Can anyone clarify whether the CNCC's decision to allow the issue of permits for Leck and Casterton to commercial cavers is for additional permits, or whether any commercial permits issued will reduce the number available to the clubs they are supposd to represent?

The so called discussion document arrived two days before the meeting and didn't allow any time to consider it! Not sure if that was deliberate or if someone just forgot to pass it on.

Does anyone other than me get the impression that many of our 'representative' bodies are being run for the benefit of the commercial guys now, rather than for the ordinary caver?

To be honest that was wasn't what I was getting at, but I do wonder sometimes

Graham, whilst I was trying to work out what happened to the "Start new topic" button (I haven't figured that one out yet - it's not there any more) I found another one that let's us have a vote!

Out of curiosity let's see what people think.

I'm going to abstain on the grounds that I like to think they mean well  :read:

graham said:

Does anyone other than me get the impression that many of our 'representative' bodies are being run for the benefit of the commercial guys now, rather than for the ordinary caver?

Click to expand...

No way with DCA, as vice chair and trustee that will never happen as long as the present team are in control, as an "Ex-Pat" I question your authority to pose this submission.

I'm sure many of them do mean well; some are good friends of mine. But there does seem to have been a degree of infiltration recently, if one was paranoid one might even describe it as entryism. I'm not that paranoid, but I do believe that some decisions being taken will prove to not be in the best interests of cavers or even of the BCA in the longer term.

bograt said:

graham said:

Does anyone other than me get the impression that many of our 'representative' bodies are being run for the benefit of the commercial guys now, rather than for the ordinary caver?

Click to expand...

No way with DCA, as vice chair and trustee that will never happen as long as the present team are in control, as an "Ex-Pat" I question your authority to pose this submission.

Click to expand...

Didn't know you were an ex-pat Bograt. I'm not, I live in Bristol where I am closely involved with the university caving club and with a number of other caving organisations on Mendip. 

as an "Ex-Pat" I question your authority to pose this submission

Click to expand...

I think as a caver Graham has every right to pose the question, and in fact it that's kind of attitude - the "How dare you question what we do" that get's my back up as well, and does occasionally make me wonder whose benefit caving bodies are run for.

And behind my question is this, the original discussion document appeared to be released for to us, as a CNCC member club, at the very last minute which gives the impression (as do the minutes) that it was a done deal. This is my opinion, not necessarily the clubs. It also gives the impression that the permits will be issued from those available to us. Both of which do suggest that we are not being represented too well.

As a former chairman of a largish club I was asked several times, by email and in person, to help get our members to work with the CNCC and use the permit system, which I did, and got a lot of stick for it, because the system is a joke - you'll never get every caver who wants to go down Lancaster to apply in writing three months in advance. It will not happen. Whoever negotiated that one was asking for trouble, and not even representing reality, never mind the best interests of cavers.

So if the CNCC have really agreed to give two permits of ours a day to commercial cavers then I would say this is a slap in face to people who have tried to back them, but I'd like to find out if that is what happened before I say they have done that.

Can anyone shed any light on the decision?

At least I've got you thinking about YOUR participation in your local caving bodies!! these are organisations that are supposed to represent you, protect the holes, and help you get down them, if you don't like the way they are doing it, get in there and do something about it !.
Moaning on a forum site will not get anywhere unless the people who make the decissions (sp?) are challenged.

P.S. Apologies to Graham, got you mixed up with someone else  :doubt:

Bottlebank said:

you'll never get every caver who wants to go down Lancaster to apply in writing three months in advance. It will not happen. Whoever negotiated that one was asking for trouble, and not even representing reality, never mind the best interests of cavers.

Click to expand...

To be fair the system has improved greatly, it's possible to get them at shorter notice, via email these days, at least for Casterton Fell.


Anyway, back to the topic in hand, have you looked at the minutes from the CNCC meeting, which explains a few things? - http://www.cncc.org.uk/documents/cncc_minutes_21st_september_2013.pdf

graham said:

Does anyone other than me get the impression that many of our 'representative' bodies are being run for the benefit of the commerical guys now, rather than for the ordinary caver?

Click to expand...

I get completely the opposite impression, although there are few commercial outfits locally, most being professional in scope; our local representative body recently presided over a new site, including providing a degree of funding (as I understand) but for which access explicitly prohibits professional use entirely, this despite BCA urging all new access agreements to specifically try and secure access for professionals as there appears to be a risk to continued instructed caver training due to a lack of sites being available.

Cap'n Chris said:

graham said:

Does anyone other than me get the impression that many of our 'representative' bodies are being run for the benefit of the commerical guys now, rather than for the ordinary caver?

Click to expand...

I get completely the opposite impression, although there are few commercial outfits locally, most being professional in scope; our local representative body recently presided over a new site, including providing a degree of funding (as I understand) but for which access explicitly prohibits professional use entirely, this despite BCA urging all new access agreements to specifically try and secure access for professionals as there appears to be a risk to continued instructed caver training due to a lack of sites being available.

