Crow: yes vote. worst case?

[jasonbirder]

lots of Mendip landowners are really proud of their caves.

Good, they wouldn't want to fill them in then.

Don't want 'em trashed, either.

To be fair...its pretty much just Graham that consider Cavers visiting a Cave and A Cave being Trashed, Vandalised, destroyed to the point where no-one should f*cking bother to look are the same thing...

Its an extreme outlier view that doesn't have many supporters...

Most peoples attitude to conservation vary somewhere between...access coupled with education is sufficient protection through to In Some sensitive situations gates/permits and leaders may be necessary to protect fragile and easily accessed area's and I doubt if there is much hostility between those two camps which between them probably encompass 99.9% of Cavers views...

There are very few posters on UKCaving that believe

one party, one individual even

is too much

 

[TheBitterEnd]

6 & 3. At least, those are simply the ones where I can immediately recall the conversations in some detail. I know others who have had similar conversations with other landowners. The gist of those conversations has often covered conservation issues as well as those of liability.

For each of those six, please tell us whether they lease the land or own it and what their primary purpose is in holding the land (farming, shooting, nature conservation, etc.)

Also regarding "has often covered conservation", in that context please give a rough idea of what "often" means, i.e. do you speak to them weekly/monthly and do they without prompting mention conservation every time, every other time, sometimes?

I know you probably don't have exact details but some fact based indication of your experiences would be most informative.

 

[graham]

6 & 3. At least, those are simply the ones where I can immediately recall the conversations in some detail. I know others who have had similar conversations with other landowners. The gist of those conversations has often covered conservation issues as well as those of liability.

For each of those six, please tell us whether they lease the land or own it and what their primary purpose is in holding the land (farming, shooting, nature conservation, etc.)

Also regarding "has often covered conservation", in that context please give a rough idea of what "often" means, i.e. do you speak to them weekly/monthly and do they without prompting mention conservation every time, every other time, sometimes?

I know you probably don't have exact details but some fact based indication of your experiences would be most informative.

No, I won't. Why the flying f**k should I? If you don't want to believe me then don't believe me. Call me a liar to my face.

It is exactly this type of personal harassment that is stopping other people speaking out against this campaign.

How do I know? Guess.

 

[Peter Burgess]

The cross-examinations that take place here are more like a murder trial! Surely this place is meant for discussions and debates, not trial by jury?

 

[jasonbirder]

No one needs cross examination...simple logic answers the question...

The Landowners and Caves Graham refers to are either...

a) one of the half dozen or so well known high profile gated leader systems on Mendip

b) one of a large number of CSCC key controlled caves for which the key is immediately and easily available to all cavers simply by asking at one of the cottages on Mendip

or

c) Open access cave with no restriction...

Its not likely to be c) is it...as there will no change pre or post CRoW interpretation

It is unlikely to be a) either simply as they are all concrete specific examples that would be mentioned by Graham to support his argument...IE The landowner has threatened to fill in UFS if the leader system is replaced...

Which leaves b) and does anyone genuinely believer a landowner (let alone 3) has said..."if easy and informal access for all cavers via a key that can be picked up at short/no notice at any caving hut on Mendip...is replaced by free access to all cavers perhaps by a derbyshire key or unlocked grill I'll fill the cave in with my JCB"

??? Me neither...

 

[Peter Burgess]

No one needs cross examination....

Don't do it then!

 

[steviet_scg]

I knew I shouldn't have started this beeping thread  I was at the wrong end of a bottle of red and should know better.

Thus far, on the issue of access the main downside of a yes vote going wrong would be a loss of goodwill and possible physical closure of a few caves - how many, no-one knows (obviously). Of these two I would imagine that the goodwill issue would be the greater threat - and to mitigate that threat will need careful handling by BCA officers, good communication with cavers - all cavers as far as possible - and patience on the part of cavers.

Nobody (Bottlebank aside) has tried to answer the other point I raised - what are the implications to someone who goes underground on CRoW land without permission. Either now or following failed negotiations etc. I understand that if the cave in question is covered by other protections then there may be the potential to pursue more serious charges - but, for a cave not covered by any such protection then is the case that you would be asked to leave and not come back for 72 hours. To be perfectly honest the way my body feels after a decent trip these days I'd be quite glad for someone to tell me not to come back for 3 days. 

To go off topic a little - why has there been no mention of the power given to access authorities by the CRoW Act to create byelaws to limit and prohibit access to designated land to protect the land or things on it or in it. Might be a bit simpler and quicker than a s.26 order and if breached would lead to a fine of around ?500.

Anyway, I'm off to the Dales for a week of walking, caving and the general avoidance of anything connected to the internet. 

Steve

 

[badger]

whats the worse case scenario, bit like a lot of the questions no one really knows until its all put to the test.

 

[graham]

I made no mention of who these people were nor what their attitudes to CRoW were. I knew that had I done so such as The Bitter End and Jackalpup would have demanded that I name names, or rescinded my post if I wouldn't.

Well, I'm damned if I'm going to.

So simple logic can say what it wants. It's wrong.  :icon_321:

 

[graham]

whats the worse case scenario, bit like a lot of the questions no one really knows until its all put to the test.

So apply the precautionary principle. As far as I can see the worst case scenario of the law not being changed is that Dabvid Rose still cannot ger down Mossdale & other caves in the Dales can still be accessed.

 

[TheBitterEnd]

6 & 3. At least, those are simply the ones where I can immediately recall the conversations in some detail. I know others who have had similar conversations with other landowners. The gist of those conversations has often covered conservation issues as well as those of liability.

For each of those six, please tell us whether they lease the land or own it and what their primary purpose is in holding the land (farming, shooting, nature conservation, etc.)

