PeteHall said:Can we please leave out the comparisons of farm land to a private garden
BCA's constitution states at sub section 10.1 that "The Association shall not interfere in the affairs of a Member unless specifically requested to do so by that Member. The Association shall not mediate between Members unless requested by them in writing to do so." But if DCUC and what ever club / potential ACB was involved, invited BCA to help, then I am sure it would provide support. And that would include financial support via the RCC, see https://british-caving.org.uk/wiki3/lib/exe/fetch.php?media=about:documents:accounts:bca_regional_council_funding_2020.pdf . What I suspect at least one region would object to is BCA itself negotiating an access agreement directly with a land owner. If you don't ask .....mrodoc said:I know this is just a forum but perhaps somebody knows BCA's position with this.
mikem said:This isn't his first year on BCA council.
Legally the situation is exactly the same though, you are presumably trespassing. However, if you cause damage (crash landing / digging) it becomes a criminal offence. Morally it's not so great.mrodoc said:PeteHall said:Can we please leave out the comparisons of farm land to a private garden
I am glad to see somebody else voice this opinion. This comment has been thrown at me in the past (in relation to hang gliding in fact).
The one thing that people with ill-intent such stealing a quad from a farm don't want is to be spotted by other people. So if the farmer has honest cavers crossing the land it might deter thieves or spot them in the act. There's something to offer.fi said:If we want continued (and improved) access then we need to look at what we can do for the farmer (cash for access isn't everything).
Fjell said:The BCA probably has enough cash in the bank to buy 20 acres of good farmland, or half the Pennines. You can then lease it back to a farmer. This sort of thing goes on all the time in farming. You should see what a hodgepotch of fields some farmers operate. Some are miles apart.
The BMC has bought several crags.
Jenny P said:It sounds as if, unhappily, the landowners/tenants on Mendip have insisted on a lock and key system, which does create problems for whichever caving organisation tries to run it.
NewStuff said:Jenny P said:It sounds as if, unhappily, the landowners/tenants on Mendip have insisted on a lock and key system, which does create problems for whichever caving organisation tries to run it.
The sticking point is more that while some system may be required by the landowner, it's certain organisations that push for a lock and key system, to keep the archaic status quo.
It goes without saying that will be vehemently denied by Mendip's one-man excuse crew, however, anyone with the modicum of sense required to look at all the other restrictive shenanigans ongoing in and around Mendip, will see that it's actually a very likely scenario indeed.
mikem said:Box mines had a Derbyshire key system & just look what happened there...
Jenny P said:DCA has been able to persuade owners/tenants to allow the "Derbyshire Key" system,
John Gresty, blimey, how are you? It is indeed a long time, probably approaching summer 1971 in Cardiff just as I was about to leave. I take it you are living somewhere in the Peak. We must catch up when all this current madness settles down- the pandemic that is!John Gresty said:Russel, long time, no see. Your comments re history are important. I quite recently questioned a high-up in the Peak district national park authority who was speaking about 'restoring the peak district moors' , I asked whether they were planning to replant with trees as that was the original flora, my final riposte was 'When does history start'.
Another occasion I heard someone make a very definite statement, that was correct within their knowledge timespan, but within mine it was total rubbish.
It is always useful to have the full story, but the difficulty is to know how to use that knowledge. Added to which I also believe that the more one knows about a subject, the more you realise how little you actually know.
Good luck with the 'job'.
John
Excellent point and one I only became aware of at the CNCC Meeting on Saturday much to my embarrassment. It is on my to do list, as far as I am aware there is no initiative to engage in this matter from within BCA but I'll do my best to get one going.Badlad said:Badlad said:mikem said:Whilst the current situation is not directly related to access, it does stem from the view that taking control away from the landowners will adversely affect digging - why would they allow new caves to be found that will result in more people coming on to their land?
Or, to put it another way, why wouldn't they. Lots of landowners are fascinated by what might lie beneath their land and of course you generate good relationships to enable that.
In my experience of the Dales, landowners expect us to be representing cavers including campaigning for better, improved and legal rights of access. Building relationships on this basis has improved access and those relationships all round and sometimes you have to be challenging in order to achieve that. We are often seen as the solution to access issues rather than the problem. If anything it has improved opportunities for digging not diminished them.
Landowners have to comply with many laws and regulations every single day of their lives. It is not something they aren't used to but as you say this has nothing to do with current CSCC and BCA problems as outlined in Malc Foyles letter.
I wanted to make another point when I wrote this yesterday but had to leave the house for some rather damp potholing.
"Why would they [landowners] allow new caves to be found that will result in more people coming on to their land?" ELMS perhaps?
Environmental Land Management scheme will take over farm payment schemes post brexit. All farmers/landowners get large subsidy payments for a variety of reasons. These are changing in the post brexit world as they can no longer be delivered through the EU Common Agricultural Policy. Government Ministers have stated that the new scheme will deliver "public money for public good" and that "public access is a public good". Most outdoor organisations are working hard to ensure this happens for their own sectors. The most difficult part seems to be placing a value on access. Never the less it is likely that schemes will pay farmers for access on PROW, horse riding, climbing etc and it is perfectly possible to include caving amongst that mix. So find a new cave and the farmer/landowner gets paid for it.
The problem lies that you need to impress on government/Defra/NE that caving has a value. That's the job for a national organisation. Unfortunately since I reported on a meeting with other outdoor organisations two years ago (as a stand in for the BCA C&A officer) nothing has been done. The BCA volunteer effort and good will is minimised by the infighting and disruptive politics as outlined in the subject of this thread. It is likely that caving will be forgotten again because we haven't engaged with the outside world only looked inwards to our own petty battles. We missed the boat with CRoW for the same reason and now we are playing catch up at great expense, I expect we'll be playing the same game with ELMS.
Oooo Mr Odoc , touchy subject asking BCA to interfere in another regions affairs, I refer you to the Constitution:mrodoc said:What it would be good is to have specific support from BCA (rather than a regional body) when dealing with organizations such as councils or governing bodies. We have a very promising dig site in Devon on Highways land but local cavers are scared of asking permission to dig there despite my suggesting that a proposal with a risk assessment might do the job. There are sites we know of (OR knows one) where our regional representatives appear unable or unwilling to assist with such issues. I know this is just a forum but perhaps somebody knows BCA's position with this.