Click to expand...

I said 'many' not all. As to the site you mention, my understanding is that the landowner concerned was quite specific about that, whatever the local body might have - or have not - urged. That is, of course, his prerogative.

You're quite right; landowners' wishes are primary and sacrosanct. 

Bottlebank said:

Can anyone clarify whether the CNCC's decision to allow the issue of permits for Leck and Casterton to commercial cavers is for additional permits, or whether any commercial permits issued will reduce the number available to the clubs they are supposd to represent?

The so called discussion document arrived two days before the meeting and didn't allow any time to consider it! Not sure if that was deliberate or if someone just forgot to pass it on.

Click to expand...

It looks as if someone forgot to pass it on, and that person could have been the person who represents your club at CNCC meetings....

The paper was sent out to CNCC committee on 29th July; it was then re-sent in September to give clubs that hadn't commented another chance to comment.

The Minutes of the September meeting are available on the CNCC website:
http://www.cncc.org.uk/minutes/

Bottlebank said:

as an "Ex-Pat" I question your authority to pose this submission

Click to expand...

And behind my question is this, the original discussion document appeared to be released for to us, as a CNCC member club, at the very last minute which gives the impression (as do the minutes) that it was a done deal. This is my opinion, not necessarily the clubs. It also gives the impression that the permits will be issued from those available to us. Both of which do suggest that we are not being represented too well.

Click to expand...

Which CNCC member club are you from? Does your club attend CNCC meetings? Have you asked to be on the list of CNCC clubs who have the papers circulated in advance?

If the answer to the last two questions is "yes", and you didn't get the circulation of 29th July, I can only apologise.

If you are from a member club which is not attending the meetings, then you are welcome to do so, and if you let me know the name and email address of your club representative, I will add them to the list of people who do get the the papers sent out to them.

The CNCC is of course democratic. That means the "rules" are available and any caver can find what the rules are and have as much say as any other caver.

My own experience of the attitude of officers of the CNCC is that they couldn't have been more helpful.

Bottlebank said:

I think as a caver Graham has every right to pose the question, and in fact it that's kind of attitude - the "How dare you question what we do" that get's my back up as well, and does occasionally make me wonder whose benefit caving bodies are run for.

Click to expand...

In isolation, that's a perfectly reasonable point of course, but it fails to take account of the fact that in most cases, issues within the caving community which require the balance of one set of interests with another are much more finely nuanced than can be expressed in a short conversation or a three or four line posting on a forum.

While I don't doubt that "how dare you question what we do" comes up occasionally, I think it's far more likely to be a misunderstanding of "blimey, that's not an easy question to answer to somebody who has not spent hours in meetings trying to understand all the complexities of the issue and the other sides of the argument".

I see it as rather a cheap shot to accuse people of being involved in BCA, CNCC and other caving administrative organisations of enjoying going to meetings. It's the other side of the criticism which such people themselves sometimes make that if you don't got to the meetings then you can't expect to be represented. Neither viewpoint is accurate or particularly helpful.

The fact is that, like it or not, as a community we cannot avoid certain bureaucratic structures, and we would be immeasurably worse off without them. We who are involved in them don't get things right all the time, and it's right than when we get something wrong we are criticised for it, but it's not surprising that we get a little defensive if that criticism appears to be from a perspective which fails to take account of all the facts, or just the multilayered complexity of most controversial issues.

Nick.

As one of the two people who spent a walk up to Bar Pot and back, many years ago, trying to persuade Nick to get "involved" in these areas, I have to say that it is a day's work that I have never regretted. His service to the caving community has been exemplary.

Kay,

It sounds as though you were involved, can you answer the question? Are the permits additional to the existing one's or do they reduce the numbers.

Yes, I've looked at the proposals and the minutes and I can't tell from either which it is?

I said at the outset that I didn't know if the proposal had been circulated earlier and not passed on, it seems that was the case. When we got to see it in September it was too late to comment.

Tony.

Page 22 of the CNCC minutes (September meeting), 2nd paragraph;


"Using the existing structure within the CNCC, the CNCC will administer the additional commercial permit. The procedure will be; commercial group requests from the Access Officer a permit and states the intended group use of that permit using the definitions ?types of commercial caving? appendix A. The Access Officer checks the availability of the cave entrance with the relevant CNCC meets secretary, if there is availability the Access Officer issues a permit to the commercial member with an invoice for the amount agreed by the landowners. The commercial member will send the appropriate fee to the CNCC Treasurer who will then arrange (after a defined period) to forward the permit fees to the respective landowners.the permit fees to the respective landowners."


It is worth noting that the proposed new category of CNCC commercial group member is available to all UK commercial caving groups - not just those in the north.