Conservation and consequences of CRoW access applied to caving.

[NigR]

To restrict access, as in gated/leader to all (or the majority of) caves would be the final nail in the coffin for this sport. Would anyone seriously get in to a sport where you had to apply and wait for a leader to become available? I doubt it.

I firmly believe there are less active cavers around than ever before and there are certainly a lot less younger cavers. Just out of interest, Dunc, how many (total and/or percentage) of your club members are under the age of 30?

 

[dunc]

To restrict access, as in gated/leader to all (or the majority of) caves would be the final nail in the coffin for this sport. Would anyone seriously get in to a sport where you had to apply and wait for a leader to become available? I doubt it.

I firmly believe there are less active cavers around than ever before and there are certainly a lot less younger cavers. Just out of interest, Dunc, how many (total and/or percentage) of your club members are under the age of 30?

Off the top of my head no idea, exactly. I can say that a greater percentage are over 30 than under it, the same probably applies to a fair number of other clubs.

 

[blackholesun]

Nig,

I'm pretty sure the numbers of people who have paid for BCA insurance have gone down, which probably is closely proportional to the total number of active cavers. Can't find it on the website though.

As for young/old divide, I heard recently that SWCC had 12 out of 300 members under 30. (Note, this may be bull)

 

[NigR]

As for young/old divide, I heard recently that SWCC had 12 out of 300 members under 30. (Note, this may be bull)

By, word gets around fast! Just shows how rumours, be it of discoveries or anything else, can spread like wildfire these days. Here's me trying to be discreet, being diplomatic and all. OK, guess I better put the record straight on this one. I was recently told that the figure was 15, not 12, and this came from a most reliable source. So, there you go, a nice round 5% of the membership are under the age of 30. Doesn't augur very well for the future of caving does it? Not too sure where all these hordes of rampaging cavers are supposed to be coming from in the years to come but it certainly won't be from here in Wales.

 

[Ed W]

I do not subscribe to the view that open access to caves on CROW land will inevitably lead to a wholesale desecration of our caves.  I do however believe that there are undoubtedly grave risks associated with a  completely unfettered access to all sites with entrances on CROW land.  To my mind the answer is obvious, that we should push for open access to caves on CROW land in cases where the risk of significant damage is low, but that we should support appropriate access controls to preserve the minority of sites that are vulnerable enough to warrant such protection.

I am a little fed up with the insinuation that anyone who supports more straightforward access to caves on CROW land does not care about conservation of our underground heritage.  Personally I am passionate about trying to preserve Britain's underground scenery.  Like Chris I feel that the only really effective conservation measure for really vulnerable caves is by having some sort of leadership scheme. That is why I am a "conservation warden" for several caves and give up a noticeable proportion of my caving time to enable others to see some of the best preserved caves in this country.  However like many others I would absolutely loathe the thought that such schemes should be applied to all caves, reducing our sport to nothing more than "follow my leader".

Many caves on what are now open access land have access restrictions (such as permits) that were put in place for reasons other than conservation of the cave.  Many of these sites have ungated entrances and are frequently pirated.  Others have locked gates with more or less easily available keys.  In neither case does the current access arrangements provide any real protection for the cave, it being impossible to vet every application for a permit or key.  Once the permit or key is obtained there is no way to police what the cavers get up to in the cave.  Equally I can think of at least one cave on open access land that is currently open for which a good case could be made for introducing some form of protection.

As such, and along with some of the other arguments made above, I cannot see how caving becoming a permitted activity under CROW will be any worse for cave conservation for those sites which presently have no gate, or where a gate/leader scheme is in place for reasons other than cave conservation.  So long as robust access controls can be retained for that relatively small subset of caves which presently benefit from gates and/or warden control to preserve them the conservation impact of open cave access under CROW should be minimised.  I would also add that to my mind such leader schemes must be open and transparent, and not simply enable the local clique to visit the local gems whilst keeping everybody else out.  To my mind it is too often the case that conservation is used as an excuse to keep special sites to an elite few.  I have been on the receiving end of such ultra-conservationism that can descend into a selfish and arrogant  case of "I've seen it but it's too vulnerable for anyone else to do so".

Finally I would hope that freer access under CROW might just encourage a few more people into the sport of caving.  If we are to protect our caves in the long run, then we need a vocal, and I would suggest numerous, body of people interested in our caves.  To my mind the only people who are going to do this are cavers.  Placing unnecessary hurdles in the way of accessing fine caves could be a factor that puts people off caving and leads them to other (lesser) past times, losing us a potential future advocate of cave conservation.

So rather than rail against the evils of open cave access on CROW land, why not debate how best to manage conservation issues in such a case?

 

[Glenn]

Nig,

I'm pretty sure the numbers of people who have paid for BCA insurance have gone down, which probably is closely proportional to the total number of active cavers. Can't find it on the website though.

Membership numbers are reported to each Council meeting - see the minutes for details. Additionally, trends are reported to the AGM, again see the minutes for details.

 

[notdavidgilmour]

I don't think the number of BCA insurance holders is an accurate figure to base the number of active cavers on.  We are in a recession and therefore many people may be opting not to renew purely on the basis of cost. 

There is a hole I frequent in North Wales which is VERY easy to get into.  Every man and his dog go in there but late last year someone (who still remains anonymous) took it upon themselves to place some "do not cross" tape around some pretties in there.  Even kids go down there for BBQs etc. and to be fair, people now walk around the tape and the pretties have been preserved.

