Ogof Draenen survey

[Rob]

I've once been in Draenen, up to Knees up Mother Brown, and have no involvement of the survey. The line survey is good if you have a modest understanding of the system and to see how different parts relate to each other, but is poor for navigation and does not help beginers very much.

My 2ps worth would be to get the old printed survey out into public distribution, either in paper of electronic form. I'm sure the passage information on this will be very detailed and of a high standard and would take ages to redraw. Updated versions will also require additional work and time, unless the "new" stuff has been drawn up to the correct scale already?

I say, let's just get the old one out first. Good luck lads 

 

[Cave Mapper]

If a survey has been done and drawn up, then it should be published.

If it's out of date, then it should still be published, it can then be updated, or a new one can be produced, or both.

Even after a survey has been superseded, it is still useful and interesting to be able to refer to it.

Here's an example of how it should be done - all the surveys from different eras readily available:

http://mendipcavinggroup.org.uk/sections/upperflood/surveys.html

Craven Pothole Club did something similar (before the Web), by republishing all the historical surveys, back to 1929, of Sell Gill Hole (CPC Record No 41 Jan 1996).

I really hope that the current silliness in South Wales can be sorted out. But if we're looking for silver linings in black clouds, then maybe this incident will act as a prompt for other groups in other regions to publish (or release under Creative Commons) their previously unpublished surveys. There are a few surveys of Yorkshire caves that are crying out to be published, Great Douk and Jean Pot spring to mind (both recently requested on this forum).

 

[Clive G]

If a survey has been done and drawn up, then it should be published.

. . .

I really hope that the current silliness in South Wales can be sorted out. But if we're looking for silver linings in black clouds, then maybe this incident will act as a prompt for other groups in other regions to publish (or release under Creative Commons) their previously unpublished surveys.

A big 'thank you' to everyone who has come forwards so far to speak their minds on the question of the Ogof Draenen cave survey.

I've now heard by e-mail from Paul Stacey, whom I suppose you could call 'one of the big three' (along with Arthur Millett and John Stevens) in the case of the high quality survey which has been drawn up and issued in the 1990s but not published in a recent edition.

[quote author=Paul Stacey]
"I meant to submit something to the caving forum but we're off on Hols. so it'll have to wait until I get back......"
[/quote]

So, whilst Paul (and I guess a number of others) are off caving abroad, I've pulled out my copy of the first draft of the Ogof Draenen (central sheet) survey produced in April 1996. It states that it has been surveyed to BCRA Grade 5d by Chelsea Speolaeological (sic) Society with single lines to BCRA Grade 2 by Oxford UCC, Chelsea SS, Grwp Ogofeydd Garimpeiros & others.

The principal surveyors are given as being (in order of publication): A. Millett, J. Stevens, J. Cooper, G. Newton, P. Stacey, M. Green, H. Green, A. Tyler, J. Mullington and many others. The survey is computed by J. Stevens and M. McCombe, and drawn by J. Stevens.

On the 1st edition of the same survey, published in August 1996, the names are the same but others contributing single lines to BCRA Grade 2, not previously credited, are given as being: BEC, Morgannwg CC, Wessex Caving Club and Brynmawr Caving Club. The north sheet and south sheet published in September 1996 carry similar acknowledgements.

If anyone reading this forum discussion knows any of the above-mentioned cavers or clubs, please make it your task to speak to them and persuade them the value of voicing an opinion in this debate. Clearly a lot of effort went into surveying Ogof Draenen and the people who carried out the work hold the key to producing an updated and historically-archivable edition - if the surveying work is not going to have to be repeated all over again by a new set of exploration cavers in the future.

 

[Les W]

I was one of the Wessex Cave Club surveyors, but I don't have a direct opinion on the grade 5 survey as our data was all grade 2/3 and passed to Morgannwg for the grade 2 line survey.

My personal opinion is that it is a shame that internal politics/disputes have resulted in the impasse we currently find our selves. As I mentioned earlier in this thread I tried to find some common ground between the various sides involved some time ago but came to the decision that unless some significant compromises were made that the problem was intractable.

I support any initiative that sees publication of the grade 5 survey into the public domain in some form, ideally with the agreement of ALL parties, but certainly within any copyright constraints.

 

[ken]

I was looking through a couple of older (2001) caving magazines and there are partial surveys printed from Ogof Draenen. Whats the story on that?

