Observations on CNCC meeting

[Bottlebank]

Hmm. That was a surprise, have to be careful what I say.

One of the problems with the way the CNCC operates currently is that cavers in effect don't have a voice. They're represented at meetings by their club rep, if they have one and he or she attends. The rep is than asked to vote on proposals. So the first we get to hear of them is usually some time after the event. This makes it very difficult for individual club cavers to express an opinion in time for it to be considered.

As an example their seems to be an agenda in circulation for the AGM, which I haven't seen, however I have seen an extract from it which proposes a constitutional change to create a new category of member - "Commercial" member. Many cavers will be opposed to this and are probably unaware it is on the table.

It strikes me that it would be a good idea if the CNCC published their meeting agenda on their website to allow time for club members to consider proposals such as this and give feedback to their CNCC rep.

In the meantime if anyone is prepared to send me a copy of the full agenda for the next meeting I'd love to see else it contains!

 

[Mrs Bottlebank]

By the way any chance we could see an agenda for the AGM of the CNCC?

Club reps could then canvas opinions of their respective club members before they arrive at the meeting and will have a mandate form their clubs on how to vote, comment etc at the AGM.

 

[AndyW]

I don't usually feel a need to post on this forum, but I've been watching this thread with interest and some of the comments here have driven me to add my personal opinion.

I am also an active northern caver and have been regularly attending CNCC meetings for over ten years. I am not, nor have I ever been on the CNCC council. I purely attend as a representative of a member club.  I don't claim to know the real names behind some of the aliases used on this board, but I do know that the vast majority of the posts in this thread are by individuals that have either not regularly attended these meetings, or have NEVER attended a meeting. I find it very frustrating that there are so many people here that do not understand the basic functions and aims of the CNCC with regards to access.

The CNCC is purely an administrator of the access restrictions imposed by the LANDOWNERS. The CNCC does not create the access restrictions, it negotiates, on behalf of its member clubs, for the best possible access for recreational cavers. A number of very dedicated members of the CNCC comittee have given years of their life negotiating and building a good working relationship with the various estate offices to get to the access arrangements we have now. There seems to be no little or no gratitude directed to them for this, just criticism.

To break this down into a simple explanation for those that are still confused:

1. Landowner/his estate office instructs the CNCC as to how many cavers they will allow on the fell at a given time.
2. CNCC administers the permits of behalf of the landowner/estate office.

Quite simple really. The CNCC does not control, dictate, prevent or limit caving activity.  In fact, it does the opposite. I seems that the general ignorance towards the CNCC's aims and functions are largely due to the fact that it is easier to sit behind a computer and criticize than it is to make the effort to attend the meetings and contribute something useful.

Andy Whitney

 

[Bottlebank]

Andy,

It's true I've never been to a meeting, but I don't have to go to parliament to have express a view on how it represents my interests. You've put it in a much nicer way, but essentially it's the same old line - go to meetings or shut up.

I understand that people who've put a lot of good work in over the years will be upset by all this, which is a shame, but they've refused to listen to us, inform us of what's happening and give us a chance to consider ideas being put forward.

I've just received a copy of the AGM. There is a proposal for a new class of membership, there is no confirmation that the permits will be additional ones and no mention of liability or insurance - if a customer is injured or killed after a CNCC permit has been issued will (as has happened in the States) the threat of legal action arise if for example the CNCC did not subsequently withdraw the permit because of flood risk. A couple of other things crop up - it seems there is a working committee of fourteen clubs and these were apparently re-elected at the 2013 AGM - although the minutes don't seem to confirm this. There is also a proposal to extend voting rights to any full member club attending a meeting - I think that's a good idea although it renders the working committee concept pointless.

On the commercial caving side my own view is that the CNCC should not be negotiating on behalf of commercial cavers until after they have properly negotiated access for DIM's, partly because this seems fairer, but also because until they do the system will continue to be widely ignored.

If nothing else at least this thread has allowed me to communicate my opinion on a proposal to our CNCC rep, which hasn't been possible in the past.

Tony

 

[Stu]

The CNCC is purely an administrator of the access restrictions imposed by the LANDOWNERS.

Andy Whitney

The thing is Andy it would seem that this isn't always the case, and it appears, at times to be the cart leading the horse.

 

[AndyW]

Tony,

I understand where you are coming from regarding the ability to be able to express the general views of cavers, but I was specifically trying to clarify the misconception that the CNCC are the 'cave police', or a body that restricts access. I think that if people choose to attend some meetings they would very quickly see that this is not the case.

The representation of cavers views and interests is a separate matter. I can understand why the CNCC chooses not to discuss/facilitate these on an open forum (which the estate offices quite possibly monitor from time to time). There is nothing stopping cavers from representing their views - that is what the meetings are for. I have often found it disheartening that a lot of meetings are only attended by a small handful of representatives. Given how many member clubs there are there is so much more potential for a wide cross section of opinions to be presented.

