Extraordinary Meeting of the PDCMG

[Chris Seal]

What perhaps isn't clear from Fleur's original post is that various options were discussed at the PDCMG AGM and are up for the discussion at the EGM.  So it's not just a question of the known second entrance, but what the policy should be in the event of other future entrances and the allowed uses of such entrances.  I believe there ought to be room for some compromise, concessions, exceptions, etc.

My personal opinion is that the existing 2nd entrance isn't in a good location for another permanent entrance and so shouldn't be opened for general use.  I believe (but haven't heard direct) that it also doesn't have approval from the landowner.  I've been assured several times (whenever I've asked) that it could be opened up fairly easily in the event of major rescue.  So I would have no problem extending that principle if it were opened for a limited time for pre-approved & specified special purposes only i.e. whilst it doesn't make sense to open it for general use, it could make sense (for a limited period) to allow the surveying trips use it to complete their job as it saves several hours of commuting, enables them to use those saved hours to do more hours surveying per trip and thereby do fewer trips overall (and so causing less damage and not more).

Regarding other future entrances, I believe they would need to be looked at on a case by case basis and so I think a blanket ban is perhaps too extreme.  In the right locations, they could sense and make for some very good through trips.  Does that increase the damage by increasing the number of cavers visiting the cave?  I'm not convinced; yes it may increase the number of cavers that choose to visit the cave, get to see it and makes some locations less remote, but equally those cavers only pass through the passages once and not twice by returning the same way.  Also I've always suspected that cavers (both novice and expert) do more damage on their return journey that the inward journey.  On the outbound journey, cavers are tired and since they've already seen the passage they tend to hurry through.  And is it so wrong if more cavers visit a cave?  I believe that damage is roughly proportional to the number of cavers (both novice and expert) that visit somewhere and then it follows that the extreme conversation argument is caves should be barred from any access.  If no one is allowed to go and admire the beauty, then what's the point of the beauty (probably too deep   But I don't believe it is so wrong that more cavers get to see a cave provided there's balance with conversation and it doesn't encourage total novices/incompetents.  It's difficult to lay down criteria for the second entrances in advance and so that's why I think it need to be on a case by case basis.  In general, I'd want to assure myself of factors such as a) the entrances are far enough apart not to encourage novice through trips b) that it doesn't create 'trade routes' through particularly sensitive passages, c) that the entrance is acceptable from an above-ground perspective (landowner, location, etc) and no doubt more factors I can't think of at this moment.  On this basis, I believe PDCMG could change it's position from 'no new entrances' to one of stating new entrances will be considered of a case-by-case basis if that gains wider acceptance by cavers.  Whether it makes much difference in practice I'm not sure as I'm not aware of a potential second entrance that would gain widespread agreement as acceptable (suggestions?).

Chris
ps. For the avoidance of doubt the opinions above are mine and do not necessarily reflect opinions I express at PDCMG meetings when I'm acting on behalf of CSS.

 

[Andy Sparrow]

Thanks for that, Chris.  Sounds very sensible to me.

 

[danthecavingman]

Hi,

I presume that the 'locals' are the owners of the farm approx 150m from the entrance of Draenen. Why after so many years of access being allowed are they suddenly unhappy? Have they expressed the reason for their unhappiness to the PDCMG? Just want to know what's going on here. I think I'm right in stating that there is something going on that most people on this forum are not party to - hence my confusion as to what has soured access.
Any chance someone can shed some light?

Cheers,

Dan.

 

[Peter Burgess]

Fearless Dan steps into the spotlight.

 

[Otter]

The locals may read this forum. It is enough to make anyone unhappy.

 

[Peter Burgess]

If I was seriously concerned (not necessarily 'unhappy') about the activities of a group of people in my area, one of the things I would almost certainly do would be to scour the internet for relevant information. Before posting anything in the public arena, we should be careful to make sure it cannot be misconstrued.

 

[NigR]

I presume that the 'locals' are the owners of the farm approx 150m from the entrance of Draenen. Why after so many years of access being allowed are they suddenly unhappy? Have they expressed the reason for their unhappiness to the PDCMG? Just want to know what's going on here. I think I'm right in stating that there is something going on that most people on this forum are not party to - hence my confusion as to what has soured access.
Any chance someone can shed some light?

Hi Dan,

I can fully understand your confusion considering some of the alarmist nonsense that some folk are posting on here.

Just don't believe the crap they are telling you, that's all.

