WANTED underground surveys of Merstham and Chaldon areas

H

hole_in_the_rock

Guest
Has anyone got any surveys of the Merstham series of caves and mines?

One of the landowners of the area has asked me to see if anyone is willing to part with a copy of these surveys, as the caving club responsible did not send any details to them, and have refused to share the information they obtained from the land owned by these people.

We can only wonder why they will not give the details that they would not have had without the use of the land? unless they did not have the use of the land and the surveys were done unlawfully?

Perhaps WCMS members frequent here and may be able to shed some light onto this subject?
 

cap n chris

Well-known member
hole_in_the_rock said:
Perhaps WCMS members frequent here and may be able to shed some light onto this subject?

Perhaps you or the landowners can shed some light onto this subject.
 

zomjon

Member
Hole in the rock, your posts on this website intrigue me. Do you write with any specific caving interest, or always with an official estate manager's hat on? Your reference to the Merstham Mines seems quite unfriendly. I'm sure a little bit of politeness might help obtain a survey from some quarter.
 
H

hole_in_the_rock

Guest
Why is it people always want to know more?
OK, here goes:
Zomjon,
I love the mines, really honestly love them like they were my own.
My interest lies in their use throughout the decades.
I assume you meant that I am unfriendly to the people who have been found out using the land without permission? I beg to differ. I feel that it is quite friendly to ask if anyone has copies of the surveys that this club, (WCMS) claim to be responsible for. What is unfriendly is the way that members of WCMS are abusive and suggest that the owners:
"Move on,
Get a life,
Shut-up
and Forget about it."
They have even gone so far as to accuse the landowners of hacking the WCMS website to get information about the landowners own property!
Why would they say that? Why would the owner have to hack a site to get information about their own property?

Not all members feel the same way and more may come forward, hopefully someone with copies of the surveys we have asked for. Not every member wishes to be excluded from this area (nor do the other clubs and individuals), and some realise that the longer this is allowed to continue, the more damage it will do to their reputation as a club, and to individuals reputations.

Most cavers in the Uk are aware that there are access problems, and that the whole country is banned from using the area until such time as the problems are fully resolved to the legal owners satisfaction. What is not well known is that those cavers responsible are doing nothing to try to resolve things, and are doing their utmost to inflame the situation.

By letting the whole caving community know about a few of the problems, some people with the relavant data might be willing to share it. How else can we get a message accross to all far reaches of the caving community, and let some of the WCMS members know what is going on and what they could do to start to resolve some of the problems, whilst their committee stand like the proverbial Ostrich with their heads in the sand hoping that things will go away?
 

cap n chris

Well-known member
Why is it people always want to know more?

Surely this is the whole point of this forum (and the internet, and life on planet earth!).

I love the mines, really honestly love them like they were my own
...copies of the surveys we have asked for

The use of "I" and "We" give the impression that you are on both sides of the fence.

the whole country is banned from using the area until such time as the problems are fully resolved to the legal owners satisfaction

I imagine it would help tremendously to have a definition of what the legal owners consider to be their "satisfaction" on this topic. It's so much easier to help people if you know what they want.

... by letting the whole caving community know about a few of the problems

I imagine there are many who are still at a loss to know what these problems are: please elaborate with specific details - if it's your intention to provide information to people it might help if you don't hold back; be more precise and less vague.


What is unfriendly is the way that members of WCMS are abusive and suggest that the owners:
"Move on,
Get a life,
Shut-up
and Forget about it."

This sort of thing happens to most people on a regular basis and should be water off a duck's back; certainly it's something one hears almost every day! Perhaps people shouldn't put up with it but what use is that?

it is quite friendly to ask if anyone has copies of the surveys that this club, (WCMS) claim to be responsible for

It depends how you ask, and what your motive/agenda is. If a survey has been published and is in the public domain then you should have no great difficulties; however, it is worth noting that many surveys remain the work of small groups of individuals who have put in all the effort to create them and many (even around this area) are not published, remaining instead as the private property of the person who drew them; many surveyors jealously guard their work so that others may not gain from knowing that there may be an elusive link to another as yet undiscovered area nearby, for example. Also, imagine someone painting a picture and then subsequently having the landowner(s) of the depicted landscape trying to twist their arm into providing them with a copy of the painting - it's not really reasonable, is it? If you are a member of the club in question it still wouldn't mean you could demand a copy - members of our club have no right to use other members' privately owned kit/archives etc.. an offer to provide such things may be considered a reasonable request and treated accordingly but there is no right to expect such generosity. Also, the provision of surveys from within the club may be beyond the reach of the committee and outside of the stated aims of the club.

