Rowter Hole- Now Bolted

[bob dearman]

As DCA Equipment Officer I would just like to clarify the above dialogue. The anchors and resin and all the installation equipment i.e. drills, resin guns, bits etc were all supplied by BCA FOC to DCA. Expenses incurred by the installers i.e. transport, will be paid by DCA out of their regional fund. DCA does not receive any monies, only equipment, from BCA for projects.

 

[Simon Wilson]

As DCA Equipment Officer I would just like to clarify the above dialogue. The anchors and resin and all the installation equipment i.e. drills, resin guns, bits etc were all supplied by BCA FOC to DCA. Expenses incurred by the installers i.e. transport, will be paid by DCA out of their regional fund. DCA does not receive any monies, only equipment, from BCA for projects.

Thanks for informing us Bob. Mark certainly gave the impression that it was entirely funded by the BCA and that the amount was ?1000. We now know that it was only partly funded by the BCA and partly by the DCA.

 

[Bob Mehew]

Thanks for informing us Bob. Mark certainly gave the impression that it was entirely funded by the BCA and that the amount was ?1000. We now know that it was only partly funded by the BCA and partly by the DCA.

Not necessarily true.  The situation is complicated.  BCA E&T Committee was happy to deal with kit but did not wish to deal with expenses.  Expenses are first dealt with by Regional Caving Councils (RCCs).  RCCs submit claims at the end of each year to BCA for reimbursement.  The guidance agreed by BCA & RCC Treasurers for expenditure related to E&T matters is as follows:

1) Allowable:
a) Eco Anchors and Resin will be provided for free by the Equipment Committee for sites where all BCA Member Clubs have access. 

b) Grants are available to cover the costs of the instructor and consumables for training (including refresher training) in the placement of eco anchors  from the Equipment Committee.

2) Not Allowable:
Eco Anchors and Resin where not all BCA Member Clubs have access.

So DCA may well be claiming from BCA for the expenses part of this project in due course. 

(Sorry finger trouble caused a posting before I had finished composing.)

 

[Madness]

DCA website states that Public Liability Insurance is required for Rowter.

Is that still the case?

 

[Jenny P]

If it says that on the website it should be correct but I will check and post reply.

Jenny Potts, DCA Hon. Sec.

 

[Madness]

If it says that on the website it should be correct but I will check and post reply.

Jenny Potts, DCA Hon. Sec.

But, it doesn't say on the DCA website that insurance is required for JH. Surely it would be a case of both or neither?

 

[Mark Wright]

All you need to do is pay the farmer ?1.00.

Mark

 

[Jenny P]

You should be in possession of BCA PL Insurance, even though you are unlikely, at present, to be asked to show your BCA card for either Rowter or JH. 

As Mark says, many Peak District farmers and landowners ask for a goodwill "trespass fee" when you go onto their land.

Relations are good at the moment so let's help to keep it that way.

Jenny Potts,
DCA Hon. Sec.

 

[Badlad]

Fortunately, thanks to BCA the landowner need have no fears, I quote from an agreed statement from the BCA insurers;

"BCA's insurers have confirmed that landowner indemnity will apply wherever a landowner gives cavers and mine explorers permission to access to sites on their land. The access agreement can be formal or informal.

Cover for the landowner extends to incidents arising from all visitors whose objective of their visit is the cave or abandoned mine, not just those who are members of BCA."

I see no need for an individual to be in possession PL insurance.  That would be unnecessarily restrictive. 

 

[Madness]

All you need to do is pay the farmer ?1.00.

Mark

Thanks Mark for clarifying this.

Given that myself and my regular caving partners are not BCA members and therefore have no PLI, it's good to have confirmation that this is not required.

Jenny, could the DCA website be amended, so as not to put off other non BCA members from visiting Rowter?

 

[alastairgott]

Doesn't seem to say you need to be a BCA members.

http://thedca.org.uk/dca-cr/registry/sitedetails.php?id=33

"Access Information: Grade 4. Permission to visit and park obtainable from Rowter Farm. Charge of ?2 for access over land. Best to avoid lambing time (April/May). From farm go across fields to north, in direction of Winnats Pass. Keep lid secure."