The ruling clique on the PDCMG can see that caver opinion is turning against them and they are becoming desperate. Hence all this 'unhappy locals' rubbish.

The situation is firmly under control and is in the more than capable hands of Elsie Little, Cambrian Caving Counil's Conservation and Access Officer. Just leave it for her to deal with and everything will be fine.

Cheers,
Nig

 

[manrabbit]

Are the the locals unhappy about cavers visiting caves on their land? or the fact that theres an official group set up to control access to a cave on Their land. The very presence of the PDCMG could be seen as threat to the land owner. Did the land owner ask that a group be set up to manage access, or was an offer made  by the PDCMG to do that on his behalf, theres a big difference.

Are the land owners really concerned about their legal liabilities, indeed, were they even interested in this issue before being made aware of it by the PDCMG?

We can be our own worst enemies sometimes, and I can't help feel that negotiations that involve committees and a very small number of locals is doomed to fail.

 

[NigR]

Hi manrabbit (interesting name - do you live down Carno?),

I'll try to answer your questions.

Are the the locals unhappy about cavers visiting caves on their land?

No. So long as you are meant to be there, don't park at the pub without asking, remember to fill in the logbook, take the correct route to the cave and don't have a shit in full public view everything is cool.

.......or the fact that there's an official group set up to control access to a cave on their land?

Not that I am aware.

Did the land owner ask that a group be set up to manage access, or was an offer made  by the PDCMG to do that on his behalf, theres a big difference.

The PDCMG was already set up and functioning before the present landowners bought the land. Initially, the PDCMG was formed without prior consultation with the existing landowner and an access agreement was negotiated later.

Are the land owners really concerned about their legal liabilities?

Yes, most definitely. However, I have been reliably informed that they are happy with the current situation regarding liability.

...indeed, were they even interested in this issue before being made aware of it by the PDCMG?

Don't know for sure but my gut feeling would be that they were probably not. Certainly, there is a faction within the PDCMG that has deliberately attempted to mislead the landowners over the question of further entrances and they may well have used the liability issue to do so.

Hope this helps.

 

[danthecavingman]

Ok, I'm going to read between the lines here and suggest the following:

The landowners that own the land that Draenen and other possible entrances into the system are located on / under have changed. Whereas the previous landowner did not want other entrances into Draenen opened up on their land, the new owners (ex-cavers?) are not adverse to this and to this end have granted permission for cavers to dig on their land. These digs may end up going into Draenen. The PDCMG are opposed to this on conservation grounds (fair enough) but are unable to stop the digs as the landowner is the only person who can say yay or nay to a dig on their land. The PDCMG have try to intervene and in doing so have possibly upset the land owners by trying to tell them what they can / can't do on their own land and mentioning liability issues etc. The land owners now want to distance themselves from PDCMG and organise access through CCCCA.

Anywhere near the mark?

My only reason for posting here btw is that it is not being made clear if current access to Draenen is under threat. If it is then that's obviously bad news.

 

[manrabbit]

Hi Nig

My Carno past has caught up with me, found out on my first post!!..

I hadn't realised that ownership of the land had changed, I've been away from the caving scene for about 10 years and was surprised to find such issues regarding access to Draenen. Is it true that the new owners are ex cavers, I'd love to see them on here. Someone should suggest it!! 

Cheers

Huw

 

[NigR]

Dan,
Whoooaaa (or words to that effect)! Slow down, you are way, way, way off the mark here. I've just got back from a very muddy surveying trip and need to get cleaned up, otherwise I'd put you right here and now. Will try to do so tomorrow. However, you can rest assured that current access to Draenen is not under threat.


Manrabbit,
No, the landowners are not ex-cavers - it's just Dan fantasising!
(Is it Huw D from Brynmawr, by any chance? If so, let me know 'cos there's a dig over Llangattock way I'd like to ask you about).

 

[danthecavingman]

Perhaps some of you should have a chat to the locals who are or who have been cavers but not to the knowledge of other Pwll Du locals.  These (ex)cavers can sit in the pub and glean a lot of information... The locals are very unhappy.

As I said, I was trying to read between the lines.

I know it's virtually impossible on a forum like this, but is there any chance someone can post a neutral, unbiased account of the current climate at Pwll Du and what is going on?

Anyone reading this thread at the minute will probably like me be forming an opinion that unauthorised digging and caving has been going on that has upset the locals and the PDCMC for some reason.

It would be nice to get the cavers viewpoint and the 'locals' viewpoint.


Dan.

 

[NigR]

Dan,

Have you looked at the other threads concerning Ogof Draenen?