What is not well known is that those cavers responsible are doing nothing to try to resolve things, and are doing their utmost to inflame the situation.

A) who is responsible?
B) what is your definition of resolution?
C) what are they doing to inflame things?
 
M

Mine Explorer

Guest
hole_in_the_rock said:
We can only wonder why they will not give the details that they would not have had without the use of the land? unless they did not have the use of the land and the surveys were done unlawfully?...

It doesn't seem that puzzling to me.


Any surveys that exist will be the personal work (and copyright property) of those involved in their creation. This is not necessarily the same person who collected the raw survey data. Having been told that permission to visit the area has been withdrawn, why should the cartographer then give the same person(s) copies of his work?



It is unsurprising the landowner(s) want copies of plans made by Wealden. The only other way they will get details of what lies beneath their land is to employ a professional mining engineer to undertake a survey, together with the huge cost associated with employing someone to do *anything* in abandoned mine workings.



Of course, as both you and the landowner are very sensitive to things being done without permission, you will be aware of and respect the fact that a 'map' is defined in the "Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1998". For anyone to reproduce copies of the survey without the copyright holder's permission would be breaking the law. I'm sure the landowners would not condone such an illegal act and would not wish to be associated with it in any way.


If a survey had already been published and was commercially available in the public domain you could go and buy a copy. The fact you're posting begging messages on here suggests they can't be bought - so illegal copying is the only avenue left open to you.



PS: Of course someone else may have also carried out their own survey work at the site in question. They may be prepared to give/sell you copies of their survey. If this is what you are requesting, then my apologies, but I still think it fairly obvious why Wealdon aren't prepared to give copies of their work.
 
H

hole_in_the_rock

Guest
Cap 'n Chris,
Both the owners and I have now asked, so "I" and "we" fit well.
WCMS are responsible for the surveys done in the 1990s and Unit 2 members in the years before this. Would you like the names of the people? or do you have access to the WCMS website, where you can read about the surveys and people involved with them?
Chelsea subaqua club I believe were also taking surveys at some point, but members of the other clubs made this difficult for them,by cutting the lines they laid through the under water sumps and passageways.

elusive link to another as yet undiscovered area nearby

From surveys prior to 1944, it is clear that many areas lay undiscovered, and possibly still do ;)

Responsibility is a simple matter. Everyone is responsible for their own actions. If somone says it is alright to use someone else private land, because they have the access rights and control of the land, "one" is responsible if it is found that the person claiming access control had none, and "one's" actions had been unlawfull.

So who is responsible??? Check thier website and see how many visitors were encouraged to trespass on private land.

My idea of a resolution (I hope you will put your thoughts?)
The end result of a resolution should be that the landowners are happy once more for people to visit their land, and that these people can carry on the different researches that they have been doing, or want to do in light of the new information ;) Unfortunately it is not resolved :(

From what I know, the owners require to know exactly what activities have happened on their property and who sanctioned them. They want to know because no-one had ever been given the access rights to their property, and they discovered by pure chance that WCMS had been advertising it for many years, and using it for the benifit of WCMS and WCMS members.
If any contact had been made with the legal owners, they would not be asking others to try to obtain the information for them.
If anyone has a copy and would like to send it to the Harrison family, their address in Sussex is now known to WCMS, Croydon History Society (???), and the WCMS legal representatives, and should be known to anyone legally using their land. Please do not send any details to me, the owner require them

How do they inflame things?
How about phoning the owners and sending them letters asking about access, and after getting told that there will not be access for any WCMS member, phoning and writing again, and again?
Does this count, when it is the same member every time (and yes he is definately a member, and has been for a considerable time)?


Mine Explorer,

To be able to satisfy copyright, the author must have complied with English Common Law. I am sure that you would not condone the breaking of common law, and realise that it is the very foundation of the British justice system. I am sure that along with numerous other readers that you would not wish to be asociated with law breakers or clubs that condone law breaking, and that actively encourage it? (check out WCMS details on how to trespass on highways agency land without getting caught "No.10 Entrance, Merstham" 1995).
Trespass: covered by English Common Law.
Ooops, did some author of a survey forget that? How silly of him. As the mines were already known copyright law will not help the common trespasser, or the tresspasser duped into using private land to produce surveys for the caving clubs personal use!



