BCA statement on CROW land

[owd git]

Respect is earned. It is not an automatic right.

How does that work then?

If I meet a person for the first time must I be prepared to endure several days/weeks/months of offhand and insulting treatment before that person decides that I am worthy of respect?

I don`t think the vast majority of people work this way for the excellent reason that life would be unpleasant for most people most of the time.

Respect IS an automatic right on first acquaintance. It can later be forfeit. Anyone who suggests otherwise just hasn`t thought things through.

Whilst I respect the first posters right to an opinion;  :tease:
I respect, and agree with the thoughtfulness and decent tone of G. Hardwicks reply.
O. G.

 

[jonnyrocketboots]

A little while ago I had a Gentlewomans through trip in Derbyshire with a few mates and asked for any info on this forum.  Owd Git went out of his way to tape some gen underneath the lid (and unknown to me!) on the exit in Matlock.  Was a nice surprise and I learned a lot from info received.

A successful trip and a great day out was had by all, So O.G. certainly has my respect for his help. One day I hope I can return the favour somehow.

:bow:Cheers OG!

 

[NewStuff]

Respect is earned. It is not an automatic right.

How does that work then?

Some people get my respect almost immediately, some will never get it. Most fall somewhere between.

I do not subscribe to the theory that You should automatically respect people in a position of "power". They are still people, the same as the rest of us, and like us, their attitude and actions define how quickly/if they gain respect

 

[droid]

All very true, but with the caveat that people that don't show respect tend not to get it.

 

[bob monkhouses face mole]

I will respect a person. I will not respect pomp or ego.

Mr. Burgess sor, I agree with what you said, just not how you said it.  ?

 

[Peter Burgess]

In all walks of life there are "givers" and "takers". From what I have seen of Dave Judson's contributions, he is, I think, one of our "givers". Ego come from the Latin for "I" - people who put themselves first no matter what. So, all those who are repeatedly telling us "I want xyz", "I have the right", or more indirectly "why don't they ....." - these may be the ones with the "ego"? <--- note the question mark. Those who you don't hear much from, but in the background are busy contributing, getting a buzz from working with others for the general betterment of the whole, these are not "egos" but certainly deserve respect. Just because they choose to work in the background and not blow trumpets, doesn't make them any the less valuable. And they are probably only too happy to get helpful or even critical comments from others, PROVIDED it is done in a positive and contributory way, rather than shouting from the touchline. I think that's why so frequently we hear from the likes of JennyP and others that the direct approach from individuals is the way forward, not policy created from the ether by anonymous disparate cavers with no form or identity. So, if you have a problem with how things are organised by representative bodies, the better way to be heard is to take it up with the positive attitude of a "giver", and not the negative sourness of a "taker". When policy statements are made, such as the one mentioned above, it would have been made with a genuine open attitude to clarify the situation to those who cared, in a simple easy to understand manner. Picking holes in the statement is not really conducive to getting it reconsidered. Making a constructive comment along the lines suggested by JennyP elsewhere is much more likely to achieve something.

 

[bob monkhouses face mole]

From what I have seen on here I agree that JennyP deserves respect, but she also earns it through the way she communicates. I also agree that there is a problem with people who you describe as takers, but I think that it stems from unconstructive communication (and I know i have not bathed myself in glory in this regard). I feel  that there is is a need for clearer communication of what peoples needs are in these debates to further things along. What we are seeing when one group of similarly interested individuals is saying 'I have a legal right...' or 'why don't they' or 'I want XYZ' may  instead be a sign that those individuals have a need that is not being met. For example in this regard, it may be a need to feel that the BCA or whoever is supporting the interests of all cavers. The BCA or whoever also have needs, such as time to address the issues, bearing in mind they may be volunteers and may have very busy lives. If we can identify what the needs are that aren't being met, and listen to each others needs, things will be able to move forward.

Apologies for being a tit.

 

[Jopo]

Danthecavingman is right.

There has NOT been a increase in rescues since the leadership requirement in OFDl was lifted. A broken ankle in OFDl.5 rescued out of OFDl. One party could not find it's way into OFDl from OFDll and returned to Top Entrance to met by the team as well overdue. One party could not find it's way out of Cwm Dwr and returned via OFDl again met as well overdue.
It is fair to say that a OFDll - OFDl required a leader who would know the way through the boulder choke from Hush Sump (not kidding that is as close as they got!)
When SWCC purchased the entrance to ensure access for cavers (in perpetuity one hopes) it was felt by most that to keep a leadership requirement in a cave where the route finding is less onerous, and no more 'dangerous' than in the rest of the cave was not justified.

If Draenen ('controlled') or for that matter Daren ('open access') or Agen Allwed ('controlled') had less than a quarter (at most) of the trips into Ogof Ffynnon Ddu then one would expect a rise in callouts.

The number of frontline rescuers within 1 hour of the cave is below 15. We do think about our responses and if you think we are over zealous move down here and join the team. I can assure you that any decent caver would be more than welcome and you will get occasionally get some good trips between 7pm and 2am 

Jopo

 

[Peter Burgess]

Thank you Jopo. I can't remember who it was who suggested there had been more incidents through over-confident trips into Bottom entrance. Whoever it was, maybe they will read this.

