Don't forget that BCA did, for the first time ever, ask their members via a postal referendum to vote on the CRoW issue. It had to be done by a postal vote because BCA does not have email addresses for all its members and did not have permission to use email addresses for the purpose of holding a referendum. This cost BCA a few thousand ???s but did achieve a result in that there was a clear majority in favour of the proposal, which has been quoted above.
Since the postal referendum BCA has been attempting to collect its members email addresses so that, with their permission, it can allow them to vote by email in future. This is quite a complicated process but it is an attempt to make BCA more democratic and able to respond to its members wishes as expressed by their votes. One difficulty is that many members are CLUB Individual Members, i.e. their club informs BCA of their contact details, pays their membership fees on their behalf, etc. For some reason a few clubs have refused to pass on their members' emails, despite it being quite simple to ask the members for permission to pass this information on. There remain some members who would prefer not to allow BCA to have their email address and BCA has to respect this and a postal vote will still be possible for these people but it is more expensive and takes longer. So there will be a chance to vote in respect of changes to the constitution without having to travel long distances to attend an AGM.
I can't remember who it was that said something on the lines of, "democracy is the worst possible form of government - until you look at all the other options". For this to work it is important that all members of BCA take the trouble to inform themselves of issues raised and don't just rely on being "told what to think" by their club or regional council.
It's also worth pointing out that the conditions on the ground are quite different in the different caving regions, e.g. square miles of open, unfenced moorland with large areas of access land covered by CRoW legislation in the North; as opposed to farmland which is fenced, quite heavily used, close to roads which give easy access and very few areas covered by CRoW in the South. It's clear that those from opposite ends of the country often fail to appreciate the conditions which inform the points of view of others. It isn't impossible to make access to caves under CRoW legislation work sensibly but it does need some serious thought, a willingness to see the others' point of view and an understanding of the legislation which already exists under CRoW to protect especially vulnerable sites.