Lack of conservation in Dreanen and the Management Policy

J

John S

Guest
Lack of conservation in Dreanen
I have always tried to lead by example but it has been a huge struggle to get a reasonable policy in place. Unfortunately the ideals have not been carried out in the cave.
It all started with CSS idea that route taping passages was the way to preserve them and the sediment. This was the most important thing to try and preserve. If this was saved so would other stal etc. The idea of route taping was opposed by the PDCMG as being intrusive and not needed, spot tapping was their way. Who wants to be told where to walk and it looks ugly.
CSS persisted and almost every metre on the round trip was laid or re-laid by CSS. The PDCMG had run out of tape , I gave a loan of cash for 1km of tape, hoping others would follow my example, no one did. Once they got a grant several months later, and I was asking to be repaid, they wanted my money for scaffolding ! hardly conservation.  In the mean time CSS was still taping as we continued to buy tape ourselves.
I then wrote a long article on how to conserve a cave, published Chelsea Speleological Society Newsletter. Vol 38 No 6 June 1996 p78-81. This was given to PDCMG and was buried, but was picked up by the NCA and formed part of the Cave Conservation Handbook 11-1 to 11-7 (even has part of the dreanen survey as an example)published in 1997. It was much later that PDCMG adopted the NCA handbook in June 2003, only 7 years after first being given it! How much damage had been done in the mean time?
Still no real progress, so we started noting and publishing the areas we saw that needed conservation. A summary was then given to the PDCMG in June 1997. Little actual work was done.

Areas and passages that still require taping.
Area / Passage at Risk Action Explored by Explored Noted CSS NL's

Big Country main passage "sediments, crystal" 28/10/1995 16/12/1995 Jan-96
Bolder Passage near far end "stal, mud floor" 21/01/1996 02/03/1996 Apr-96
Strawberry Passage "sediments, stal" 1km of tape laid by CSS 18/12/1994 27/05/1996 Jun-96
Woodenspoon Passage "conites, fine bedded mud " 19/11/1994 27/07/1996 Aug-96
The Swim "sediment, stal" route taping needs completing 04/12/1994 17/08/1996 Sep-96
Life on Mars southern reaches sediment 03/11/1994 05/10/1996 Nov-96
Life on Mars northern reaches "sediment, stal" 03/11/1994 12/10/1996 Nov-96
Swallow Series cap mud 12/11/1994 04/01/1997 Feb-97
MS & D North "sediment, stal" 16/11/1996 11/01/1997 Feb-97
"Into the Black, (western end)" mud banks 23/11/1996 18/01/1997 Feb-97
Yellow Van "sediment, only 1 side taped ! " 23/11/1996 18/01/1997 Feb-97
Into the Black "mud banks, cross bedding" "double taping required, done 15/3 by CSS" 23/11/1996 08/03/1997 Apr-97
Dogleg Series Circus Maximus "sediments, crystal" "30/3/97 +300m laid by CSS, more required" 19/01/1997 15/03/1997 Apr-97
Out of the Blue "straws, mud banks" "500m laid by CCC shortly afterwards, more required" 24/11/1996 15/03/1997 Apr-97
Luck of the Draw beyond grotto "crystals, stal, sediments" 07/12/1996 19/04/1997 May-97
Gone in the Years crystal and sediments last visit 2 years ago when we first mentioned this! 23/04/1995 24/05/1997 Jun-97

Other areas noted but not published

Gone in the years to 3 Amigos "sediments, crystals" Oct-95
Crystal Mole (fab side pas) "crystals, sediments" "~250m laid by CSS, route taping needs completing." 19/11/1994
Garage Passage (Wyvern) 100m required at start Oct-95


Date Explored is taken as the date it was first surveyed.
The conservation policy of NCA states that the onus is on the explorers to conserve their finds.
The table only includes areas noted by the G5 surveyors in the course of their survey. There are probably many other areas requiring conservation.
It was decided to publish areas requiring work in the CSS newsletter to enable others to do the work as the surveyors may not be returning to that area for some time(some areas only have 1 survey trip to complete it). Informing others would help avoid damage and speed the conservation up.
The high grade survey is also a very useful conservation tool and lack of manpower means that frequently the physical conservation must be
"left to those that should have done it in the first place, the explorers."

JS  - 06/97

A bit of a mess but it was an old document. Can someone sort it out please. But you can have a good guess at the guilty clubs and I bet most of the work is still required!!!
Next I gave various clubs a detailed survey of their finds to ask them to mark on the taping they had done. One replied. This was an attempt to get a comprehensive conservation survey done of the cave. It failed.
The present policy may sound good but has to be implemented. The group seems to think that management starts and stops with the gate. This is where the caver management should start.
I see another long article forming of how to manage the caver and the cave.
 

graham

New member
John

Not a criticism, but an observation. Complete tramline taping is not necessarily the best answer in a given circumstance. There are places, certainly, where you should limit cavers to a narrow route, but there are others where you might wish to "spread the load" depending on the precise nature of the floor.

It is always worth remembering that taping is not an impact-free technique of itself, as I have heard argued in the past. it is simply a method of confining impact into specific areas.
 
J

John S

Guest
graham said:
Not a criticism, but an observation. Complete tramline taping is not necessarily the best answer in a given circumstance. There are places, certainly, where you should limit cavers to a narrow route, but there are others where you might wish to "spread the load" depending on the precise nature of the floor.

It is always worth remembering that taping is not an impact-free technique of itself, as I have heard argued in the past. it is simply a method of confining impact into specific areas.

I think you need to read the NCA handbook pages I highlighted to see what I have actually said. "spread the load" could be viewed as "spreading the damage" so it's an unuseful term.
 

SamT

Moderator
I have often talked about expanding the grading system in a cave, we have 1 to 5 grades for physical difficulty/pitches/flood risk etc...

but what about a to e for delicacy. We have graded bagshawe thus, a being robust cave, e being exceptionally delicate requiring high levels of skill/care to avoid/minimise damage. 

That way, people can at least have a pointer as to what the ability of their group is, and whether or not the planned trip is suitable or not.

1a - nice big solid clean walking type tube.
5e - arduous wet crawling over delicate flowstone floors with straw stal just above your head.

You get the idea.

Just a thought, if we are talking about conservation..

Oh - and I agree that 100% tramline tape is quite intrusive and un-necessary, taping is a balance between being over done, and not enough to protect the vulnerable bits.
 
L

Lou Maurice

Guest
I am not familiar with the PDCMG conservation policy prior to 1998, but since 1998 I have been involved in the exploration of new passages in the far reaches of Ogof Draenen with members of OUCC and MCC (two clubs on the PDCMG for those that do not know the situation).  We have been provided with conservation tape by the PDCMG.  We have taped passages we have discovered, and even taped off unentered passages that connect to known cave to prevent any impact on them.  We have left promising leads where continued digging effort would cause destruction of unusual formations.  We have also taped other areas of the cave that needed taping and hadn?t been previously taped, and have re-taped areas where the tape was broken or poorly placed.  I would say that  members of the PDCMG are very much in favour of conservation taping, and have themselves carried out extensive taping and conservation work in the cave.

I do agree that there are areas in the cave that need more taping effort (either because they weren?t taped or because the tape has deteriorated) and cavers should be encouraged to do this.  I believe money can be obtained from the PDCMG for conservation tape and I hope that the recent debate on conservation will lead to more conservation work within the cave.  For many years we took conservation tape on every trip and did a little bit on the way in (as well as taping discoveries), and this is a good way to make progress. 
 

Ian Adams

Active member
I couldn?t agree less with the sentiments on this thread.

I understand the desire to preserve and protect the cave and it?s formations (and agree in principle)  but to form a group/club/society/body (call it what you will) which is totalitarian (single idealism dictatorship) and conservative (ie. to resist change) meets the dictionary definition of fascism.  Worse still, the group/club/society/body is self-appointed and carries no weight in law.

As much as the intentions of the club may be honourable, what right does one person (groupl/body etc.) have to dictate policy and police their peers ?

As I said in another thread on this subject, this kind of self opinionated politics has created a war zone in North Wales.

Guys, you have to respect other people?s opinions (even if you don?t accept them) and before you dismiss that, consider this ? you are DEMANDING that other people accept YOUR opinions and are prepared to shout very loudly if they do not.

I think you will find that the vast majority of cavers will (and do) respect the environment they are in (with or without tape) and you will get a small rogue element regardless of whether you tape something or not.

Please try to stop being so ?controlling? and just accept that not everyone sees things the same way but that we (as cavers) all hold pretty much the same values. And, yes, some ?damage? will happen along the way but that is the nature of caving. Even the most careful of us can make a mistake (whilst putting the tape around a decoration as an example).

?.. posted with (as always) the best of intentions?..

;)

Ian
 

NigR

New member
It is hoped that once some form of access agreement for the new entrance is finally reached that it will be possible to begin rectifying some of the glaring omissions outlined by John in his original post. Having recently visited several of the areas he mentions, I can confirm that much still remains to be done.
 

Imo

New member
Jackalpup said:
I couldn?t agree less with the sentiments on this thread.

I understand the desire to preserve and protect the cave and it?s formations (and agree in principle)  but to form a group/club/society/body (call it what you will) which is totalitarian (single idealism dictatorship) and conservative (ie. to resist change) meets the dictionary definition of fascism. 
?.. posted with (as always) the best of intentions?..
;)
Ian

Like I said in the last thread, I went to the meeting myself to see what it was all about. Following these accusations on this forum.

Having done so, I really find it obsurd that you should be accusing this group (made up of representatives of I think 9 or 10 clubs that are active in the system) of being facist.

The cave has completely open access, no restrictions, anyone can go into it and anywhere inside it.

I'm not on that commitee and my club (SUSS) is not represented, but having heard the discussions on sunday and I'm satisfied that the group is open, honest and is in a difficult position of having to balance lots of opinions and make the best recommendation about conservation to the landowner.

The landowners as I see it from the meeting are this they want some sort of system to a) regulate people wandering all over their land caving/ digging and b) conserve the cave environment.

I personnally hate leader operated access such as in OFD1, I think its far more draconian and I worry that in order to conserve a cave with multiple entrances, this might be introduced in Draenen - god forbid!!

Leader systems really do concentrate power of access into a few cavers hands. I would rather have one entrance and free access than multiple entrances and a leader system.

A strong taping policy is a good idea in my opinion, if it keeps us away from leader systems.

 

Ian Adams

Active member
Imo,

Sorry but I think you are missing the point.

I said the PDCMG meets the dictionary definition of fascism, I did not say they were acting as fascists.  (You quote my line in your post).

What I don?t agree with is our peers imposing their opinion over us with implications if we don?t comply.

We are each entitled to our own opinion and we are each entitled to behave and act within the law of our country.

I have asked that we respect the fact the we each have differing opinions; you feel a strong taping policy is in order for example and I respect that. Personally, I am not certain it will make much difference and I have no strong feelings about it one way or the other. However, a dedicated photographer may have a different opinion. Could you respect that (even if you don?t agree) ?

I do not wish to join the PDCMG as it is unlikely that I will visit Ogof Draenan (I am not so enthusiastic about caving that I will travel lengths of the earth to explore all the exciting areas) and in any event, I am opposed to any self-appointed group/body that assumes responsibility and then commands dominion over others.

If you were to tell me that the land owner was initially refusing access and the group came into existence to protect and preserve cavers interests by negotiating with the landowner for access (for all cavers) then I would see that as an admirable position. However, there remains the problem of the apparently singular constitutional mandate (conservation) and the fact that it is totalitarian.

I said this in another post on one of these threads and I will say it again; it is precisely this kind of ?empire building? and politics that has utterly ruined caving in North Wales and it is quite clear (just look at the number of viewings and posts on this subject within the ?Wales? thread on this forum) that the same thing could easily happen in South Wales.

Why can?t everyone just accept that we have differing views and that we share the common interest of ?caving? and why can?t we stop trying to demand that people do ?this and that? or stop doing ?this and that? ?

Has anyone actually behaved irresponsibly in Draenen to the degree that ?cavers? have suffered a deep wound ?

I am still posting with the best of intentions.

:)

Ian
 
P

Pete Talling

Guest
Ian, 

You were not at the PDCMG meeting yet you see fit to post a view that those who spent their sunday trying to sort this mess out were fascists. Perhaps come along to the next PDCMG meeting.

The PDCMG is a democratic organisation (one club has one vote). Any club can join. The views of member clubs were being carefully discussed on sunday, as were all other views sent to the committee. Observers from non member clubs had a chance to have their say. The opinions of those on the Forum, those who wrote to Descent, and those who sent letters or emails direct to the committee were considered carefully.

The PDCMG is not a ?single idealist dictator? as you posted - without being at the meeting ? there are plenty of different ideas represented by the clubs. That is why the meeting took six hours plus.

What kind of ?empire building? do you refer to ? is it representing the views of cavers in a democratic way. The PDCMG is not resistant to change ? it is democratic. If the majority view changes, it changes.

There is a majority of people in the PDCMG clubs and in the wider community that have one view and a minority that have another view. The minority have lost the democratic processes and are now systematically slagging off those involved in the committee, jeopardising relations with the landowner, and posting intimidating and/or rude messages on the forum (such as your own recent reply to Lou Maurice in my view).

If the new entrance is shut then one group of people gets pissed off. If the new entrance remains open then groups of novices can merrily do through trips and trash a cave, one of the few remote wilderness areas in the UK has gone.

Can you say why cavers should not respect the landowners views, and the views of a majority of other cavers? The question is then how best to determine what the majority caver view is, which is what the PDCMG then represents. The view of the landowner is also really quite important - not just in a legal sense but because they are the people who live there. 

To me it seems that you do not care about other people's views?

What is the way forward? I can offer to buy you a beer at the next PDCMG meeting and try to constructively find out how to move forward. In return perhaps it would be nice if you stop calling the PDCMG fascist. Posted with the best of intentions too!

Pete
 

Ian Adams

Active member
Pete,

Not for the first time, I have been mis-quoted and mis-understood.

To be blunt, I did not call the PDCMG fascists. I was very careful in what I said and went to pains to explain and define exactly what I meant.

Empire building ? if you tell me that the landowner either had or was about to deny access to everyone and the various clubs got together to appease the landowner to secure access for all then I will agree it is not empire-building (I haven?t actually accused the PDCMG of that either though).

However, if the PDCMG ?got together? and then approached the landowner and said ?we can blah blah bah?.? Then it is a blatant case of empire building (which has been so destructive in north Wales). I still haven?t accused the PDCMG of this ? I have asked the question but so far not got an answer.

Cavers SHOULD respect landowners views and I have never suggested to the contrary. If the land owner said ?No one is going into the hole on my land unless there is a strong conservation policy and I, the landowner, demand that ?my? hole be treated as such ? then fair enough ? I would have no problem with that. (It?s his hole and he is entitled to treat it as he (or she of course) sees fit).  Is that how it happened ?

Of course, what happens under the ground can be a matter for the mineral rights owner (quite probably the same person/people with Draenen (but not so in North Wales). Additionally, since Draenen is extensive, there may be multiple landowners. I don?t know, for example, if NigR?s dig is on land owned by the same owner.

You pen-ultimately say that it seems I don?t care about other cavers views ? actually, the complete opposite is the case and it is precisely the complete opposite I have been arguing for the whole time ? we SHOULD consider other cavers views.

I appreciate your offer of a beer and believe that you are sincere in your desire to find a remedy to Draenen. I don?t live anywhere near and will decline (I wouldn?t attend the meeting anyway) but I do appreciate your sincerity.

?. I really do mean well (I know peeps are picking up on me keep saying that) ? but I do).

:)

Ian
 

RobinGriffiths

Well-known member
Can you say why cavers should not respect the landowners views...

What actually are the landowner's views? Do they have a published position rather than interpretation by people who have a vested interest one way or another? Many of the posts on the other threads mention 'landowner views' or 'conservation', but what are the landowner's view on conservation, and is one or the other a straw man ?

Robin
 

NigR

New member
Jackalpup said:
However, if the PDCMG ?got together? and then approached the landowner and said ?we can blah blah bah?.? Then it is a blatant case of empire building .......

Sounds about right to me.

Jackalpup said:
I appreciate your offer of a beer and believe that you are sincere in your desire to find a remedy to Draenen.

Yes, he certainly is sincere in his desire to find a remedy - so long as that remedy consists of obliterating our entrance from the face of the earth! I wasn't at the meeting either but I have spoken tonight at great length to someone who was. Interestingly, this was a person I have never met who was attending his first ever PDCMG meeting and was unaware of any of the personalities involved. He gave me a very unbiased, outsider-based view of the proceedings. Within a short time he had correctly identified the alignments of the ruling clique. He was then taken aback by the vehemence of some of those steadfastly opposed to any form of progress and attempted to describe one club representative in particular who was exhibiting a surprising level of personal animosity towards myself. No prizes for correctly guessing who this might be.

So who is the real Mr Talling? Is it the Mr Sincerity (Let me buy you a beer) of the forum, or is it the Mr Angry (Fill it in! Concrete it!) of the meeting?
 

graham

New member
NigR said:
Jackalpup said:
However, if the PDCMG ?got together? and then approached the landowner and said ?we can blah blah bah?.? Then it is a blatant case of empire building .......

Sounds about right to me.

Jackalpup said:
I appreciate your offer of a beer and believe that you are sincere in your desire to find a remedy to Draenen.

Yes, he certainly is sincere in his desire to find a remedy - so long as that remedy consists of obliterating our entrance from the face of the earth! I wasn't at the meeting either but I have spoken tonight at great length to someone who was. Interestingly, this was a person I have never met who was attending his first ever PDCMG meeting and was unaware of any of the personalities involved. He gave me a very unbiased, outsider-based view of the proceedings. Within a short time he had correctly identified the alignments of the ruling clique. He was then taken aback by the vehemence of some of those steadfastly opposed to any form of progress and attempted to describe one club representative in particular who was exhibiting a surprising level of personal animosity towards myself. No prizes for correctly guessing who this might be.

So who is the real Mr Talling? Is it the Mr Sincerity (Let me buy you a beer) of the forum, or is it the Mr Angry (Fill it in! Concrete it!) of the meeting?

For someone who claims to wish to move forward and agree matters, NigR is damned good at being inflammatory and rude.

Did Pete once run over your cat or something?
 

Andy Sparrow

Active member
Pete Talling said:
If the new entrance remains open then groups of novices can merrily do through trips and trash a cave, one of the few remote wilderness areas in the UK has gone.

Why would 'novice' use of the cave increase?  Groups including less experienced cavers already visit the cave and generally tramp up and down Gilwern Passage - I suppose the new through trip might be more appealing but there would likely be some wobbly lips on the traverses.  And quite why increased activity in this part of the cave should 'trash' the entire cave is beyond me.  Don't forget that even with the new entrance it's still 4 hours in to the remote areas, probably a good deal longer for potential 'trashers'.

 

graham

New member
RobinGriffiths said:
Can you say why cavers should not respect the landowners views...

What actually are the landowner's views? Do they have a published position rather than interpretation by people who have a vested interest one way or another? Many of the posts on the other threads mention 'landowner views' or 'conservation', but what are the landowner's view on conservation, and is one or the other a straw man ?

Robin

Robin

Whilst these are valid questions, they are also somewhat naive. Does any landowner who has delegated administration to a caving group the length and breadth of the country actually have a published policy on such matters? I know that the ones on whose behalf I act don't, except for the one which is itself composed of caving clubs. Most landowners who do delegate matters, do it because, amongst other things, they don't want the hassle  of the admin themselves and appreciate the advice that the relevant cavers can give them. Do any of the northern estates have published policies? Down here I can think of one landowner who makes a point of not putting anything in writing exactly so he cannot be held liable later.

Did the PDCMG suddenly make a flying visit from Dorset or Norfolk and "snatch" this cave from under the noses of honest unsuspecting Welsh diggers? No of course they didn't; the people associated with the finds realised that such a cave would need some managing and undertook the responsibility. Now, it is possible that some things could have been done better here in the past, but no-one can complain that access is difficult; no-one that is except selfish gits who believe they have the god-given right to trample over the views of others and do what they want where they want and screw the rest of you.
 

graham

New member
Andy Sparrow said:
Pete Talling said:
If the new entrance remains open then groups of novices can merrily do through trips and trash a cave, one of the few remote wilderness areas in the UK has gone.

Why would 'novice' use of the cave increase?

I would refer you to the report on this very site of a group of ten who have recently done a through trip, some of whom were so looking forward to this cave that they didn't even know what it was called.
 

graham

New member
danthecavingman said:
Which report is this?

I can't bloody find it now, but I read it this morning. It described someone meeting a group of ten, it mentioned some of them being in boiler suits (not commenting on that just mentioning it as one of the details) and it noted that some of them had no idea of the name of the cave they had just visited. It did specifically say that they had done a through trip.
 

NigR

New member
Graham,

I was informed of this report by John Stevens earlier this morning. I could not find it either. This suggests it might have been removed either by the OP or a moderator. If this is the case, there could be a good reason for doing so. Let's just be careful what we say for a while, OK?

(See, Dan - I can be extremely diplomatic when I want to be).





 
Top