Let's make something quite clear. There are procedures to follow which allow disturbance or changes to Scheduled Ancient Monuments, just as there are to allow things to be done within SSSIs. It isn't illegal to disturb a site, but it is illegal to do it without permission. The problem lies when people do not follow these procedures. And this is the inevitable consequence of not seeking permission in the correct manner, starting with the owner. The issue here is not necessarily that a monument has been disturbed, but that the disturbance was done without any consultation. I am not saying that permission would have been granted, but as the procedure was not followed, the perpetrators have effectively "cooked their goose", and everyone else's as well. Comments on this thread are not exactly making things better - I am sure Cadw will be monitoring this discussion. That's why a direct condemnation of illegal actions is very important, and people need to get "on message".
Statement from the Trustees of Pwll Du Cave Management Group
- Thread starter NameOfTheDragon
- Start date
alastairgott
Well-known member
MJenkinson said:
Jenks, I think you could shorten this a lot.
"Digging isn't covered under CROW and isn't allowed in Draenan without prior permission, so they have done something wrong on every level."
Digging "inside", digging in open air, all banned.
Put them in the stocks and we'll throw snappers at them.
RobinGriffiths
Well-known member
I'd be interested in whether the tramroad has been affected by other offences, such as any other alterations or additions. Or any flooding or tipping operations. Seeing as we are concerned about the tramway, and nothing to do with multiple Draenen entrances. Perhaps someone local can have a look and report to Cadw if they find anything else. Only sensible if they're already in the area.
Simon Wilson
New member
mikem said:
The Chief Constable is busy in Cheddar Gorge at the moment
https://ukcaving.com/board/index.php?topic=22822.msg288023#msg288023
Digging without permission is covered by CROW and may be allowed with permission.
Not ALL BANNED. A statement guaranteed to raise hackles of everyone,
But WITHOUT PERMISSION. Very different (which I believe correct in this instance) and will only inflame those too arrogant to believe it applies to them.
Does anyone know of a country where one can just turn up and dig, or even prospect, for cave (or anything else) without permission or a licence from the landowner - beit land private or government owned?
I can think of a couple where you might get shot but none where you can just do as you please.
Jopo
RobinGriffiths
Well-known member
Just had a look at the map. Quite an extensive monument http://lle.gov.wales/map#m=-3.08495,51.79847,17&b=osraster&l=3;
Interesting, there's a shaft marked in the quarry.
That's quite an odd place for an ironworks though. So the limestone comes along the track from the quarry. Anyone know where did they get their ironstone from ? Must be quite near. I can see some scratches along the eastern margin of the Blorenge in the Castell Coch formation. I guess from there, it's a similar age to the limestone at Garth.
Interesting, there's a shaft marked in the quarry.
That's quite an odd place for an ironworks though. So the limestone comes along the track from the quarry. Anyone know where did they get their ironstone from ? Must be quite near. I can see some scratches along the eastern margin of the Blorenge in the Castell Coch formation. I guess from there, it's a similar age to the limestone at Garth.
RobinGriffiths
Well-known member
Possibly answered my own question. Pwll Mawdy: Lower Coal Measures to the south. "area littered with evidence of early mining, both for coal and iron ore".
"the Lamb and Fox, and the Welfare Hall, is all that remains of a 300 strong village of iron workers, miners, colliers and quarrymen. Their homes, a pub, two chapels, a school and a shop were all
demolished in 1960 when the villagers were relocated to Govilon." - The Iron Mountain Trail
"the Lamb and Fox, and the Welfare Hall, is all that remains of a 300 strong village of iron workers, miners, colliers and quarrymen. Their homes, a pub, two chapels, a school and a shop were all
demolished in 1960 when the villagers were relocated to Govilon." - The Iron Mountain Trail
David Rose
Active member
Discussion of whether digging is allowed by CROW and the extent to which historic monuments law may have been violated misses a point in the case of Twll Du, which may have implications for other sites.
