Big hole on Hucklow Edge
- Thread starter Mark
- Start date
Peter Burgess
New member
I accept that it would be better to say "workings" rather than "old workings". However, "old" workings are going to be more susceptible to instability than "new workings" that will have been or are still being maintained.
nickwilliams
Well-known member
Now made it to the BBC, which, I am pleased to see, has a somewhat more factual account:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-25554549
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-25554549
Lord Whatwotleigh
New member
graham said:
This appears to be the usual precursor to unicorns. Happened before and will undoubtedly happen again.
Don't say I didn't warn you, it will all end in tears.
Yours, in his cups,
Whatwotleigh
Mark
Well-known member
pwhole
Well-known member
I was up there this morning with a mate having a look when we bumped into David Hirst from Calendar News, who asked us if we'd be interested in commenting (on camera) on what 'we thought of the hole'. We both declined on the grounds that anything we said would probably be misconstrued, my mate also has a professional interest in the subject, and what could we say other than 'impressive'?
He said he was following it up as it was a good story, rather than weather-related specifically. But he'd heard 'there was a mine underground near here'. He was already gathering names and numbers so we pointed him in the direction of Cavendish Mill. He had a cameraman with him, so maybe something's been on by now - I don't really watch it, to be honest.
After that, a woman from Webster's farm came out and told us we shouldn't all be parking on the bend. She had a word with David Hirst too, so lord knows how his story might end up. Fear and Loathing in Foolow, here we come
He said he was following it up as it was a good story, rather than weather-related specifically. But he'd heard 'there was a mine underground near here'. He was already gathering names and numbers so we pointed him in the direction of Cavendish Mill. He had a cameraman with him, so maybe something's been on by now - I don't really watch it, to be honest.
After that, a woman from Webster's farm came out and told us we shouldn't all be parking on the bend. She had a word with David Hirst too, so lord knows how his story might end up. Fear and Loathing in Foolow, here we come
Was at a meeting convened for Great Hucklow locals on Monday night where Peter Robinson, chairman of British Fluorspar (BF), owners and operators of Milldam Mine, explained that the collapse was solely due to accumulated water logging and collapse of old man workings in shale and had connection with operations in Milldam. He was also keen to stress that BF had no responsibility for remediation of the hole but they would assist as part of being 'good neighbours' and that the National Park Authority would decide what could and should be done.
Ultimately he suggested that DCC were the responsible authority and seemed unsure what responsibilities fell to the mineral rights owners. He also seemed to suggest that BF had no responsibility for what went on outside of their operating areas, i.e. areas of the mine beyond Black Engine through to Ladywash etc.
My internal 'porkie-pie' detector bleeped a few times during these statements!
Ultimately he suggested that DCC were the responsible authority and seemed unsure what responsibilities fell to the mineral rights owners. He also seemed to suggest that BF had no responsibility for what went on outside of their operating areas, i.e. areas of the mine beyond Black Engine through to Ladywash etc.
My internal 'porkie-pie' detector bleeped a few times during these statements!
AR
Well-known member
Hmm... if BF are saying they have no responsibility for anything beyond the working areas, does this mean they have formally relinquished title to them? If they still hold possession of the veins under the 1851 and 1852 acts then they have responsibility for those workings whether or not they are actively doing anything with them.
zippy
Member
AR said:
Not necessarily - under the 1851/1852 acts (IIRC) they own the mineral (vein), but not the void created when the mineral is extracted. So if the hole collapses, it's not (automatically) their problem. I believe there was an interesting test case to this affect not so many years ago...
