Loss of cave access, CROW and other things

[jasonbirder]

Use your imagination, Stu. It's not rocket science

I'm fairly certain given Graham's proclivities he's refering to Concrete

 

[Stu]

The caving omission at best was through lack of organisation at national level. I don't want to consider the alternative reasons.

Maybe you should. Maybe there were wholly valid alternative reasons. Maybe they remain valid today. To refuse to even consider this is to close down debate.

Think you misinterpreted my meaning of not considering the alternatives.

Maybe you should express yourself with more clarity, then.

Pretty sure you get the drift.

In which case my previous comment stands and there is no point in continuing to debate with closed minds.

For clarity: it's my suspicion that BCA and/or CNCC kept themselves out of the picture. Which is a pity. A useful and detailed debate at the time might have answered a lot of caver's questions and this subject might never have arisen. But maybe BCA and/or CNCC closed their minds to the possibility that cavers might understand the reasons for doing so.

 

[graham]

The landowner normally owns whatever is directly below their land as far as the centre of the earth.  (The exception might be where they have sold the mineral rights to someone else.)  However, the landowner owns the walls of the cave but it's a moot point as to whether they own the space which makes up the cave

This also applies to the designation of Scheduled Ancient Monuments where these relate to mining remains on the surface - DCA has recently had occasion to query this and the answer is that the scheduling applies to the remains below ground as well as those above ground.

Interesting case is the Giants - Oxlow connection where the former owner of Giants refused people permission to do the connection, even if they had asked permission beforehand to exit onto his land and had paid his 'trespass fee'.  Theoretically the system has 3 owners:  the Oxlow end belongs to the owners of Oxlow House Farm;  the Giants Hole end belongs to the owner of Peakshill farm;  but there's a bit in the middle which belongs to Derbyshire County Council because it goes under the B6061 Sparrowpit to Castleton road.

I'd be fascinated to see someone do the connection without touching those walls and floors that don't belong to them.

 

[Stu]

Use your imagination, Stu. It's not rocket science

I'm fairly certain given Graham's proclivities he's refering to Concrete

Maybe, who knows? He did earlier on on this thread invoke a memory of a caver of yore suggesting all caves become show caves.

 

[Les W]

Just for a point of clarification - BCA came into being in 2003.
CRoW was 2000
NCA was the body in question during he CRoW consultations.

 

[blackholesun]

The YDLAF minutes state that it was through lack of organisation. Graham, if you could give us other reasons, with evidence, for its omission, then we would all be interested in them. This isn't about reasons why it could be, these would be reasons why it wasn't. Historical, rather than logical, evidence.

Chris, I agree that it is important. However, CROW lands can still be subjected to exceptions if there are reasons of conservation. This is part of the legislation. However, archaeological finds are not common, and the vast majority of caves show no signs of ancient human activity. Is this your main concern about free access?

 

[paul]

[gmod]Once more we are drifting (prior to the last couple of posts) from the point in question: If cavers are allowed to cross CRoW designated land to a cave entrance, are they also legally allowed to enter the cave on a caving trip. Please stick to the subject.[/gmod]

 

[Stu]

Just for a point of clarification - BCA came into being in 2003.
CRoW was 2000
NCA was the body in question during he CRoW consultations.

Yes, sorry Les.

 

[Stu]

Once more we are drifting (prior to the last couple of posts) from the point in question: If cavers are allowed to cross CRoW designated land to a cave entrance, are they also legally allowed to enter the cave on a caving trip. Please stick to the subject.

http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php?topic=15045.msg195431;topicseen#new

 

[Jenny P]

Just for a point of clarification - BCA came into being in 2003.
CRoW was 2000
NCA was the body in question during he CRoW consultations.

I think you will find that the BCA came into existence officially in 2005/6, though 2003 was the start of the process of moving from NCA to BCA.  The fact remains that BCA, per se, had nothing to do with the original discussions on CRoW and NCA did.  However, the new booklet NECR012 Edn. 2, which appeared in 2009 appears to include caving/potholing:

3.2.1 The CROW Act provides for open-air recreation, basically on foot,
which would include the following activities:-
 Walking.
 Climbing.
 Potholing.
 Informal games.
 Scrambling.
 Scree-running.
 Picnicking.
 Ski-ing, toboganning, etc.

