notdavidgilmour
Member
NigR said:
I found this in my lunch box on last week's caving trip
MI5 were waiting when I got out :-\
Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
- Thread starter Ian Adams
- Start date
I found this in my lunch box on last week's caving trip
MI5 were waiting when I got out :-\
the problem is that we don't know exactly what is going on 'behind the scenes' in each situation so we don't know for sure whether the landowner or the caver individuals or caving club or regional body are setting the agenda and if we're not in the room listening to the discussion, we have no proof either way, we only have the opinions of those there and for every individual, there is likely to be a different opinion! (and add some chinese whispers in as well by the time the story is retold in the pub several times!) Sometimes, if access is being denied or become awkward, we don't necessarily know the trigger for the reasons - it could just as easily be internal or external to cavers.Jackalpup said:
Every region is different and access arrangements are handled differently - we don't seem to hear much about CROW land in the Mendip area, but then looking at the CROW webpage and map, there seems to be very little land within that caving area marked yellow for CROW land and South Wales seems to be much the same, while the northern caving areas seems to have a lot more land covered by CROW so it no doubt makes the CROW argument a non-starter if very little land is covered by it where it seems to be quite a big feature up north.
when does a 'dig' become a 'cave' though? and don't many existing caves also have dig sites within the cave?
Ian Adams
Active member
Estelle,
Of course we are not privy to the actual negotiations but we do see the end result. We also see the terms and conditions laid down by those who did the negotiation. Without naming anyone (to avoid flaming) there are some very obvious examples.
Of course I accept that some negotiations are for the benefit of cavers per se and I can name some of them too (as probably we all can).
I still think the ?dig? issue is a misnomer; digging would not be covered by CROW as it stands and would need landowner consent.
Ian
Of course we are not privy to the actual negotiations but we do see the end result. We also see the terms and conditions laid down by those who did the negotiation. Without naming anyone (to avoid flaming) there are some very obvious examples.
Of course I accept that some negotiations are for the benefit of cavers per se and I can name some of them too (as probably we all can).
I still think the ?dig? issue is a misnomer; digging would not be covered by CROW as it stands and would need landowner consent.
Ian
Blakethwaite
New member
I'm not really certain why so much energy and anger is being expended debating this issue on an internet forum.
Do people think that Parliament is likely to go to the trouble to extend current legislature to satisfy the needs of a minority section of a minority group? If so, are they likely to do so as a consequence of a handful of people arguing on UKCaving?
If not, what practical steps are being taken? Presumably people are writing to their MPs and forming action / lobbying groups? Are these producing positive feedback?
If an extension of CROW did allow Joe Public to wander down any old open hole it wouldn't remove the landowners rights upon the ground & the landowner would presumably be at liberty to block said hole by means suitable to a particular situation?
How would conservation issues be addressed? Increased traffic demonstrably causes increased wear & tear and that's without starting to consider litter, graffiti & aggravated damage.
As for alleged local 'empire building' on non-Open Access land, again the internet isn't likely to change much. My club isn't likely to try and change its access agreements because of sour comments on the internet because we know what hoops we had to jump through to get permission to dig in the first place and I imagine that there will be very few clubs who don't share that thought.
If there is a need to do something then that action needs to be done on the ground in a way that will not prejudice existing though possibly not ideal agreements if they fall through?
Do people think that Parliament is likely to go to the trouble to extend current legislature to satisfy the needs of a minority section of a minority group? If so, are they likely to do so as a consequence of a handful of people arguing on UKCaving?
If not, what practical steps are being taken? Presumably people are writing to their MPs and forming action / lobbying groups? Are these producing positive feedback?
If an extension of CROW did allow Joe Public to wander down any old open hole it wouldn't remove the landowners rights upon the ground & the landowner would presumably be at liberty to block said hole by means suitable to a particular situation?
How would conservation issues be addressed? Increased traffic demonstrably causes increased wear & tear and that's without starting to consider litter, graffiti & aggravated damage.
As for alleged local 'empire building' on non-Open Access land, again the internet isn't likely to change much. My club isn't likely to try and change its access agreements because of sour comments on the internet because we know what hoops we had to jump through to get permission to dig in the first place and I imagine that there will be very few clubs who don't share that thought.
If there is a need to do something then that action needs to be done on the ground in a way that will not prejudice existing though possibly not ideal agreements if they fall through?
TheBitterEnd
Well-known member
mad-dan said:
The CROW act is silent on the matter of caving. The act grants permission to access the land shown on the maps. The act lists a specific set of Exclusions (quoted earlier in this thread), caving is not in that list of exclusions. Perhaps of note is that rock climbing is also in this situation and the view there is that if it is not explicitly excluded then it is allowed.
Also worth noting is that the act significantly reduces landowners liability with respect to natural features for people exercising their CROW Act right of access.
Ultimately a court would have to decide if caving is in or out and given that caving is such a minority sport and has no money in it it is unlikely to get that far.
cap n chris
Well-known member
NigR said:
Two caves on Mendip during my tenure as C&A numpty - not sure if they're still in situ - shan't name the caves though.
graham
New member
Cap'n Chris said:NigR said:
Two caves on Mendip during my tenure as C&A numpty - not sure if they're still in situ - shan't name the caves though.
Some in South Wales as well. This information is freely available on the world wide interweb.
NewStuff
New member
Rhys said:
Rhys -
On the contrary, Yes.
He was banned as a direct result of posting on one of the 2 threads where the issue of CROW access has been raised.
NigR - A number of Welsh caves have counters IIRC, and re-reading a few CCC newsletter seems to support that notion.
Should someone be so inclined, it's probably not difficult to bypass these without causing damage to them, or the cave in which they are situated.
NewStuff
New member
graham said:
He may not have banned him.
But he was banned as a direct result of posting in here. Stop being a wind up merchant and wind your neck in.
graham said:
I wouldn't, and Your reading comprehension appears to need time to warm up in the morning.
You may want to try again later, maybe after You have a nice coffee.
cap n chris
Well-known member
Nothing on moderation log about recent bannings; have you checked password or done a reset etc.?
Your IP has a large number of errors logged on it, though.
Your IP has a large number of errors logged on it, though.
cap n chris
Well-known member
Ah, just checking IPs and I think we've got two contributors registered to the same IP - I'm not a geek so wouldn't know but perhaps therein lies a techie problemo. Could notdavidgilmour and his alter ego stand up to be counted!
NewStuff
New member
Cap'n Chris said:
I'll check, but he said it was a ban, and he's not the type easily confused by a forum.
Cap'n Chris said:
It's BT on VDSL, it wouldn't surprise me. Sadly, I can't get this bandwidth at this price any other way, C'est la vie
EDIT:-
I am me, and only me. I do not have another account on here, and this is my username on a number of exploration fora.
notdavidgilmour
Member
I am here. Is there a problem?
notdavidgilmour
Member
Bad Behavior has blocked 2232 access attempts in the last 7 days. LOL :spank:
No break time and detention for a week? :spank:
No break time and detention for a week? :spank:
