The Welsh Government (WG) Access Reform Advisory Group (ARAG) have categorically decided that caving will not considered by the group.  This means that caving will not benefit from any broadening of the scope of the CROW Act 2000 in Wales as a result of the 2017 WG public consultation.  It is expected that hang-gliding, wild swimming, horse riding and cycling will all be legalised on Access Land.  Currently all these activities are forbidden by Schedule 2 of the Act.  Caving is not on any banned list of activities but instead Natural Resources Wales (and equivalent bodies in England) assert that the phrase ?open-air recreation? as used in Section 2 of the CROW Act 2000 does not encompass caving which has the effect of discouraging public visits to caves on Access Land even though they present it as a semantic difference of opinion.

The Welsh Government appears to have forgotten that some major caves in Wales are on Urban Commons, for instance certain Ogof Draenen entrances, Agen Allwedd and Daren Cilau.  Access to urban commons is granted by the Law of Property Act 1925 section 193 for ?air and exercise? which trumps the CROW Act 2000 and so the "openness" of any air is then not material.  Furthermore, this 1925 Act defines ?land? in a three-dimensional way in Section 205 to include ?mines and minerals whether held apart from the surface ? including any strata or seam of minerals or substances in or under the land?.  NRW does not challenge that caving is ?air and exercise? but then they go on to argue that urban common land does not include the caves within that land which seems to be completely at odds with the statutory definition of land in the very Act that grants recreational access to such land.

This is a disappointing and sudden development after five years of engaging in political processes with NRW and WG that had begun to look hopeful.  It runs contrary to the whole spirit of what countryside access is meant to be about; to promote enjoyment of our natural resources, physical activity, and all the associated socio-economic and health benefits. BCA and Cambrian Caving Council say they will not be giving up on campaigning for better access on the basis of this one setback.

The decision to drop caving from the reform programme was taken on 22nd January but only delivered in an email a month or so later, with apparently perfect timing just two hours after a meeting of the Outdoor Alliance called by Welsh outdoors recreational bodies to discuss the government?s access reform programme had ended.
http://cambriancavingcouncil.org.uk/wg/wgletter-200224.pdf

Stuart France
Conservation and Access Officer
Cambrian Caving Council

In a similar vein if wild swimming is allowed then would diving be allowed in the same body of water ?

In July this year there is some sort of outdoor pursuits event taking place, over three days near Grassington: http://outdoorsfestival.com/

I note that caving is chosen as one of the main features. Just saying . . .

Maybe they have seen all the bickering and petty childish behaviour going on with Welsh cave entrances/access, wildly broadcast on caving forums, and decided that if they/we can't keep their house in order, why should caving be included ?

alexchien said:

Maybe they have seen all the bickering and petty childish behaviour going on with Welsh cave entrances/access, wildly broadcast on caving forums, and decided that if they/we can't keep their house in order, why should caving be included ?

Click to expand...

Oh no, naughty cavers, wanting to go caving  instead of tugging at forelocks and going "yes sir, sorry sir"... How very dare they!  :spank:

I'd like to see NRW try to prosecute someone, I really would.

Discord between cavers, cavers and the authorities may not be helpful but it is far from unique to our sport.  Take the watersports of kayaking and angling as an example where there has been some terribly hostile behaviour both at the river bank and in the courts, yet, they are both welcomed into the access reform group. 

Caving's exclusion from this process looks (to me) to be nothing more than discriminatory, based on an unprofessional negative bias towards our sport.  Cambrian, as the representative body for caving in Wales, has engaged with all the processes.  A few years ago, on behalf of BCA, I met with Natural Resources Wales and some of the individuals involved in this decision.  There was no logic to their position other than a deep bias.  I compare this to the many meetings I have had with the National Park Authority in the Dales and it could not be more different.  Caving is understood and welcomed by them.  Caves are seen as one of the special qualities of the area and caving supported by the authority. 

I expect if such an exercise was undertaken in England, Defra's Natural England would try to take a similar position to NRW.  Again, my dealings with NE, suggest that their position is biased, based on a lack of understanding of our sport at the top level.  With our limited resources and voluntary representatives we need to fight for our right to be included on the same basis as our sister sports.  We're not asking anything more that to be offered the same freedoms that others enjoy.

Don't give up the fight.

Keep going Cambrian.  Saw this at thought of you...

I think the blame for the exclusion of cavers is, as noted by others, just down to intransigence on NRW's part. They seem to hold a grudge against cavers as a corporate body, not just individual officers. They really cannot present any logical arguments - they stick with there chosen party line. The Welsh Government (WG) will go along with this even though NRW's reputation in other areas is severely tarnished. It was WG's idea to form NRW and it's turned out to be a dogs breakfast - but they are not going to be embarrassed by admitting it. 

