BCA resources directed towards 'commercial caving' (spin off from CNCC thread)

[graham]

Besides, our registration fees contribute towards the bolt fund so are we not entitled to a bolt or 2?

If those bolts are placed specifically for you guys then their placement may not be in the best interests of cave conservation and so the answer cannot be an unqualified one.

 

[Pete K]

Graham all bolts are affronts to cave conservation, even the ones non-professionals use. I don't think anyone will win that argument.

The bolts at Garlands are regularly used by all types of cavers, way more so than any paid group. I can't think the ones you refer to. If it's the Chert Hall route then I have seen the spits keep multiplying as they fail up there because the DCA has chosen not to P bolt that route because it is mostly a professional circuit.

 

[Bottlebank]

I didn't mean the ones at Garlands, I meant the ones in Upper East Passage and the aven above base camp chamber.

Perhaps they're no longer there or perhaps you haven't looked hard enough

 

[Peter Burgess]

And for the record I don't care how people come into caving, no one knows, the likely answer is it's a combination of routes including commercial caving at various levels. So what, as long as they do keep coming.

Well, if professional cavers persuade us that their operations are essential for the long-term future of the activity, they can justify more influence on the way we do things than might otherwise be the case.

 

[graham]

Graham all bolts are affronts to cave conservation, even the ones non-professionals use. I don't think anyone will win that argument.

Everything is to some degree a compromise. The original point of the p-hanger program was that it facilitated both conservation and safety by eliminating bolt-rash and the use of dangerously worn spits. Sadly it has not achieved one of its original design criteria as it has not been possible to routinely drill out and replace worn p-hangers in the same drill hole.

 

[Pete K]

I didn't mean the ones at Garlands, I meant the ones in Upper East Passage and the aven above base camp chamber.

Perhaps they're no longer there or perhaps you haven't looked hard enough

Ahh, I'm with you. You confused me because they're no where near Garlands. Again, I see far more club groups up the Spiral than led groups. As for Upper West, I don't know the origin of the bolts but I think they where placed as training bolts (badly as it's a poor ladder hang) and I do use them a lot professionally with newbies before going deeper. Better to practice there than snarl up Garlands.
Anyway, we digress, back on topic.....

 

[graham]

To my mind the one development that has done more to facilitate the long term health of caving has been the growth and success of CHECC.

Thanks to the friendships they have made through this, many of our younger members now have extensive contacts throughout British caving and get to share experiences and knowledge for more widely than before. A number of our ex-students are now actively serving on committees on non-student clubs, are actively caving (and digging) with them on a very regular basis.

This is all to the good - and we never talk about the nudity (Descent, last issue, page 17, all we said was how remarkable it was that the bloke on the right was underground and isn't it about time he bought some new kit.  :blink

 

[Andy Sparrow]

This is all very interesting but I'm still waiting for exsumper to answer my questions.....

 

[damian]

This is all very interesting but I'm still waiting for exsumper to answer my questions.....

So am I , Andy, which is why I am sorry to be somewhat highjacking your thread. However some points have arisen that I think need comment.

Despite what a few people will try to have you believe, there is absolutely no intended (or, I believe, unintended) "commercialisation" of BCA. BCA (as NCA before it) has had a Training Committee which deals with everything to do with caver training on BCA Council's behalf, including recreational and professional training.

This is one of a number of Committees that do all sorts of things on behalf of cavers, including: conservation & access work across the country; negotiating and providing insurance to allow us all to go caving and club committees to be able to function; providing attractively priced web space to members; installing and testing bolts across the country; testing ropes & equipment; keeping abreast of legal developments that may affect our ability to go caving; representing cavers at a national level with Bodies such as Natural England, Defra etc; representing cavers in Europe and the rest of the World; supporting a national caving library; supporting university caving; encouraging newcomers into the sport; keeping an eye on current issues such as WNS in bats, radon and fracking; liaising with the media to further our interests. Virtually all of this is done by hard-working volunteers and has absolutely nothing to do with professional caving.

In fact I suspect virtually the entire evidence for the assertion about BCA's commercialisation comes from the appearance of a draft statement on "commercial caving". This simply seeks to remind members that BCA's constitution states that we should always seek for the widest possible access when negotiating agreements. Specifically it points out that there are potentially many different types of what is often termed "commercial caving" and it may be that a landowner may be willing to allow some of these, but they don't necessarily realise they exist unless it is pointed out to them. It absolutely totally does NOT, as Graham claims*, instruct anyone to renegotiate any agreements.

