BCA CRoW Poll Result

damian

Active member
I've just posted the result of the CRoW poll on the BCA website.

Many thanks to everyone who took the time to reply. BCA Council will be discussing how to proceed at its next meeting on 10 January.

Damian Weare
BCA Secretary
 

Badlad

Administrator
Staff member
A majority (1402) voted yes but it saddens me greatly that 864 cavers voted against.  864 voted not to campaign for a legal right of access to caves.  To me that is like turkeys voting for Christmas.

Anyway the scores are in and not very different from the poll on UKcaving.  Thanks to Damian for letting us all know ahead of the January council meeting.  Merry Christmas.
 

cavermark

New member
Number of eligible voters: 6,085
Total number of votes cast: 2,270
Turnout: 37.3%

Out of interest - do we have any estimate of how many active British cavers are not BCA members?
 

Peter Burgess

New member
Badlad said:
A majority (1402) voted yes but it saddens me greatly that 864 cavers voted against.  864 voted not to campaign for a legal right of access to caves.  To me that is like turkeys voting for Christmas.
They have their reasons, and I think they deserve a bit more respect that being equated to turkeys. I feel your comment was rather inappropriate, given that it is everyone's interest now to work together, and not slag each other off. Please try to get cavers closer rather than drive them further apart.
 

menacer

Active member
Are there stats for the club votes. ( the ones where commitees decided not the cavers themselves)
It would be interesting to see if there is a correlation/consensus between the politicians and " their electorate"
Eg did nearly 2/3rds of the clubs/regional councils vote yes too.
 

martinm

New member
cavermark said:
Number of eligible voters: 6,085
Total number of votes cast: 2,270
Turnout: 37.3%

Out of interest - do we have any estimate of how many active British cavers are not BCA members?

Not many I'd have thought as you need BCA Insurance for most caves these days to keep the landowners happy...


[mod]Subsequent tangential insurance comments resulting from this post have been split into a new thread. Which can be found here: http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php?topic=17534.msg230564[/mod]
 

cap n chris

Well-known member
From a thread a while ago (link below)...

Mark Wright said:
Cap'n Chris mentioned earlier, with 'absolute certainty', 'when offered with a choice of "Yes, or No", approximately two-thirds of people vote Yes for no ostensible reason other than that people naturally are inclined to say yes when asked?.

Approximately two-thirds. Was I right?

:read:

http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php?topic=17155.msg226728#msg226728


Another predictable trait of human nature is to bicker after a vote about whether it's valid, whether it was wholly representative, whether it should be ignored or re-counted, or re-done, ... whether people really knew what the question was, whether they knew what the consequences would be and whether that would have altered their voting choice, if they knew how much money it had cost them, was it skewed by dint of asking the "wrong question" ...bicker bicker etc.. People wanted a vote, a vote was had, the results are in. Let the process continue (I'll refrain from pointing out yet more obvious consequences!). People love a good bickerment.

Stanhope has a cynical observation about opinions:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RycwYRcm3Lc
 

al

Member
menacer said:
Are there stats for the club votes. ( the ones where commitees decided not the cavers themselves)
It would be interesting to see if there is a correlation/consensus between the politicians and " their electorate"
Eg did nearly 2/3rds of the clubs/regional councils vote yes too.

Both of my clubs (TSG and CCPC) asked their members before placing the club vote.
 

Ian Adams

Active member
al said:
menacer said:
Are there stats for the club votes. ( the ones where commitees decided not the cavers themselves)
It would be interesting to see if there is a correlation/consensus between the politicians and " their electorate"
Eg did nearly 2/3rds of the clubs/regional councils vote yes too.

Both of my clubs (TSG and CCPC) asked their members before placing the club vote.


Likewise at UCET - all the members were offered a week or so to vote in a club vote and then the ballot paper was returned accordingly.
 

Chocolate fireguard

Active member
menacer said:
Are there stats for the club votes. ( the ones where commitees decided not the cavers themselves)
It would be interesting to see if there is a correlation/consensus between the politicians and " their electorate"
Eg did nearly 2/3rds of the clubs/regional councils vote yes too.

If clubs did the reasonable thing and asked  their members how the club should vote wouldn't we expect the club vote to be close to 100% YES?
 

NigR

New member
Badlad said:
A majority (1402) voted yes but it saddens me greatly that 864 cavers voted against.  864 voted not to campaign for a legal right of access to caves.  To me that is like turkeys voting for Christmas.

Yes, that is sad but it is not surprising. Caving, particularly here in South Wales, has always attracted those whose main concern is to exercise their control over others. This is because there is a tried and tested (readily accepted) infrastructure already in place for them to do so. These type of people are hardly going to vote for their own demise are they?
 