The CNCC does not currently represent individual or commercial cavers, but that is not the fault of the CNCC. It is currently a condition of the landowners/eastate offices that access is only available to member clubs via the permit system that they (the landowners) implemented.

The other option is disbanding the CNCC and all cavers just trespassing. Most of us do not agree with the 'permit system', but it is more beneficial to recreational caving in general to keep the peace with the fell owners who could, if goodwill broke down, severely damage the ability for clubs and universities to continue to operate should 'official' club trips no longer be possible.

Andy

 

[Bottlebank]

Andy,

I'm not advocating the CNCC debating issues on a public forum, but they could use this forum to explain what they are planning or aiming to achieve just as they could Descent etc. rather than us having to drag the truth out of them as happened over commercial caving. There will be debate whatever they do - it's better that they lead and inform it.

Giving people the chance to express an opinion will probably encourage more clubs to send their CNCC reps to meetings with a clearer mandate.

I accept that getting landowners to accept individual cavers having permits may in some cases be difficult or impossible, but the CNCC should be representing them and pushing for them to have access, it's constitution establishes that, and it needs to make it clear that it represents them not deny them representation as it has in the past. This is clearly their fault, they've narrowly interpreted one phrase in their constitution and ignored the rest - and it's one of the main causes of the dislike and distrust that many people express towards them. It's a slippery slope, they refuse to represent DIM's, people then feel they don't represent clubs very well, start looking for other failings, and before you know it phrases like "not fit for purpose" get bandied about. It's no coincidence that their decision to then represent commercial cavers seems to have brought things to a head.

I'm no fan of the permit system but fully support working with landowners and accept it as a necessary evil. The CNCC's job is to administer and improve it, not sneak about doing deals behind our backs.

I'm not sure how I even got dragged into all this - I think Glenn's reaction a few months ago to what I thought was a reasonable and simple question well and truly got my back up! It was an innocent question, I hadn't realised the implications, but there you go!

Cheers!

Tony

 

[jasonbirder]

As ever the usual caveat about appreciating people who negotiate with landowners and do the hard work applies!

I think part of the issue here is that many people simply don't believe that the CNCC merely administer access conditions that the landowner specified...

The stance on commercial caving access and permits was one which was designed to present to the landowner a CNCC defined solution to prevent commercial cavers negotiating a seperate agreement and maintain CNCCs primacy of contact with the land owner whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is another issue...but it certainly shows the CNCC are far more pro-active about access than merely implementing the landowners specified requirments...

I for one don't for a minute believe that the estate office said to the CNCC that they would only accept written applicationd from clubs if they were signed by the club secretary...why would they...landowners are concerned about numbers, parking, liability etc etc not the minutia of caving politics!
Sent from my SK17i using Tapatalk 2

 

[exsumper]

By the way any chance we could see an agenda for the AGM of the CNCC?

Club reps could then canvas opinions of their respective club members before they arrive at the meeting and will have a mandate form their clubs on how to vote, comment etc at the AGM.

Those are extremely dangerous ideas. You should be careful you'll upset the BCA, regional councils and other caving politicians the length and breadth of Great Britain!

 

[Bottlebank]

I probably already have

 

[exsumper]

Extremely well done Badlad!!!,Mr Bottlebank and Graham

It would appear that change for the better is on its way. 

Personally I only hope for three things from a potentially renewed CNCC.

First: that any new regime ensure that this cash for access arrangement is squashed; The dangers of which, were what started this in the first place.

Second: That some fresh faces emerge to run it, not the same old ones that have been entrenched in local and national politics for what seems an eternity!

Third: And this applies to the BCA too! That it returns to representing the interests of ordinary cavers and not  the commercial sector!

 

[exsumper]

Just a quick query badlad! Do any members of the exisitng CNCC committee have a financial interest in commercial caving?

 

[Simon Wilson]

I am also an active northern caver and have been regularly attending CNCC meetings for over ten years. I am not, nor have I ever been on the CNCC council. I purely attend as a representative of a member club.
Andy Whitney

Hi Andy, I'm glad you have entered the discussion. Because you are a regular attender as the representative for RRCPC you are certain to know the answer to two questions.

At the January meeting the Access Officer was asked this question and dodged it: Did the secret permit system apply to Casterton Fell as well as Leck?

The other question which has not yet been answered is: When did the secret permit system start? The figures suggest it was either about 7 years ago or about 3 1/2 years ago. Please tell us when it was.

 

[Alex]

Playing devils advocate as I am not a member of CNCC and have been naughty (all be it accidently) on occasion in the past. One of the things that is bugging me is if the CNCC  is trying to block/make exclsuive access as some people claim then why have the BarbonDale caves and Washfold pot changed to no longer require permits? Seems like they are heading in the right direction to me, all be it slowly. None of our caves (except show caves) have locks on them either, I am glad of that! I am not a Mendip caver, it must be a right pain there if your not a member of certain clubs.

