READing such posts like the situation with shelfield Uni caving group and problems with insurence last year and the current regulation involving under 18's and all the paperwork, meetings, documentation rubbish. It strikes me going 'offical' means less caving, more hassle, more money, more restrictions. I joined a caving group a couple of months ago for a few differnet reasons. Everyone says its best to do so. The group I have joined is a fine group, I just see a lot of paperword generated by lots of people higher up the food chain who seam to have nothing else better to do then make up rules (like our present goverment).

I find my own (loose term) unofficall group of explorers doing more then ever, unhindered by meetings, regulations by unelected groups, unrestricted, we are dynamic. We say, hey lets go see... and its done. We are capable and skilled, no different from any offical club. Only we dont answer to the likes of the BCA, or some 'Southern Caving Association or some Nothern caving group. Who are they to tell me I cant explore somewhere? Who electred them, I didnt.

Yes this is partly a rant. Its an attack on the over hyped heath and safety groups who dont seam to understand, humans like risk. Risk is good for humans. Its also a message to these 'umbrella/overall/group' organisations and caving groups alike. Dont drown in your own regulations.

On the issue of insurence - Its the biggest scam of all time, you dont need it. People are not sueing each other every 5 mins, thats a lie created by the media, and the media is bad.

I feel better now. thankyou.

I agree with your comments.

I and new to caving, and small group of us are going it alone. We are all Kayakers as well and we are all sick of the club mentatily we have seen in Kayak clubs, ie rules , regulations, restrictions on when and where you are allowed to paddle. We are no longer club members and the kayaking is much more fun.

We did think about joining a caving club, and may well do so yet, but I do suspect we will see the same old club mentality. :twisted:

Based on my experience of various types of clubs for various pursuits,I tend to keep my distance from them.
For me it's the "commitee" types who piss me off,and of course the "what are you doing on "our" patch ? ones,the latter in particular when they have been attempting illegal entry into sites which,using their term,could be called "our" patch.

My particular interest is mines,not caves,and what I do is link up with a few like minded people on an informal basis,and we arrange trips by consensus.
The only rules are respect for where we visit,respect for the people with us,and of course,safety.
We also welcome newcomers on most of our trips,and have loaned them u/g gear until they get their own.

Some people are suited to the "club" situation,others choose a different road.

I'd have to disagree with a some of what's said here.

While I can see why c**tplaces believes unofficial groups of friends get more done than a club, such groupings are far more common within a club than without. Since the small grouping that he goes caving with seems to be for all intents and purposes a club then we have to consider the advantages of going official.

Clubs exist for two main purposes, to enable like minded people to meet and go caving, and to enable people to share resources (such as pooling money for kit.) Small groupings have little need for any form of organisation as talking together in a pub or a couple of phone calls to organise stuff will generally suffice. Larger groupings are generally more problematic, people want to know where their money is going (and who decides and how they can influence the decision), where the kit is (leading to centralised storage and booking procedures to avoid conflict), and how the kit's being looked after (would you be happy if the rope you've helped pay for is treated like crap?) Suddenly we get rules, and people enforcing them on behalf of everyone else. But this is still not the same as going official. The real reason for a club going official, I believe, is to ensure the club's continuity. If one person becomes so central to a club (or grouping) that if they had to give up caving then the club tends to dissolve. With an "official" type club, for instance ,they can set up club bank accounts so that no one person leaving would be able to throw the club into financial chaos as accounts are created, money moved, and accounts closed. Such "official" clubs can also own club huts (how often have you stayed in them?) and have various other advantages that make up for the supposed beurocratic restrictions (and I've yet to see one that states you can't go caving). As an aside, University clubs have always been much more strictly regulated due to receiving money and other aid from Student bodies. This is the same as pooling resources, people want to know that the money is being used correctly and, rightly or wrongly, feel they have a responsibility to ensure this.

As for governing bodies, we don't answer to them, they answer to us, as they've been set up by and for cavers. To believe that CNCC and CSCC are some controlling group that restricts what cavers can do is just plain wrong. In fact, these organisations free cavers to do caving, by negotiating with landowners on behalf of cavers for access to caves that would be otherwise shut. And when I say shut, I don't mean gated with a piddily little padlock, I mean filled in with a JCB. These bodies, as well as doing excellent work on behalf of us, most of which we don't ever see, also show to the world that cavers have their own house in order. All other bodies that a caver might encounter know that you can talk and agree with a unified group, but you can ignore a mass of individuals as what they say doesn't matter (how can you trust a group that wont even talk to and agree with their peers?)

