Author Topic: Concreting Drws Cefn  (Read 219894 times)

Offline Martin Laverty

  • menacing presence
  • **
  • Posts: 244
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #50 on: July 06, 2014, 05:57:38 pm »
Peter: CRoW is very much on-topic for Drws Cefn and the 'landowner': the current 'landowners' have  leant heavily of the advice of PDCMG, bolstered by the dubious advice from BCA which has now been removed. If PDCMG do not appraise them of developments, perhaps CCC should.

Graham: Wales might take into account the mixed messages from DEFRA, but I think you are very much in the minority in thinking the situation is clear in England, let alone Wales. The Welsh Government has it under review...

Rhys: CCC has been moving away from its old disavowal of direct interest in access for some time, so your comment on lack of a Conservation AND ACCESS officer does indeed seem pedantic. I applaud the change in approach.

Offline Peter Burgess

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
  • Left ukcaving by this name
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #51 on: July 06, 2014, 06:05:10 pm »
Regional bodies, or at least CSCC, have been active in access matters for quite a while. I should know as they provided some funding for WCMS for entrance works a few years ago, which was very welcome. But that was by invitation; their involvement was not by imposition, or by them taking some form of moral high ground.

Online Brains

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #52 on: July 06, 2014, 06:13:58 pm »
Just a quick thought... Perhaps matters might be easier (yeah, right  :( ) if the body believed to be acting out of line by CCC (and a significant number of cavers) were called an access group, as opposed to a management group?
Perhaps CCC would vote to suspend the group, or constituent members, if they were deemed to acting contrary to the raison d'etre of the council?

For the record, are these entrances on CRoW land or not?
What are the current landowner views or reassesing the old agreement, especially in view of the remarkably low numbers of visits recorded?
How difficult is enlarging or merging SSSI?
Dependent on the QC's response, how difficult are the measures for exclusion under CRoW to put in place?

Offline NigR

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
  • Grwp Ogofeydd Garimpeiros SWCC
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #53 on: July 06, 2014, 06:29:56 pm »
For the record, are these entrances on CRoW land or not?

Drws Cefn is on CRoW land.

Nunnery (Second) entrance is on CRoW land.

Ogof Draenen is on private land.

Offline bograt

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3592
  • Speliodecrepit
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #54 on: July 06, 2014, 06:38:49 pm »
Isn't there some rule or other about interfering with natural features on CRoW land?

(Can't be arsed to look now, but Graham should be able to advise ;))
Aim low, achieve your goals, avoid disappointment

Offline NigR

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
  • Grwp Ogofeydd Garimpeiros SWCC
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #55 on: July 06, 2014, 06:44:09 pm »
Isn't there some rule or other about interfering with natural features on CRoW land?

Yes, I believe there is.

Offline Peter Burgess

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
  • Left ukcaving by this name
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #56 on: July 06, 2014, 06:44:34 pm »
Well, Brains, here are the respective lists

http://www.cambriancavingcouncil.org.uk/member_clubs.html

http://www.pdcmg.org.uk/com.htm

So who is at risk of suspension, by way of your suggestion? And if a club that opposes the blockage wanted to remain in CCC would they be best advised to leave PDCMG?

Be careful what you wish for!




Offline Martin Laverty

  • menacing presence
  • **
  • Posts: 244
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #57 on: July 06, 2014, 07:15:14 pm »
Peter: There used to be a complete spectrum of involvement in access by regional councils from the CNCC - set up exclusively to mediate access - to CCC - renouncing any involvement; the DCA seems to have been a happy medium. Meanwhile, most cavers didn't really know but, not unreasonably, probably assumed (as BCA seems to have, too) that they could all act similarly, and on any topic involving caves and cavers in their region. Anyway, back on topic...

Still little discussion of the wilderness conservation concept applied to Draenen in their little-read Conservation Policy and Guidelines [ http://www.pdcmg.org.uk/plancons2003.htm ]
Graham pointed out that this seems to be largely a transatlantic import (along with the example of OFD, which is highly debateable), and Wikipedia gives a good summary of the concepts as discussed for the surface [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilderness ]. What is not emphasised there is the idea of remoteness, which I think is what its proponents in PDCMG espouse - their stand would have all entrances to the Three Counties system blocked except for Low Douk. Would that be reasonable?
Another parallel some have suggested is the climbing community leaving some crags without any fixed aids - ie maintaining a psychological edge (there is an aesthetic appeal too, I suppose) - in this case through physical endurance required to get to the far reaches rather than explicit risk. Is that desirable?

