More media - an alternative view

Bob Mehew

Bob Mehew

Well-known member
OK I will rise to the bait.  I am awaiting to hear what has been said in reply to the communications which were received by several people on BCA Council which hopefully will be forthcoming tomorrow.  I was not party to the replies though I supplied some material for one of them, so sense it unwise to make any comment at this moment.  Now I am off the internet and getting to bed as I have to dodge Aintree tomorrow by an early morning start.
 
molerat

molerat

Member
droid said:
And still nothing from the pro-CRoW lobby?
Click to expand...

1. Public safety - Gaping Gill is fenced, and if it and Jib Tunnel were 10m from the car park in Clapham then they would not be on access land.

Caves on access land are natural features, just like the cliffs, bogs and pointy rocks that can be found on access land all over the British countryside. They are all natural hazards that the public are expected to be able to deal with.

Where exactly would there be a danger to public safety? Nobody expects any gates to be removed from caves that are currently gated.

There are many open potholes and cave entrances on access land that already have free access. DEFRA have admitted that access to every other pot/cave on access land is already allowed up to the limit of daylight. Surely access beyond this limit in the restricted caves poses little meaningful additional danger.

Trying to restrict access to some caves in order to discourage non-club cavers is just daft. Many cavers legitimately cave outside of the club system. Access to restricted caves in the Dales and in South Wales is being extended to non-club cavers anyway.

2. As above, nobody expects any gates to be removed from caves that are currently gated. Permit systems were never intended to magically distinguish between responsible cavers and vandals. There are not hordes of would-be cavers standing around waiting for the right to go down restricted caves on access land.

3. This just sounds like more unsubstantiated rumours to me. The CRoW Act provides liability benefits to landowners. I wonder how much of these supposed upset landowners have been told by a few angry cavers that cave access under CRoW would be the end of the world? Most landowners in the Dales are supportive of increased access.
 
Brains

Brains

Well-known member
droid said:
The original request is months old.
On here. You might recognise one of the correspondants.


http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php?topic=19628.0
Click to expand...
Just been refreshing myself on that topic - seems everything was answered to my satisfaction at least back then. As you have no doubt also re read the thread  your requested riposte is there already.
This whole issue is very fraught and tangled, guess it is time to leave the whole thing to a fitter, more politically savvy bunch of enthusiasts. Over to them.
All this wrangling is bad for my health and my blood pressure so I will leave you with this old saw.
"Not my monkeys, not my circus"
 
bograt

bograt

Active member
I suspect a certain amount of mis-information has been fed to the ABIS, the credibility of their comments is put into question by the comment;

Quote - "impact of changing the legislation"
 
P

Peter Burgess

New member
Really? Do you not think ABIS are quite capable of working out what their concerns are without being fed lines? Such comments are simply driving our ABIS colleagues and cavers further apart, which is precisely what nobody should be seeking to do. Just think for a moment about how good relationships are between show caves and cavers, what trust exists between them, and what you are implying by making such a suggestion. I believe ABIS have expressed their concerns precisely because they do not want to see the good relationship established over many years being ruined by rash actions on the part of the caving community.
 
J

jasonbirder

Member
Because we ALL know...that if we mess about with this issue...sure as apples are apples - the people that object "because they care about conservation" will be back objecting "because they care about digging" or "because they worry about Landowner relations" "are unsure about insurance Implications or "Bats" or whatever the objection du jour is...
Click to expand...

Its like I can predict the future...only the other day I mentioned that the anti-CRoW lobby would be able to come up with yet another "objection du jour"
And...here it is...

It'll upset showcave owners

Do I win anything...
 
Madness

Madness

New member
It seems that all the press reporting from the standpoint of the 'CRoW cautious' are failing to mention in their articles an important fact - the BCA vote. It is obvious to me the the 'CRoW cautious' are being very selective with what they feed the press/MPs/showcave owners - manipulation is a good word for it.

I've heard it suggested that they might even be telling blatant lies.
 
P

Peter Burgess

New member
Bograt and Jason. ABIS concerns being published came out of the blue. I suggest that if you continue to suggest some kind of underhand operation, you will be jeopardising the many years of trust and cooperation that has been developed between showcaves and cavers. Is that what you want?
 
J

jasonbirder

Member
Why on earth would it jeopardise relations between Cavers and Show-cave owners?
Showcaves aren't Access land...anymore than someones front-room, factory or shop is...
Are you GENUINELY suggesting that...even though it has absolutely no relevence to them what-so-ever...they are such delicate flowers...that Cavers seeking better access to open Caves...miles away on Access Land might upset them?


 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top