As I said in an earlier post, there are currently 9 sites listed as being on access land and also with some kind of access control which involves a locked gate.
One, Giants Cave, is listed as a show cave and cannot therefore be considered under CRoW legislation - it must be exempt.
All the other 8 sites are SSSIs:
Two of these are gated because of a deep open shaft close to a public footpath or easily accessible to the public - perfectly sensible and it should be easy to continue to safeguard these on grounds of public safety (Section 25 legislation would apply).
One, Aveline's Hole, has a gated and locked section to protect ancient symbols - perfectly sensible and surely there would be no doubt that a section 26 would apply.
One, Foxes Hole, is gated to protect bats as formerly people held parties in the cave - again, perfectly sensible and should continue to be protected under the legislation relating to bats.
Four remain: Upper Flood Swallet (leadership system), Shute Shelve Cavern, St. Cuthberts Swallet (leadership system), Manor Farm Swallet (the owner charges for entry).
It does seem that the restrictions on these sites are sensible and, if they are widely accepted by Mendip cavers, I would expect that BCA would be in support of continued protection of these sites when CRoW is deemed to apply to caves.
I have a query from a Mendip caver who no longer posts on this forum:
"I note that you have recently spoken about the number of gated caves on Mendip, based on information collected in 2013. Of course things move on and there is, of recent weeks, another gated cave there. See http://darknessbelow.co.uk/?p=1459 for details. It is my understanding that to effect a Section 26 notice under the Act it would require a consultation period of four months. I may be wrong on that, but it was certainly a period of several months. After that length of time, I expect that this delightfully decorated little gem would be as trashed as so many other unprotected caves in
that area now are."
My understanding is that, when the CRoW legislation comes into effect, there would normally be a period of time during which existing controls would be examined
before they are removed outright in order to give time to make necessary adjustments. So, this latest cave would join the others in being left as "status quo" for a while in order to give time for any representations to be made. If, as seems likely, all these caves are considered to be still worthy of special protection then there should be no problem in obtaining a section 26 (or section 25, or whatever else is required) as this would be supported by local cavers, by CSCC (presumably?), by Natural England, Bat Conservation Trust, etc. and, I would expect, by BCA.
So, as has been pointed out by andrewmcleod, it would surely be wise for those most concerned to get their arguments and evidence together and all lined up to ensure the continued protection of these special sites. It seems unnecessarily defeatist to throw one's hands up and say "they'll all be trashed!" - instead, get your collective acts together to prevent this happening and I'm sure you will get support from all sensible cavers.