 

[SpeleoTrog]

Thank you Jopo. I can't remember who it was who suggested there had been more incidents through over-confident trips into Bottom entrance. Whoever it was, maybe they will read this.

Based in the typical response in other threads, it won't matter if people read it. If it fits their world view, they'll agree. If not, it'll be written off as lies designed to fit whatever the latest conspiracy theory is.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[blackholesun]

Am glad that I didn't mention OFD now!

For some perspective, I deal with science as my trade. In theory, at least, if someone criticises your idea, they are not criticising you. It simply means that when they have weighed the evidence, they have not arrived at the same conclusion. Perhaps they have seen different evidence, or perhaps they have applied different reasoning.

This post is not meant to say anything about David Judson. It is simply meant to draw light on a seemingly very influential document. If anyone has read the more absurd section and subsequently decided to scrutinise the rest of it, resulting in them drawing an informed conclusion, then I feel that this post has fulfilled its purpose.

 

[Rhys]

"Think about it, free access to caves and potholes would be quite inoperable (and dangerous) in many situations including popular sites such as... Swildons Hole, etc."
[/quote]

Swildons Hole is not on CROW land. Not relevant.

Rhys

 

[potholer]

Respect is earned. It is not an automatic right.

How does that work then?

If I meet a person for the first time must I be prepared to endure several days/weeks/months of offhand and insulting treatment before that person decides that I am worthy of respect?

I don`t think the vast majority of people work this way for the excellent reason that life would be unpleasant for most people most of the time.

Respect IS an automatic right on first acquaintance. It can later be forfeit. Anyone who suggests otherwise just hasn`t thought things through.

I'd say that some default level of respect as a minimum is a right on first meeting, after which it will likely change for better or worse in the light of experience.

Though, of course, the internet complicates things a little - A's experience of B might well begin or even become significant before B is even aware A exists.

 

[bograt]

Nah, tolerance is the word, tolerate them until you can decide to respect or otherwise, then spend time to change your attitude. This works face to face or electronically.

 

[glyders]

The way I look at it there are two things about access I feel strongly about:

1. If it is on private land with no automatic right of access (eg. Swildons, Alum Pot, Pridhamsleigh) then I don't have any problem with respecting the landowner's wishes. If it is on open access land then I still don't mind respecting the landowner's wishes as long as they are fair (eg. access for cavers, walkers, climbers all the same).
I must point out that whilst I may not like it, I do still respect their access requirements. The only time I am aware that I have been caving against a landowner's wishes was due to bad gen given to me by another caver (the land had changed hands since they got permission).

2. I much prefer a system where I can do a spur of the moment trip. Due to work I never know more than a day in advance when I will be available (and that counts weekends too). Places like those I've named above are great - you either just drop money in a box or knock on the farmer's door. On the other hand, if I can't get a key to somewhere it isn't a big deal as I can go somewhere else.
I've never thought about a key/permit system for safety. I've always seen it as being about knowing who was there and when. This could then be used if there were damage above or below ground (OK, so it is more likely to have been someone else but it is a starting point - they may have seen something or be able to pinpoint the time better).

 

[Alex]

If it is on private land with no automatic right of access (eg. Swildons, Alum Pot, Pridhamsleigh) then I don't have any problem with respecting the landowner's wishes. If it is on open access land then I still don't mind respecting the landowner's wishes as long as they are fair (eg. access for cavers, walkers, climbers all the same).

That is exactly the way I look at it, which is why Leck Fell, Castleton (Though I know permits are pretty quick) and other Fells in the same situation is so unfair.

 

[jasonbirder]

They're not THAT quick tho'
Here's an example of why people are probably so fed up of the access process....
I and some of my buddies are members of a caving club that are members of the CNCC; had a day off mid-week at fairly short notice before christmas...
I got in touch explaining the situation...Club Members...Have had Casterton Fell permits before...its mid-week so its HIGHLY unlikely that there would be many other permit requests that day...explained that I knew it was short notice and if we could get something sorted out I'd follow up with the appropriate paperwork (Permit request on Club headed notepaper by Club access official) as soon as we could arrange it after the date...
The response I got was...couldn't respond to email communication...couldn't issue a permit to individuals (even members of CNCC clubs) had to be in writing...on club headed note paper...signed by either club secretary or club meets official...
No prizes for guessing what we did...
(I obviously mean we went and did Swinsto...)

 

[Badlad]

It is a pity you are not in the CNCC clique.  For those individuals that are they can print out their own permit, or if you know those individuals well, and you are in the right club, they will do the same for you.  I have witnessed this with my own eyes.

Unfortunately Jasonbirder you are not in the right club and/or don't know the right people.

 

[bograt]

That is exactly the way I look at it, which is why Leck Fell, Castleton (Though I know permits are pretty quick) and other Fells in the same situation is so unfair.

Think you mean Casterton, Castleton is in Derbyshire.