This vaguely 10-line statement represents a tiny fragment of the work BCA has done in the last few years and in no way represents "commercialisation".
* albeit only slightly exagerating!

 

[damian]

Oh and just incase there is any doubt, BCA's qualifications are entirely self funding (and have always been). In theory they "break even" but in fact this has seen a surplus every year since BCA's inception. Despite theoretically breaking even, the net overall contribution of the professional schemes to BCA's (recreational) coffers is something in the region of ?20k.

 

[exsumper]

Taken from the current CNCC thread:

The point I'm making is that the BCA appears to spend a disproportionate amount of its time and resources promoting the interests of the commercial sector rather than that of ordinary cavers. 

On Mendip dozens of uneccessary bolts (paid for by the BCA)  have been installed on little used and pointless esoteric SRT routes, the installation of which appear to be largely for the convenience and entertainment of commercial operators and their clients.

The point I'm making is that the BCA appears to spend a disproportionate amount of its time and resources promoting the interests of the commercial sector rather than that of ordinary cavers. 


Examples, please....

On Mendip dozens of uneccessary bolts (paid for by the BCA)  have been installed on little used and pointless esoteric SRT routes, the installation of which appear to be largely for the convenience and entertainment of commercial operators and their clients.

Examples, please....

"The point I'm making is that the BCA appears to spend a disproportionate amount of its time and resources promoting the interests of the commercial sector rather than that of ordinary cavers".

Examples. The national bolt scheme and the national cave leader scheme.  The developement and operation of both of these schemes were and are largely financed by ordinary cavers. They are to a great extent, mostly for the benefit of the commercial sector.

On Mendip dozens of uneccessary bolts (paid for by the BCA)  have been installed on little used and pointless esoteric SRT routes, the installation of which appear to be largely for the convenience and entertainment of commercial operators and their clients.

Examples 2 As far as pointless and unecessary bolts paid for by the BCA is concerned. Hunters Hole springs to mind.  It is arguable whether the re-bolting of many of the routes in Thrupe Lane Swallet was necessary; For some of which natural belays exist .

The prize for the cave with the most ludicrous, uneccessary, and pointless bolts, installed by a commercial operator; is won hands down by Mangle Hole.

For those who don't know Mangle Hole; it consists of a narrow rift angled at forty five degrees, the descent of which leads to a series of chambers.  To demonstrate how ludicrous the situation is, I present  the following anecdote:

In the nineties I did a solo trip into this cave to dive the sumps. For the descent of the cave I used a handline, whilst simultaneously carrying full cave diving equipment;including bottles!; in three tackle bags suspended from a sling around my shoulders. Thats how necessary some of these stupid bolt routes are!!

The prize for the cave with the most uneccessary bolts installed by and for the benefit of a commercial operator has to has to go to Gough's Cave in Cheddar. For the numerous pointless bolts installed within.

Pray tell if any of the examples I have given are factually incorrect?

over to you Andy

 

[exsumper]

This is all very interesting but I'm still waiting for exsumper to answer my questions.....

In fact I suspect virtually the entire evidence for the assertion about BCA's commercialisation comes from the appearance of a draft statement on "commercial caving". This simply seeks to remind members that BCA's constitution states that we should always seek for the widest possible access when negotiating agreements. Specifically it points out that there are potentially many different types of what is often termed "commercial caving" and it may be that a landowner may be willing to allow some of these, but they don't necessarily realise they exist unless it is pointed out to them. It absolutely totally does NOT, as Graham claims*, instruct anyone to renegotiate any agreements.

Rubbish  Commercialisation has been part of the agenda all along. First you tried to destroy  the influence of clubs, second you then tried to destroy the amateur ethos.

As an example of this,

In the nineties It was announced that the BCA had purchased a large number of SRT kits for the purpose of facilitating club training days. Not an unreasonable request!

As club cave rescue rep, I wished to run an SRT training day for  my club and asked to borrow them. I was told that despite my extensive experience, this would not be possible because I didn't have a CIC or similar qualification.

I'm not interested in the rest of the crap you've spouted, In common with a lot of other cavers I'm just sick of the Hypocrisy, lies, deceit, and pathetic games, engaged in by some of the more senior representatives of our national and regional caving bodies!