I too realise why WCMS are not prepared to send details of their work or activities to the owners, so do most other readers. It's not fear of their work getting copied, it's that they unlawfully gathered parts of the surveys, and then allowed others to use the same surveys for their unlawfull use of the land. Now there is a thing not covered by the copyright umbrella.


It is very possible that other surveys exist. But eventually the people responsible for the newer ones will "cave-in" with the owners of the land. If it ends up a matter for the courts, they will have to produce it anyway, and then risk the bad publicity that the case will bring to their club, and any clubs also associated with the use of that area?
I do not think they will be handing out Blue Peter Badges, or the cub-scouts good citizen badges to all those people. Hey, maybe, just maybe they will only pick on a few to sue? Who should they go for then? The people in charge? The surveyors whose maps allow further intrusion?, the bats that use the caves? the scouts? Blue Peter?
HMmmmmm I wonder.


You suggest an alternative way that might the leave me open to action from the authors for illegally copying what they gained unlawfully. I welcome the challenge! If anyone has a copy they can leave lying around long enough for me to copy, please let me know, and I will take my chances.
 

cap n chris

Well-known member
The topic of land ownership cropped up in a conversation yesterday and the owner of land containing a mine asked whether they owned the underground bits or whether they only owned the approach land or whether they owned the approach land and the first 10feet of the mine. I don't know the answer to this but presumably you will know.

Perhaps you can help shed light on this topic from a legal point of view? - if someone owns land with mines underneath and with entrances upon it, do they own the cavities underneath and is UK common law applicable to the underground bits?
 
M

Mine Explorer

Guest
Whether or not the landowner, or their representatives, have ever given permission to anyone in the past is unknown to me, and is a matter for those involved, not, I feel, us. In the absence of any written details I suspect it's as difficult for the landowners to show they've never given permission to anyone, as it is for a third party to show they were given permission.

Given that you're saying nobody has ever been given permission to visit, it seems the search for surveys is an attempt to find people who may have trespassed on their land – given your assumption that to compile a survey someone must have trespassed initially.

As I alluded to previously, the person who owns the copyright to the survey will be the cartographer who compiled it. This person may have never been near the site in question. The map could have been compiled from historical sources; abandonment plans, even original survey data if it could be found, and the final possibility is more modern survey data. However, the modern survey data could have been assembled by someone other than the map maker - a third person, who will not hold copyright on the final map even though they may have trespassed to obtain the data.

It should not be forgotten that whilst trespass (without damage) is a civil offence, certain types of infringement of various sections of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are criminal offences. Therefore, it would seem that you (and possibly the landowners) are prepared to condone someone possibly committing a criminal offence in the pursuit of information that may (or may not) lead to someone who may have trespassed on land whilst acquiring data leading to the compilation of a map.

I wish you luck in your search.
 
M

Mine Explorer

Guest
cap 'n chris said:
The topic of land ownership cropped up in a conversation yesterday and the owner of land containing a mine asked whether they owned the underground bits or whether they only owned the approach land or whether they owned the approach land and the first 10feet of the mine. I don't know the answer to this but presumably you will know.

Perhaps you can help shed light on this topic from a legal point of view? - if someone owns land with mines underneath and with entrances upon it, do they own the cavities underneath and is UK common law applicable to the underground bits?

As I understand it, (told to me by a council representative with responsibility for mining). With the exception of coal mines, the landowner is responsible for the workings under their land. However, if the entrance to those workings lies on an adjoining persons land, they do not have a right of access to reach the bit under theirs, which they are responsible for. In the same way that although it may be their responsibility, someone else may own the mineral rights.

If your mine landowner wants a more definitive answer to their specific situation, their best bet is to contact an appropriate lawyer.
 

cap n chris

Well-known member
I get the impression that the resolution of this situation may involve the following:

A) Everyone ends up being happy, including the landowners
B) Everyone can visit the site again but before then...
C) Someone gets picked on and...
D) Has legal proceedings taken against them and perhaps experiences further unpleasantness.

The expression "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us" springs to mind.
 
S

sma

Guest
Anybody wanting to know the situation about the surveys, when they were produced, on what basis of permission they were produced, and who owns the copyright (not WCMS) can contact us via our website www.wcms.org.uk. We will respond accordingly, depending on the nature of the query, and assuming we are certain of your identity.

