A second entrance to Ogof Draenen?

[nickwilliams]

Can someone tell me what is wrong with being elitist?

Nick.

 

[Peter Burgess]

Can someone tell me what is wrong with being elitist?

Nick.

Nothing, provided it doesn't descend into selfish cliquey protectionism, which is what it can be mistakenly taken for sometimes.

 

[old-timer]

a very difficult step to avoid in a sport with so little formal structure..... mind you, there seemed to be plenty of self-serving cliques with no claim to excellence, and I don't suppose it's much different now.

 

[Duncan Price]

Similarly, how do people feel about opening up new entrances past sumps - such as at Wigmore..? 

We (the divers actively digging the end of Wigmore) were asked first if we minded (before any consultation with the landowner).  I guess that if we had said that we preferred that there wasn't an easier way to get to Wigmore 10 then the surface dig would not have been started...

I think that there is a difference between linking two pre-exisiting caves to provide an easier way into one from the other (Ogof Cnwc - Daren Ciliau) rather than digging out from or into one cave from the surface (Draenen, OFD II).  It might seem an artificial distinction but the former seems to be more "acceptable" than the latter.

There are also moral questions about linking parts of caves to make easier routes to them.  For example, connecting the Summertime series in Agen Allwedd with the entrance series or digging the end of Eastern Flyover in Daren Ciliau to open up access to the Restaurant.  Both have been vetoed - the former on "making it too easy" grounds and the latter on cave conservation.

In the case of elitism and geting back to the original question which I have tried to answer - no one seems to object too much to bypassing sumps.

 

[graham]

Can someone tell me what is wrong with being elitist?

Nick.

Nowt, as far as caving is concerned. The caves don't need any more visitors. I know there are places I once enjoyed that I can no longer get to & places I would like to have seen that I shall never get to.

But then there are other places I've seen underground that virtually none of you lot ever have or ever will  :tease:

 

[graham]

- no one seems to object too much to bypassing sumps.

'cos non-divers hate carrying bottles for you buggers. 

 

[robjones]

About a page or so ago it was mooted that this discussion should get hypothetical rather than continue to flog Draenen round and round.

My two penn'orth on caves is that additional entrances are better avoided, by and large. Yes, I enjoy the added through-trip permutations, but I also observe the wear and tear on the system...

Re: elitism - as lots of us cavers also go hill walking, consider access to the hills when walking rather than caving. Most folk seem to decry new tracks being built (unless its placing stones in bottomless mires) and glory in the remoteness of harder-to-reach areas. So are we applying wildly differing standards to the surface wilderness (which is more plentiful and better at self-mending) than the underground counterpart (much less of it and much of it tending to preserve most of us cavers' impacts on it).

If we're prepared to train and strive to reach, say, the interior of Knoydart and accept that only the 'tigers' can tackle certain routes, why do we seem to adopt a different approach to caves? Many people talk about caving being an exercise in self-reliance, learning one's limitations, etc. If this it true then it seems to inevitably mean that there will be parts of some caves that not everyone will be capable of reaching.

I'll readily admit that I'm past my mental and physical peak; there were places underground I aspired to reach but didn't strive to when I might have managed it, and others I never could have reached. Now the list is longer and includes places I once did visit. It's just part of life rather than elitism.

Oh - I have camped underground a few times. The impact on the underground environment is definite, even with considerable care. Best avoided unless the trip length would be preposterous - e.g. inner reaches of Darren Cailau.     

 

[anfieldman]

I went to Draenen for the first time a couple of months ago. I didn't mind the entrance but found the early passages rather boring and tedious. We had not planned for a long trip on that day so I felt as if a second trip was definately called for. There are some things in life worth waiting for and to get to some really pretty formations after a long trip in is one of them. However, if there was another existing entrance that bypassed the boring, slippery and very tiring entrance, wouldn't you want to take it? I know I would.
Ok, the landowner doesn't want us to use it so it's out of the question but I think it was good to raise the subject for discussion. It 's just a shame that there are some people on this forum seem to think that they own it (only Bubba does) who have to result to talking down to the other forum members as if they are people who have never caved before.
You know who you are.

 

[wookey]

One other consideration of a Draenen second entrance is that opening it up/allowing its use might cause the survey to be finished, and perhaps rather more significantly, published. That isn't a sufficient reason in and of itself, of course, but it is a consideration.

One thing shouldn't be dependent on the other, but that is the situation in Draenen (as I understand it, having done my best to keep out of the arguments).

The overall question is actually quite tricky. In general I think it is better to keep remote cave remote, and clearly this keeps those remote areas much more pristine, but on the other hand exploration/survey/study are clearly helped enormously by easier access. It is the age-old tension between wanting to explore caves but at the same time not wanting to trash them, and of course the two going hand in hand.

Ultimately I'm glad it's not my descision to make.

 

[NigR]

From a factual perspective, since the current land owner purchased the land from the Coal Authority it has been his stated intention that the cave have a single entrance. As recently as last September the landowner re-iterated this position and was EXTREMELY annoyed by the actions of two individuals who were trying to re-open the exact entrance mentioned in this thread.