Twll Du was dug from the inside of the cave, after climbing avens. It follows that the diggers would not have known exactly where the new entrance would be on the surface, in relation to both CROW access land and ancient monument boundaries. Indeed, they are unlikely to have known how far they were from the surface - and whether the way on would be blocked by dangerous boulders or other obstacles: hence, whether they would in fact be able to emerge.
This has implications. You may need permission to dig an entrance on CROW land from the surface - but so far as I understand the position, you don't need permission if you're digging in a cave that lies beneath it. Do you suddenly need to acquire retrospective permission if the dig breaks out into the open? Or would you have the right under CROW to visit the entrance and go as far as the end of daylight (according to Defra's interpretation of the law) or to enter the system from the new entrance and go as far as you wanted (according to the interpretation set out in my sister Dinah Rose QC's legal opinion, and adopted by the BCA)?
And does the strict liability about works within historic monuments boundaries imposed by the 2016 amendment to the original legislation apply if you don't know where you are? If so, does that mean cavers are at risk if they dig anywhere that may have a monument overhead, even if they deep below the surface?
Twll Du was dug from the inside of the cave, after climbing avens. It follows that the diggers would not have known exactly where the new entrance would be on the surface, in relation to both CROW access land and ancient monument boundaries. Indeed, they are unlikely to have known how far they were from the surface - and whether the way on would be blocked by dangerous boulders or other obstacles: hence, whether they would in fact be able to emerge.
This has implications. You may need permission to dig an entrance on CROW land from the surface - but so far as I understand the position, you don't need permission if you're digging in a cave that lies beneath it. Do you suddenly need to acquire retrospective permission if the dig breaks out into the open? Or would you have the right under CROW to visit the entrance and go as far as the end of daylight (according to Defra's interpretation of the law) or to enter the system from the new entrance and go as far as you wanted (according to the interpretation set out in my sister Dinah Rose QC's legal opinion, and adopted by the BCA)?
And does the strict liability about works within historic monuments boundaries imposed by the 2016 amendment to the original legislation apply if you don't know where you are? If so, does that mean cavers are at risk if they dig anywhere that may have a monument overhead, even if they deep below the surface?
In theory (& law) you can't dig anywhere in a cave without permission from the landowner, but where the cave extends under various properties, is that the owner of the land you are under or of the entrance? So, what they don't know doesn't generally hurt them. It has yet to be determined whether CRoW applies to natural entrances, let alone engineered ones & when does one become the other?
They do have a responsibility to try to determine where they are when digging near a scheduled monument...
Mike
They do have a responsibility to try to determine where they are when digging near a scheduled monument...
Mike
David Rose
Active member
What if you're digging 150 metres below a scheduled monument? What then?
royfellows
Well-known member
David Rose said:
Ancient Monument status extends to the centre of the earth and consent would have to be sought.
The "centre of the earth" bit would be challengeable following Bocardo V Star Energy, however this is academic, especially if the depth is not further than 300 metres from surface.
MJenkinson
Member
Thing is we are trying to compare law with common sense as it applies to our rather odd little hobby. Oddly enough I am not sure the law makers considered weird people, who dig in mud and squalor for fun when they wrote the laws!
Whilst David Rose makes a valid point about digging out and not knowing where you are etc..I would expect the legal response be "tough shit, get permission before breaking surface".
Whilst David Rose makes a valid point about digging out and not knowing where you are etc..I would expect the legal response be "tough shit, get permission before breaking surface".
David Rose
Active member
Keep the answers coming, folks. Not what I hoped to read, but useful to know.
royfellows
Well-known member
David Rose said:
You cant by any chance get your learned sister to join the forum David?
MJenkinson
Member
Does Draenan run under any land at all where the land owner might be willing to let you open a dig?
royfellows
Well-known member
Rhys said:
This is often cited, however:
We have a twin track legal system in this country, as in most others. That of civil law, and that of criminal law.
In civil law there is no liability without negligence, (unlike the USA) and negligence cannot exist without prior knowledge of risk.
In criminal law its 'ignorance of law' is not a defense, rather than ignorance of material fact. If you discharge a firearm on a range and unbeknownst to you someone is behind the target and killed, you could not be charged with murder. Although there may be other charges brought relative to H and S etc.