The matter of a landowner's request for information to WCMS and our response to that request is a private matter between the two parties. As a properly constituted charity and limited company, it is not appropriate to enter into discussion on a public forum on this matter, especially with someone who is not prepared to identify themselves.

Surrey Mines Agent
WCMS
 
H

hole_in_the_rock

Guest
sma wrote
As a properly constituted charity and limited company, it is not appropriate to enter into discussion on a public forum on this matter.

Ooh, WCMS is a charity! They have to be careful what they do, dont they?

As a properly constituted charity and limited company, wcms have already been seen to enter into discussions on other messageboards.
A "google" of the author "sma" and keyword "Merstham" in google groups brings up another? "sma" who states the following:
"For the benefit of those not actually involved in this dispute, I have asked
Andy to address the specific allegations that have been published in this
thread. Hopefully, his response will appear soon."

If you are the same "sma" then you appear to have double standards,
Or to put it in laymans terms, you say one thing yet do another.
If you are not the same "sma" then I apologise for suggesting that you might be the same one, and urge you to do the google search so that you can see what I am talking about.

Two sma's and not one of them produces baby food.

If wcms has a problem with the landowners seeking outside help with finding all the details that they say wcms will not send to them, then wcms could always start to communicate with them or could send them the details that they require. It might just set the ball rolling towards access again!
However, from what I hear (and others I have spoken to) wcms never contacted the legal owners of the land prior to many visits, and the owners discovered the use on the Internet.
Cripes! what a shock that must have been! Must have been a greater shock when wcms refused to send any details to them.

The web is bound to be alive with people talking about this situation. Lots of people have lost the use parts of the area because of what the owners had to discover for themselves.


Here is a little irony, sma

Peter currently holds the post of 'Surrey Mines Agent', a WCMS Committee post, nominally responsible for the access, maintenance and upkeep of all of the WCMS Surrey sites

I love Google!

So is it the mines agents fault then?????????
Cripes! I wouldn't like to be in his shoes.


[/quote]
 
A

andymorgan

Guest
Perhaps you could do your own survey if you have access to the land?

If somebody takes a paints a picture or takes a photo while trespassing on land do they have to give it to the owners, probably not? What is the difference legally with a survey?
 
H

hole_in_the_rock

Guest
Cap 'n Chris did write
C) Someone gets picked on and...
D) Has legal proceedings taken against them and perhaps experiences further unpleasantness.

(C) Oops, I think I just picked on "sma" :oops: not deliberately, i just looked for any messages he may have written as he is a new member here, and good old Google came to the rescue.
(D) If honest communication existed between the parties they could possibly work it out. But (and Google I love you) the threads written about this on another group suggests that wcms will not communicate with the owners and hope that ignoring them will make the situation go away.

What sort of person believes that this works? Shall we have a poll?

Should the question be:
If one severely upsets landowners and they want to know of one's actions on their property (because one had never gained permission) does one:

A) Ignore them and hope they go away
B) Talk to them, explain what happened and why. Ask how to put matter right and work together on a resolution.
C) Tell them to F*^k off
D) End up in court explaining everything there, and hope that they are leanient and that the press do not get the story, one's kids dont find out, one's employer doesn't sack one and one's wife doesn't leaves for a more honest man.
E) Jump down a mine, it may be the cowards way out, but so is ignoring any situations.

I have to admit that the bit about further unpleasantness intrigues me. Any suggestions as to how they can be unpleasant? (the owners that is).

How about someone with a copy of these surveys who IS involved with their making, do a copy without anyones names on it, without any dates on it, and a little letter of apology for having done surveys without their approval or knowing. It could even be anonymous, but from what they tell me, it would go a long way towards opening up channels of communication, and the surveyors would be thanked for adding to the records of the land. it appears that two of the previous owners were surveyors (who also made notes on most of the underground workings in the Surrey area) and one of their ancestors was one of the surveyors for the Jolliffe family many many years before their own family bought their land there.
Surveys maps and mines are in their blood. They dont want blood from the surveyors, just more maps.

Where is the harm in letting somone know what lies under their land, when the owners have old records that show some of the workings anyway, and the newer surveys could not have been made without the owners allowing them to be made?
By saying that they have surveys for their own clubs use, and that the people whose land they entered should have no knowledge of where under their land they went or what they found, they are jeopardising any further surveys that they, the club, might want to do in the future, and not only on this land.
What message does this send to other landowners?
What future is there for such a club?


Will the last one to leave....
or will someone honest, decent and respectable from their club emerge and try to save the day?
 
