Access in private or democratic groups.

[andrewmcleod]

They do in Cheddar Gorge.

It's very much the exception that proved the rule - one crag out of tens of thousands. One half is CROW/National Trust with a right of access and only a tiny fraction voluntarily banned (for public safety reasons). The other half would under normal circumstances be CROW but it is basically a 'show gorge' so isn't open access. What restrictions there are though are for public safety and usually seasonal - there is almost nowhere else where there is so much potential for loose rock to fall directly onto a road and a large number of visitors. The North side (the NT side) mostly doesn't nearly overhang the road.

Yes - climbers are perfectly capable of having a right of access and then adhering to a voluntary ban (whether for conservation reasons, public safety or nesting birds).

 

[Ian Adams]

..... people seem genuinely convinced that BCA is enhancing its reputation and good relations by using force of law to trample on landowners' wishes to control access to caves on their land, and on the other hand people consider this a form of antagonism of landowners

I think this is pretty unfair on the BCA.

At the last meeting in April, none of the committee members were using "force of law to trample on landowners' wishes".  Of course, the committee was not in unison but what was apparent was that there was respect for landowners regardless of which side of the fence each person was on.

Ian

 

[Peter Burgess]

Time will tell.

 

[royfellows]

..... people seem genuinely convinced that BCA is enhancing its reputation and good relations by using force of law to trample on landowners' wishes to control access to caves on their land, and on the other hand people consider this a form of antagonism of landowners

I think this is pretty unfair on the BCA.

At the last meeting in April, none of the committee members were using "force of law to trample on landowners' wishes".  Of course, the committee was not in unison but what was apparent was that there was respect for landowners regardless of which side of the fence each person was on.

Ian

I agree with this view. The law itself does a very good job all on its own without any help, I have said this before.

Consider the position of a landowner. Cant build anything without planning consent. Public may have rights of way, even for vehicles. Others may have rights over your land which could be mineral ownership, sporting rights, grazing rights, or 'restrictive covenants' or whatever, and then you have possible SAM and SSSI, and of course good old CROW itself.

 

[PeteHall]

CAL policy is that access to the mines on its schedule should be as free and easy as possible, and bearing in mind that there are no conservation issues, does anyone feel this this should be done differently?

No 

 

[Simon Wilson]

There are landowners who are most definitely not impressed, to put it mildly, with the turn of events.

Name one.

 

[cap n chris]

We've already been here before on another thread and names weren't mentioned then and they are not going to be mentioned now, either.

 

[droid]

There are landowners who are most definitely not impressed, to put it mildly, with the turn of events.

Name one.

You first....

 

[Simon Wilson]

..... people seem genuinely convinced that BCA is enhancing its reputation and good relations by using force of law to trample on landowners' wishes to control access to caves on their land, and on the other hand people consider this a form of antagonism of landowners

I think this is pretty unfair on the BCA.

At the last meeting in April, none of the committee members were using "force of law to trample on landowners' wishes".  Of course, the committee was not in unison but what was apparent was that there was respect for landowners regardless of which side of the fence each person was on.

Ian

Nobody wants to trample on landowners' wishes. We know that some landowners have concerns about their liability when they give permission for caving. Hopefully we can get into a situation where one of the landowners' wishes is to see the removal of liability by the CRoW Act.

 

[droid]

So is that the situation we have NOW, or some 'wish-list' aspiration?

And which landowners are *currently* happy with CRoW? because if you are not willing to name names, it is somewhat 'off' for you to demand that someone else does.....

 

[Wayland Smith]

CROW CRAP! 

Why has the usual meaningless rubbish about Crow been dragged into this debate which began about a totally different subject.

If you want to wave your willies about Crow again do it on one of the numerous other debates.

Something for moderators to clean up?

 

[Peter Burgess]

You mean like the moderator who thinks it's OK to make a contribution to it without resorting to ranting?

 

[cavemanmike]

CROW CRAP! 

Why has the usual meaningless rubbish about Crow been dragged into this debate which began about a totally different subject.

If you want to wave your willies about Crow again do it on one of the numerous other debates.

Something for moderators to clean up?

unfortunately "a" moderator got in the middle of the "off topic" debate and should know better.
moderate please and KEEP on topic

 

[badger]

yes lets keep on topic, which was a question asked about CAL and has I believe been answered.
CROW has nothing to do with CAL as it concerns access to mines, if I am correct on my understanding.

 

[royfellows]

yes lets keep on topic, which was a question asked about CAL and has I believe been answered.
CROW has nothing to do with CAL as it concerns access to mines, if I am correct on my understanding.

I would say that you are.

 

[Rhys]

[gmod]OK everyone, put the handbags away and take the CROW talk elsewhere. This is a topic about access management groups. Any new CROW posts here will be deleted.[/gmod]

 

[cavemanmike]

OK everyone, put the handbags away and take the CROW talk elsewhere. This is a topic about access management groups. Any new CROW posts here will be deleted.

thank you

 

[Rhys]

So, back on topic; The Charterhouse Caving Company who were mentioned earlier in the thread; do they have a procedure for replacing their company directors/personnel? What do they intend to do if one goes rogue?

I could direct the query to one of the company people or look at their website, but I don't want to. I'm asking here. Does anyone know?

Rhys

 

[Les W]

I believe the directors are appointed by the member clubs at the AGM so I assume those same clubs could remove a director if they wanted to.

 

[Rhys]

I see. Does Cave Access Ltd have an AGM or member clubs?