I am amazed that we managed to get the CAL agreement on mine access signed - but that only happened due to Stuart France adopting brinkmanship tactics with the NRW lawyers.

Part of NRW's problem with cavers may lie with bats - NRW think bats are really fragile and the sight of a caver will kill them and so all caves should be left alone. The fact that digs and opening up old mines provides extra habitats for bats is dismissed as unproven. Bats numbers in N. Wales seem to be increasing.

If the Welsh government opens up access to hang gliders/paddlers/wild swimmers etc. then it will make it clear that they are disadvantaging and excluding a significant group of people. Taking on the WG is going to be difficult, but a big freedom of information request for ALL the details of discussion and emails will hurt them - particularly if it goes on and on as interesting snippets emerge which need further requests...

The other thing is to have a mass cave-in  on access land - make sure its well reported and challenge NRW to do something - akin to the Kinder Scout trespasses. This would have to be very carefully choreographed to point out the discrimination WRT other sports.

Finally we could just say f*ck it and just go caving on access/common land without any fanfare - akin to what used to happen in certain mines (and still probably does in others)

Dave

Dave Tyson said:

The other thing is to have a mass cave-in  on access land - make sure its well reported and challenge NRW to do something - akin to the Kinder Scout trespasses. This would have to be very carefully choreographed to point out the discrimination WRT other sports.

Click to expand...

I'm certainly up for that.

Please be assured that Cambrian and I are not going to roll over and let NRW tickle our tummies.

You might not believe this but I feel sorry for the Welsh Government team.  Simon Pickering is decent man handed a difficult job.  He did write in December to invite me to contribute to his Expert Group as and when the topic of cave access came up, which echoes what the Deputy Minister said in her letter to me last May.

What's plain is that something changed in January.  WG is still driving the car but it has a difficult passenger.  We've just seen it do a 180 degree handbrake turn and then accelerate off in the opposite direction.

The time comes when folks recognize their situation is worse than the alternative on offer and then they do a deal,  as with my mines access agreement.  I've dealt with NRW too in business contracts, and it's the same story.  Call it brinkmanship if you like.  They hang the other side out to dry; the mess meanwhile grows; and eventually they want their tummy to be tickled.

So everyone please be polite and be patient.

Serious question here Stuart -  based on my experience of working with NE in the Peak on monitoring of SSSIs with underground features, how do NRW deal with the monitoring of their underground SSSIs given they will have a statutory duty to do this? If they are not making arrangements for monitoring of sites with underground interest to be carried out, why not?

The simple answer to your first question is that NRW does not monitor any of its underground SSSIs in a coherent way.  There has been a degree of oversight of caving activities where an access agreement results in meetings with NRW staff, but that is not the same as ongoing condition surveys as done in Derbyshire.  NRW is relying on anecdotal evidence  obtained in an ad hoc way.

The former OFD cave management committee and Mynydd Llangattock CMC were in fact actual NRW committees that were chaired by NRW staff.  Both committees have now been handed over to cavers to run as NRW has given up any idea of direct control of NNR/SSSI caves in the face of staff and budget cuts.

NRW has handed executive control of OFD (the NNR part of it) to South Wales Caving Club via a written agreement between NRW and SWCC.  SWCC in turn has set up a subsidiary advisory committee for OFD which involves a few people from other clubs, but it is exactly that ? advisory.  NRW as parting gift to SWCC paid for about 10 cave gates to be fabricated by local engineering company, so they have plenty of spares if OFD gates disappear, and if the gates endure then I suppose SWCC have enough spare parts now to deal with a few centuries of simple dilapidation.

The MLCMAC, the cavers on it that is, have stopped meeting with NRW.  Only one meeting was held in 2019 - at Whitewalls ? and NRW were not invited to it.  The Old MLCMAC run by NRW was mainly concerned with Agen Allwedd which is on the Craig y Cilau NNR - the cave itself is SSSI but not part of the NNR ? which is different to the OFD situation.  The New MLCMAC has decided that cavers don?t need a permit system anymore and the distribution of keys should be more liberal, but in reality nothing much is happening and things are now drifting.  NRW handed over its stock of spare locks and cave keys to the New MLCMAC and really that?s the last we?ve heard from them.

As to other Welsh SSSI caves, there are many of them of course, like Little Neath River Cave, which are places where NRW has never shown any interest in their conservation status that I can recall.