But if you did need to request an update, there's a link at the bottom of the page "Errors or omissions in this information? Submit corrections/additions/comments for this entry to the registrars."

 

[Madness]

Doesn't seem to say you need to be a BCA members.

http://thedca.org.uk/dca-cr/registry/sitedetails.php?id=33

"Access Information: Grade 4. Permission to visit and park obtainable from Rowter Farm. Charge of ?2 for access over land. Best to avoid lambing time (April/May). From farm go across fields to north, in direction of Winnats Pass. Keep lid secure."

But if you did need to request an update, there's a link at the bottom of the page "Errors or omissions in this information? Submit corrections/additions/comments for this entry to the registrars."

I think it's been updated within the last hour!

 

[Jenny P]

Fortunately, thanks to BCA the landowner need have no fears, I quote from an agreed statement from the BCA insurers;

"BCA's insurers have confirmed that landowner indemnity will apply wherever a landowner gives cavers and mine explorers permission to access to sites on their land. The access agreement can be formal or informal.

Cover for the landowner extends to incidents arising from all visitors whose objective of their visit is the cave or abandoned mine, not just those who are members of BCA."

I see no need for an individual to be in possession PL insurance.  That would be unnecessarily restrictive. 

I agree that you don't HAVE to be a BCA member to visit Rowter Hole, JH, or many of the other caves in Derbyshire.

However, the Landowner Indemnity which Badlad quotes above only exists because BCA has taken out the insurance which gives this.  In other words, if there were no BCA members, the Landowner Indemnity wouldn't exist because BCA subscriptions, which include PL insurance, pay for it. 

So, in a rather roundabout way, it's to everyone's benefit if you are a member of BCA because that allows BCA to provide Landowner indemnity for everyone - if there are more members sharing the cost it's less for those members to pay as a sub. to BCA.

I probably haven't phrased that very well but I hope you can see what I'm getting at.

 

[Goydenman]

I agree that you don't HAVE to be a BCA member to visit Rowter Hole, JH, or many of the other caves in Derbyshire.

However, the Landowner Indemnity which Badlad quotes above only exists because BCA has taken out the insurance which gives this.  In other words, if there were no BCA members, the Landowner Indemnity wouldn't exist because BCA subscriptions, which include PL insurance, pay for it. 

So, in a rather roundabout way, it's to everyone's benefit if you are a member of BCA because that allows BCA to provide Landowner indemnity for everyone - if there are more members sharing the cost it's less for those members to pay as a sub. to BCA.

I probably haven't phrased that very well but I hope you can see what I'm getting at.

Makes sense to me - good point

 

[Madness]

I agree that you don't HAVE to be a BCA member to visit Rowter Hole, JH, or many of the other caves in Derbyshire.

However, the Landowner Indemnity which Badlad quotes above only exists because BCA has taken out the insurance which gives this.  In other words, if there were no BCA members, the Landowner Indemnity wouldn't exist because BCA subscriptions, which include PL insurance, pay for it. 

So, in a rather roundabout way, it's to everyone's benefit if you are a member of BCA because that allows BCA to provide Landowner indemnity for everyone - if there are more members sharing the cost it's less for those members to pay as a sub. to BCA.

I probably haven't phrased that very well but I hope you can see what I'm getting at.

Makes sense to me - good point

Indeed

 

[Badlad]

That is a good point, of course, and one of the reasons to support the BCA. 

However, BCA is recognised as the governing and representative  body for cavers.  It is not just there to represent it's paid members but all cavers too, just like other similar bodies representing outdoor sports.  Covering landowner indemnity for all cavers is a service it is necessary to offer in order to fulfil its wider role.

Imagine if it only covered landowner indemnity for it's paid up members.  That would discourage landowners from allowing free and open access and put them in a very difficult position should a non-member incident cause a claim.  The end result would more likely be a loss of access for all rather than trying to enforce a restriction on access only to paid up BCA members.