These are:

http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php/topic,8177.0.html

http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php/topic,8528.0.html

http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php/topic,6645.0.html

If not, then you might like to spend the weekend reading them.

I find it hard to understand why you are still continuing to focus on one totally negative comment. Why not do as I have already sugggested and contact Elsie Little, Cambrian Caving Council Conservation and Access Officer? Surely you can accept what she has to say as being neutral and unbiased? Will pm you her telephone number now.

Nig

 

[danthecavingman]

Hi Nig,

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction on the forum - I was following the threads but sometimes you give up with a long topic that goes bitchy halfway through.

I understand now that the landowner is opposed (still) to the (original) second entrance being opened.

I have the following questions:

Is the 'Back Door' now under consideration? Is it owned by a different landowner? Will the PDCMG permit the opening of 'Back Door'? Why are the locals unhappy? Why is the owner of the original entrance so unhappy?

Seeing as this subject always causes so much feeling, isn't it best if we just accept the single entrance policy?

Personally if I were digging at the far end of Draenen I would prefer to have a shorter transit time between entrance and dig to maximise my time pushing the system. However as a tourist caver who has been in Draenen a few times through the original entrance I have always accepted that it is a long trip to get to the further points in the cave. I have been as far as the start of Last Sandwich and back out in a ten hour trip that i found very tiring. That is the limit of how far I have been in Draenen. I have also done the round trip and been up Gilwern passage.
From a conservation point of view I don't see how the opening of the second entrance could be that detrimental. If it encouraged through trips then there aren't that many formations between Perseverance and the Original Entrance that could get trashed, just a lot of big, bouldery passage.
I was very disappointed 5 years ago when I got to the snowball to find it had what looked like a muddy hand print on it. To get that far you have to be a fairly reasonable / determined caver. For me that would be the nearest decent formation to the second entrance and it's already been trashed.

Anyway, I'm not going to get involved in this. All I want to know is why there seems to be an undercurrent to this whole thread that the current owners of the Draenen entrance are really pissed off and access is in the balance. If this is the case it seems to me that we need the PDCMG to continue to negotiate access on our behalf.

Dan.

 

[dunc]

Personally if I were digging at the far end of Draenen I would prefer to have a shorter transit time between entrance and dig to maximise my time pushing the system.

Why can't any potential diggers do like they do in Daren and camp underground - Is it possible / permitted in Draenen?

From a conservation point of view I don't see how the opening of the second entrance could be that detrimental. If it encouraged through trips then there aren't that many formations between Perseverance and the Original Entrance that could get trashed, just a lot of big, bouldery passage.

Ahh, I have a very vague idea of the area in which this second entrance lies now..
As for through trips, it sounds crap from your description! Lots of big bouldery passage is not my idea of fun for a through trip, is there some variety in the passages, some mediocre formations?? If it's like you describe I would have to detour to see something else, like many other people no doubt would (I'm not familiar with the cave at all so I don't know how far I would have to go to find something worthwhile.)

I'll now retire again to my comfy chair and read/skim over this thread again in a few days as, like Dan, I've grown tired of reading too much bitchy-political shit on this and the other similar threads.

 

[Ian Adams]

Time to jump in at the 11th hour ?.

?Dunc? has hit a nail on the head which I think is driving most of us totally potty and that is (not to put too fine a point on it) ?too much bitchy political shit?.

A MAJOR problem we (as cavers) face is the differing ?political? opinions of persons (landowners, other cavers etc.) and so called ?bodies? (BCA, CCC, PDCMG, CCW etc.).

I have only been caving seriously for around 3-4 years and , frankly, the utter rubbish that I have witnessed that has been thrown in the way of ?progress? is so frustrating that sometimes it makes me feel like giving up caving altogether and I will wager a number of other cavers feel the same way.

It just seems that some people exist to cause problems. In fairness I think that some of these people believe they are doing the right thing but I am certain some are on a ?power trip? and even those who believe they are doing the right thing are often ?mis-guided? by others.

As some examples not dis-similar to this thread ?

Our own club discovered a surface sink by the terminus of cave in our area which was conveniently by the car park we use. The cave entrance being some way away, it made good sense to dig the sink to create an exit for a through trip and we approached the landowner for his permission (which he gave).