However you describe it; Both the CNCC and BCA have been  promoting and suggesting  to landowners "Cash for Access" !!!!!!

The ordinary caver doesn't want it! It'll destroy caving as we all know it!

So cut it out or f*** off!!! :icon_321:

P.S.
If you think this a little harsh or unfair, just reflect on the fact that the cash for access issue has only come to light as a result of recent activism on this forum!!  Prior to this, the only cavers that knew amateur caving was being sold down the river  were officials of the BCA/CNCC!!  :spank: :spank:
 

 

[Andy Sparrow]

Taken from the current CNCC thread:

The point I'm making is that the BCA appears to spend a disproportionate amount of its time and resources promoting the interests of the commercial sector rather than that of ordinary cavers. 

On Mendip dozens of uneccessary bolts (paid for by the BCA)  have been installed on little used and pointless esoteric SRT routes, the installation of which appear to be largely for the convenience and entertainment of commercial operators and their clients.

The point I'm making is that the BCA appears to spend a disproportionate amount of its time and resources promoting the interests of the commercial sector rather than that of ordinary cavers. 


Examples, please....

On Mendip dozens of uneccessary bolts (paid for by the BCA)  have been installed on little used and pointless esoteric SRT routes, the installation of which appear to be largely for the convenience and entertainment of commercial operators and their clients.

Examples, please....

"The point I'm making is that the BCA appears to spend a disproportionate amount of its time and resources promoting the interests of the commercial sector rather than that of ordinary cavers".

Examples. The national bolt scheme and the national cave leader scheme.  The developement and operation of both of these schemes were and are largely financed by ordinary cavers. They are to a great extent, mostly for the benefit of the commercial sector.

On Mendip dozens of uneccessary bolts (paid for by the BCA)  have been installed on little used and pointless esoteric SRT routes, the installation of which appear to be largely for the convenience and entertainment of commercial operators and their clients.

Examples 2 As far as pointless and unecessary bolts paid for by the BCA is concerned. Hunters Hole springs to mind.  It is arguable whether the re-bolting of many of the routes in Thrupe Lane Swallet was necessary; For some of which natural belays exist .

The prize for the cave with the most ludicrous, uneccessary, and pointless bolts, installed by a commercial operator; is won hands down by Mangle Hole.

For those who don't know Mangle Hole; it consists of a narrow rift angled at forty five degrees, the descent of which leads to a series of chambers.  To demonstrate how ludicrous the situation is, I present  the following anecdote:

In the nineties I did a solo trip into this cave to dive the sumps. For the descent of the cave I used a handline, whilst simultaneously carrying full cave diving equipment;including bottles!; in three tackle bags suspended from a sling around my shoulders. Thats how necessary some of these stupid bolt routes are!!

The prize for the cave with the most uneccessary bolts installed by and for the benefit of a commercial operator has to has to go to Gough's Cave in Cheddar. For the numerous pointless bolts installed within.

Pray tell if any of the examples I have given are factually incorrect?

the installation of which appear to be largely for the convenience and entertainment of commercial operators and their clients

Hunters Hole - the only cave on the list which is ever likely to be used by the 'commercial' sector.  I am probably the most regular 'commercial' user of this cave - amounting to about 10 times a year.  Hunters Hole is Mendip's most popular SRT training and practice cave and as such is used regularly by club cavers, who, without doubt, represent the largest user group for this cave.

Thrupe Lane -  You seem to be making the mistake of assuming that if the installer is a club caver, and a professional instructor, their only possible motive for undertaking the work is personal gain.  You really think that instructors are running commercial trips into Thrupe Lane?  It's far from an ideal venue, and one that I gave up using about 20 years ago.

Mangle Hole - the same observation applies.  You are again assuming that if the installer is a club caver, and a professional instructor, their only possible motive for undertaking the work is personal gain.  But, please, use some common sense - is anyone really going to use Mangle Hole as a 'commercial' venue?  It's a ridiculous concept.

Gough's Cave - most bolting was done by members of Cheddar Caving Club in order to create a venue for club training.  This venue is very rarely made available to instructors. 

So in conclusion your assertion that the installation of which appear to be largely for the convenience and entertainment of commercial operators and their clientsis factually far from correct.

 

[Pitlamp]

I am not against instructed caving; many of my friends make a living in this way and they're very good at it. The ones I know are just ordinary cavers anyway. I'm pretty sure they also include conservation education as standard when dealing with clients (which I mention to make Graham feel a bit happier).