As one of the two individuals involved in this ill-advised venture, having had a heated discussion at close quarters with the landowner on the occasion in question, I can readily confirm that he is opposed to the re-opening of this entrance.

However, there is no doubt in my mind that the landowner's opinion has indeed been heavily influenced by the selective information certain members of the Pwll Du Cave Management Group have given him in the past (as was earlier suggested by Duncan Price).

I entirely agree with Ali Garman's view that the current (blocked) second entrance is in a "wholly unsuitable surface location".

But only in so far as it is clearly visible from the main road and hence you will be easily spotted by the landowner as he drives home from Abergavenny if you are stupid enough to attempt to drill the concrete capping away in broad daylight!

Regarding Andy Sparrow's original post, I am in broad agreement with the majority of the sentiments he has expressed. Grwp Ogofeydd Garimpeiros have been represented on the PDCMG since its inception and we were one of the few member clubs who were not in favour of the permanent closure of this entrance ten years ago. Our opinions have not changed and it is our express intention to propose a motion at the next meeting of the PDCMG (should this ever take place) that the second entrance should now be re-opened. Due to the way the Committee is made up and voting rights are distributed, I am well aware that this motion has very little chance of being carried but we can at least try our best.

It is worth noting that one of the original aims of the Pwll Du Cave Management Group was "To encourage a free exchange of information". Whilst praiseworthy, it is clear to anyone who has any idea of what has taken place over the years that this has not been achieved (see Wookey's comments re. the survey). The current immovable stance of the PDCMG with regard to the opening of further entrances to the system has, in fact, had completely the opposite effect and has consequently lead to the creation of an atmosphere of deep suspicion and mistrust. It is my firm opinion that this situation will only continue to worsen unless an abrupt change of policy is implemented. As someone who knows the cave system fairly well and is currently involved in several active digging projects in the surrounding area I am convinced that it is only a matter of time until further entrances (and, hopefully, new passages) are discovered. It would be nice to be able to share these discoveries with the rest of the caving world but, as things stand, this sadly will not be the case.

 

[graham]

Nig

No offence but if that was your land, who would you believe, the duly elected representatives of the caving community or some random bloke who turns up on your land, starts drilling away and argues with you when you attempt to stop him?

 

[old-timer]

I see that much-worn phrase, 'duly elected members of the caving community'.... ho hum. The landowner probably doesn't care that they are elected, by a self-styled 'community' seeking to establish rights and accesses he probably isn't interested in, have no legal basis and he has no particular reason to give, in many cases.

cavers are probably in a better position than say, 4x4 users and trailbike riders, who have what they regard as a 'code of practice' for those who follow it, but are still largely regarded as a general, and sometimes destructive, minority nuisance which a high proportion of both working and recreational outdoor users would happily do without. But, cavers are still a specialised minority who don't enjoy unmitigated public support, not by any means.

comments about specific groups and free exchange of information aren't new, either. I first came to Mendips 30-odd years ago, and never did much more because I simply couldn't be bothered with the small number of controlling groups who appeared at times, to be more interested in playing what was then referred to as 'cave monopoly' and obstructing each other, and certainly gave little sign in being interested in strays from the North. Doesn't sound as though that has changed a great deal.

 

[graham]

I see that much-worn phrase, 'duly elected members of the caving community'.... ho hum. The landowner probably doesn't care that they are elected, by a self-styled 'community' seeking to establish rights and accesses he probably isn't interested in, have no legal basis and he has no particular reason to give, in many cases.

But an access agreement has been negotiated, hasn't it. Having been involved in such negotiations myself (on Mendip, evil elitist person that I am) I am aware of just how much time and effort goes into such things and goes into fostering good relations with our neighbours and with the landowners whose goodwill we rely on for access to their property.

cavers are probably in a better position than say, 4x4 users and trailbike riders, who have what they regard as a 'code of practice' for those who follow it, but are still largely regarded as a general, and sometimes destructive, minority nuisance which a high proportion of both working and recreational outdoor users would happily do without. But, cavers are still a specialised minority who don't enjoy unmitigated public support, not by any means.

Which is why it is incumbent on us to work at fostering good relations.

comments about specific groups and free exchange of information aren't new, either. I first came to Mendips 30-odd years ago, and never did much more because I simply couldn't be bothered with the small number of controlling groups who appeared at times, to be more interested in playing what was then referred to as 'cave monopoly' and obstructing each other, and certainly gave little sign in being interested in strays from the North. Doesn't sound as though that has changed a great deal.

Unlike "oop north" where one could just pop down a pothole anytime one chose. Oh hang on, no you couldn't, if you were from "darn sarf" you first had to have your club join CNCC, but only as an "associate" member, you were constitutionally barred from having any sort of say in these arrangements*. Then you had to apply months in advance for permits. Funnily enough such a system never held sway either on Mendip or in South Wales where anyone could get a key (or a leader) for any cave with a relative minimum of fuss.


