MJenkinson
Active member
Badlad said:Safeguarding access to some 2000+ caves with a legal right seems a good idea to me.
This.
Badlad said:Safeguarding access to some 2000+ caves with a legal right seems a good idea to me.
Badlad said:Very little money has been spent on an actual campaign. In two and a half years I can only recall claiming for some travel and a pop up banner - say ?500.
[...]
So BCA has spent most of the money ensuring the CRoW issue is dealt with democratically and very little actually campaigning. At last Saturdays meeting council gave the go ahead to increase insurance costs by ?8000 across the membership. This was to meet the higher insurance demands of the Longleat estate and ensure continued access to caves in Cheddar such as Reservoir hole which could be lost without it. Access to caves costs a lot of money too.
droid said:, but feel the entire process was very inefficiently managed.
Hindsight has 20:20 vision though....
droid said:How much did the ballot re the Constitution change cost?
And with a bit of preparation, could this not have been combined with the CRoW ballot?
I'm not accusing Badlad of going on BCA-sponsored freebies, and fully appreciate the amount of his OWN time he's spent on this subject, but feel the entire process was very inefficiently managed.
Hindsight has 20:20 vision though....
droid said:Mike: why the f**k should I volunteer to help something I don't agree with?
I won't stand in the way of those that do, and I've said before the BCA should just crack on, but that's as far as I'm going on that one....
cavemanmike said:I don't know why the likes of you bother caving at all, you think because "the majority " of the caving community are pro-caving, you think we Are anti conservation.
BradW said:Credit those who hold different views with a modicum of maturity please!
Ian Adams said:Every single caver I know (both pro-CRoW and anti-CRoW) respect the environment they are in and both proffer and practice conservation (including some very well known people on here). I don?t even know why ?conservation? is an argument in the CRoW debate.
Indeed, why should anyone volunteer to represent something they happen to disagree with unless they've got their own agenda to pursue?droid said:Mike: why the f**k should I volunteer to help something I don't agree with?
Reading the comments appearing here, anyone would think Linda's proposed role (if indeed there ever was one) was to provide direct legal support and advice to Tim Allen for his campaign. Perhaps it was never thus, but let's not spoil a good bit of banter with truth and logic. Have you ever thought that perhaps there are wider legal issues that need attention now and again that have s*d all to do with CRoW?tony from suffolk said:Indeed, why should anyone volunteer to represent something they happen to disagree with unless they've got their own agenda to pursue?droid said:Mike: why the f**k should I volunteer to help something I don't agree with?
BradW said:Have you ever thought that perhaps there are wider legal issues that need attention now and again that have s*d all to do with CRoW?
BradW said:What's good for the goose is good for the gander.