What I do find slightly concerning is an assumption that people who gain qualifications to allow them to lead less experienced people are somehow superior to regular club cavers. I don't think this is a problem at all within our own community but it may be how uninitiated outsiders see the situation. As a result it may be that people who act as instructors are the first to be consulted by the media for example, whenever there is some newsworthy caving related happening. If that's the case then such instructors have quite a responsibility to give a well rounded response, taking into account the overall caving community's interests. I have to say that, in my experience, that does generally happen.

But the real forcing ground for speleological endeavour remains the many clubs and individual cavers who do it very competently, as a pastime. Happily, that's exactly where many instructors originate anyway. I suspect BCA's attitude has always (rightly) been "Can we afford not to deal with commercial caving interests?".

The issue about the numbers of folk entering caving via a commercial operation is not an easy one. When many people who use this forum started caving there were hardly any instructors! The proportion of entrants from an instructed beginning is probably much higher among younger cavers. In some cases they may have had no choice in this - for example many university unions seem to be insisting on student clubs having the involvement of a professional caver, even though the clubs may be entirely competent to look after their freshers themselves. (Perhaps it's yet another classic example of people mixing up the true meanings of "professional" and "competent".) But let's not blame our caving instructors for this - it's more to do with the silly way our legal system "works" in this country these days.

 

[exsumper]

Taken from the current CNCC thread:

The point I'm making is that the BCA appears to spend a disproportionate amount of its time and resources promoting the interests of the commercial sector rather than that of ordinary cavers. 

On Mendip dozens of uneccessary bolts (paid for by the BCA)  have been installed on little used and pointless esoteric SRT routes, the installation of which appear to be largely for the convenience and entertainment of commercial operators and their clients.

The point I'm making is that the BCA appears to spend a disproportionate amount of its time and resources promoting the interests of the commercial sector rather than that of ordinary cavers. 


Examples, please....

On Mendip dozens of uneccessary bolts (paid for by the BCA)  have been installed on little used and pointless esoteric SRT routes, the installation of which appear to be largely for the convenience and entertainment of commercial operators and their clients.

Examples, please....

"The point I'm making is that the BCA appears to spend a disproportionate amount of its time and resources promoting the interests of the commercial sector rather than that of ordinary cavers".

Examples. The national bolt scheme and the national cave leader scheme.  The developement and operation of both of these schemes were and are largely financed by ordinary cavers. They are to a great extent, mostly for the benefit of the commercial sector.

On Mendip dozens of uneccessary bolts (paid for by the BCA)  have been installed on little used and pointless esoteric SRT routes, the installation of which appear to be largely for the convenience and entertainment of commercial operators and their clients.

Examples 2 As far as pointless and unecessary bolts paid for by the BCA is concerned. Hunters Hole springs to mind.  It is arguable whether the re-bolting of many of the routes in Thrupe Lane Swallet was necessary; For some of which natural belays exist .

The prize for the cave with the most ludicrous, uneccessary, and pointless bolts, installed by a commercial operator; is won hands down by Mangle Hole.

For those who don't know Mangle Hole; it consists of a narrow rift angled at forty five degrees, the descent of which leads to a series of chambers.  To demonstrate how ludicrous the situation is, I present  the following anecdote:

In the nineties I did a solo trip into this cave to dive the sumps. For the descent of the cave I used a handline, whilst simultaneously carrying full cave diving equipment;including bottles!; in three tackle bags suspended from a sling around my shoulders. Thats how necessary some of these stupid bolt routes are!!

The prize for the cave with the most uneccessary bolts installed by and for the benefit of a commercial operator has to has to go to Gough's Cave in Cheddar. For the numerous pointless bolts installed within.

Pray tell if any of the examples I have given are factually incorrect?

the installation of which appear to be largely for the convenience and entertainment of commercial operators and their clients

Hunters Hole - the only cave on the list which is ever likely to be used by the 'commercial' sector.  I am probably the most regular 'commercial' user of this cave - amounting to about 10 times a year.  Hunters Hole is Mendip's most popular SRT training and practice cave and as such is used regularly by club cavers, who, without doubt, represent the largest user group for this cave.