But the last paragraph of the Wikipedia article perhaps sums up  (for avoidable voids like Draenen) one extreme while skewing the other when it says: "applying any control to define nature unavoidably voids the very freedom and independence of human control that defines wilderness"

Offline Peter Burgess

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
  • Left ukcaving by this name
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #58 on: July 06, 2014, 07:27:33 pm »
Thank you, Martin.

Offline Peter Burgess

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
  • Left ukcaving by this name
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #59 on: July 06, 2014, 07:31:50 pm »

Online Brains

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #60 on: July 06, 2014, 07:39:05 pm »
Well, Brains, here are the respective lists

http://www.cambriancavingcouncil.org.uk/member_clubs.html

http://www.pdcmg.org.uk/com.htm

So who is at risk of suspension, by way of your suggestion? And if a club that opposes the blockage wanted to remain in CCC would they be best advised to leave PDCMG?

Be careful what you wish for!
I would imagine CCC would decide upon that - either a complete censure of the group, or those constituents that could be shown to be acting contrary the wishes and needs of the cave, the caving community, BCA and CCC would seem starting points. If the management group is not fit for purpose, why be a member and bring discredit on your club?

I wish for nothing other than on going access for my fellow cavers in as free and easy a manner as is appropriate to the nature of the cave as a whole, with either natural or artifical control as deemed best in the individual circumstance. Blocking entrances or needlessly restrictive political interference on access does our pusuit no favours at all.
As cavers and underground explorers we should all be doing our very best to facillitate and encourage people into our sport, not making life hard - the trips thelmselves do enough of that to drive away people. No new blood = death of caving = nobody to speak for the trees caves (oops - drifted into Lorax territory!)

Offline graham

  • Retired
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10942
  • UBSS, Speleo-Club de Perigueux, GSG, SUI
    • UBSS
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #61 on: July 06, 2014, 07:49:55 pm »
Peter: There used to be a complete spectrum of involvement in access by regional councils from the CNCC - set up exclusively to mediate access - to CCC - renouncing any involvement; the DCA seems to have been a happy medium. Meanwhile, most cavers didn't really know but, not unreasonably, probably assumed (as BCA seems to have, too) that they could all act similarly, and on any topic involving caves and cavers in their region. Anyway, back on topic...

This does, indeed, take us rather off topic, however, the understanding that different regions do things differently has been part of British Caving ever since CSCC was set up to avoid CNCC's views being presumed to apply to all back in the 1960s.

Still little discussion of the wilderness conservation concept applied to Draenen in their little-read Conservation Policy and Guidelines [ http://www.pdcmg.org.uk/plancons2003.htm ]
Graham pointed out that this seems to be largely a transatlantic import (along with the example of OFD, which is highly debateable), and Wikipedia gives a good summary of the concepts as discussed for the surface [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilderness ]. What is not emphasised there is the idea of remoteness, which I think is what its proponents in PDCMG espouse - their stand would have all entrances to the Three Counties system blocked except for Low Douk. Would that be reasonable?

Well, I did try. :) I think your example is not wholly relevant as the Three Counties system was brought about by joining up discrete caves unlike Draenen where, essentially, the entire cave was explored from the one entrance.

Another parallel some have suggested is the climbing community leaving some crags without any fixed aids - ie maintaining a psychological edge (there is an aesthetic appeal too, I suppose) - in this case through physical endurance required to get to the far reaches rather than explicit risk. Is that desirable?

Why not, at least in this case, or should we insist that, for example, any long cave has a second entrance contrived 'for safety reasons'? I'm not wholly certain that the explorers of Charterhouse Cave or Dan yr Ogof would agree with you.

But the last paragraph of the Wikipedia article perhaps sums up  (for avoidable voids like Draenen) one extreme while skewing the other when it says: "applying any control to define nature unavoidably voids the very freedom and independence of human control that defines wilderness"

This is the one that gets me on my soapbox. The fact is that nowhere on the planet is wholly free of the activities of man. Nowhere. If taken to its logical conclusion, the attitude summed up in that sentence would have us shrugging our shoulders and logging the entirety of the rain forest, just because we can. Is that an attitude that we, as cavers, wish to encourage?
Caving is for Life not just for Christmas

Offline Peter Burgess

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
  • Left ukcaving by this name
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #62 on: July 06, 2014, 07:52:17 pm »
We should be seeking to bring cavers and their clubs together, not driving them apart. Anything CCC can do to keep clubs working together DESPITE their differences must be the best way forward. I don't think this letter that started the whole topic goes anywhere near achieving this, although no doubt others may question that.