This brings us nicely onto insurance. I agree that people aren't sueing each other all the time, but what happens to you if you are sued? The biggest thing with the BCA scheme is not the caver - caver part of the insurance, but the landowner indemnity. This landowner indemnity is required for access to many systems and can smooth the way for opening access to others. Landowners don't care if someone says "We'll never sue you" or "You can't be sued due to you not owning a cave, blah, blah" They want cast iron assurance that nothing will happen to them ever.

Just think though, is your dynamic, unhindered group of cavers florishing in spite of official bodies, or because of the club/ official bodies system you spurn?

Not so sure you're right about the insurance, Vance. I spend a large amount of money (as a land owner) on public liability. I believe- though may be wrong - that this aspect of insurance is "double insured", covered by caving AND landowner insurance. Surely the best bit of the BCA insurance is the caver to caver aspect.

As far as the validity of organisations such as CNCC?CSCC goes- they should be judged by their successes and failings. I'll say no more!

I am curious, does anyone know if a claim has ever been made on the 3rd party liability insurance cover that cavers have? If so is it a frequent occurrence?

I can see both sides to the insurance side of things, from the land onwers point of veiw :- why should the landowner have to be resposnable for cavers actions? and why should the land owner possiblly loose out on damaged land etc after all what are grass and moorland to us are pound notes to them! But all landowners need to have insurance so that when some daft sod does try and claim (it could be as daft as ripping your suit when climbing over a style) they have some thing to fall back on.

However in days gone by it was a unwritten rule that you did knock on the farmers door if you knocked a topstone off a wall it got replaced etc etc I fear some of the old unwritten rules are been forgotton and i think this is one good reason why people should still try to cave in organzied groups if nothing more than learn these old hefted down rules.

I thought i might add to this debate from the perspective of a uni caver.

I (and others who are ex members of the uni club) need the club for its equipment (rope, maillons etc amongst other things) and as we are all still friends are more than willing to contribute a small fee every year to membership and insurance because we get a lot from it. The 'committee types' people have referred to put in a lot of work organising trips, booking accomodation etc etc meaning that all i have to do, is e-mail in and turn up on the right day and it is all sorted. Also how are 'new' members ever supposed to learn to cave safely or at all? Teaching newbies is a great element of caving for me and very rewarding at times but it could not happen if we all joined 'private groups'.

Lastly on the insurance side, I think the potential to be sued is quite high; last week a case was luckily thrown out of court but worrying that it even got there, of a student from Sheffield suing her old teacher who took her on the Gold Duke of Edinburgh award. She didn't realise that she might get blisters on her feet and tried to get compensation for the discomfort. It may not have got through but she still tried.

Clubs retain, gain and distribute knowledge.

lets not too side tracked by insurance side of things, its an issue we are all aware of, is reasonably stable at the moment and something we will just have to live with since it will probably never go away.

This thread was actually about whether clubs and bodies are a pain in the arse or not.

Well I dont know which bodies you have been in contact with (resists childish snigger)
but I cant think of one which would actually try and stop you caving or dictate to you which caves/mines you can go down. If a body puts out a notice warning you that access to a certain place is not allowed, this is probably due the owner restricting access. NOT the caving body.

As a derbyshire based caver, I only have real experience of local clubs and bodies.

the DCA does a fantastic job, of maintaining access to caves often negotiating with 'difficult' landowners and usually coming up trumps. See devonshire cavern recently http://ukcaving.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=693

Access is only one of the many contentious subjects. P bolting of popular caves is another. Sorting out pollution of underground water ways, monitoring CO2 levels in some places. I could go on. Essentially - all these things are done transparently to help YOU, the explorer go off and do what you want to do underground.

You say your into mines etc. Well what about Peak District Historical Mines society. (PDHMS). Just look at the work they've put in over the years, rescuing mines from farmers or quarry owners who would have filled in the mines long ago. Just seek out Bird mine. Raddle pits, New venture mine to name just a few which have been beautifully capped with very expensive galvanised lids. So who sorted the money out for that, who spent hours on the phone or typing letters, invoicing people for materials. All on a volunteer basis, just so YOU can still just turn up, drop your rope and explore.

As for clubs, its been mentioned in other replies. Most people join clubs to meet people into the same thing, have access to kit etc.
But as mentioned above, the most important thing is to learn. Not just the basics, anyone can do that. its the tricks of the trade. the tried and tested short cuts. Also, local knowledge of systems or areas. Stuff thats not in the guidebook.
Digging techniques, How many books can you buy on that.

As someone said - Clubs gain, retain and distribute knowleged and as we know - knowledge is power.

Of course each club will have to have a secretary , treasure etc just to look after the admin (especially if your taking money off people) , they usually like to know where it goes.

The thing is though Dark, YOU dont have to join a club, no one is forcing YOU, YOU needn't get involved in the politics if YOU dont want to. YOU just keep in doing what YOU want to do.
But maybe you should spare at thought for the clubs and bodies that selflessly work on YOUR behalf before YOU slag em off as being a bunch of over officious beaurocrats.

