A second entrance to Ogof Draenen?

[menacer]

I wonder if French and Spanish cavers endure similar bickering regarding their multi entrance systems?  :-\

 

[graham]

I wonder if French and Spanish cavers endure similar bickering regarding their multi entrance systems?  :-\

Dunno but they can build some epic gates out of lots and lots of stainless ...

... and I know at least two sites that have permanent CCTV at the entrance.

 

[NigR]

Since when was access to a grade 5 survey linked to the opening of a second entrance.

Be realistic here, Ali. The two have always been inextricably entwined (rightly or wrongly) and always will be. Had the second entrance not been closed the survey would still be readily available today. You know it, I know it, everyone involved knows it so don't try to pretend otherwise.

I have little or no recollection of a chat with Nig a year or so ago.

Come on, Ali! I can't believe that your memory is as bad as you make out - you are a lot younger than me after all. Just to remind you; our conversation took place sat outside Penwyllt around lunchtime on the day of the mega-party only last summer (Saturday 26 July) - a lovely hot sunny day. We spoke for a good half hour about the then-current thread on this very board concerning the unavailability of the Draenen survey to the caving community at large, a thread you were fully aware of and had been following but were not inclined to contribute to. Any recollection yet?

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.

Ali, you told me at the time that the the information I had been given which prompted my actions was factually incorrect and I did indeed apologise to you for acting hastily if that were the case. However, since then I have been assured by both my original source and a second independant source that the information was, in fact, correct. So precisely where that leaves us I am none too sure. (I do, of course, fully stand by the profuse apologies I made to all concerned regarding any distress I may have caused the landowner as that was never my intention.)


Finally, I would be grateful Ali, if as Secretary of the PDCMG, you could provide me with the answers to 2 simple questions;
1. Why have the minutes from the last meeting of the PDCMG, which took place on November 18 2007, still not been posted on the Group's website?
2. Why has the meeting provisionally scheduled for November 16 2008, then later planned for sometime before Christmas, still not yet been held?

 

[slippery_matt]

At first I thought this discussion was quite interesting - now it's turned into a bit of a farce.  Please keep your personal quibbles to yourselves and the other relevant parties rather than make it so public. 

Not cool  :thumbsdown:

 

[NigR]

At first I thought this discussion was quite interesting - now it's turned into a bit of a farce.  Please keep your personal quibbles to yourselves and the other relevant parties rather than make it so public. 

Not cool  :thumbsdown:

Matt J,

Apologies if my comments are 'not cool' enough for you but, if you can be bothered to read them, you will find that each and every one has distinct relevance to the subject matter of this thread - i.e. 'A second entrance to Ogof Draenen?'

I would suggest that this is clearly not the case so far as your only other contribution is concerned. Blue Greenies? Sorry, wrong cave.

 

[old-timer]

Matt J gets my vote....  up to a point, anyway

'relevant' and 'for public consumption' aren't quite the same thing, and I do rather think that a great disadvantage of the internet, is the scope it affords for personal disputes, general name-calling and unsubstantiated, contradictory accounts of what is supposed to be the same event.

I've had a lot of experience of clubs of various sorts, in a variety of sports, over he years, and one thing I did learn a long time ago is that a lot of useful stuff gets done by people you don't necessarily approve of, in ways you would rather not be involved in; the main thing is that something gets done by someone, it's like Caesar's centurion.; 'if you have no other choice, and no better reason, choose a proud man; for you may be sure he will do something rather than nothing, and to hold the initiative is often valuable in itself'

 

[Peter Burgess]

Nobody will ever win a message board argument (in general, not just this topic), - all people do is get themselves worked up and quite often over what appears to be pretty unimportant (which may or may not be the case here - I'm not qualified to say).

Some people on UKCaving just post stuff for a heavy argument or debate, - if you give it to them, it will continue. So if you don't want it to continue, stop replying.

Rats! I've just replied. Better stop now, I suppose. 

 

[Hatstand]

Without wanting to get too caught up in the specifics, as an innocent bystander to this thread I find it fascinating that this particular cave has been caught up in such an argument, while I get the impression that in other caves around the country people are digging away trying to open new entrances, links to other caves etc... leads me to wonder why Draenen has turned out so differently...