 

[Duncan Price]

I was looking through a couple of older (2001) caving magazines and there are partial surveys printed from Ogof Draenen. Whats the story on that?

The fact that these were (apparently) published without permission or acknowlegement didn't help matters.

Scans of the three published survey sheets will be made available as soon as possible.  Photographing the survey and stitching it back together was not very satisfactory.

 

[csspub]

During the first couple of years surveying in this cave there were regular write-ups in the Chelsea Newsletter.  You should be able to find these in your caving club library.  Later on CSS produced two publications covering the years 1994/5 and 1995/6 containing all the material from those newsletter referring to South Wales.  Details of these can be found at  http://www.chelseaspelaeo.org.uk/pubs.htm  These publication are still available.

 

[Huge]

I don't have a lot to add here other than I'd really like to see the G5 survey re-published and later completed and published.

I contributed to the centre-line survey (mostly to a fairly high grade btw) and did one trip on the G5 survey with Arthur etc.

 

[Duncan Price]

I now have the three sheets as PDF's.  In due deference to copyright law I am awaiting the permission of John Stevens to make them available.  They are "Copyright CSS & John Stevens" so I need to get the nod from both parties before proceeding.

 

[NigR]

They are "Copyright CSS & John Stevens" so I need to get the nod from both parties before proceeding.

Any idea as to how long this may take?

 

[John S]

Having just returned from holiday, and not being active on the boards. It was only after a couple of emails and phone call of Duncan P. that I decided to have a read.
I could go into details of the problems and others peoples interpretations, but this would not solve anything and show up that it took more than one person to be intransigent to get to this unfortunate situation.

I did make series of suggests and plans to get the survey published but one more try to solve other issues seemed a better option at the time, but again this was stone walled by others.

Recently more drawing up was completed and a new publication got underway. Unfortunately a disc crash (data not lost) derailed this plan as I started working on other projects. I would not be happy to see the old one as a pdf (or data at present), in the public domain as this may interfere with the new survey/publications.
As to time scales, which seems to be a major concern to some, I prefer something to be right, than flawed. And when completed, it won't be locked away. 

 

[NigR]

Yep, just as I thought - back to square one. Don't hold your breath waiting, folks.

 

[cap n chris]

Recently more drawing up was completed and a new publication got underway. Unfortunately a disc crash (data not lost) derailed this plan as I started working on other projects. I would not be happy to see the old one as a pdf (or data at present), in the public domain as this may interfere with the new survey/publications.
As to time scales, which seems to be a major concern to some, I prefer something to be right, than flawed. And when completed, it won't be locked away.   

All sounds very promising and reassuring. 

 

[Clive G]

Recently more drawing up was completed and a new publication got underway. Unfortunately a disc crash (data not lost) derailed this plan as I started working on other projects. I would not be happy to see the old one as a pdf (or data at present), in the public domain as this may interfere with the new survey/publications.
As to time scales, which seems to be a major concern to some, I prefer something to be right, than flawed.

A very positive start to resolving the problem overall, but it does sound like there could be a drawn out process involved with producing an up-to-date version of the survey - with a completion date 'sometime in the future'?

This is not actually what people have been enquiring about in this forum.

If a survey has been done and drawn up, then it should be published.

Duncan has a copy of the previous edition available in PDF form and it could be made available via this forum today - where those who are specifically interested in finding a copy of the survey have congregated recently. However, if those who are entitled to put the survey into public availability object, then Duncan really shouldn't be doing so.

Yep, just as I thought - back to square one. Don't hold your breath waiting, folks.

All sounds very promising and reassuring. 

Sympathising with Nig with regards to the potential outlook - bearing in mind past history which John has breathtakingly skated over the top of, without (thankfully) going into the gory detail of - but also sharing the optimism of Cap 'n Chris . . . As an alternative to the PDF John could provide details of how and where copies of the printed A0 sheet from the existing master can be obtained. This would be either through the post or by calling in, in person.

However, bear in mind here that when I spoke to Tony Jarratt last night he told me that he's having to shut up shop at Bat Products in August (see separate thread) because he can't compete with the internet - it's a case of the cost of the overheads involved, which affect the prices you have to charge!

 

[NigR]

As an alternative to the PDF John could provide details of how and where copies of the printed A0 sheet from the existing master can be obtained. This would be either through the post or by calling in, in person.