This appears to be a change to the original thinking and ought to be followed up.  However, it would be sensible to try to do this in a non-confrontational way since we do not want to antagonise landowners unnecessarily and risk losing the limited access we have in some areas.

 

[Badlad]

Think on this.

Most of the caves under Leck and Casterton Fells are part of the Three Counties System.  A permit is required for the entrances on these fells.  Yet easy and unpermitted access can be gained if you access this same system via Link, Pip, Boundary, Mistral, Bull Pot, Ireby, Large or Rift. 

You can park at Bull Pot Farm, get kitted up in full caving gear, walk over the CRoW open access land, walk past Lancaster Hole (but you can't go down it), continue to the entrance of Link Pot, go caving, end up underneath the entrance shaft of Lancaster Hole (but you can't go up it) and exit via Boundary Pot and walk back to the car over Casterton Fell.  This doesn't make sense.

Although what you describe is physically possible, what makes you believe it is legally so? What is it about accessing the cave via Link Pot that gives you the right to visit the bottom of the Lancaster Hole entrance shaft?

Well there lies another interesting debate.  The complexities of which make a mockery of the system and one which is, of course, impossible to control or police.

So, you agree that you do not know that what you describe is legal. Fair enough. As to whether it can be controlled or policed, of course it can be. Whether the required methods would be considered acceptable in all quarters is another matter.

Should I say, "in practice this would be impossible to control or police", as is the case up there now.  I don't know about the legalities of passing underground borders but I suspect it will be well disputed.  This thread has demonstrated to me that no one really knows the legalities of access to CRoW land anyway, and below it will likely be more so.

 

[paul]

You can find a link to the dcoument Jenny is referring to above at http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/41007

 

[blackholesun]

Jenny, despite linking to that document, I'm cautious about it and may not have described it originally correctly. N.E. have replied to me to say that:
"Therefore it is fair to say that the consultant [who wrote it] didn?t express solely their opinion or that of DEFRA or Natural England."

 

[Jenny P]

Jenny, despite linking to that document, I'm cautious about it and may not have described it originally correctly. N.E. have replied to me to say that:
"Therefore it is fair to say that the consultant [who wrote it] didn?t express solely their opinion or that of DEFRA or Natural England."

Agreed, but it is at least a small chink of light and worth following up if it's part of a document that NE commissioned.

 

[Ian Adams]

.... it would be sensible to try to do this in a non-confrontational way since we do not want to antagonise landowners unnecessarily and risk losing the limited access we have in some areas.

Completely agree. All we want is clarity as to whether we "can" or "cannot".



Ian

 

[blackholesun]

Jenny, despite linking to that document, I'm cautious about it and may not have described it originally correctly. N.E. have replied to me to say that:
"Therefore it is fair to say that the consultant [who wrote it] didn?t express solely their opinion or that of DEFRA or Natural England."

Agreed, but it is at least a small chink of light and worth following up if it's part of a document that NE commissioned.

I certainly agree with this. Just feel that after linking to the doc, that I should probably check that people have not got the wrong idea.

 

[bograt]

Wow Jenny, thats one hell of a missive!
Caving is referred to significantly in the Earth Heritage Sites section, page 175 on, there is some suggestion that NE could apply some form of access control to caves on conservation grounds.

 

[Jenny P]

Wow Jenny, thats one hell of a missive!
Caving is referred to significantly in the Earth Heritage Sites section, page 175 on, there is some suggestion that NE could apply some form of access control to caves on conservation grounds.

Yes, they already do on some sites anyway.  At other sites, even though they are SSSIs as are most caves, no attempt at control of access is made by anyone, neither landowner nor NE.  This does seem inconsistent.

 

[Andyj23UK]

Or, put another way, you'd like to find out whether the law can be interpreted such that it allows you over-rule or ignore any wishes of the landowner.

the CROW act - with one fell swoop removed the landowners wishes with respect to climbing , having a picnic . etc etc etc

what is so special about the landowners right to restrict caving - or delagate that restriction to an acess body ?

i have to wonder why you are so oposed to CROW act allowing caving ?

the only people who seem to benefit are those who " manage " caving access - which begs a question ... or 3

 

[graham]

the only people who seem to benefit are those who " manage " caving access - which begs a question ... or 3

I am directly involved in the management of a cave or two. What, pray tell, are the benefits that I get from this? Please take into account the fact that my current state of health means that I don't actually get underground very often these days.