Try Caving

[graham]

The UBSS Hut is self-financing even though it is not let to guest parties (we cannot, it doesn't meet the regulations).

Regulations? 

All the stuff that let accomodation has to comply with: Kitchen stuff, fire regs, seperate rooms etc. You can live in your own pit but you can't let it out.

 

[Chris J]

Generally speaking IME, clubs with huts seem to find them a financial burden, as many are either fairly run down, or are under lease and all seem to have considerable expenses or hassle involded. Insurance, rates, and or rent plus repairs etc and thus need this "feed" of incoming members to finance it. They also consume time with mainatinance and repairs.

huts are an old discussion http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php/topic,1425.0.html and fairly predictably members of clubs with huts like them (which is probably one reason they joined), students love them cos they are cheap and you can have a good time, staying up to whenever and older 'traditional' cavers like them because that is how it has always been.

Lots of good things about huts - focus for caving, understanding conditions, club libraries, affordable etc..

More 'civilised' cavers who like nice bunkhouses and a quiet pint typically don't like club huts - I guess from some of the comments on here there are quite a few of these 'civilised' cavers out there - more than I realised at any rate.

I've come from the traditional student route and loved the experience so most of my views reflect this.

 

[Chris J]

A couple of people have made points which I feel are very important.  These are:

1.  That many, many people (particularly young people) are currently given an experience of caving but precious few choose to take it up.
2.  That clubs need to have some follow-up program to the Try Caving event.

While I support the Try Caving weekend in principle I do not expect it to be very successful in recruiting new cavers.  Based on my (considerable) experience I would estimate that only a minute number of first time cavers are sufficiently inspired to take it up seriously - maybe one in a thousand.   There are already many outdoor centres, scout groups and caving instructors who routinely introduce people to caving - why not leave them to fulfill this task and concentrate on the really crucial issue?  The real problem as I see it is that many clubs do not have the internal structures that new members require - as noted in point 2.  It's not about recruiting new cavers - it's about having genuinely novice friendly clubs.  This means making sure that new members are adequately looked after.  It means lending them kit, giving them sound advice on which trips are suitable for them, steering them away from idiot 'hardmen', making sure their initial caving experiences are enjoyable ones, making sure grumpy old sods at the hut don't upset them, etc etc...  And it means making an effort to make them feel welcome and not an outsider in the midst of cliques.
It speaks volumes that Kay doesn't feel comfortable with the idea of joining a club.....  Clubs should be for cavers at all levels not just for the hardmen.

The letter all clubs received when the campaign was launched told them this. I don't know how many have taken it to heart but there is only one way to find out - give them some 'new' cavers and let them get on with it.

We can lecture all the clubs to be more novice friendly but we need to also give them some novices to be more friendly too. So don't worry - we're well aware of the need for clubs to adjust their attitudes.

I also think it is very important that not all clubs need to be 'novice' friendly (I don't expect the BEC to ever be - we're better with ex students).

So it's better for us to advise novices to join a few clubs which are geared up to accept them, loan them kit, run special weekends etc..

1st step - find clubs on www.trycaving.co.uk - any club which isn't on there obviously isn't proactively looking for new members
2nd - Pick a club which actually says they will do something for novices.

Which is why it is frustrating when someone comes on here - asks for a club near X place and people respond with yeah, I heard there was an XX club why don't you try them.

If they aren't interested in the initiative then in my view they're not novice friendly so we shouldn't be recommending them.

 

[cap n chris]

More 'civilised' cavers who like nice bunkhouses and a quiet pint typically don't like club huts

I stay in good hotels and drink coffee. Other than "living in luxury" does this mean I'm civilised?

P.S. Never stayed in a club hut. Never will, unless held at gunpoint.

 

[cap n chris]

I also think it is very important that not all clubs need to be 'novice' friendly (I don't expect the BEC to ever be - we're better with ex students).

So it's better for us to advise novices to join a few clubs which are geared up to accept them, loan them kit, run special weekends etc..

Slightly OT, but I didn't realise the BEC were geared up to accept cavers.

 

[Peter Burgess]

More 'civilised' cavers who like nice bunkhouses and a quiet pint typically don't like club huts

I stay in good hotels and drink coffee. Other than "living in luxury" does this mean I'm civilised?

P.S. Never stayed in a club hut. Never will, unless held at gunpoint.

does this mean I'm civilised? No it means you've got too much money.

