The BMC model
- Thread starter Jon
- Start date
jasonbirder
Member
My post was slightly tongue in cheek...
But my point remains a valid one...a proliferation of rigid rules and structures is put in place as a substitute for goodwill and trust...think about the formal rules and structures that exist at the following different levels...
The Few mates you Cave with...
A small ad hoc caving club formed so people could pool funds to buy tackle and work digs...
A traditional Caving club with a club hut...
A regional Caving body...
As you go up the ladder...the structures and strictures proliferate...because a formal set of guidelines MUST be put in place as there is a greater and greater disconnect between the grass routes and the hierarchy...
I would be the last person to critisise the work of people on Caving Committees at any level...its a thankless task and by and large they do sterling work on behalf of the majority of us who just want to Cave and Dig...
But the whole CNCC discussion seems to have derailed from a very simple issue (Why is it almost impossible for a caver to get a permit for Leck Fell or Casterton Fell) into an ever more convoluted argument about member clubs, committee constitutions and voting rights...and that this in itself plays into the hands of the tiny number of those for whom the process is more important than the end result...( MORE caving...for ALL)
8 pages of whether the CNCC TG is a genuine club and should be afforded voting rights at the CNCC general meeting (I exaggerate for effect) doesn't really engage with the majority of cavers whose thoughts are basically...if permits were easier to get I wouldn't have to pirate Lost Johns every time I go to Yorkshire (or something similar)
The argument that it is difficult to get the landowner/landowners agents to agree to any changes to the access criteria is made a lie by the speed with which a change of access for Commercial Caving was agreed...so why oh why has the existing CNCC committee never made any representation to the landowners that will allow ordinary Cavers (both DIM's AND members of CNCC affiliated clubs) to apply for permits, given that they will meet all the necessary liability and accountability requirements (They will all have BCA insurance and will all be able to be identified if they have to give their BCA number)
That's a VERY simple question...and whilst we might be able to get various committee members coming on the forum to clarify the status of the CNCC TG as a club...or whether a committee member who isn't a member of a Full member club can propose a motion but not vote upon it (yawn) there has been VERY little communication on why no action has been taken on that issue...
But my point remains a valid one...a proliferation of rigid rules and structures is put in place as a substitute for goodwill and trust...think about the formal rules and structures that exist at the following different levels...
The Few mates you Cave with...
A small ad hoc caving club formed so people could pool funds to buy tackle and work digs...
A traditional Caving club with a club hut...
A regional Caving body...
As you go up the ladder...the structures and strictures proliferate...because a formal set of guidelines MUST be put in place as there is a greater and greater disconnect between the grass routes and the hierarchy...
I would be the last person to critisise the work of people on Caving Committees at any level...its a thankless task and by and large they do sterling work on behalf of the majority of us who just want to Cave and Dig...
But the whole CNCC discussion seems to have derailed from a very simple issue (Why is it almost impossible for a caver to get a permit for Leck Fell or Casterton Fell) into an ever more convoluted argument about member clubs, committee constitutions and voting rights...and that this in itself plays into the hands of the tiny number of those for whom the process is more important than the end result...( MORE caving...for ALL)
8 pages of whether the CNCC TG is a genuine club and should be afforded voting rights at the CNCC general meeting (I exaggerate for effect) doesn't really engage with the majority of cavers whose thoughts are basically...if permits were easier to get I wouldn't have to pirate Lost Johns every time I go to Yorkshire (or something similar)
The argument that it is difficult to get the landowner/landowners agents to agree to any changes to the access criteria is made a lie by the speed with which a change of access for Commercial Caving was agreed...so why oh why has the existing CNCC committee never made any representation to the landowners that will allow ordinary Cavers (both DIM's AND members of CNCC affiliated clubs) to apply for permits, given that they will meet all the necessary liability and accountability requirements (They will all have BCA insurance and will all be able to be identified if they have to give their BCA number)
That's a VERY simple question...and whilst we might be able to get various committee members coming on the forum to clarify the status of the CNCC TG as a club...or whether a committee member who isn't a member of a Full member club can propose a motion but not vote upon it (yawn) there has been VERY little communication on why no action has been taken on that issue...
exsumper
New member
Pitlamp said:
John "poxy amateurs" was a satirical comment on the recent attempts by the CNCC/BCA to promote and push through "cash for access" It appears to be the current attitude of our self appointed "glorious leaders" to normal cavers.
I fully endorse your comments on the role of the amateur in caving! Its just a shame that the bureaucrats that run our so called "national body"sic appear to have forgotten the grass roots! Its debatable if they've ever met any of us plebs in the first place!
We are all quite aware of their attitude to all of "those nasty clubs" "awkward individuals"and their poxy amateur ethos!
"Why join a club to learn how to cave, when you can pay one of our best chums to teach you"
Would make a fitting new motto for the BCA!
Pitlamp
Well-known member
Ah - that was satire, exsumper? Well, there's no law against that.
But I con't agree with your view of the situation. Speaking as a pleb myself, I do think there is a place for cavers who make a living from the activity - as long as the balance is right. I've never gone into that side of caving but I know quite a few folk who do it - they're all decent types and they're all what you and I would call "proper" cavers anyway. They do provide a useful service in certain areas, such as satisfying parents that they can take their children caving without the likelihood of serious mishap occurring. Their qualifications provide a minimum standard of competence which, because they're administered by BCA, those parents should be able to rely on. I've never known that to impinge on the club scene, or have a detrimental effect on cavers like you who are serious players when it comes to exploration and projects. So it doesn't really bother me, to be honest.
But I con't agree with your view of the situation. Speaking as a pleb myself, I do think there is a place for cavers who make a living from the activity - as long as the balance is right. I've never gone into that side of caving but I know quite a few folk who do it - they're all decent types and they're all what you and I would call "proper" cavers anyway. They do provide a useful service in certain areas, such as satisfying parents that they can take their children caving without the likelihood of serious mishap occurring. Their qualifications provide a minimum standard of competence which, because they're administered by BCA, those parents should be able to rely on. I've never known that to impinge on the club scene, or have a detrimental effect on cavers like you who are serious players when it comes to exploration and projects. So it doesn't really bother me, to be honest.