Surely this proves the point that bomb proof doors, leader only systems etc. are not necessary.  By highlighting the fact that there was something of importance on the floor.  The mystery tape layer has educated everyone who goes in there to walk around it.

EDUCATION EDUCATION EDUCATION

 

[droid]

Presumably, because the pretties were still there, people avoided them before the tape was put up.

 

[notdavidgilmour]

Presumably, because the pretties were still there, people avoided them before the tape was put up.

Great point Droid.  This further strengthens the fact that leaving holes open is not equally proportionate to damage and therefore there will be no greater damage as a consequence of CRoW access applied to caving. 

 

[zomjon]

A thankyou to Ed W for providing such a well put and even handed contribution that should have even the most ardent members of the far ends of the spectrum giving it a bit of thought and maybe recognising positive possibilities of CRoW access.

 

[jasonbirder]

Presumably as Graham has pointed out that....alot of the erosion/wear and tear done to sensitive caves is caused by a)merely act of cavers passing through a delicate environment...and that b) alot of the damage is caused by unfortunate circumstance or accident rather than maliciousnous or poor caving skills he could inform us of why he feels his visits into sensitive caves caused no additional damage...whereas other cavers do...and put cynics (like mine)  minds at rest who suspect that Grahams desire to limit future cave access isn't in any way motivated by the fact he's no longer an active sports caver?

 

[graham]

Gosh, look chaps, another personal attack on me. 

 

[jasonbirder]

Or indeed reply to The Post rather than the fact that the post exists....

(edited for spelling error before forum pedants divert...)

 

[Alex]

I do worry for the future of our sport, I don't know why we worry so much about conservation as that won't be an issue in 30 years time. What with the health and saftey culture, cavers bickering like this and other cavers trying to make it harder for people to go caving, there will be no one caving if numbers keep going like this.

Well done extreme conservationists, it looks like you will win. 

Plus North Korea would have killed us all by then anyway.

 

[langcliffe]

I don't know why we worry so much about conservation as that won't be an issue in 30 years time. What with the health and saftey culture, cavers bickering like this and other cavers trying to make it harder for people to go caving, there will be no one caving if numbers keep going like this.

That seems to be a very anthropocentric view of the world in which you inhabit. Surely good things are worth looking after in their own right?

 

[NewStuff]

I do worry for the future of our sport, I don't know why we worry so much about conservation as that won't be an issue in 30 years time. What with the health and safety culture, cavers bickering like this and other cavers trying to make it harder for people to go caving, there will be no one caving if numbers keep going like this.

If it is made that hard to go caving by other cavers, I would suggest that gate removal, which is currently not a huge issue all over this island, will suddenly become one. I sincerely hope it doesn't get this bad, but it's not a great stretch of the imagination to see it in the not too distant future. Should people be determined that I cannot go into a large number of holes due to "pretties", yet they can, despite the fact that I have BCA, am in a club, am competent and know my abilities (and where they stop), then I would happily join in. At that point, why bother to do things the right way, why bother with decorum and trying to accommodate the wishes of a few? They clearly don't give a flying f*** about any of the rest of us outside their little gang. At that point, it's not got me anywhere, so I may as well say f*** it, and break out the tools.

Well done extreme conservationists, it looks like you will win. 

Nope, not yet, and I'll fight it as far as I can.  :icon_321:

 

[cap n chris]

Correct me if I read your post wrong but are you condoning/inciting/supporting criminal damage?

 

[NewStuff]

Correct me if I'm wrong but are you condoning/inciting/supporting criminal damage?

No.

I am saying that if the situation continues to deteriorate, I may well find myself in a position that I do support it. I do know of others, that while they are doing the "right" thing at the moment, are a lot closer to that line than I am. It won't be too long before they perceive that a minority are sitting pretty, and everyone else can get fucked. It's a constant topic in conversations, and it's starting to get an air of desperation to it, They don't *want* to do it, but they are being backed into a corner, and they'll "be damned if I'll give into the bullying little fuckers". Although a number of these guys are having this dilemma, a couple, should they be "pushed" far enough, will happily commit wholesale gate removal. Their way of saying "f*** you" is a lot more direct than mine.

And before any smartarse asks, no, I'm not about to name them. This is their dilemma, and their decision. I still don't agree with it, but I do find it a hell of a lot harder to outright condemn any action should it be taken than I previously would have.

 

[cap n chris]

OK. Not sure what part of the country you're referring to but certainly around these parts (Mendip) far less effort is involved in getting a gate opened when you want it to be, than going to the engineering lengths of removing it.

Certainly with the advent of the internet it's arguably never been easier to organise access to protected sites.

 

[NewStuff]

OK. Not sure what part of the country you're referring to but certainly around these parts (Mendip) far less effort is involved in getting a gate opened when you want it to be, than going to the engineering lengths of removing it.

Certainly with the advent of the internet it's arguably never been easier to organise access to protected sites.

In this area, it couldn't be further from the present situation. I am hoping that CRoW can give a ray of hope, however small, and start a reversal of this, to a situation You describe where it is easy to get somewhere. Should, however, the situation deteriorate, or even stay as it is now "You're not coming into our holes", people are going to lose all confidence in doing things "the right way", and just do it any way that gets results. The minority are currently keeping out the majority, and the majority are increasingly unhappy about this.

Gates here tend to be very well engineered, and it would likely be easier to just remove it wholesale, with all attendant risk involved in that, than negotiate even one-off access, let alone a situation where access was readily forthcoming. So far, that's rare. I can't see it staying that way.