 

[Peter Burgess]

Just out of curiosity, what are your club membership fees Peter? Ours are £12.....and it ALL goes on gear, and the odd subscription.

http://www.wcms.org.uk/cgi-bin/wcmsjoin.pl

How do we do it 

 

[Chris J]

P.S. Never stayed in a club hut. Never will, unless held at gunpoint.

How do I put this carefully?

I can't see how - if you've never stayed in a club hut - you can get 'it'.

How can you understand the attraction of clubs (and huts), the history and characters that make up a club, the social atmosphere, the sense of belonging, of being part of something which started before you and will continue after you?

- how can you understand club cavers - and with clubs being such a major part of caving history - understand caving and cavers? Our attitudes and why we go caving?

Sorry but I believe caving clubs and staying in huts is part of the 'core' of being a caver - but guess that is just because I've come from that background i.e. stayed in huts as a member of a student club - then wanted to become a member there.

 

[cap n chris]

How can you understand the attraction of clubs (and huts), the history and characters that make up a club, the social atmosphere, the sense of belonging,...

This is really off thread but while on the topic here goes: as you can see, Chris, club huts hold no attraction for me whatsoever; don't get me wrong, I'm REALLY into caving in a big way but I'm not into dossing down in a commune with strangers, no privacy, noise/interrupted sleep, drunk horseplay etc. It's not my bag. When caving away I prefer to stay in a good room with all mod cons, hot shower, en suite, you name it plus a restaurant and peace and quiet and relaxation ready for an early start, a good breakfast and another day's caving. It's the caves I'm interested in. Not the people.

 

[andymorgan]

I've always slept ok in huts, the Wessex even have showers apparently  :blink: It can be nice to change in a hut beforehand rather than dropping your trousers in a field with a randy bull eyeing you up.

 

[Chris J]

Slightly OT, but I didn't realise the BEC were geared up to accept cavers.

We're not for novice cavers - but anyone who has done a bit and is good for a laugh - were happy to meet.

Still it's not the sort of club which organises 'trips' - more a club of individuals.

 

[Andy Sparrow]

It's the caves I'm interested in. Not the people.

What most of us learn eventually is that our enjoyment of caving depends much more on who we cave with rather than where we go.

 

[AndyF]

"Club hut" social is great. Sitting around with a few beers or more and just bantering...... but it doesn't matter who owns the hut to me. A  caving club or a private bunkhouse or a gite in France or a stone mountain hovel in the Dolomites. The "scene" is always the same and is defined by the company not the name on a title deed.

I hope I'm not a "civilised caver" leaning over my half of shandy-bass LOL doesn't sound like me....

 

[paul]

Generally speaking IME, clubs with huts seem to find them a financial burden, as many are either fairly run down, or are under lease and all seem to have considerable expenses or hassle involded. Insurance, rates, and or rent plus repairs etc and thus need this "feed" of incoming members to finance it. They also consume time with mainatinance and repairs.

Just out of curiosity, what are your club membership fees Peter? Ours are £12.....and it ALL goes on gear, and the odd subscription.

That may be your opinion, Andy, and you are entitled to it. It may be that you have had experience of being involved with a Club which had a hut and hence your opinion or it may be that you are assuming a lot in error.

I have seen both sides having being a member of a small, informal Club like yours (St. Albans CC) which folded many years ago due to lack of members and also a Peak-based Club with a hut and many active cavers. The reason why there are so many active cavers (as opposed to hut-maintainers, form-fillers, etc., etc.) is BECAUSE we have a hut. We have members who live at many locations in the UK (and some even abroad) and they have joined simply because thay have cheap available accomodation at which to stay while caving in the Peak. When we visit other areas in the UK (about every other weekend) we stay at other Club huts for the same reasons and have reciprocal arrangements (i.e., we pay member's rates) with two major Mendip Clubs with huts.

As to running costs being a drain - well because we have many visitors staying (as it only costs £4 per night each that may be the reason... and it is only £2.50 for members) then most of the running costs are covered with the rest covered by Yearly Subs whcih are about the same as yours. It doesn't all go on tackle. etc but it doesn't need to. We have an extensive Library and also Tackle Store, with no shortages or wants, which because they are located at the hut, means that they are accessible to all members and not likely to "disappear", as they may do if stored at somebody's house and they move or whatever.

Of course having a hut means occasional maintanance and upkeep is required - but that hardly consumes much time in total and no more than the time you probably spend on your own home.

