of members questioning their continued support of their national body with the potential of individuals and clubs alike not renewing their membership in 2018.

I doubt it.

I suspect (but clearly can't prove) that many people join BCA for the Insurance. That should override any thoughts of leaving over *this*.

Are there a significant number of UK cavers who already operate independently of BCA? Other than insurance, what practical benefits does BCA membership include? What would be the practical impact of "individuals and clubs alike not renewing their membership in 2018?"

From my position, this entire discussion and the many others like it on this site are pretty comical. I'm trying to put myself in the position of a UK caver (impossible, but I'm trying) and to ask myself why I would care what happens to BCA or what decisions it makes. Then again, I've never wanted anyone to campaign for my caving rights, to arrange for my access, or to provide me insurance because I view these matters as my own personal responsibilities. 

I wish to state what seems obvious to me: There are a number of cavers who are not willing to take the initiative or full responsibility for their own activities. Maybe a big number.

I cannot see any overall benefits from enfranchising these cavers, which, apparently, BCA is in the business of doing. When I have proposed an end to national caving bodies, it was not with a view to restricting caving, but to putting responsibilities back in their proper place, with the individual and community (before anyone mentions the "caving community", let me say that I mean geographic community, based on literal common ground).

Cap'n Chris has written about the possibilities of a vetting process, by which landowners could be assured of a caver's competence. I do not think that is a practical possibility, but I'm really suggesting something much the same. Instead of testing and certification, my hypothetical qualifications would involve an individuals being willing to do for themselves. That might at least weed out a few lazy cavers, and lazy cavers cannot be caring, careful cavers.
 

NewStuff

New member
Yet again, you can go jump if you think anyone will implement that idiotic idea. Who decides who is competent? How? Why do they get to decide? How much does all this cost? The only thing this will do is put people off, which is exactly what you want anyway.
 

mikem

Well-known member
It's basically the problem of having a small island with a large population, where almost anything you do is going to impact on other people...

Mike
 

royfellows

Well-known member
Old miners used a tool called 'plug an feathers' which basically worked by a wedging action, if you kept it up the surrounding rock would shatter and fall apart.
They had a lot of patience and never gave up, if they could not break the rock in one place they would try a different area.

:LOL: :LOL: :LOL:
 

Kenilworth

New member
royfellows said:
follow the link below and questions will be answered

I've read the "mission statement" before. It is no substitute for firsthand experience and doesn't really answer any of my questions:
Are there a significant number of UK cavers who already operate independently of BCA? Other than insurance, what practical benefits does BCA membership include? What would be the practical impact of "individuals and clubs alike not renewing their membership in 2018?"
 

royfellows

Well-known member
Kenilworth said:
royfellows said:
follow the link below and questions will be answered

I've read the "mission statement" before. It is no substitute for firsthand experience and doesn't really answer any of my questions:
Are there a significant number of UK cavers who already operate independently of BCA? Other than insurance, what practical benefits does BCA membership include? What would be the practical impact of "individuals and clubs alike not renewing their membership in 2018?"

#1 Yes

#2 Strength in numbers, obviously the collective voice is more powerful, representation of our interests as a national body, this is off the top of my head and my slant on things. Oh sorry, I nearly forgot, a campaigning body for the CROW Act to apply to caves on access land. Nearly forgot all about that.
Its all there in the link?

#3 A piece of pure speculation, tea leaf reading.

Best I can do at this time of night, here in the UK its 21.20, no doubt someone else will fill in the missing pieces.
 

Kenilworth

New member
#2 Strength in numbers, obviously the collective voice is more powerful, representation of our interests as a national body, this is off the top of my head and my slant on things. Oh sorry, I nearly forgot, a campaigning body for the CROW Act to apply to caves on access land. Nearly forgot all about that.
Its all there in the link?

This is the bit that I can't relate to at all. When I was an NSS member, I received (and desired) no benefit from the "collective voice" of cavers. I'm willing to believe that the situation in the UK is much different, but as yet, I do not understand why cavers could possibly need a collective voice.
 

NewStuff

New member
In all honesty, given your anti-caver stance, why should we care about your cognitive shortfalls in comprehending our caving situation in this country? Go troll elsewhere.
 

cap n chris

Well-known member
NewStuff said:
Who decides who is competent? How? Why do they get to decide?

Award-holders under the QMC/BCA Training Scheme are considered competent and responsible. BCA has confirmed this in writing and the HSE/AALS are in accord. If landowners are seeking a bona fide of competency and responsible caving practice then the award scheme is one method of satisfying them.
 

Ian Adams

Active member
Actually, I think Droid is right on the other thread .... insurance.

I would like to agree with Roy "Strength in numbers" but there seems to be an implosion at the moment.

People like "Chris" who post statistics really need to understand how "our" (the BCA) democracy works.  We don't have to agree with it but if we want a different result we need to change the structure (not try to skew the result)

As things stand, the BCA have been properly mandated to act in the positive interests of CRoW regardless of any consequence.

If it  fails to do so, the BCA risks extinction.

Ian
 

Kenilworth

New member
Ian Adams said:
As things stand, the BCA have been properly mandated to act in the positive interests of CRoW regardless of any consequence.

If it  fails to do so, the BCA risks extinction.

Ian

That belongs in the other thread. But what would an extinct BCA mean for cavers, caving, and caves?
 

andrewmcleod

Well-known member
How many sites have access because the 'BCA' were able to advocate for access instead of just a few random geezers? In climbing the reputation and experience of the BMC is certainly responsible for a lot of access. They also got climbing explicitly included in CROW...

The BCA have of course funded a lot of the bolting that makes a lot of SRT caves safely accessible, as well as training for many other things.

The BCA is cavers.
 

Kenilworth

New member
Are you saying that caving=BCA? What of the independent cavers whose existence Roy confirms? What of those who fund their own bolting and arrange their own access? What of those who don't care what CROW includes or doesn't include? etc. etc. 

I mean, is it imaginable that British caving could go on without BCA?
 

Madness

New member
Kenilworth said:
I mean, is it imaginable that British caving could go on without BCA?

There''s no doubt that caving would continue without the BCA. We have regional organisations such as the DCA, CNCC etc. They do a lot of work regionally regarding access, conservation, bolting, training etc.

If the CRoW situation ultimately caused the BCA to implode, I'm sure another national body would take it's pplace, born from the ashes of the BCA, and probably excluding those with anti-CRoW views.

As people have already pointed out, the negotiating power of a national body is much better than individual cavers.

Kenilworth - You are obviously anti anything that organises cavers into groups. However, those groups benefit lots of cavers in various ways, otherwise those organisations wouldn't exist.

There are lots of cavers who are individuals and do not belong to any club or organisation, and do not have the associated liability insurance that people keep mentioning. I am one of these individuals. However, I understand the need for clubs, regional and national bodies and they get my support.

 

owd git

Active member
I for one would like to join Kenilworths organisation, :clap:
Then perhaps he/she would feel compelled to depart!  :cry:
O.G.
 
Top