[/rant]

i know it doesn't apply to everyone, but for me the most important benefits of a club is that without them very few people would ever START caving!

once you've joined a club, you've got people you know who go caving, who you can go caving with whenever you want (it doesn't always have to be a big official club trip)...

...i don't see any real problems with clubs, so i'll have to disagree with you, c**tplaces...

It's horses for courses isn't it? I've spent more years caving without a club than within a club and can see the pros and cons of both. However, I'm starting to feel that the level of bureaucracy is beginning to impinge to the detriment of the sport. - but that's me just me, of course. I also think it's only a matter of time before cavers will have to possess a certificate of competence to acquire insurance.

To respond to Sams points - remember the BCA insurance fiasco of late 2003? The only caves that were closed were either club controlled or CSCC/CCC controlled - even if one could produce a DCA insurance certificate! The landowner controlled cave remained open. I think DCA/CNCC seem to have cavers interest much more at heart than their southern compatriots

I think I'd better stop - starting to rant!

Hughie said:

To respond to Sams points - remember the BCA insurance fiasco of late 2003?

Click to expand...

I was trying to leave insurance out of it. Most of the time access is a seperate issue to that of insurance cover. (though of course the two can be linked)

Anyhow, its not the bodies that create the problems, its just up to them to sort them out when they occur.

As a member of both a Uni club and a 'grown-up' club, I think the club structure is very useful. It allows people to get into caving in a safe way; clubs can buy tackle and their own hut; clubs can organise big trips and clubs can be great for making friends. OK, they may not be for everyone, but I am proud to be a club member.

As for BCA, DCA etc etc. A lot of hard work goes unrecognised, which allows us to go caving relatively freely. I ave no doubt that without these groups some caves would have been closed long ago, others never found. They work for cavers, not against them, and to slag them off seems to me to be a little ungrateful to say the least. If you don't like what they are doing, you could always go to one of their meetings and make your point there, or even volunteer to change things yourself.

Sam - fair point - that was a bad example to use. Please accept my humblest!!

Hughie said:

It's horses for courses isn't it? I've spent more years caving without a club than within a club and can see the pros and cons of both. However, I'm starting to feel that the level of bureaucracy is beginning to impinge to the detriment of the sport. - but that's me just me, of course. I also think it's only a matter of time before cavers will have to possess a certificate of competence to acquire insurance.!

Click to expand...

Much the same way as SCUBA really,we used to find it highly amusing to see a BSAC group lined up on the beach,waiting to have their logbooks filled in by an "official".
I used to dive at a "banned site",someone had died there.If I'd belonged to the BSAC,I would have had my membership cancelled for diving it,and would have compounded my "crime" by solo diving at that site(and loads of others too).

When was "common sense" bred out of our society,does no one operate the TITS system anymore ? (TITS = Think It Through Stupid).

My rant over.

Well an interesting number of view points. Thanks. I am part of a group and I do pay the BCA TAX. I have to test my view by 'going offical' dont I. So I actually know what I am talking about.

Offical's do stop people caving/mine exploring. Thats a fact. If you dont have BCA tax, or belong to a club and plenty of people just dont want to join a club (why force them?) then your barred from the sport. Your unwanted, thought off as vandals (automaticly), youths just wanting to go and have raves underground. Far from the truth. In the groups I go underground with the vast majority of people are 30ish adults who respect the locations but who dont want to join a group, who already have a group of friends they go caving with.

By demanding everyone have BCA tax your encouraging this 'sue each other myth', if landowners have insurence then BCA insurence is redundant. I fully beleave insurence removes peoples sense of responsability, we dont worry anymore, because were covered, so we stop careing.

For plenty of locations nobody has put any effort or money into a mine or a cave, people explore these places for meny years. Suddenly the local 'trust' gate the entrances... Then demand only caving groups have access, stopping people who have explored these places for meny years. Is that right? It happens far too offten.

I guess that final point is my main annoyance, someone comes along and gates an entrance for no good reason then demands money (via BCA TAX).

It's horses for courses isn't it? I've spent more years caving without a club than within a club and can see the pros and cons of both. However, I'm starting to feel that the level of bureaucracy is beginning to impinge to the detriment of the sport. - but that's me just me, of course. I also think it's only a matter of time before cavers will have to possess a certificate of competence to acquire insurance.

Click to expand...

This is rubbish surely? I can't think of a single instance in which caver imposed bureaucracy has impinged on our ability to go/or enjoyment of caving. The only bureaucracy I can think of is set up by the various bodies/clubs in order to keep the landowners happy, and therefore allowing us to go caving freely.