Also regarding "has often covered conservation", in that context please give a rough idea of what "often" means, i.e. do you speak to them weekly/monthly and do they without prompting mention conservation every time, every other time, sometimes?

I know you probably don't have exact details but some fact based indication of your experiences would be most informative.

No, I won't. Why the flying f**k should I? If you don't want to believe me then don't believe me. Call me a liar to my face.

It is exactly this type of personal harassment that is stopping other people speaking out against this campaign.

How do I know? Guess.

Well, apologies for causing such upset and at no point did I in anyway indicate I did not believe you. I was only trying to establish some facts   

 

[damian]

Can any member go to any BCA meeting? I had a brief look for info on this and couldn't find any. Certainly the impression was that the C & A meeting was closed.

Theoretically, Council and Standing Committee Meetings (such as Conservation & Access) are for members of the Committee only. However in reality we are generally pleased to welcome anyone as an observer. In fact, I am not aware of anyone ever having been turned away and do not anticipate this situation changing.

Damian Weare
BCA Secretary

 

[Bottlebank]

Can any member go to any BCA meeting? I had a brief look for info on this and couldn't find any. Certainly the impression was that the C & A meeting was closed.

Theoretically, Council and Standing Committee Meetings (such as Conservation & Access) are for members of the Committee only. However in reality we are generally pleased to welcome anyone as an observer. In fact, I am not aware of anyone ever having been turned away and do not anticipate this situation changing.

Damian Weare
BCA Secretary

Not really an open invite then? So the possibly paraphrased line "if you can't be bothered to turn up to meetings... etc" is a little misleading?

The BCA should make absolutely crystal clear, well in advance, when it's meetings are and who is entitled to attend.

And Damian, that's a criticism of BCA, not you.

 

[badger]

http://british-caving.org.uk/wiki3/doku.php?id=diary, this might help

 

[Bottlebank]

http://british-caving.org.uk/wiki3/doku.php?id=diary, this might help

Dates are easy - they key point is "who is entitled to attend".

 

[damian]

The BCA should make absolutely crystal clear, well in advance, when it's meetings are and who is entitled to attend.

With respect, I think it is pretty clear for anyone who is interested enough to read around. Everything is clearly explained in the BCA Handbook, for example. Apart from this, though, I accept there probably isn't anywhere else with it all clearly listed in one place.

However the meeting dates are on the calendar and the Constitution makes fairly clear who is entitled to attend which meetings, the only exception being that there is the potential for extra people to be co-opted to the various Committees and these are not listed by name. Whether they are actually listed on the website, and in what way, is currently a bit mixed. I am going to be working on a content revamp of the website over Christmas and/or Easter, so should be able to sort that then.

For the avoidance of doubt, BCA has the following meetings:

General Meetings (AGMs, SGMs and EGMs) - all Individual and Group members are entitled to attend, speak and vote. Anyone else is entitled to attend and speak at the Chairman's discretion.
Council Meetings - Council members (with a vote) are elected by the AGM, or are appointed directly by the Organisation they represent. The list is: Chair, Treasurer, Secretary, Conservation & Access Officer, Equipment & Techniques Officer, Training Officer, Legal & Insurance Officer and Publications & Information Officer, plus 4 individual member and 4 club reps. Those who can send a voting representative are: the 5 Regional Councils (CCC, CNCC, CSCC, DCA, DCUC), and the 7 Constituent Bodies (ACI, ASCT, BCRA, BCRC, CDG, CHECC, WPCST).
Council then makes a few other non-voting appointments: Newsletter Editor, Handbook Editor, Webmaster, Web Services, Rope Testing, Youth & Development, 2016 Co-ordinator.
BCA's main employees (i.e. Training Administrator and Membership Administrator) are also invited.
Beyond that anyone else is welcome to attend and speak, at the Chairman's discretion.
Standing Committees - Each of the Standing Committees meet with varying degrees of frequency. Training has sub-committees which also meet. Each Committee is made up of a voting representative from each of the Regions and the Constituent Bodies, plus the Officer themselves and anyone the Committee appoints. I don't have the time to list all the appointments here.

Despite this, I am not aware of anyone ever having been turned away from any BCA meeting, so meetings are basically open to anybody.

(I will almost certainly have missed something out here!)

 

[Bottlebank]

That's Damian, if you're doing a revamp would it be simpler to have a couple of extra columns on the diary which state who can attend and who can vote?

Must admit other than the AGM I thought, obviously mistakenly, that meetings were closed.

Must admit though until CRoW came along I'd never had the urge to attend one!

 

[Bottlebank]

We can all dream up increasingly unlikely scenarios, go to Greece and an eagle may drop a tortoise on your head but whenever I've been to Greece I have never bothered to wear a hard hat, just in case.

What it is the cost of getting in a JCB to block a cave? What is the damage to the moorland? Would an environmental impact assessment be needed?

Quite simply, why would a landowner bother? A lot of cavers seem to have hugely over inflated view of the importance of caving in wider circles. Landowners really care about money and things like gates and permits are a way of reducing liability, so is CRoW.

So is filling in a hole on your land. If the land is not a SSSI then cost to a typical farmer of filling in something the size of say Bull Pot entrance shaft in Kinsgdale, would be around ?30 to ?50 in diesel and a few hours work - assuming there's enough material around to fill it. If they don't have or can't borrow a digger (and most have or can) this might increase by ?100-?150. Or put another way, cheaper than fencing it in many cases - no need to renew the fence every ten or fifteen years.

The question was what is the "worst case".

 

[droid]

Tony's right you know: I've never known a farmer that couldn't access at least a back-actor within a couple of hours, on the promise of the lend of a sheepdog....

 

[Bottlebank]

Tony's right you know: I've never known a farmer that couldn't access at least a back-actor within a couple of hours, on the promise of the lend of a sheepdog....

Or a couple of pints