*A situation that has changed in recent years thanks to the work of a number of northern cavers. Particular thanks to those who read this site, you know who you are and that your efforts are appreciated.

 

[NigR]

No offence but if that was your land, who would you believe, the duly elected representatives of the caving community or some random bloke who turns up on your land, starts drilling away and argues with you when you attempt to stop him?

Graham,

I am not blaming the landowner for believing what he has been told by these 'duly elected representatives of the caving community', just making the point that he has been cleverly manipulated by them from the outset.

Also, please allow me to correct a couple of your factual misconceptions. Firstly, I was incredibly polite to the landowner and did not argue with him at all despite his aggressive attitude. Secondly, he did not attempt to stop us from drilling as we had already finished having run out of battery power.

 

[graham]

No offence but if that was your land, who would you believe, the duly elected representatives of the caving community or some random bloke who turns up on your land, starts drilling away and argues with you when you attempt to stop him?

Graham,

I am not blaming the landowner for believing what he has been told by these 'duly elected representatives of the caving community', just making the point that he has been cleverly manipulated by them from the outset.

Also, please allow me to correct a couple of your factual misconceptions. Firstly, I was incredibly polite to the landowner and did not argue with him at all despite his aggressive attitude. Secondly, he did not attempt to stop us from drilling as we had already finished having run out of battery power.

Nig

Thanks for the reply. Two things

Firstly, you may not agree with what the access body has said to him, but hey, that's democracy. You have already said that you'd lose a vote if you tried to change the policy.

Secondly, I accept your clarification, but, speaking as a landowner myself (though I don't own any caves) if I found someone bang to rights on my land doing something that I had already specifically prohibited then they'd be lucky if all I did was shout at them.

 

[Hughie]

Secondly, I accept your clarification, but, speaking as a landowner myself (though I don't own any caves) if I found someone bang to rights on my land doing something that I had already specifically prohibited then they'd be lucky if all I did was shout at them.

As another landowner - I'd have to agree with you. And I would probably be quite unhappy for quite a long time.

 

[graham]

Secondly, I accept your clarification, but, speaking as a landowner myself (though I don't own any caves) if I found someone bang to rights on my land doing something that I had already specifically prohibited then they'd be lucky if all I did was shout at them.

As another landowner - I'd have to agree with you. And I would probably be quite unhappy for quite a long time.

And I imagine that my neighbours, when I discussed with them over a beer in the local, would also be less than impressed and less willing to engage with other participants in the activity that caused the annoyance, be they cavers, off-roaders, horse-riders or anybody else.

 

[old-timer]

actually, I'm well aware that landowner relations are often problematical. It may be that the Mendips couldn't work any other way, for that reason. I'm not close enough for it to know or care, these days. But the recent back-biting about a certain Welsh cave management group on this forum, speaks for itself.

 

[NigR]

One other consideration of a Draenen second entrance is that opening it up/allowing its use might cause the survey to be finished, and perhaps rather more significantly, published. That isn't a sufficient reason in and of itself, of course, but it is a consideration.

Wookey,

Although I have had no active involvement in the Grade 5 survey, I certainly think you are correct in your assumption that the re-opening of the second entrance would allow the survey to be completed (and ultimately published). Naturally, this would take some time but I am pretty sure that if the entrance were re-opened a temporary solution could be reached whereby the old survey is quickly re-published, either in printed format or (possibly more likely) in the form of a scanned PDF file, so at least making something immediately available for cavers to use. In fact, I mentioned all of this to Ali Garman in a chance meeting at Penwyllt last summer but the longer our conversation progressed the more it became clear that the attitude of the PDCMG was as firmly entrenched as ever and that any form of compromise is always going to be unacceptable to them.

 

[Ali Garman]

Hi All,

I only joined this forum yesterday....and already I can see how dangerous they can be. Do you think these threads and the things that are said on them have credibility in the wider caving community?

People are adding two and two and getting six.

Since when was access to a grade 5 survey linked to the opening of a second entrance. It hasn't been in any discussions I've been involved in. I have little or no recollection of a chat with Nig a year or so ago. Nig, is using words like entrenched, means that he clearly does not know that the PDCMG and the grade 5 surveyors had a amicable meeting several years ago. The state of play was left that the PDCMG would review its surveying requirements and the grade 5 surveyors would produce a proposal, about how they would like the grade 5 survey to be used and made available. How is the PDCMG entrenched, when we are simply waiting for a proposal from the people who hold the grade 5 data. Numerous attempt have been made by many individuals and the PDCMG to come to some agreement, these have all failed so personally I think waiting for a proposal sounds sensible.

After the entrance opening incident last Sept, Nig apologised to me because the premise under which he attempted to reopen the second entrance was factually incorrect. People need to get their facts straight, before they make what appear to be definitive statements on public forums.

I'm not looking to and will not enter into a mud slinging contest with Nig, but I felt I had to make this one response to counter some of Nig's statements.

cheers and good caving
Ali