Loss of cave access, CROW and other things

[Brains]

We dont know - but can guess, having the control and authority is a motive well known in many walks of life, as is being part of an elite. Being a big fish in a small pond is a role that is assumed by many, far too many people.

 

[Andyj23UK]

I am directly involved in the management of a cave or two. What, pray tell, are the benefits that I get from this? Please take into account the fact that my current state of health means that I don't actually get underground very often these days.

if you dont get anything out of it - why do you do it ? [ PS - i consider the ` warm fuzzy ` of knowing i have helped someone else - a benefit to me ]

PPS - your health and fact you no longer cave are an irrelevant appeal to emotion

EDIT  to add : screw decorum - some people thrive on " power " real or imagined - however petty - you are not " one of those people " - are you ?

 

[khakipuce]

I am directly involved in the management of a cave or two. What, pray tell, are the benefits that I get from this? Please take into account the fact that my current state of health means that I don't actually get underground very often these days.

You get to tell people how marvellous you are on Internet Forums

 

[graham]

Right so now I know what the benefits are. To quote a very good friend of mine super smashing, great.  :blink:

Oh and Andy, my health is wholly relevant as it means I'm not involved simply to secure easy access for myself, that's why I pointed it out. 

 

[Badlad]

Graham - if you had been around a hundred years ago would you have upheld the landowners right to prevent access to all members of the public to open country?  This was the position in much of the country until the 1932 mass trepass of Kinder Scout.  Landowners clearly didn't want anyone on their land and it took militant action, mostly by ramblers to set in motion change.  Some went to jail for it, not for trepass, but for brawling with the gamekeepers which the landlord sent to try and stop them.  Since then the ramblers have led a campaign for open access to fells and the like culminating in the CRoW Act of 2000.  One of the main reasons the 'right to roam' gained favour with governments was because being able to freely access certain land for recreational purposes was likely to improved the nations health. It wasn't very popular with the big landowners though.  Social change requires that more people have greater access to the countryside and I welcome it, the more free the better, and it that causes problems then educate, don't control and restrict. 

Basically, I am suggesting that if we just did what the landowner wanted we wouldn't enjoy much access to open countryside at all. 

By the way I am also a landowner myself but take a very different view to the controlled and restricted position you seem to favour.

 

[graham]

Badlad

Am I the only one that sees the distinct ecological difference between people wandering freely over reasonably robust fellsides and remembering that spreading them all out over the fell minimises the energy impact previously limited to narrow footpaths, which them needed constant repair and comparing this with most of our caves where there are not many different routes through one passage and where energy inputs from visitors are disproportionately high compared with the normal background levels.

Caves is different to fells.

 

[dunc]

Am I the only one that sees the distinct ecological difference between people wandering freely over reasonably robust fellsides and remembering that spreading them all out over the fell minimises the energy impact previously limited to narrow footpaths, which them needed constant repair and comparing this with most of our caves where there are not many different routes through one passage and where energy inputs from visitors are disproportionately high compared with the normal background levels.

Caves is different to fells.

Obvious difference, yes. But even under CRoW narrow over-used footpaths exist, people are somewhat sheep-like, they follow defined routes, so given greater freedom they don't necessarily wander randomly, ridges being a fine example of high traffic areas. Some more enlightened walkers do make their own routes rather than sticking to guide books / defined paths - I seem to recall some access/ecological reference when CRoW first appeared that tried to alleviate fears by saying exactly the same thing! CRoW made little difference in the greater scheme of things.

Caving has and always will be a minority sport. Even with more open access the increase in traffic will be, in most places, negligible.

 

[Alex]

Badlad

Am I the only one that sees the distinct ecological difference between people wandering freely over reasonably robust fellsides and remembering that spreading them all out over the fell minimises the energy impact previously limited to narrow footpaths, which them needed constant repair and comparing this with most of our caves where there are not many different routes through one passage and where energy inputs from visitors are disproportionately high compared with the normal background levels.

Caves is different to fells.

If that was true Graham then the Leck fell permits for example would not ask you to stick to a certain path would they? Caves on the otherhand tend to be made from Rock which is much harder than grass, so your right caves are different, but were diverging off topic again into conservation.

 

[NewStuff]

Caving has and always will be a minority sport. Even with more open access the increase in traffic will be, in most places, negligible.

Graham - The vast majority of people think we're "fucking crazy". I can count on one hand the amount of people that have *not* expressed that, or similar sentiment, when told of my hobby.

I think pretty much everyone has encountered this on a regular basis. If CRoW was applied, just where are these people, hiding away, that will add the mass of bodies into caves that you seem to be assured is imminent? You are making a mountain out of a bloody molehill in an effort to prop up your ailing argument.

 

[Alex]

Aye true, Also even those who do cave only cave normally 10 - 20 times a year (I am in the minority with my 60+).

Except for commercial groups there won't be masses and masses of people going through these now open access lands and as the CROW act someone pointed out does not allow commercial groups, they will still need permission. There will not be a massive increase in people and even if there was doubling caving numbers is still not alot of people.

 

[graham]

Caves on the otherhand tend to be made from Rock which is much harder than grass ...

Don't the caves in your part of the world contain sediments or delicate minerals?

 

[Alex]

Yep in places but often not as most are stream-washed. In any case applying your same analogy where you are saying spreading out reduces the damage, then why are we taping these sediments and walking over one bit. (This is a rhetorical question, as I know the answer)

But basically your analogy don't work, especially when the other point is taken into account where the increase in traffic would be minimal.

 

[langcliffe]

Yep in places but often not as most are stream-washed.

The majority of known cave passage in Yorkshire is either fossil or contains only a misfit stream.

 

[bob monkhouses face mole]

Surely the best defence in terms of conservation of special sites is to know what the level of exposure is? Is it open access or is it access controlled? Does CRoW apply or not?

 

[RobinGriffiths]

Jenny, despite linking to that document, I'm cautious about it and may not have described it originally correctly. N.E. have replied to me to say that:
"Therefore it is fair to say that the consultant [who wrote it] didn?t express solely their opinion or that of DEFRA or Natural England."

He/she must have been a consultant and a half though. There was even a flowchart investigating the projected degree of ground trampling down to 12inches, or whatever it was.

 

[NigR]

Use your imagination, Stu. It's not rocket science

I'm fairly certain given Graham's proclivities he's referring to Concrete

Do you really think so?

How about heavily armed Einzatzgruppen patrolling both above and below ground keeping a lookout for any foolish Untermenschen (i.e. ordinary cavers) who might dare to venture forth without their precious permits? Much more effective in the long run.

 

[bograt]

Lets keep it English, we are talking about English ( Or at least British) !!!. caves.
(unless NigR wants to go Kraut, in which case I suggest an intervention is indicated  )

 

[Pete K]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

 

[Jopo]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Where do people find the time to come across stuff like this?

Brilliant!

Jopo

 

[paul]

Another issue to add to the mix regarding access and CROW:

Kate Ashbrook warns Kinder meeting of plans for new criminal trespass law.