Fulk

Well-known member
Caving, particularly here in South Wales, has always attracted those whose main concern is to exercise their control over others.

I find that an astonishing claim / allegation; most cavers I've met over the donkeys' years I've been doing it simply want to get underground with the minimal hassle.
 

NigR

New member
Fulk said:
Caving, particularly here in South Wales, has always attracted those whose main concern is to exercise their control over others.

I find that an astonishing claim / allegation; most cavers I've met over the donkeys' years I've been doing it simply want to get underground with the minimal hassle.

It is neither a claim nor an allegation. It is a personal observation based upon 42 years of caving in South Wales.
 

Dave Tyson

Member
WCG asked its members a few weeks ago for their views on CRoW and caving as part of the feedback to our regional council, CCC.
Since the majority thought CRoW should apply the club voted yes.

I have heard a rumour that one NW club suggested its members vote no and so I guess that club voted no...

Dave
 

Antwan

Member
Badlad said:
A majority (1402) voted yes but it saddens me greatly that 864 cavers voted against.  864 voted not to campaign for a legal right of access to caves.  To me that is like turkeys voting for Christmas.

Or maybe 38% have concerns that the BCA now need to very mind full of moving forwards, more so than if it was a 90/10 split.

<gobble gobble>
 

Bottlebank

New member
Cap'n Chris said:
cavermark said:
Hughie said:
BCA insurance is wholly inadequate at it's current level. Cover of only ?5million is no longer considered sufficient.

For third party liability? what sort of scenario would require more than this?

Since truth is stranger than fiction, any guesswork scenario you can envisage (no matter how bizarre and preposterous it may sound) will be nowhere near as bizarre and preposterous as a reality that could result in a +?5m claim.

An accident to a young child resulting in quadriplegia could easily result in a claim higher than ?5 million. But this is a bit off topic I think?

I'm a bit disappointed in the result, not for reason you might think, i.e. because it's a yes vote, but because of the size of the vote.

Just 1400 out of over 6000 cavers, less than 25%, of BCA members have voted for CRoW. The remainder either don't know, don't care or have voted against. Obviously some may not have received the ballot papers. I suspect the BCA decision to not present cavers with any information plays a big part in this.

So the end result is that BCA will be embarking on a process that could result in reduced access, in an era where as we've seen recently access has been improving, based on the wishes of less than one in four members.

To me that's a pretty sad state of affairs. The true situation is a very long way from the overwhelming support we've been repeatedly told CRoW enjoys amongst cavers, in fact over 75% in one form or another don't support it, or don't support it enough to tick a box. 

I'm also disappointed in Badlad's statement, as the forum owner it's a bit odd to describe a third of your own members as "turkeys", perhaps we should all be sending him stuffing for Xmas as he has so many to deal with?
 

Stu

Active member
Antwan said:
Badlad said:
A majority (1402) voted yes but it saddens me greatly that 864 cavers voted against.  864 voted not to campaign for a legal right of access to caves.  To me that is like turkeys voting for Christmas.

Or maybe 38% have concerns that the BCA now need to very mind full of moving forwards, more so than if it was a 90/10 split.

<gobble gobble>

BCA need only be mindful of the fact that a democratic process has established that the majority who voted did so in favour of campaigning for the inclusion to go underground re: CRoW. The percentages make no difference to how BCA should act - that's democracy.
 

Stu

Active member
Bottlebank said:
Just 1400 out of over 6000 cavers, less than 25%, of BCA members have voted for CRoW. The remainder either don't know, don't care or have voted against. Obviously some may not have received the ballot papers. I suspect the BCA decision to not present cavers with any information plays a big part in this.

So the end result is that BCA will be embarking on a process that could result in reduced access, in an era where as we've seen recently access has been improving, based on the wishes of less than one in four members.

To me that's a pretty sad state of affairs. The true situation is a very long way from the overwhelming support we've been repeatedly told CRoW enjoys amongst cavers, in fact over 75% in one form or another don't support it, or don't support it enough to tick a box. 


I'm also disappointed in Badlad's statement, as the forum owner it's a bit odd to describe a third of your own members as "turkeys", perhaps we should all be sending him stuffing for Xmas as he has so many to deal with?

You can only be confident of 864 supporting the opposing yes vote. Anything else is conjecture.
 

Bottlebank

New member
Stuart,

I'm not arguing BCA doesn't have a mandate based on this, I'm saying it's a very poor one, and a very disappointing one.

Tony
 
Top