Cambrian CC newsletter

damian

Active member
A few clarifications on some of the comments relating to BCA in Stuart France's Access & Conservation News Round-Up on p.3.

1) The quotation attributed to Andy Eavis is incorrect. At the BCA AGM he did not say that he "cannot see how the CRoW Act does not apply to caving" but instead, he "cannot see how the CRoW Act will not apply to caving." There is an important distinction here, involving at a minimum some changes in legal advice from Natural England first!

2) David Judson's statement about the CRoW Act and its application to caving was removed from the BCA website because it had not been approved by BCA Council (rather than Executive). That's a small point, but I might as well correct it while I'm covering the other things here.

3) There is a reference to the Leck Fell access agreement that implies it is a BCA agreement. It is, of course, a CNCC agreement and BCA does not, nor can it, involve itself in the affairs of any Regional Council.

4) The Conservation & Access Committee's meeting on 16 August is not "between BCA Executive and the Regions". It is actually a meeting of the C&A Committee members (who are the BCA C&A Officer, plus a representative from each of the Regional Councils and each of BCA's Constituent Bodies, plus anyone else the committee wishes to co-opt).

5) The final paragraph is an opinion, rather than factual but I think merits a response. It says ...
It does not take a genius to work out why [The Cave Conservation Handbook] review has got on the BCA ?to-do list? right now. BCA needs robust arguments for its position when its credibility is put on the line by recreational cavers pulling on the levers that the law provides to them so as to carry out their sporting activities unimpeded by a national governing body pursuing restrictive policies that hinder participation in the very sport that this organisation exists to facilitate and promote.

Firstly the update of the Cave Conservation Handbook has everything to do with the fact that we have a new C&A Officer with the drive to make it happen and nothing at all to do with creating arguments to prove BCA's credibility.

Secondly, at the 2013 AGM BCA began responding to the work of a few cavers on CRoW (who had independently been questioning, among others, Natural England). The AGM took the view that BCA could not formulate a considered policy in favour of a change to the current position without fully considering the impact of that change. It therefore set up a Working Party to determine which caves might be affected across England. Only then, the AGM felt, should the membership consider whether to push further on CRoW. However 10 months later, between the deadline for Agenda Items and the 2014 AGM itself, some cavers began independently pushing even further in their quest for CRoW to apply to caving. The 2014 AGM was left with a difficult decision about how to proceed ... and in the end it tasked its C&A Committee with looking at it carefully and managing BCA's response over the next year.

This is not going to be easy as the facts are that the policies Stuart cites as being "restrictive", are seen by other members are being good. If you are a member of any of the following organisations, then talk to them.

Regional Councils (CNCC, DCA, Cambrian CC, CSCC, DCUC)
Constituent Bodies (ACI, ASCT, BCRA, BCRC, CDG, CHECC, NAMHO, WPCST)

They have a seat (and a vote) on the C&A Committee and the AGM has delegated responsibility for BCA's response to CRoW to it.

Damian Weare
BCA Secretary
 

graham

New member
Thank you Damian, for a very clear and detailed post.

It is important to note that BCA policy on this issue is by no means 'done and dusted' and, as you imply, there are clear and distinct differences of opinion that must be carefully worked through and resolved before BCA will be in a position to take an official view on this matter.
 

Badlad

Administrator
Staff member
I am looking forward to the BCA secretary applying this same scrutiny to all the regions newsletters/publications and posting his comments about them on UKC. 
 

Rhys

Moderator
Scrutiny of all our representative bodies is required, otherwise opinions dressed up as facts and distorted facts are believed. This stuff needs to be challenged; from wherever it comes.
 

bograt

Active member
Badlad said:
I am looking forward to the BCA secretary applying this same scrutiny to all the regions newsletters/publications and posting his comments about them on UKC.

Are you really looking forward to it, or just looking for a reason to stir it ?  :LOL:

Your attitude could be a contributary reason why more news is not posted!! :confused:
 

bograt

Active member
Rhys said:
Scrutiny of all our representative bodies is required, otherwise opinions dressed up as facts and distorted facts are believed. This stuff needs to be challenged; from wherever it comes.

With you all the way on that one Rhys  (y) (y) (y) (y)
 

Rhys

Moderator
Oh. And it was an officer of the Cambrian CC who sought confirmation from somebody of the Andy Eavis quote on the "QC" thread, by the way...

Martin Laverty said:
There is a report in the latest Cambrian Caving Council newsletter [ http://www.cambriancavingcouncil.org.uk/pdf/newsletters/July2014.pdf ] that:

"Chairman Andy Eavis stated at the June AGM that he ?cannot see how the CRoW Act does not apply to caving?."

Can anyone confirm this statement in the absence, as yet, of any minutes being available on the BCA website?
 

Peter Burgess

New member
Rhys said:
Scrutiny of all our representative bodies is required, otherwise opinions dressed up as facts and distorted facts are believed. This stuff needs to be challenged; from wherever it comes.
Oh yes - absolutely correct.
 

estelle

Member
Badlad said:
I am looking forward to the BCA secretary applying this same scrutiny to all the regions newsletters/publications and posting his comments about them on UKC.
do any of the other regions do a regular newsletter/publication? I don't recall seeing any.
 

NigR

New member
Does CSCC not produce a newsletter then, Estelle?

Do you think it would be a good idea if they did?
 

estelle

Member
NigR said:
Does CSCC not produce a newsletter then, Estelle?

Do you think it would be a good idea if they did?
I am not aware of seeing any such publication from the CSCC beyond what is on the website. I'm not sure if it's a good idea or not, or even needed as such, as i think the member clubs tend to disseminate what comes from the CSCC meetings via their own mediums for communication with their membership. All those on the regional committees are volunteers and with the levels of public scrutiny the Cambrian CC have just got on here for theirs, it doesn't encourage others to do the same really...
 

Peter Burgess

New member
Public scrutiny is a good thing. Intelligent people can see through critical bluster. Large clubs that don't provide some kind of media "glue" for their members shouldn't be surprised if the club festers. If regional councils can loosely be described as a club of clubs then providing media "glue" whether a topical website or a newsletter should strengthen the "club". Knowing that a newsletter is going to be read and publicised makes those contributing to it sharpen their act, provide good material and promote the ethos of the council positively. The better the newsletter, the more it will be read, and the more likely people will contribute to it. Wales is not a small region, and the activities range from the south to the north, and everywhere in between if you include the mine exploration side of things. The more the member clubs know about each other, the better for everyone. Visibility is a great bleaching agent.
 

damian

Active member
NigR said:
NigR said:
Did you enjoy reading the newsletter, Damian?

No response after more than 24 hours.

Should we take that as a "no" then?
No response equals been away all weekend (at my brother's stag do as it happens). Just got back. Sorry for not being permanently available. To answer your question, I'm not sure I "enjoyed" it, but it was useful to read about various pieces of news.
 
Top