In Matienzo for example a lot of effort was put into digging open Giant Panda, specifically to remove a couple of hours hard caving to the far reaches, encouraging more exploration... is it going to get filled back in again in a couple of years???

...there is also a mildly perplexing quandary when I compare the well known and widely accepted argument for not making a cave artificially easier, with the one here for do you make a cave artificially harder??

Like I said, I don't really want to get caught up in the specifics but the generic arguments that this thread raises are fascinating 

 

[graham]

Hatstand makes an interesting point which I would like to see explored further. How does Ogof Draenen compare with the long systems in Matienzo in terms of caver traffic? If the essential reason for refusing a further entrance to the former is conservation, then to compare it with the latter one has to understand the usage patterns.

A few years ago, I was caving on Mendip with a friend of mine from Slovenia. In Swildons (and this was on a weekday evening, mind, not a weekend) he commented that he had never met another party underground in many many years of caving in his homeland. Fortunate we didn't take him to Goatchurch or P8, then, really.

I still don't understand why those carrying out the grade 5 survey are unable to use the present entrance, mind.

 

[Duncan Price]

Since when was access to a grade 5 survey linked to the opening of a second entrance.

Be realistic here, Ali. The two have always been inextricably entwined (rightly or wrongly) and always will be. Had the second entrance not been closed the survey would still be readily available today. You know it, I know it, everyone involved knows it so don't try to pretend otherwise.

There is a connection between the two in that the second entrance was dug with the stated intent of making surveying easier, but also without the consent of the (then) landowner and agreement of the cave management group.  I suspect that 2nd entrance or not, the survey would still not be available today.  The cave is pretty much all surveyed anyway.

I agree that the location of the second entrance is unfortunate - being on a steep hillside in full public view (i.e. a bit of an eyesore - even in a former heavily industrialised landscape).  The dig at Drws Cefn would have been a much more strategically placed and less conspicous location.  This was stopped at the request of the cave management group.

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.

Ali, you told me at the time that the the information I had been given which prompted my actions was factually incorrect and I did indeed apologise to you for acting hastily if that were the case. However, since then I have been assured by both my original source and a second independant source that the information was, in fact, correct. So precisely where that leaves us I am none too sure. (I do, of course, fully stand by the profuse apologies I made to all concerned regarding any distress I may have caused the landowner as that was never my intention.)


Finally, I would be grateful Ali, if as Secretary of the PDCMG, you could provide me with the answers to 2 simple questions;
1. Why have the minutes from the last meeting of the PDCMG, which took place on November 18 2007, still not been posted on the Group's website?
2. Why has the meeting provisionally scheduled for November 16 2008, then later planned for sometime before Christmas, still not yet been held?

I would like the answer to these questions to.  If not in a full public forum then privately.

I'm not after an argument, I will readily admit that I'm probably misinformed on a number of points and probably have my own preconceived views. I have made efforts to get the survey published as witness other threads here.

 

[NigR]

Without wanting to get too caught up in the specifics, as an innocent bystander to this thread I find it fascinating that this particular cave has been caught up in such an argument, while I get the impression that in other caves around the country people are digging away trying to open new entrances, links to other caves etc... leads me to wonder why Draenen has turned out so differently...

OK, keeping away from specifics, how does this sound?. This is Wales. The cave is gated. Access is (supposedly) controlled. Simply put, it's all to do with power and people wanting to exert their will over others (as always). Draenen was only discovered in 1994 and hence provided the perfect blank canvas upon which to show what could be achieved - now gaze upon the result. Yet it all started off so well.....

I still don't understand why those carrying out the grade 5 survey are unable to use the present entrance, mind.

Using the present entrance to reach the south-eastern extremities of the current system involves around 90 minutes extra caving in each direction, so adding approximately 3 hours to the length of your trip. It also means you get pretty wet (not long after entering and not long before exiting) whereas by using the second (blocked) entrance you (and your gear) would remain completely dry. Bearing in mind that in order to achieve anything worthwhile survey trips were taking anything in the region of 12 to 15 hours (sometimes longer), I can quite understand why the surveyers were keen to keep the second entrance open.