At the moment our national body dosn't even seem to have the manpower to produce a regular magazine, never mind producing restrictive rules!

I am curious, does anyone know if a claim has ever been made on the 3rd party liability insurance cover that cavers have? If so is it a frequent occurrence?

Click to expand...

Wasn't there a claim made by somebody (or their family) who had an unlined bloke fall off a ladder on to them (this may be a complete figment of my imagination though!)

c**tplaces said:

Offical's do stop people caving/mine exploring. Thats a fact. If you dont have BCA tax, or belong to a club and plenty of people just dont want to join a club (why force them?) then your barred from the sport. Your unwanted, thought off as vandals (automaticly), youths just wanting to go and have raves underground.

Click to expand...

Thats just bollocks, give me an example then.

By demanding everyone have BCA tax your encouraging this 'sue each other myth'

Click to expand...

How - again give us an example of one single successful case of one caver suing another caver following an accident.

if landowners have insurence then BCA insurence is redundant.

Click to expand...

How are you covered personally if the landowner has insurance.

I fully beleave insurence removes peoples sense of responsability, we dont worry anymore, because were covered, so we stop careing.

Click to expand...

Oh, so Im more likely to throw myself down a pitch without a care now that I've joined a club and hence have third party liability insurance.

For plenty of locations nobody has put any effort or money into a mine or a cave, people explore these places for meny years. Suddenly the local 'trust' gate the entrances... Then demand only caving groups have access, stopping people who have explored these places for meny years. Is that right? It happens far too offten.

Click to expand...

I cant think of any cases of the top of my head - if it happens far too often - enlighten me.

I guess that final point is my main annoyance, someone comes along and gates an entrance for no good reason then demands money (via BCA TAX).

Click to expand...

I dont know where you cave, but it sounds like china 50 years ago. Tell us, where are all these gated caves. And who are these random people damanding money, eh.

Dont get me wrong - Im not a fan of insurance what so ever. I just cant see how you can justify calling it a "BCA tax". Why are you trying to blame the BCA.

:?

If your not part of a group and ask someone for permission (eg english nature) for access they say no. Indipendant groups are excluded.

Why do I need insurence? Why dont cyclists need insurence? Why dont walkers need insurence? Why dont swimmers need insurence, what makes caving different that it needs insurence, dont tell me risks, we know walking accross the road is more risky then caving.

caving is only safe because we take equipment and skills to make it safe. Having BCA insurence or belonging to a group doesnt automaticly make caving safe. A club is no safer then any other group of skilled cavers.

How about I make a group called the BWA (British Walking Association) and charge people to go walking, on say national trust land? Provide insurence to walkers then encourage national trust to block people access unless they have BWA insurence. What is the difference?

How - again give us an example of one single successful case of one caver suing another caver following an accident.

Click to expand...

So why is insurence needed if its not used?

Oh, so Im more likely to throw myself down a pitch without a care now that I've joined a club and hence have third party liability insurance.

Click to expand...

No Silly :roll: its a general state of mind. Example: If we have the carpet insured we dont care if we spill anything on it, we just claim. (yes its annoying etc but not a worry) Who is to say that spill we created and didnt care about wont cause an accedent. We have become lax due to 'its ok, its covered'.

I cant think of any cases of the top of my head - if it happens far too often - enlighten me.

Click to expand...

Its happened a lot down here in the corsham area. We had a major problem with Avon wildlife trust who basicly gated everything after meny years of open quarrys. For a time nobody was allowed access, this was the time when people resorted to ripping the padlocks off in protest. Nenthead is amazing, big gates on the mines, no locks access for all as long as you can lift the gate this is how it should be, I would be happy to contribute if only I didnt HAVE to join a group to do so.

Its happening in the north with perfectly fine entrances nobody had toutched being gated, or people saying were not allowed to go in unless we are part of a group. I have had emails saying a perfectly OPEN (no gates, untoutched) non-gated mine in the forest of dean is off limits to non BCA members.

The BCA Insurence/Tax is simply an example of a group I have to pay because everyone says so.

erm, aren't the wildlife trust the sort of people that are best dealt with by a collective response from cavers? By (e.g.) a club? I'm a bit young (i.e. still have most of me own hair....) but I believe the CNCC was formed precisely to deal with the landowners in the Dales, who demanded a single voice to talk to.

To call BCA membership a tax is somewhat unreasonable. Any representative body has overheads and these need paying. If you want to benefit from their work, it's fair to ask you to pay up for these. The people who run these groups are volunteers - unlike most national bodies for other sports I suspect.

Again, if you being insured is an access requirement - which it often is - then it's fair enough for you to get cover. It's hardly costing the earth anyway.

Now, everyone take a deep breath and chill out