It is a very dangerous and unnecessary step to encourage cavers to base access arrangements on insurance.  The risk of a successful claim is remote.  If it wasn't the dangers of premium rises or loss of cover could put future access in jeopardy as has happened before.

Support BCA by all means (I do) but lets be careful we don't make a rod for our own back.

 

[Jenny P]

As Badlad says in relation to PL Insurance:

"The risk of a successful claim is remote."

However, experience of negotiating access shows that some landowners have been persuaded by their solicitors that they should not allow access unless each individual caver can offer PL insurance.  It is very difficult to counter this so, being able to quote the BCA PL insurance is extremely useful when negotiating for access on non-CRoW land.  This isn't to say that such negotiated access should be limited to BCA members only, DCA would always try to make such access as widely available as possible for all cavers.  However, there are just a few landowners who insist on access for BCA members only (i.e. those who can produce a membership card and/or quote a BCA membership number) and, if it's that or no access at all, then DCA regretfully has to comply.

Luckily there are few such problems in the Peak District and most landowners are content that DCA is able to confirm, if required, that the BCA PL insurance will cover them no matter who is caving on their land.  So the majority of the landowners/land managers of most of the caves and mines in our area do not require proof of BCA membership before allowing access.  It may be different in other areas.

Note that this is NOT the same as the situation on CRoW land, where DCA believes that access should be freely available to all cavers, regardless of their affiliation.  The law as regards landowner liability on CRoW land effectively absolves the landowner from all liability for incidents involving those taking part in activities covered by the CRoW legislation on their land.

Don't forget that costs incurred in maintaining access & supporting conservation in our area are largely covered by a grant from BCA - so why wouldn't you support BCA by becoming a member.  And don't forget either that this also gives you the right to vote on BCA policy and to change things if you don't like what BCA is doing.

Jenny Potts,
DCA Hon. Sec.

 

[AlexR]

Having been down Rowter recently (23/11/17), I'd like to say a very big "Thank you!" to the BBPC and all those involved! It's a fantastic extension with very accommodating rigging and interesting sights.

For anyone interested in poking their head down there (which I'd highly recommend), this may be useful:
The trespass fee at the farm is currently ?2.
I used the rope lengths suggested by Mark in the first post, and they were bang on as far as I went ("Main shaft 70m, Gin shaft 15m, Badger rift 10m, Two Left Wellies 50m, Milky Relief 35m"). Although there is a ladder down Gin Shaft, it is made of wood and its current state will make the sensible go for a rope instead.
Deviations are not in situ, bring your own slings. In the medium-wet conditions at the time, it was easily possible to rig out of the water, with the exception of the very bottom of Milky Relief. If there is an obvious deviation, I must've overlooked it. If you don't want to get wet, there are two alternatives: There is a spit (no hanger) which was probably placed as a deviation (cannot miss it at the moment, cleared rock around it). Having brought no hangers, I went with option two: Approximately two meters above and slightly to the right of the spits there is a natural thread. To reach it you need to traverse very far from the initial Y hang, the consequences of a slip would be highly unpleasant. Position indicated on pictures below.

I can't wait to go back and explore the rest, unfortunately had to turn around at the Wizard's Sleeve this time as it was only meant to be a quick trip. Thank you BBPC for this great addition to Derbyshire caving!

 

[Jenny P]

The rigging topo for the Rowter extensions will soon to be on the DCA website for all to see.  The draft version shows an astonishing 66 BP-bolts installed by Mark Richardson and his team of dedicated cavers, as well as a number of deviations.  Drawing up the topo and detailing the exact positions of all the anchors installed has been a job in itself - it's meant going and re-checking bolt numbers to ensure that all the DCA Bolt Installation Record details are absolutely spot on - a really major task in a very difficult cave.

As Bob Dearman, the DCA Equipment Officer says:  "I would personally like to thank Mark and the rest of his team on behalf of DCA for the tremendous amount of hard work they put in equipping what has been the largest anchor installation project undertaken in the Peak District."

Many thanks guys!

Jenny Potts,
DCA Hon. Sec.

 

[aardgoose]

Rigging Guide now available...

https://peakdistrictcaving.info/home/the-caves/castleton/rowter-hole