After we began the new entrance we were advised (by the police) that we were digging SSSI land and thusly committing an offence (actually, they were very arsey about it). We genuinely were not aware of this (yes, the landowner should have told us) and obviously we co-operated to remedy the position. We applied to the CCW to continue the dig but we were refused. Strange really as the dig was in a quarry spoil heap and the reason for the SSSI was to protect special ?fauna? (of which there was none on the quarry spoil). However, with the threat of prosecution and a refusal of permission we were compelled to abandon the project and re-fill the ?entrance?.  Powerplay? Politics?

In another instance, a dig had been on-going for in excess of 10 years and the land was suddenly designated SSSI. The CCW ordered the dig to be stopped as the dig spoil was being tipped outside the cave entrance. The CCW argued it was destroying the ?fauna?. The diggers argued that there was no fauna (on account of the tipped spoil) and hadn?t been for at least 10 years prior to the order. Guess who won that argument.

In another, the remake of the Hollywood blockbuster ?Clash of the Titans? includes scenes from Dinorwig quarry in Llanberis. In order to get permission there, the film company had to agree to protect all the ?fauna? that was manifesting on the spoil heaps with camouflage netting, they had to agree to put wooden boards over muddy and swampy parts of the area to protect the ?fauna? and they had to agree to re-plant 3 trees for every tree they cut down (well, they were only allowed to coppice them) ?. (how many trees are there in Dinoriwig quarry anyway) ?  If I were the film company I think I know what my response to all that would have been ?.

But, you may argue conservation is ?right and proper? and that it is ?right? to protect the land. So, why then, do the same ?conservationists? cut down branches and trees, fence off areas to protect certain species of lifeforms and lay down rocks on footpaths to ?protect? the land, the vegetation and the animals ?

I expect you will believe that they do it to protect the environment ?. .?

However, are they not, themselves, interfering with the natural cycle of nature in doing so ?  By that I mean they are interfering with the natural food chain and the natural way in which vegetation and lifeforms live and adapt to the environment.

This leads to very clear ?double standards? and hypocrisy. How is it ?ok? to rebuild a footpath with stones flown in form everywhere (thus changing the landscape and destroying the ?fauna? and yet it is not ok to dig through spoil (non-natural) to benefit cavers?  The other examples I have given are equally ridiculous.

You might argue that they are doing it ?for the best? BUT, at the end of the day, the very best you are going to be able to say is that it was a political decision. What actually is for the best? Some would argue that we should just ?get on with it? as this is natural progression. Whereas I understand the ?desire? to protect and preserve? there are consequences (ie. A woodland I know has recently been ?preserved? and as a result  mink have re-inhabited the area and eaten everything ? this would not have happened if the conservation people had not have interfered.)

It is this kind of ?politics? that is causing us (cavers) so much difficulty, grief and expense.

What happened to common sense ?

What happened to be a ?progressive? people ?

Seems to me that we are being stiffled with utter rubbish from the powers that be who say ?you can?t do this?. You can?t do that ?. Etc. etc.?.

What gives them the right to say so ?

Ultimately, should it not be the landowners decision ?

Sorry to have gone into a ?rant?, but, like ?Dunc?, I am fed up with the politics of it all.

I mean well though.



Ian

 

[NigR]

All I want to know is why there seems to be an undercurrent to this whole thread that the current owners of the Draenen entrance are really pissed off and access is in the balance.

Hi Dan,

It's late and I've just got back from a very exciting caving trip so I'll have to be briefer than I would have liked.

For now, just rest assured that access is not in the balance. (Don't know how many times I've got to say this!). The undercurrent that you mention above has been created by certain individuals purely to further their own interests.

And, sadly, some people are still being taken in by it. Witness your own conclusion:

Seeing as this subject always causes so much feeling, isn't it best if we just accept the single entrance policy?

See what I mean?

 

[Hughie]

Jackalpup - I've had more than 25 years of SSSI's and their incumbent bodies that trail along behind them. Welcome to the real world  .

 

[graham]

Jackalpup

It may well be possible to, quite reasonably, explain each and every point in the cases that you lay out. Unfortunately it is impossible to do so based on the very limited information you give other than to say that I know of other cases where similar restrictions have been placed for perfectly good reasons.

But to summarise:

What gives them the right to say so ?

The fact that we live in a democracy and that they have been delegated those powers by democratically elected bodies.

Ultimately, should it not be the landowners decision ?

Would it were that life was that simple. To take a famous (and sufficiently ancient to be non-controversial) example. What the landowner on the top of Mendip did in washing lead ore and allowing the used water to flow into the swallets completely screwed the water supply to the paper making mills at Wookey Hole several miles away. What we do on our land affects our neighbours in so many different ways.