Thrupe Lane -  You seem to be making the mistake of assuming that if the installer is a club caver, and a professional instructor, their only possible motive for undertaking the work is personal gain.  You really think that instructors are running commercial trips into Thrupe Lane?  It's far from an ideal venue, and one that I gave up using about 20 years ago.

Mangle Hole - the same observation applies.  You are again assuming that if the installer is a club caver, and a professional instructor, their only possible motive for undertaking the work is personal gain.  But, please, use some common sense - is anyone really going to use Mangle Hole as a 'commercial' venue?  It's a ridiculous concept.

Gough's Cave - most bolting was done by members of Cheddar Caving Club in order to create a venue for club training.  This venue is very rarely made available to instructors. 

So in conclusion your assertion that the installation of which appear to be largely for the convenience and entertainment of commercial operators and their clientsis factually far from correct.

Nicely finessed Andy. So you never had anything to do with installation of any of these bolts then?

 

[exsumper]

To my mind the one development that has done more to facilitate the long term health of caving has been the growth and success of CHECC.

Thanks to the friendships they have made through this, many of our younger members now have extensive contacts throughout British caving and get to share experiences and knowledge for more widely than before. A number of our ex-students are now actively serving on committees on non-student clubs, are actively caving (and digging) with them on a very regular basis.

This is all to the good - and we never talk about the nudity (Descent, last issue, page 17, all we said was how remarkable it was that the bloke on the right was underground and isn't it about time he bought some new kit.  :blink

Graham: I couldn't agree more.

With regard to student nudity However I wouldn't dare comment; Lest I be accused of being an old lech. Mrs Exsumper is also a deft wielder of a Wok!

 

[graham]

I am not against instructed caving; many of my friends make a living in this way and they're very good at it. The ones I know are just ordinary cavers anyway. I'm pretty sure they also include conservation education as standard when dealing with clients (which I mention to make Graham feel a bit happier).

I am not against instructed caving either. However, I am against the way that it is carried out by certain 'qualified' people. I can attest to intentional flouting of access agreements and when I make the point about 'assets' to be expolited, I am merely reporting conversations that I was party to.

What I do find slightly concerning is an assumption that people who gain qualifications to allow them to lead less experienced people are somehow superior to regular club cavers. I don't think this is a problem at all within our own community but it may be how uninitiated outsiders see the situation. As a result it may be that people who act as instructors are the first to be consulted by the media for example, whenever there is some newsworthy caving related happening. If that's the case then such instructors have quite a responsibility to give a well rounded response, taking into account the overall caving community's interests. I have to say that, in my experience, that does generally happen.

Most of the 'legends' of British cave exploration had little if anything to do with paid instruction. I suspect that the reasons for this can be found in Chris Bonnington's autobiography. Worth reading anyway.

But the real forcing ground for speleological endeavour remains the many clubs and individual cavers who do it very competently, as a pastime.

Happily, that's exactly where many instructors originate anyway.

Ironic, isn't it.

I suspect BCA's attitude has always (rightly) been "Can we afford not to deal with commercial caving interests?".

This is a two-way street and the traffic most be carefully monitored.

The issue about the numbers of folk entering caving via a commercial operation is not an easy one. When many people who use this forum started caving there were hardly any instructors! The proportion of entrants from an instructed beginning is probably much higher among younger cavers. In some cases they may have had no choice in this - for example many university unions seem to be insisting on student clubs having the involvement of a professional caver, even though the clubs may be entirely competent to look after their freshers themselves. (Perhaps it's yet another classic example of people mixing up the true meanings of "professional" and "competent".) But let's not blame our caving instructors for this - it's more to do with the silly way our legal system "works" in this country these days.

The legal system in the UK works well, which is why the Jib Tunnel case failed against Dr Farrer but succeeded against the Scout Association. The University Union thing is a red herring, as anyone who knew the Bristol safety officer who was made redundant a few years back will tell you. Jim had no problem with the way UBSS operated. Others use the law as an excuse, 'cos it certainly ain't a reason.

 

[graham]

To my mind the one development that has done more to facilitate the long term health of caving has been the growth and success of CHECC.

Thanks to the friendships they have made through this, many of our younger members now have extensive contacts throughout British caving and get to share experiences and knowledge for more widely than before. A number of our ex-students are now actively serving on committees on non-student clubs, are actively caving (and digging) with them on a very regular basis.