Finally, I would be grateful Ali, if as Secretary of the PDCMG, you could provide me with the answers to 2 simple questions;
1. Why have the minutes from the last meeting of the PDCMG, which took place on November 18 2007, still not been posted on the Group's website?
2. Why has the meeting provisionally scheduled for November 16 2008, then later planned for sometime before Christmas, still not yet been held?

I would like the answer to these questions to.  If not in a full public forum then privately.

I honestly am not trying to be argumentative for the sake of it but I think it is perfectly reasonable to expect a reply to basic questions such as these on a full public forum, particularly when the last fully-minuted meeting of the body in question took place on November 19 2005. Otherwise, we could be waiting a long time for an answer.

 

[Ali Garman]

Hi Nig,

I'm not going to reply to your points, about my points, about your points and about........... I think the other posters are right and that no one 'wins' an argument on a message board. That is not to say and I don't have perfectly good responses to your points and clearly my memory is that bad

I'll let you score the last few points and answer your two very valid questions at the end of your post, these I am both happy and slightly ashamed to answer...

i) The minutes have not yet been written up from the last meeting. My intention is to distribute them by the end of May.
ii) The date for the next meeting has not been fixed. I intend to arrange it for mid June.

This is not a situation I am proud of and starting in about two weeks time, one that I will endeavour to rectify. I can obviously provide excuses for why this is not all up to date, such as the home PC that I do all of my admin on is currently packed away as I'm in the middle of a major DIY project renovating 3 rooms in my house, but that is enough of my personal challenges. I would also say in my defence, that as with virtually all voluntary committee post of this nature I was coerced / obliged to take up the post and was obviously unopposed. I will obviously attempt to pass on the role to someone who has more time to devote to it at the earliest opportunity, offers welcome

.....right, must now go and check my DIY forum.....not ;-)

cheers
Ali

 

[cap n chris]

Is it this one ??
http://www.diynot.com/ 

 

[NigR]

I think the other posters are right and that no one 'wins' an argument on a message board.

Ali, I agree so let's call it a draw for now and leave it at that.

One point I would like to stress is that despite the fact we obviously hold very different opinions on a number of issues, I feel no personal animosity towards you. In fact, I have the utmost respect for the effort you have put into Draenen over the years, both as a caver during the exciting time of initial discovery and as a member of the PDCMG in the difficult political turmoil since. I know there must have been many occasions during the latter period when you wished you were back in the former and I really do sympathise, believe me.

I will obviously attempt to pass on the role to someone who has more time to devote to it at the earliest opportunity, offers welcome

Caving politics have never really held much appeal, otherwise I might have been tempted to offer my services! However, I think I may be able to help come up with a possible solution. Stuart France has generously agreed (at incredibly short notice) to assume your role as Secretary of PDCMG whenever it would be convenient and I hope you will see fit to take up his kind offer. Stuart has extensive relevant experience, having been a member of the Mynydd Llangatwg Cave Management / Advisory Committee for the best part of 20 years and he is currently Secretary of CSS, so is used to paperwork. He lives locally, knows Ogof Draenen well and would have plenty of time to devote to his new position. I can send you Stuart's contact details if you do not already have them. Have a think and let me know what you decide.

Cheers,
Nig

 

[Huge]

I agree that the location of the second entrance is unfortunate - being on a steep hillside in full public view (i.e. a bit of an eyesore - even in a former heavily industrialised landscape).  The dig at Drws Cefn would have been a much more strategically placed and less conspicuous location.  This was stopped at the request of the cave management group.

I agree with Duncan that the surface location of the second entrance is rubbish. It's in full view of a main road and visible not only to the land owners (no problem with that) but also to the local scallies who can easily see that cavers are disappearing underground for several hours and leaving their cars unattended. The slope is very steep and would be subject to erosion from regular use. In fact the slope is so steep it's dangerous - I write from experience as someone who has slid, out of control, down to the bottom (gets your heart beating faster)!

Just to move the discussion on from "should there be a second entrance" to "which second entrance", I think Drws Cefn (Back Door!) would be a better option in all respects. Well, except that it still needs to be dug to connect! It's also better positioned within the cave, as it's closer to the further reaches. Maybe Nig should suggest opening this entrance at the next meeting instead. He won't get anywhere with the other one as it's rubbish. Mind you, no ones going to listen to him after what he's just done - try and fail to open the second entrance and afterwards suggest it to the management group!