Exactly, or put the PDF on a CD and sell that. If you want to make the survey available then do so, if you don't then just carry on as you are now. This is all complete and utter bollocks and you know it.

 

[Clive G]

As an alternative to the PDF John could provide details of how and where copies of the printed A0 sheet from the existing master can be obtained. This would be either through the post or by calling in, in person.

Exactly, or put the PDF on a CD and sell that. If you want to make the survey available then do so, if you don't then just carry on as you are now.

Just for information, for those who don't know, Nig is a member of Grwp Ogofeydd Garimpeiros, which I referred to in my reply 122 on July 16 - being one of the individuals or groups from whom I have requested an opinion to be posted.

We see now a hole appearing in the 'thin ice' - which I referred to John skating over the top of above - so it's important to keep focused on the way round the hole, rather than plunging terminally straight down into it.

 

[martinr]

I dont know if this is helpful:

Ben Cooper's survey of Upper Flood Swallet has been made available online by Bill Chadwick using Google Maps. This means the survey can be viewed on your PC but cannot be printed or copied. Well, not easily anyway - you could cut and paste all the "tiles" but for a cave the size of Ogof Draenen I doubt anyone would go to all the effort. You can zoom in to see high resolution details, or zoom out for low resolution

You would have to ask Bill how this was done. But it is a neat solution which makes the survey available without users being able to copy it.

http://mendipcavinggroup.org.uk/sections/upperflood/uf_500.htm

 

[NigR]

We see now a hole appearing in the 'thin ice' - which I referred to John skating over the top of above - so it's important to keep focused on the way round the hole, rather than plunging terminally straight down into it.

Yes, well (as is probably becoming apparent) I, for one, am rapidly losing patience. One of the problems with this whole affair is that it is clear that a lot of people are painfully unaware of the true background to all this nonsense. It is high time that someone took the bull by the horns and sketched out what really happened. So, if nobody else is willing to do so that is precisely what I will do - but not now, I'm too tired.

I would not be happy to see the old one as a pdf (or data at present), in the public domain as this may interfere with the new survey/publications.

Perhaps John S could be so kind as to elaborate upon this statement in so much as I would like to know precisely what he means by "interfere"? Is he referring to financial matters? If so, I think he would be well advised to re-consider his stance. As things stand by putting the PDF on a CD and charging for it he (and presumably CSS) could make some money out of it - once a pirate version is released (as it most undoubtedly will be) they will make absolutely nothing. Simple economic logic in my opinion.

 

[Clive G]

Yes, well (as is probably becoming apparent) I, for one, am rapidly losing patience. One of the problems with this whole affair is that it is clear that a lot of people are painfully unaware of the true background to all this nonsense. It is high time that someone took the bull by the horns and sketched out what really happened.

This is what a lot of people think and feel, I believe, and some who could say more have, so far, kept their reserve in all this.

What I'm trying to do here is find out what those who were involved with producing the survey feel about the current status quo and what progress (if any) they would now like to see made.

John has explained what he is doing about producing a new survey, but in the meanwhile there has been a call for the already existing edition of the survey to be made available again. A number of suggestions have been made above and these are awaiting a response from John S.

I could start to list down a 'history' of the survey, and Nig has volunteered to do the same, but everyone's view will, I feel, end up being different. It's like making a good book into a movie. Often someone else's view of the story ends up upturning your own reading and if you really like the novel, then the movie can turn out to be a big disappointment. In the case of the Ogof Draenen survey, then I suspect the issue of when and how the survey will be reissued and updated is likely, as a result, to be replaced in this debate by a recriminatory struggle over who said what and when. Trenches will be dug and we'll all be splashing around down the hole in the ice that I mentioned above. Does it really matter any more - more than actually having the survey available, in print and being used by as many people as possible?

A good survey is needed - for people visiting Ogof Draenen, in order to plan their trips - for people exploring the cave, to make sure they're not digging into already known territory - and for people writing about the cave, who need to illustrate the work they have done in the cave, for the purpose of educating and informing others.

 

[NigR]

OK, let's forget about the past history for now.


Two further questions for John S whilst we await his response with bated breath:

Firstly, precisely how many copies of the original printings of the survey were actually sold?
Secondly, roughly how many copies of a new edition would you expect to sell?

Come on, let's talk real figures here.