Well said.jasonbirder said:But there aren't problems in Derbyshire, or Mendip. Or if there are, they can be sorted locally.
Having Caving considered an activity that can take part on CRoW land isn't going to affect those agreements though is it? Yes, its mainly an issue that affects the Dales and yes, mainly the large estates...but farmers in Derbyshire aren't going to think Oh no! Caver's are caving freely on access land...I must instantly bar access to them on my farmland to show solidarity with my Grouse Moor owning bretheren in Yorkshire are they?
Similarly there are plenty of Caves on access land in Yorkshire were there is a fantastic and flexible arrangement in place...IE E Kingsdale Caves...no need to change things there if the interpretation of the CRoW legislation changes...if access to those Caves contains reminder...please make a courtesy call at the farm before descending...people still will...
A change in the interpretation of CRoW doesn't blow any existing relationships or agreements away...it merely opens up more possibilities in area's where access is presently difficult...or dis-allowed...
kay said:Simon Wilson said:I do not want to see the CNCC in control of anything because they clearly cannot be trusted.
But you must take some responsibility for that, surely? Earby has been a member of the CNCC Committee since at least 2008.
Nothing would change with that particular example, as you pass the farm and use a field (not CRoW) to gain access to the CRoW land.. Unless of course you took a long winded route via a footpath that crosses the CRoW land and avoids the field, but that's just silly! Similar situations exist elsewhere in the Dales..jasonbirder said:Similarly there are plenty of Caves on access land in Yorkshire were there is a fantastic and flexible arrangement in place...IE E Kingsdale Caves...no need to change things there if the interpretation of the CRoW legislation changes...if access to those Caves contains reminder...please make a courtesy call at the farm before descending...people still will...But there aren't problems in Derbyshire, or Mendip. Or if there are, they can be sorted locally.
Simon Wilson said:kay said:Simon Wilson said:I do not want to see the CNCC in control of anything because they clearly cannot be trusted.
But you must take some responsibility for that, surely? Earby has been a member of the CNCC Committee since at least 2008.
The EPC have not been a member of the committee for about 15 years before the 2014 AGM and did not attend a committee meeting before 2013. It was our representative at the meeting in 2013 who alerted us to the fact that correct procedures were not being carried out at committee meetings. I have already pointed out that the list of the committee in the agenda for the AGM is complete fiction. The officers were unable to name the committee at the January meeting; something that they have since tried to deny. As the Minutes Secretary at the time you should have known who the committee were and clearly you do not. It is highly offensive of you to suggest that the EPC bear any responsibility for the appalling behaviour of the CNCC over the past few years and you should apologise.
jasonbirder said:But there aren't problems in Derbyshire, or Mendip. Or if there are, they can be sorted locally.
Having Caving considered an activity that can take part on CRoW land isn't going to affect those agreements though is it? Yes, its mainly an issue that affects the Dales and yes, mainly the large estates...but farmers in Derbyshire aren't going to think Oh no! Caver's are caving freely on access land...I must instantly bar access to them on my farmland to show solidarity with my Grouse Moor owning bretheren in Yorkshire are they?
Similarly there are plenty of Caves on access land in Yorkshire were there is a fantastic and flexible arrangement in place...IE E Kingsdale Caves...no need to change things there if the interpretation of the CRoW legislation changes...if access to those Caves contains reminder...please make a courtesy call at the farm before descending...people still will...
A change in the interpretation of CRoW doesn't blow any existing relationships or agreements away...it merely opens up more possibilities in area's where access is presently difficult...or dis-allowed...
droid said:Some people seem to be locked into the thinking that a problem that affects their area is a national problem.
Yes, there may be (are?) problems in the Dales and North Wales.
But there aren't problems in Derbyshire, or Mendip. Or if there are, they can be sorted locally.
Alex said:Thats what I am thinking. If he cant explain his position how can he expect us to understand his point of view.
droid said:Your gain should not be at others' loss though, George.
Peter Burgess said:Do you think it would stop people illegally ripping locks off gates? If so, I'm all for it.
georgenorth said:I'm at a complete loss to see how this might affect access arrangements in areas outside of the Dales such as Graham is alluding to. Clearly I'm not the only one...
blackholesun said:Graham;
That last comment is both an ad hominem and straw man fallacy. You can't reasonably say "Ignore idea Y from person X because I think person X believes idea Z, which is ludicrous".
Pen Park Hole has nothing to do with CROW.
blackholesun said:Pen Park Hole has nothing to do with CROW.
graham said:georgenorth said:I'm at a complete loss to see how this might affect access arrangements in areas outside of the Dales such as Graham is alluding to. Clearly I'm not the only one...
Will you not adopt the precautionary principle and accept that taking steps that might deal with a local issue locally, by reforming CNCC and revamping its relationships with the relevant estates, might be preferable to potentially destabilising relationships that currently work perfectly well elsewhere?