Online Brains

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #63 on: July 06, 2014, 08:00:56 pm »
The letter may have started this thread, but the matter has been festering in the dark for a long time before it was written. Perhaps the light of open debate will lead people to think clearly about all the issues, and look for a workable consesus. This will no doubt have wide repercussions throughout the caving world regardless of eventual outcome for this particular issue. If nothing else the letter shows some of the gulf in empathy that exists...
Get out of the trenches and play some footie while you still can

Offline Peter Burgess

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
  • Left ukcaving by this name
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #64 on: July 06, 2014, 08:05:09 pm »
I can here the frantic digging noise of entrenching tools from 200 miles away!  :(

Online Brains

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #65 on: July 06, 2014, 08:14:52 pm »
I can here the frantic digging noise of entrenching tools from 200 miles away!  :(
Sadly I fear that may be the case.
But we can only live in Hope - a beautiful bit of the High Peak, handy for for some wonderful caves....

Offline graham

  • Retired
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10942
  • UBSS, Speleo-Club de Perigueux, GSG, SUI
    • UBSS
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #66 on: July 06, 2014, 08:17:46 pm »
Brains

What compromise is possible between a viewpoint that requires one entrance and one that requires two?

How does one fashion a cave with 1 1/2 entrances?
Caving is for Life not just for Christmas

Offline Ian Adams

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1306
  • UCET
    • UCET Caving Club (North Wales)
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #67 on: July 06, 2014, 08:53:18 pm »
The compromise is evidently simple;

1) The cave is currently freely open
2) The cave is concreted over

The compromise would be to gate it. Is that not precisely what was suggested by CCC ?

Ian
A door, once opened, may be stepped through in either direction.

Offline Peter Burgess

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
  • Left ukcaving by this name
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #68 on: July 06, 2014, 08:55:50 pm »
Does it work for the owner? Who is going to find out?

Offline TheBitterEnd

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
  • KCC
    • KCC - Join an active club
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #69 on: July 06, 2014, 08:56:32 pm »
Isn't there some rule or other about interfering with natural features on CRoW land?

Yes, I believe there is.

Only for people exercising their right of access under CRoW, landowners are by-and-large free to do what they want within the limits which may apply from other legislation (planning, SSSI, etc.). It is no different to getting a builder in to build a wall in your garden, CRoW does not apply to the landowner in that sense.
'Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.' — Mark Twain

Offline Ian Adams

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1306
  • UCET
    • UCET Caving Club (North Wales)
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #70 on: July 06, 2014, 09:08:08 pm »
Does it work for the owner? Who is going to find out?

It's a compromise - don't deflect from Graham's question  ;)

Ian
A door, once opened, may be stepped through in either direction.

Offline graham

  • Retired
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10942
  • UBSS, Speleo-Club de Perigueux, GSG, SUI
    • UBSS
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #71 on: July 06, 2014, 09:17:26 pm »
Does it work for the owner? Who is going to find out?

It's a compromise - don't deflect from Graham's question  ;)

Ian

It doesn't, in the sense that my view is that cavers need to work with landowners, antagonising them is not in our best interests. Others seem to disagree with that.
Caving is for Life not just for Christmas

Offline Ian Adams

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1306
  • UCET
    • UCET Caving Club (North Wales)
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #72 on: July 06, 2014, 10:00:41 pm »
..... my view is that cavers need to work with landowners, antagonising them is not in our best interests.

I completely agree.

 ;)

Ian
A door, once opened, may be stepped through in either direction.

Offline Andy Sparrow

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1232
    • new website now online
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #73 on: July 06, 2014, 11:03:42 pm »
If the landowner really feels strongly that Drws Cefn should be sealed then he should undertake the task himself.  Cavers dig caves open, they don't fill them in.
Andy Sparrow



Offline RobinGriffiths

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1289
Re: Concreting Drws Cefn
« Reply #74 on: July 07, 2014, 12:31:45 am »
If the landowner really feels strongly that Drws Cefn should be sealed then he should undertake the task himself.  Cavers dig caves open, they don't fill them in.

Totally agree. So if current owner sells land after PDCMG have filled it with concrete, and new owner finds out - actually this is a scientific site and shouldn't have been filled. Who's going to dig the concrete out?

 

Main Menu

Forum Home Help Search
SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal