No Access to Lttle Neath River Cave / Bridge Cave

paul

paul

Moderator
From Jeny Potts
Derbyshire Caving Association Secretary/Treasurer

Access in Wales

Sorry to have to report that there is currently no access at all to either Little Neath River Cave or Bridge Cave. Cambrian Caving Council are negotiating with the landowner and hope to get access restored although this may take some months. The problem doesn't seem to be related to any bad behaviour or problems with cavers themselves - rather it's to do with Health & Safety and possible insurance. Suggest you steer clear for the present and keep an eye on the Cambrian website at www.cambriancavingcouncil.org.uk for updates on the situation.

The new Ogof Ffynnon Ddu Permit Secretary took over in February:
Elaine Owen, 19 Parham Road, GOSPORT, Hants. PO12 4TZ
Tel. O23 92 715 382, Em. ofdaccess@hotmail.co.uk
 
H

Horace

New member
Hmmm, had a trip down there on Saturday. We were staying at the SWCC and heard just before we left that there might be access issues to do with insurance but went up there anyway to find out for sure. The landowner seemed quite happy to take our money and let us do the trip without asking for insurance documents, though he did possibly think we were from the army despite the guy paying him having blue hair.

Perhaps if we'd known negotiations were necessary and taking place we would have avoided going, especially as we made a muddy mess of the grass verge with the bus!
 
D

DaveL

Guest
We were there on Sunday, and likewise had no trouble - for £1 a head the farmer even let us park practically in his farmyard and agreed to keep an eye on the cars. (The farm dogs didn't seem so happy to see us though.)
 
M

martinr

Active member
I lifted this from the Latest News section of the Cambrian website http://www.cambriancavingcouncil.org.uk/

Little Neath River Cave and Bridge Cave - January 2005

Please would all cavers be aware that access to these caves is in a delicate situation of negotiation with the owner. If you visit them please behave with extreme care and consideration. Thanks from Elsie. conservationofficer@cambriancavingcouncil.org.uk
 
D

diggerdog adam

Guest
cave god, is that them the ones that you can see blackpool tower from on the way back? :bash:

Thanks for the info paul
 
D

diggerdog adam

Guest
If any one is wondering whats that all about i was stood up! Southwales - Ripon, N yorkshire How many miles?
 
J

Jenny

Guest
Re Little Neath River Cave and Bridge Cave: Agreement has been reached for Cambrian Caving Council to take over administration of access to these caves on behalf of all cavers both recreational and professional. As before, cavers will be expected to pay the agreed fee for parking to the land owners (the Lewis Family of Blaen Nedd Farm). However, parking will from now be at the site near the bridge and not at the farm yard.
See http://www.cambriancavingcouncil.org.uk/ccc.htm for further details.
 
D

dunc

New member
However, parking will from now be at the site near the bridge and not at the farm yard.
Click to expand...
We pay to park our cars in a place where we can expect them to be broken into, sounds good to me..:roll:

Agreement has been reached for Cambrian Caving Council to take over administration of access to these caves on behalf of all cavers both recreational and professional
Click to expand...
But on the good side for the ccc, access is bascially as it was and whilst insurance is recommended (typical blame-claim culture statement) is not mandatory. At least the matter is now resolved!
 
cap n chris

cap n chris

Well-known member
I thought the layby near the bridge (i.e. the one where cars get broken into) was the reason behind parking at the farm and hence the fee of £1 for the privilege of the cars being less likely to be broken into. So, is the fee for parking or for access to the cave?
 
Rhys

Rhys

Moderator
The payment was always for access. It's only relatively recently that they've suggested parking at the farm rather than near the bridge for car-security reasons.

Rhys
 
cap n chris

cap n chris

Well-known member
Presumably, then, if cars repeatedly get broken into it'll only be a matter of time before it is suggested that cavers once again park at the farm rather than near the bridge for the same car-security reasons?

If this is likely, why not cut out the hassle of having lots of cars broken into and just have everyone park at the farm as of now? QED.

