Access Re Caves on Longleat Land ( ie Reservoir Hole )

[NewStuff]

I rather believe more stringent requirements were dropped during those informal meetings .

That trick is as old as the hills. Tell someone X, Y and Z will be happening, where Z, Y and Z are unbelievable and outrageous, and actually implement A, B and C, which were your original intentions. The other side think *they've* pulled a blinder.

 

[The Old Ruminator]

Who pulled the blinder us or them ? Why should we not be content with the present position . I just cannot understand why some cavers are so aggressive about their so called    " rights ". They own the place therefore they can say and do as they please within certain legal limits regarding SSSI etc. Ultimately cavers on private land are guests yet you have people advocating sawing off locks and riding roughshod over landowners requirements. If I wasnt a caver with a cave on my land I would fill it up with concrete and say sod the lot of you. Perhaps some would like to take their arguments to the owners of Box Mine, Twin Titties Swallet, Lamb Leer etc and see where it gets you.

 

[cap n chris]

Cavers have access to the cave. What's wrong with that?

 

[rhychydwr1]

Might have been better to have kept quiet about it

. . .  and risk cavers being denied all access to Reservoir Hole (and other caves on Longleat land)?

No, they can still go down Reservoir using my top entrance....if they can find it.

 

[The Old Ruminator]

I have gone to write up a meager photo thread to escape the bickering and wind ups then I shall have a long lie down and say no more on this particular subject.

Night, Night -------- :ras:

 

[Oceanrower]

We have basically what we want here and that is unrestricted ( except for the age requirement ) free  ( except for the ?2 conservation fee ) access under the existing scheme instituted by Willie Stanton.

So, err, not unrestricted or free then...

 

[Ed]

We have basically what we want here and that is unrestricted ( except for the age requirement ) free  ( except for the ?2 conservation fee ) access under the existing scheme instituted by Willie Stanton.

So, err, not unrestricted or free then...

Also a competent 17 year old with 5 years or so SRT experience can't go down while a 19 year old on their first trip can.....

I think the Estate need to have a long look at the competence of their "legal advisers" if they are trying to reduce their liability. Certainly say competent, fit and suitable experienced but a blanket age limit? With this approach best best instigate an upper age limit - may be 60 as older cavers risk all sorts of medical issue ie heart attack due to the excursion.....

 

[2xw]

Cavers have access to the cave. What's wrong with that?

The point is that young cavers do not. Surely you can see how that is negative.

All very well being "I'm alright jack" until your sport dies with you

 

[Speleofish]

In the early 70s, when I was a fanatical, young, teenage caver, the lower age limit for many Mendip caves was 16. GB, Longwood and several others were therefore out-of-bounds for several years. Interestingly, Reservoir Hole was allowable and I first went down aged 11. Granted, it was a rather shorter trip in those days...

By the time I reached 16, I'd largely switched to climbing as there were no real restrictions and you could decide how much adventure you felt you could cope with, rather than having to accept the more limited adventures imposed by access agreements.

I'm not clear on the legal arguments for limiting access to over 18s. However, I suspect that the most productive time for recruiting new caver to the sport is before or around puberty (before other attractions/distractions take over). If there only a small number of really worthwhile caves in your area and they have to last for several years before you are old enough to go down the others, you are likely to start seeking excitement elsewhere. Therefore, while I support the idea that certain caves should have access restricted in the interests of conservation, denying access to competent teenagers (supervised by a leader) is not in the long term interests of the sport.

 

[David Rose]

I'm pleased to see people posting comments that support my complaint about age restrictions.

So how about those caves where bodies such as the Longleat Estate are not in play? Where - maybe - cavers could change things more easily? Such as St Cuthberts and all those feeders to the Cheddar catchment, such as GB and Longwood?

Would anyone like to comment?

 

[complex]

I think that (at least some of) the age restrictions are in place due to UK contract law. The Charterhouse Caving Company permits (for access to GB), for example, could be interpreted as a contract between the caver and the CCC on behalf of the landowner to allow access to the caves across land where there is no public right of way. People who are under the age of 18 are minors (at least in the eyes of the law) and are therefore unable to enter in to such a contract. Under this interpretation of the permits, the simplest approach is to restrict the permits to those who are over 18.

Note that I am not a lawyer and have no desire to become one.

 

[Bob Mehew]

For legal views, re read earlier contributions to this thread starting at https://ukcaving.com/board/index.php?topic=22192.msg280922#msg280922. 

For CCC's position, see half way down http://charterhouse-caving-company.ltd.uk/.  Whether CCC can renegotiate depends in part on getting sufficient push from its 'members' (see top of same page ) to do so.  The willingness of the land owner also counts of course.

 

[2xw]

So, Bob, I'm not very good at understanding legal viewpoints -

Is it possible for these landowners w/ waivers to allow u 18s to enter whilst not taking on any extra liability etc? What would be the ideal situation that would make it easier for u18s to go and see these caves (accompanied by responsible persons and other such things)

 

[The Old Ruminator]

Arrgh I had to come back

"With this approach best best instigate an upper age limit - may be 60 as older cavers risk all sorts of medical issue ie heart attack due to the excursion....."

I have fallen off my chair in a fury. What a stupid thing to say.

Oh yes. I am 70 and guess where I have been all ruddy day ?

Dying of exertion ( on in the quoted case excursion ) in Reservoir Hole with my little boy ( aged 18 + ). That's two caving trips this week a darn site more than many armchair forum whingers.

If by a remote chance any photos came to good I might post them up on a photo thread. :doubt: :doubt:

 

[Ed]

Arrgh I had to come back

"With this approach best best instigate an upper age limit - may be 60 as older cavers risk all sorts of medical issue ie heart attack due to the excursion....."

I have fallen off my chair in a fury. What a stupid thing to say.

Oh yes. I am 70 and guess where I have been all ruddy day ?

Dying of exertion ( on in the quoted case excursion ) in Reservoir Hole with my little boy ( aged 18 + ). That's two caving trips this week a darn site more than many armchair forum whingers.

And there in my point.....you are outside the normal for your ahe group.

To reduce the liability it would be better to remove lower age limit and have criteria as I said....fit, competent etc.

A 70 year (in general) is a bigger risk than a 17 year old that meets the above.

70 year olds are are more at risk from:
Heart attack
Stroke
Reduced coordination, dexterity or cognative ability
Slips trips and falls....from the above
Type 2 diabetes
The effects of dehydration
Broken bones (especially women)
Effects of medication
And death or disability due to undiagnosed medical conditions

who is the greatest liability the 17 year old competent rising caving star or the diabetic 70 year old with heart condition that caves a handful of times per year?

 

[Bob Mehew]

Is it possible for these landowners w/ waivers to allow u 18s to enter whilst not taking on any extra liability etc? What would be the ideal situation that would make it easier for u18s to go and see these caves (accompanied by responsible persons and other such things)

To paraphrase part of my original post, waivers increase the potential for liability not reduce it.

 

[Fulk]

For f***'s sake, Ed, would you have all people older than 60 packed off to a home, there to "live" (I use the word advisedly) out their declining years in peace?

You're never too old till you're dead.

 

[Ed]

Fulk......calm down.

You are missing the point.

Age limits either way are pointless. If it is to reduce liability it should be competence and fitness.

But under my example the least liable would be barred wjile the most would be ok.

 

[droid]

Banning people over 60 from a cave explored by people largely over 60.

Fucking hilarious concept.

 

[rhychydwr1]

Banning people over 60 from a cave explored by people largely over 60.

Fucking hilarious concept.

I agree.  Being a youngster, I was going to suggest an upper age limit of 60 years, but I was beaten to it.