The answer to your second question is that NRW has neither the staff or the money to monitor SSSIs.  Having scheduled such a huge proportion of the surface of Wales as SSSIs, how can they possibly monitor all that land let alone what is under the surface?  I doubt they will lose much sleep over any statutory duty.

How many historically open caves are there on access land in Wales?

Mike

I think what you're asking me is how many caves there are that you can simply walk into with no questions asked that are situation on Access Land in Wales.  See the stats in the photo attached of a spreadsheet.  The "De Facto Open" kind are the walk-in type where nobody will object to you being there.  The numbers are based on the Cambrian Cave Registry, so it includes very small caves such as digs so the total number of sites is large.  The spreadsheet itself is at:
http://www.cambriancavingcouncil.org.uk/wg/WalesCavesByAccessType.xls

If you were asking about the historic environment, i.e. Scheduled Monuments that are caves, or caves/mines that are within or near to SMs then there's a spreadsheet link for that info near the bottom of the Documents page of the Cambrian website:
http://www.cambriancavingcouncil.org.uk/docs.html

By the way, the cave numbers may have gone up slightly as people find new stuff from time to time, and this data was prepared to support a presentation I gave to NRW and also included within Cambrian's formal response to the Welsh Government's public consultation on access reform.  If you want to read the whole thing, and it is informative and pretty, this is at:
http://www.cambriancavingcouncil.org.uk/wg/consultationresponse.pdf

Stuart France said:

<snip>

The answer to your second question is that NRW has neither the staff or the money to monitor SSSIs.  Having scheduled such a huge proportion of the surface of Wales as SSSIs, how can they possibly monitor all that land let alone what is under the surface?  I doubt they will lose much sleep over any statutory duty.

Click to expand...

Thanks for this Stuart - I would comment that a statutory duty is not something any body that has one can ignore at will; they need to be able to show that they are doing _something_ towards it. NE were well aware that they couldn't do the monitoring themselves and the Peak District scheme is part of their solution to that problem; building up the relationship with DCA has also had the benefit of getting help with cave/mine issues in the nature reserves they own or manage like the Wardlow Sough works last year.

If NRW and their predecessors have designated more ground  than they can effectively monitor then they need to get voluntary help, and if this was happening on my patch I'd be making the point very forcefully that "you need our help a great deal more than we need yours; what quid pro quo are you offering?". It's your patch so your call as to nthe next move, but I'd be weighing up where to throw a rock for maximum effect by now....

I'm sorry, but telling NRW they have a statutory duty will get us nowhere.  It is a sobering experience to have meetings with people at director level in NRW or with their internal solicitor, as Cambrian and BCA have.  The only thing that truly terrifies NRW is a trip to the High Court and having to explain to the public in the witness box on oath what's been going on.  Otherwise what have they to lose from skirting around the issues when there is no downside?

May I remind you that NRW was criticised by the Auditor General for the tendering of forestry contracts which he described as "unlawful".  This prompted a Welsh Assembly Member to comment "if this was a local authority they would be put in special measures" and that the organisation was "out of control". Their chief exec put it down to incompetence not corruption, and that's probably right.  Google it all.  And what happened?  Er, nobody was charged or prosecuted.  The chairperson of NRW at the time had to resign, of course, but I've not noticed a lot else changed other than the government cutting NRW's budget which has resulted in a "company restructure" and redundancies and unhappy people in the middle to lower ranks.  It's an organisation where the vast majority of its staff were surveyed as being unhappy at work.

I don't want to dismiss your well-meant suggestions, but in reality we are dealing with a mega-quango here that knows its own size and weight to the point that the government itself has no idea what to do but live with this thing it created.

I endorse everything Stuart has said here.

As the BCA CROW access group convenor, I have been looking for a strategy to achieve our organisation's stated policy goal - recognition that CROW Act access does apply to caving, and that parliament did not intend it to be excluded - for the past three years. The long wrangles over Brexit sucked all the political oxygen out of the system for a long time, and made it effectively futile to engage with politicians in the hope they would effect change through amending the legislation. Now that Brexit is "done", or at least half done, the value of political lobbying has probably increased. It would still be a long, slow process to get anywhere. Oddly enough, even now, legislators don't devote a lot of attention to caving.

As a a group, we are not yet certain whether this new development does offer the possibility of a court action by judicial review, nor whether the chances of success would be high. However, it is clearly worth exploring. I absolutely agree that NRW and its sister bodies, including NE and Defra, are unlikely to take anything else seriously. Ever since Tim Allen began to investigate this issue several years ago, it has become ever more apparent that officialdom has been relying on legal advice given at some point around the passing of the Act, and has no interest in revisiting it, despite the opinion of my sister Dinah Rose QC that this advice was mistaken.