It would not be surprising if annoyance caused by naked/noisy cavers is the key reason behind being asked to park away from the farm; no matter how much you ask people to be polite, discrete, quiet and courteous, they never seem able to do so. If I lived there this would be my reason for the change (no pun intended). :roll:
 
M

mudman

Guest
I seem to remember the farmer as being a Mr. Morgan. Is the memory going? Must be the beer.

Was there ever much of a problem with noisy cavers? I guess there may have been some but the vast majority were always polite and respectful.

How dangerous is it to leave your car at the bridge anyway. I must say that there aren't many local chavs around there.

I'm getting thoroughly pissed off with all this crap about liability. I think we need someone somewhere to lay down some clear guidlines that say that it is nobody else's fault but your own if you go down a small wet hole in the ground and get hurt.
 
cap n chris

cap n chris

Well-known member
On reading the CCC thread it all seems quite straightforward and reasonable to me so no complaints from this quarter.
 
A

Andy Sparrow

Active member
Quote from CCC website...

"Access to Centres and other Organised Groups will depend on their demonstrating to the officials of CCC that they have appropriate insurance cover and have carried out the necessary risk assessments."

Ok, I can understand the insurance thing but what's with the risk assessments? Why make this stipulation? Who made the decision this was required and why?
 
cap n chris

cap n chris

Well-known member
I imagine it's a case of checking the weather, Andy, so that groups aren't taken there habitually without regard to the bleedin' obvious. It's all well and good being insured but if the leader's a numpty and the centre is a bit maverick then there's going to be an epic.

On second thoughts, I agree. Why do you NEED a piece of paper which says "Risk Assessment: Check the weather forecast and ground saturation in the run up to the trip over a period of days etc.." - ANY leader considering a trip to LNRC would be doing this as a matter of standard practice, otherwise they'd be easily proven as negligent, one imagines.
 
graham

graham

New member
Andy Sparrow said:
Quote from CCC website...

"Access to Centres and other Organised Groups will depend on their demonstrating to the officials of CCC that they have appropriate insurance cover and have carried out the necessary risk assessments."

Ok, I can understand the insurance thing but what's with the risk assessments? Why make this stipulation? Who made the decision this was required and why?
Click to expand...

Arse covering, Andy. But surely you cover yours by carrying out a risk assessment anyway?
 
graham

graham

New member
cap 'n chris said:
On second thoughts, I agree. Why do you NEED a piece of paper which says "Risk Assessment: Check the weather forecast and ground saturation in the run up to the trip over a period of days etc.." - ANY leader considering a trip to LNRC would be doing this as a matter of standard practice, otherwise they'd be easily proven as negligent, one imagines.
Click to expand...

It's that word "proven" Chris. If you have the piece of paper you can potentially demonstrate that you weren't negligent. If you haven't then, well how can you prove you did anything?

It's OK for a bunch of mates to be stuck underground for a few hours in Neath (I have friends who can attest to this ;) ) but if you get a bunch of young novices stuck then you have a real problem.
 
A

Andy Sparrow

Active member
Arse covering,
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but whose arse is being covered for whose benefit? Assuming that centres are insured why does it now become the responsibility of CCC to add another layer of beaurocracy over and above that already imposed by AALA, the licensing authority?

And should we not also consider that centres and professional instructors (excluding the activities of the army in the Porth resurgence) have a virtually impeccable caving safety record since the general adoption of the NCA qualifications? It is actually club cavers that are statistically much more likely to experience an accident or rescue. So why don't club cavers need to present risk assessments to gain access to this cave?
 
graham

graham

New member
I'm not going to get into a long argument on this subject with you, Andy but we are both aware of situations where the behaviour of professional instructors has led to court cases whereas it is my experience that no club caver has ever resorted to the law after being trapped in Neath by flooding - and they have come back the following day to rebuild Mr Lewis's walls.
 
D

dunc

New member
Assuming that centres are insured why does it now become the responsibility of CCC to add another layer of beaurocracy over and above that already imposed by AALA, the licensing authority?
Click to expand...
Because they can.... And we are foolish enough to let them:
I'm convinced that certain people within the caving community thrive on power/access issues - I refuse to divulge exact details but certain people do appear to get some kind of kick out of making access more awkward..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top