How about opening up Drws Cefn and closing the current entrance. It would still be a single entrance cave but maybe the survey would get finished (maybe not) and exploration in the south east would be reinvigorated. Of course the already well worn passages near the current entrance won't recover and exploration in other parts of the cave may suffer. If I remember correctly, the G5 surveyors spent a lot of time exploring new stuff in the north west of the system a few years ago.

All that would need to happen is to convince a majority of representitives on the management group and then approach the land owners. Since Stuart France was involved in openning up the second entrance, it maybe more likely to happen if he takes over as secretary.

 

[NigR]

Huge,

Personally, I do not think the second entrance is in as bad a position as do Duncan and yourself. A faint tramroad (obscured by bracken in summer) contours around the hillside not far above it and, if approached at this intermediate level, the steep slope is only in the order of 20 metres or so. Steps cut into the hillside (as has been done with the original entrance) would easily overcome this final obstacle. Keepers Pond would probably become the car park of choice if the second entrance were re-opened, although it can be just as easily reached from the old Garnddyrys Forge lower down on the Abergavenny road (bit further to walk, much less descent and ascent). Of the two options, I would regard Keepers Pond as probably being the most secure so far as car crime is concerned due to the fact that lots of local people walk their dogs there. We have parked in both locations on dozens of occasions with no problems whatsoever. If you are really bothered about the security of your vehicle, you could park it in the same place you do now and walk from there - it's just a bit further again, that's all.

Regarding the proposal we will be making at the next meeting of the PDCMG, I have been reliably informed that the precise wording is largely immaterial as this can be modified after discussion (and before voting) takes place. So, to keep things simple, we will probably start off with something along the lines of suggesting that "the current (blocked) second entrance be re-opened with immediate effect (subject to the landowner's approval) in order to facilitate and encourage exploration in the further reaches of the system". I am sure that other options will be considered as a matter of course and I can assure you that we will be far from inflexible and would certainly be willing to modify our stance if it would help secure a favourable outcome. So, for example, it is not totally inconceivable that we could end up with a mandate to open up Drws Cefn instead, as you suggest. (But don't hold your breath waiting!).

Thanks for your input.

Regards,
Nig

 

[Ali Garman]

Hi Nig,

I believe the next PDCMG committee meeting is when a new executive is due to be elected. This would be the obvious point for Stuart to stand for the post of secretary.

I'm grateful that your intentions are to bring a proposal for discussion to the next meeting regard opening a second entrance. This is preferable to the historical problem of covert / unilateral action which has caused immense strain on relations, both within the caving community and with the landowners.

I have to say that I personally am not looking forward to raking up all of the old arguments, with the associated time and effort that this will inevitably entail. However the vehicle for this discussion has to be a face to face meeting of all of the interested bodies, ie. the PDCMG, and not an online forum that only embraces a minority.

cheers
Ali

 

[cap n chris]

"is only embraced by", rather than "only embraces", perhaps.

 

[Andy Sparrow]

I have to say that I personally am not looking forward to raking up all of the old arguments, with the associated time and effort that this will inevitably entail. However the vehicle for this discussion has to be a face to face meeting of all of the interested bodies, ie. the PDCMG, and not an online forum that only embraces a minority.

Those associated with PDCMG seem irritated that this issue will not go away.  They should not really be surprised that by implementing a policy strongly disagreed with by a significant proportion (quite possibly a majority) of cavers that the issue persists.  We are talking about the current and future management of what is probably our biggest UK cave system.  Cavers have a right to express their views on this and will continue to do so.  Sooner or later PDCMG may have to conclude that their single entrance policy simply isn't tenable.  The 70+ kilometres of passage must be close to the surface at several points and PDCMG cannot veto every dig without causing acrimony.  Some caves are by their nature multi-entrance and no amount of committee resolutions can change that reality.  Read Jim Eyre's account of the days when the old BSA tried to control the then single entrance to what is now Lancaster-Easegill and failed.  Sometimes it's better to bend with the wind rather than peeing into it.

 

[graham]

"is only embraced by", rather than "only embraces", perhaps.

Does Chris want a cuddle?

(That's not an offer BTW.)