This is all to the good - and we never talk about the nudity (Descent, last issue, page 17, all we said was how remarkable it was that the bloke on the right was underground and isn't it about time he bought some new kit.  :blink

Graham: I couldn't agree more.

With regard to student nudity However I wouldn't dare comment; Lest I be accused of being an old lech. Mrs Exsumper is also a deft wielder of a Wok!

Alex, yours is one of the clubs that I had in mind, as to the other, as I said we never talk about it. 

 

[damian]

Rubbish  Commercialisation has been part of the agenda all along. First you tried to destroy  the influence of clubs, second you then tried to destroy the amateur ethos.

If by "destroying the influence of clubs" you mean allowing individual members to vote but still allowing clubs to veto anything in a separate vote, then maybe. I sort of take your point about SRT kits, but that is a fairly isolated example and certainly doesn't point to BCA becoming massively commercial. Also, at the risk of being fussy, in the 90s it was NCA not BCA.

I'm not interested in the rest of the crap you've spouted, In common with a lot of other cavers I'm just sick of the Hypocrisy, lies, deceit, and pathetic games, engaged in by some of the more senior representatives of our national and regional caving bodies!

With respect, that's not very nice. I don't think I have every lied, been hypocritical or played "pathetic games" while involved in BCA. Everything I have ever done has been precisely as I have believed BCA Council (as the senior democratic body) wishes me to. In my time as secretary (5 yrs I think) I am not aware of any attempt by Council to hide anything ... and I'd have a pretty good idea if it did. We publish everything, allow anyone who wishes to to attend our meetings, invite voting representatives from all the Regions and Constituent Bodies and are generally as open as I think it is possible to be.

However you describe it; Both the CNCC and BCA have been  promoting and suggesting  to landowners "Cash for Access" !!!!!!

P.S. If you think this a little harsh or unfair, just reflect on the fact that the cash for access issue has only come to light as a result of recent activism on this forum!!  Prior to this, the only cavers that knew amateur caving was being sold down the river  were officials of the BCA/CNCC!!  :spank: :spank:

I have said it before, and I'll say it again. BCA does not equal CNCC. We are separate bodies and in fact constitutionally BCA is not allowed to interfere in CNCC's affairs at all. This is exactly the same with CSCC, or indeed any other Region or Constituent Body. BCA has not suggested or promoted cash for access, nor I suspect will it ever.

So cut it out or f*** off!!! :icon_321:

I'll ignore that particularly unpleasant line.

 

[exsumper]

I am not against instructed caving; many of my friends make a living in this way and they're very good at it. The ones I know are just ordinary cavers anyway. I'm pretty sure they also include conservation education as standard when dealing with clients (which I mention to make Graham feel a bit happier).

What I do find slightly concerning is an assumption that people who gain qualifications to allow them to lead less experienced people are somehow superior to regular club cavers. I don't think this is a problem at all within our own community but it may be how uninitiated outsiders see the situation. As a result it may be that people who act as instructors are the first to be consulted by the media for example, whenever there is some newsworthy caving related happening. If that's the case then such instructors have quite a responsibility to give a well rounded response, taking into account the overall caving community's interests. I have to say that, in my experience, that does generally happen.

But the real forcing ground for speleological endeavour remains the many clubs and individual cavers who do it very competently, as a pastime. Happily, that's exactly where many instructors originate anyway. I suspect BCA's attitude has always (rightly) been "Can we afford not to deal with commercial caving interests?".

The issue about the numbers of folk entering caving via a commercial operation is not an easy one. When many people who use this forum started caving there were hardly any instructors! The proportion of entrants from an instructed beginning is probably much higher among younger cavers. In some cases they may have had no choice in this - for example many university unions seem to be insisting on student clubs having the involvement of a professional caver, even though the clubs may be entirely competent to look after their freshers themselves. (Perhaps it's yet another classic example of people mixing up the true meanings of "professional" and "competent".) But let's not blame our caving instructors for this - it's more to do with the silly way our legal system "works" in this country these days.

Sorry John:  I have to disagree with the opinion you express in your last paragraph. As we have seen with the CNCC Cash for access fiasco. Commercial instructors will always be looking to their own financial interest! Rather than the interests of ordinary cavers.  The University training situation can solely be laid at the BCA's door, due to their active promotion of commercial training qualifications and quite deliberate denigration of other training routes; e.g. learning by experience or from training provided by experienced amateur cavers or clubs. 

Best Wishes
Alex