Repairs to Carlswark Flower Pot Entrance.
- Thread starter martinb
- Start date
The landowner has been to have a look, since I had a word with him last week. I dont know if it was him that left it uncovered. he,s quite happy to let it be sorted anyway.
[/quote]
I'll let Jo's boss know (as she's looking after things in Jo's absence) that the landowner has given permission for the work to be done. As soon as Natural England have issued a consent to the landowner we can get cracking with the repairs!
Mark
[/quote]
I'll let Jo's boss know (as she's looking after things in Jo's absence) that the landowner has given permission for the work to be done. As soon as Natural England have issued a consent to the landowner we can get cracking with the repairs!
Mark
Natural England have agreed in principle to the proposed repairs to the Flower Pot shaft. The landowners consent is still required by Natural England (he must sign the notice issued by Natural England on his behalf), however as long as the landowner has given the cavers involved his permission, work can now begin. The works must be completed by 30th November 2008 and conditions apply - for full details refer to the Proposal Requiring Consent PDF at: http://www.chesterfieldcavingclub.org.uk/news.html
Mark C
Mark C
nickwilliams
Well-known member
MarkC said:
What's the logic behind the fairly short timescale, if you don't mind me asking?
Nick.
nickwilliams said:
As I understand it one month is the usual timeframe for Natural England consent of works on a SSSI. For a longer period it could be perceived that there would be visual impacts on the setting of the SSSI. Damage to a SSSI is unacceptable from a statutory point of view (CRoW Act), in which case Natural England consent would be denied. For further details refer to http://www.english-nature.org.uk/Special/sssi/protection.cfm
Natural England have given over a month for the works to be carried out, which is more then they are required to do. They have also been very flexible: Jo Poll who was originally dealing with our application has been signed off sick which stalled things a little, however in her absence her boss has kindly kept the process going for us. If there is a problem with the current timing, I see no reason why an alternative one month window could be rearranged. I was under the impression that the works needed to be completed ASAP...
Mark C
The SSSI designation is in part a response to the discoveries that were made in Stoney Middleton Dale during the 1970's and 80's. The rest of the designation is ecological. The fact that the caves are protected by law is of benefit to cavers as it means the caves will always be there for cavers today and in the future to enjoy. So what if you have to get permission to put an entrance shaft in? Sarah's Cave and Farnsley Lane Swallets are not protected as they fall outside of the SSSI, and look what has happened to them...
Stoney Middleton SSSIs is not just of importance to cavers. It is of national importance, valuable to geologists, ecologists, archaeologists and recreational users alike. The same rules apply to all users, which thankfully includes developers, utility providers and the quarrying companies... How would you feel if a cave was destroyed? Now put yourself in an ecologist's shoes. They don't want to see habitat destroyed by cavers either.
Permission to undertake surface works has been required since the Dale was notified as a SSSI in 1990. Its only in the last few years that 'reckless' damage to a SSSI has become a criminal offence. In so far as underground digs go, act responsibly and there should not be any problems, after all that's how new discoveries are made... If you are unsure about the law with regards to SSSIs then get in touch with David Webb at the DCA or Jo Poll at Natural England.
Mark C
Stoney Middleton SSSIs is not just of importance to cavers. It is of national importance, valuable to geologists, ecologists, archaeologists and recreational users alike. The same rules apply to all users, which thankfully includes developers, utility providers and the quarrying companies... How would you feel if a cave was destroyed? Now put yourself in an ecologist's shoes. They don't want to see habitat destroyed by cavers either.
Permission to undertake surface works has been required since the Dale was notified as a SSSI in 1990. Its only in the last few years that 'reckless' damage to a SSSI has become a criminal offence. In so far as underground digs go, act responsibly and there should not be any problems, after all that's how new discoveries are made... If you are unsure about the law with regards to SSSIs then get in touch with David Webb at the DCA or Jo Poll at Natural England.
Mark C