H

hole_in_the_rock

Guest
Perhaps you could do your own survey if you have access to the land?


I wish I did, but I do not. The only people currently with any access is the owners :( They are not allowing access until they get details about the people using their land, and a few things are put right by those responsible.

Your questions about law would best be argued out with a lawyer, or you could use Google to find out which laws you need to read about. There are many laws that concern such things, not just English Common laws. The exact circumstances (mitigation) have a bearing on the outcome (litigation). I have firsthand experience with trespass and media (photos, drawings etc) and can advise that it is not the best of ideas. I have learnt the hard way, to ask permission first and foremost, and to wait until it is granted, check that people are happy with the records you are keeping about their property, and that by doing so they do not feel that they have been invaded in any way.

If there were no laws protecting people and their rights, then your home could have been entered unlawfully, maps made (plans) and then offered to members of the map makers gang for their own personal use. Their claim could be that they were doing a history survey of people with your surname, and a study of how you live. You would be told that you had no right to know what they had been doing.
So long as they do not damage any property of yours, getting in, and wandering around, you would have no objections?


....... and if you turn left after entering the hall (see diagram 1a) we come to the place where.......
 
M

Mine Explorer

Guest
...However, from what I hear (and others I have spoken to) wcms never contacted the legal owners of the land prior to many visits....

So you don't know if WCMS contacted any/all of the owners.
Your vitriol is based on rumour?

The rumour I hear is that the land is owned by more than one person - perhaps one said yes and the others didn't know? Whatever the situation, persistant outpourings concerning WCMS are unlikely to impress the landowner nor lead to a speedy resolution. I'm sure if someone can assist with your perfectly reasonable request for a survey, they will contact you.
 
A

andymorgan

Guest
hole_in_the_rock said:
Your questions about law would best be argued out with a lawyer, or you could use Google to find out which laws you need to read about

I'll ask my friend who a solicitor. I wouldn't use Google to find things out:- the 'net' is invariably wrong, and if you base all your knowledge on it then you will have a warped view of reality.

I think there will be several copies of a plan of my house (if I owned it) in existence: why should it concern me if people know that i have a lounge downstairs and a kitchen etc? Maybe the surveys are also based on historical documents of the mine: they must be in existence somewhere.

Here you say entered unlawfully, but if I left the door unlocked, people can claim squatters rights. Are the mines gated and were forced to obtain access?
[/i]
 
H

hole_in_the_rock

Guest
andymorgan writes

Are the mines gated and were forced to obtain access?

One was gated, the other was innaccessable because of the entrance collapsing, so to remedy this, the caving club dug out a new access shaft into the workings and then decided to let the owners know about this many years later.

You had best ask your solicitor friend if this constitutes criminal damage? It might be advisable to check if people helping in the building of such a shaft were aiding and abetting. Those concrete rings are not easily handled by one person alone you know.

Obviously you will need all the facts first, but a general overveiw from your friend should help you understand.



Mine Explorer writes


So you don't know if WCMS contacted any/all of the owners.
Your vitriol is based on rumour?

I do know, and at least two of the owners had no knowledge of this clubs activities and neither had given the permission that they needed to give as joint owners for any activities to take place on their land. You need to understand how the joint ownership was given in the first place to understand how it always needed more than one permission. Ask the owners, I am sure that they will be happy to explain just why they are pissed off that they discovered wcms laying claim to access control of their land, when wcms were not known to them, and they had never been given the chance to allow or deny permission.

It is not my intention to impress anyone with my question. I certainly have no need to impress the owners, as I am not one of the people found to have used this area without asking first, and I have not gone digging out the mines on their land and putting in access shafts to make entry easier.

I would like to see a copy of the surveys, when it is in the owners hands. I asked for a copy for them, thinking it not unreasonable as many clubs
and individuals have made such, and that if anyone involved realised that the owner did not know about their surveys they might wish to make ammends by sending the owners a copy. It might only be a token gesture towards a resolution, but it is a start.

The refusal to allow the information to the owners of the land reinforces their belief that other mines have now been unearthed that join neighbouring lands, and that access to their other workings (not just the old quarry field) is now possible via neighbouring land.
If this is true, then the owners are excited about the prospect of the area joining up as one of their ancestors spoke and wrote of such many many years ago.
 
R

Roger Cook

Guest
There are only two owners. One has always given permission, albeit verbally.

The workings are small and do not connect to other mines nearby.

Please do not be so economical with the truth.
 
Top