 

[graham]

Of course having a hut means occasional maintanance and upkeep is required - but that hardly consumes much time in total and no more than the time you probably spend on your own home.

Interesting point. Those of us who maintain our Hut quite enjoy the time spent there, but loath doing DIY at home & would far rather pay professionals to do that.

 

[Vance]

What happens to the rescue organisations?

This is a valid point, but relatively few people are invloved. Many countries don't actually HAVE a CRO organization.
Are you saying that no CRO is an acceptable thing? A friend of mine badly hurt herself on the other side of the Cwm Dwr choke in OFD. If it wasn't for the cave rescue organisations and large amount of people involved (140+) then I firmly believe that she would never have got out of the cave. As Chris has pointed out, the infrastructure of caving is dependent on a certain amount of new cavers coming into the sport to keep active caver levels at a reasonable level. The CROs are part of this infrastructure and to lose them would result in longer call out times, less expereince amongst the rescue teams and ultimately more deaths amongst our friends. If that means that people have to wait longer to pass novice groups in Giants or when climbing the 20 in Swildons, so be it.

Nige

 

[AndyF]

What happens to the rescue organisations?

This is a valid point, but relatively few people are invloved. Many countries don't actually HAVE a CRO organization.
Are you saying that no CRO is an acceptable thing? A friend of mine badly hurt herself on the other side of the Cwm Dwr choke in OFD. If it wasn't for the cave rescue organisations and large amount of people involved (140+) then I firmly believe that she would never have got out of the cave. As Chris has pointed out, the infrastructure of caving is dependent on a certain amount of new cavers coming into the sport to keep active caver levels at a reasonable level. The CROs are part of this infrastructure and to lose them would result in longer call out times, less expereince amongst the rescue teams and ultimately more deaths amongst our friends. If that means that people have to wait longer to pass novice groups in Giants or when climbing the 20 in Swildons, so be it.

Nige

I didn't say that...

My point is that having a CRO, whilst extremely desirable, is not an imperitive to having continued caving in the country.

I think very highly of the UK volunteer CRO (and would deserve a hearty flaming if I thought otherwise) but it does not in itslef prevent caving continuing, and is independent of changes in cavers numbers.

 

[Bob Mehew]

My point is that having a CRO, whilst extremely desirable, is not an imperitive to having continued caving in the country.

Yes it is not an imperative, but after a few deaths due to failure of getting people out of caves, how long do you think it will take for some bright spark to come up with a ban?  Especially if a rescue team is flown into the country to conduct the rescue!

Re numbers of cavers, from my perspective (as what no doubt many would describe as an old fart), I have to admit that caving could continue with very few people.  Indeed the logical position if one is truly serious about conservation is zero people caving.  But given the associated collapse of infra structure, I guess many caves would no longer be legally accessible.  (I did a swift guestimate by opening a few caving guides pages and counting controlled to uncontrolled caves and found the majority were controlled - mostly with insurance as a requirement.)  So it would not matter if the numbers were small but as soon as the number started to grow, then land owners would start patrolling / filling in entrances to enforce edicts.  OK so you don't care about trespass, but is that really a sensible answer? 

The simple truth is that Caving does need a minimum number to function with its current infrastructure.  I can't tell you the relief I got as Treasurer back in early 2004, when BCA got sufficient numbers to make the insurance premium payable.  Without insurance many caves would be closed and that would hit most of the "best" caves by any ones judgement. 

The other point is not so much numbers but age profile of those numbers.  We don't have statistics but my impression is that cavers are getting older.  We have lost a substantial number of current 20 to 40 year olds who in 10 to 20 years time will form the old fart contingent who will willing pay up to help keep caving going.  Also at that time I suspect the up and coming young crowd will wonder about whether numbers should be much larger so they can get more efficient digging teams of 20 plus, as digs become more difficult because you have dug the easy ones! 

 

[cap n chris]

Without insurance many caves would be closed and that would hit most of the "best" caves by any ones judgement.

Remember the emergency closures which occurred during the insurance "hiccup"? - Remember the clubs whose officers all resigned, en masse, with immediate effect? No?

I do.

 

[AndyF]

Without insurance many caves would be closed and that would hit most of the "best" caves by any ones judgement.

Remember the emergency closures which occurred during the insurance "hiccup"? - Remember the clubs whose officers all resigned, en masse, with immediate effect? No?

I do.

Do tell us more as I was unaware of it....