However what they definitely need is a communication officer to stop this bickering in the first place, one who is willing to explain their position and perhaps we could all get along, even if none of the others want to talk directly to people on this forum.

P.s. Please don't suggest me, I already volunteer a lot of time to other causes.

 

[dunc]

then why have the BarbonDale caves and Washfold pot changed to no longer require permits? Seems like they are heading in the right direction to me, all be it slowly.

Ohh, access has changed for Aygill and Barbondale - being a member of two northern clubs (one of which is, I presume, a full-member-club) I wasn't aware of this change. Well, actually I was, not because I'd heard anything on here/Facebook/Twitter/post/e-mail/any other means, I found out (and posted on a club forum, which is possibly how Alex knows) by looking at the CNCC website and browsing around by chance, not an ideal situation.

None of our caves (except show caves) have locks on them either,

Well, mostly yes, a few exceptions exist.

However what they definitely need is a communication officer to stop this bickering in the first place

My thoughts exactly. A lot of bad feeling would be prevented if the CNCC communicated more effectively.


As for the few rogue clubs who are represented on the council, nothing in the back of Descent, no website (in this day and age, really?), no idea who they are, how to join or who to contact to gather information on... Does make you wonder. 

By the way, who are these full member clubs that might have voting rights, how many are there?

Quite simple really. The CNCC does not control, dictate, prevent or limit caving activity.  In fact, it does the opposite. I seems that the general ignorance towards the CNCC's aims and functions are largely due to the fact that it is easier to sit behind a computer and criticize than it is to make the effort to attend the meetings and contribute something useful.

Indeed it is and how easy is it to communicate with the majority of cavers from behind a computer?

I've no doubt that over the years the CNCC and the volunteers have performed admirably, however, from what I've seen they haven't managed the changing world of caving particularly well. So, rather than everyone saying read the minutes, come along to a meeting (not every northern caver lives in or near the Dales, some even have jobs and families shock horror, not everyone likes meetings/politics, the list could probably go on) maybe the CNCC should look out from their bubble once in a while and just be a little more open..

What about These three against the other almost three thousand cavers on this UK Caving forum and elsewhere who are obviously happy with the officers of BCA and CNCC and Welsh, Derbyshire  and Southern equivalents.

That has got to be the most pathetic statement I've read. Considering a fair portion of the three thousand have never even posted makes that line look a little stupid, does it not? In fact of the 2831 (just looked) if you bother to look closely at the members-list you'll find at least half have never even made a single post. And another significant portion have made one measly post, the true voice of UK Caving, I think not!!

 

[Ian Adams]

.... a communication officer ...

That's an awesome idea. It is a portal for those outside of the CNCC to understand the inside and it is a voice for the CNCC to address issues raised in the public domain.

A win/win for both sides ?

Ian

 

[richardg]

At Dunc's suggestion I took a bit of time to look at some UK Caving stats



Dunc
38 years old --- still relatively young

lives in Blackburn--- reasonable traveling distance to the Dales

Member BRCC and the RRCPC---- full member clubs --- qualifies him to sit on the committee
Has spent a staggering NINETY TWO DAYS and one hour forty five minutes 
on this forum --- certainly has lots of spare time

has posted two thousand seven hundred and ninety three posts --- certainly computer literate

Dunc you spend a lot of time moaning about others on this forum.  "oh its Dunc the UK caving moaner again... moan moan moan" :yucky: :yucky: then get off your bottom and do something about it.. make a difference in the world mate instead of always just moaning...

In this instance instead of moaning about the volunteers who put in the hours for the CNCC... get out there and  make a difference get yourself elected the onto CNCC

Yes Dunc..  Its easy to just sit back behind a computer screen and moan about everybody else.. 
.
Become an  Ian Peachey a guy with great caving credentials, who might have home commitments but he's volunteering.

Oh Dunc I was forgetting you've voted 68 times according to forum stats --- so you'll have no problem there either

And thanks Dunc for your suggestion to do a thorough investigation of UK Caving stats its been most informative

 

[dunc]

Blackburn? I think not! Further away than that I'm afraid.

I know RRCPC is a full member club, is BRCC? It might have joined years ago, prior to BCA, so could still be, not like there's a list to look at is there.. :-\

As for how long on the forum; merely time logged in, which could mean I left the page open and computer on whilst doing something else (which is a frequent occurence).
Yes computer literate, what that had got to do with anything I don't know. Although posting on a forum is hardly taxing!

Moan fucking moan; there you go, not to disappoint your so called knowledge about me.

As you seem to know so much are you on the committee and making a difference?

 

[dunc]

And I wasn't moaning that much, especially compared to some, merely suggesting communication could be improved to general cavers. Not everyone can make it to meetings, even those on the committee, its life. That doesn't mean people should be kept in the dark. :

 

[Simon Wilson]

To the recent anonymous posters and other earlier trolls.

It is because of people like you that people like me are reluctant to post on here. If this forum is ever to be taken seriously then anonymity would need to be forbidden.

You are destroying what was a serious debate about a serious matter.