Offical groups - Usefull or Pain in the arse

[Dai Trace]

The excess of miseries is indeed a feature of caving, or at least of those in high officialdom. Compare and contrast the scarey doom and gloom of the BCA insurance advice pages, including the plainly incorrect assertion that club members have joint and several liability for the debts of the club (they do not - members of clubs enjoy limited liability as good as any shareholder in a limited company), with the more measured advice given by other sports. We are a dark and dismal communion!

 

[cap n chris]

Can't resist it....

"...while cavers are pretty much in the dark about the good things which are national body might be doing for us"

:roll: only joshing. it's a lovely turn of phrase.

 

[Dai Trace]

They might be doing good things, but how could we possibly Know?

 

[cap n chris]

You know the good stuff by seeing the results. Just for starters it probably includes successfully organising insurance (eventually), publications, website(s), open meetings, grant support for training, conservation & access, regional events open to all, Hidden Earth, BCRC, RESCON, expedition support via GPF, Emergency Cave Conservation fund - and, just so as not to leave out the NEW source of caver support.... all those websites and chatrooms, just like this one, whereby us cavers get to check the pulse of UK caving.

Hosting a website is probably more demanding than serving on a regional council (and equally thankless!).

 

[rich]

You know the good stuff by seeing the results. Just for starters it probably includes

"Probably" being the important word here!

They might be doing good things, but how could we possibly Know?

That's a good point and one I was about to make. I'm sure the official bodies do lots of good stuff as has been pointed out in this thread but if people are not aware of what they do they have themselves to blame.

We do have a very effective means to provide this information in the form of the internet but it is not utilised. Most of the websites of the bodies are out of date and lack such basic information as minutes of their meetings. I'm sure this is because people would rather go caving than upload documents but it shouldn't be too difficult.

I could also go on about how the way these bodies are organised in such a way that they are dominated by the bigger clubs, but maybe that's a different topic...

 

[Mine Explorer]

Cavers should be aware that landowners really have little to fear from accidents in caves....
Paul Debney (BMC Hon Legal Advisor) asserts:

"In the UK there is no liability from a landowner to a third party for injury caused by natural hazards"

But don't forget, mines are not "natural hazards" - they're man made.

 

[Dai Trace]

I could also go on about how the way these bodies are organised in such a way that they are dominated by the bigger clubs, but maybe that's a different topic...

While those on the official bodies may largely have a big club background, I disagree that big clubs dominate. In fact, the biggest club has no more of a vote in the BCA voting structure than the smallest, and any club can nominate a rep to sit on the BCA Council. I know many members of one big club who have several members sitting in the official bodies, yet do not feel that these individuals always represent the best interests of their club.

I understand that BCA is currently debating hard to find ways to keep smaller clubs and individuals involved. The bias in control and decision making is already well on the side of the individual and not the club, which is not really too useful when most cavers, perhaps justifiably, would rather leave the politicking to someone else and not think about it themselves.

 

[kay]

As many have pointed out cave access is very different to public rights of way on fells and acess to river for canoeists and kayakers

Access to river for canoists is very different from access to fells - access is at the will of the owners of the river bank, and whereas cavers have pretty good access to caes, the vast majority of our rivers are closed to canoists.

 

[Getwet]

Kay you say:-

the vast majority of our rivers are closed to canoists.

this is a very interesting point. The only reason people believe access to river is closed is because clubs and the BCU enter @access@ agreements which effectivly closes many rivers to general access, the river Dee in wales is a fine example. It is only since the so called access agreement has colapsed that people feel free to kayak the river when they want, access has never been better than it is now there is no access agreement

This is the very type of thing that we should fight to resist for cave access.

I would point out however that the vast majority of kayakers generally ignore access agreements if they wish, it is actually hard to stop people accessing a river slighty higher up or lower down the river bank, as such hot spots of landowner resistant can be overcome. This is not possible with caves

 

[rich]

While those on the official bodies may largely have a big club background, I disagree that big clubs dominate. In fact, the biggest club has no more of a vote in the BCA voting structure than the smallest, and any club can nominate a rep to sit on the BCA Council.

The bigger clubs though are generally the ones that have enough members to nominate people to go to meetings. Smaller clubs are less likely to have members that are free or in the area. This is exacerbated by the large number of official bodies so that small clubs have little hope of getting regular representation.

I'm not saying that the system deliberately designed that way, just that this is the effect.

I understand that BCA is currently debating hard to find ways to keep smaller clubs and individuals involved.

Better access to information over the internet etc. would be a good start. Maybe allowing postal of email votes on issues might work.