WANTED underground surveys of Merstham and Chaldon areas

[Roger Cook]

Obviously you will need all the facts first

So why do you persist in distorting them ?

One was gated, the other was innaccessable {sic} because of the entrance collapsing

Untrue. One was protected by an unlocked manhole cover. The other has been accessible continously since the days of my old late friend Mullens W Harrison. It has undergone a number of transformations to keep it safe and to make it less attractive to local children, who used to use it as a glue-sniffing den many years ago. This included its current form, which was notified to the family without any adverse comment in return. Until now, that is.

 

[Mine Explorer]

...However, from what I hear (and others I have spoken to) wcms never contacted the legal owners of the land prior to many visits....

So you don't know if WCMS contacted any/all of the owners.
Your vitriol is based on rumour?

I do know,

So why did you say it was hearsay?

and at least two of the owners had no knowledge of this clubs activities and neither had given the permission

Well according to 'Roger Cook' (where've I heard that name before?) there are only two owners.

You say there are more than two. Which one of you is right? It's certainly not going to help the situation if people are claiming to have a share in ownership when they don't!

You need to understand how the joint ownership was given in the first place to understand how it always needed more than one permission...

Well, you seem to be in the know - why don't you enlighten us?

You've previously stated in this thread that no permission at all was granted by the landowners for WCMS to visit the site. Your statement above seems to suggest that permission was granted by at least one of the landowners, even if not by all of them.

If that did occur, and the partner who gave permission didn't divulge to WCMS that they didn't have sole ownership, I hardly think WCMS deserve the verbal assault you've subjected them to earlier in this thread.

 

[Roger Cook]

Hole in the rock wrote (along with a great deal more):

I love the mines, really honestly love them like they were my own.
My interest lies in their use throughout the decades. etc etc etc ....more

Sir Walter Scott (1771-1832) wrote:

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive

Hole in the rock wrote:

The web is bound to be alive with people talking about this situation

Roger Cook writes:

Err, I don't think so.

 

[Roger Cook]

Mine explorer asked:

Which one of you is right?

The truth behind any statement can only be established ultimately by demonstrable facts. But then how easy is it to distinguish between fact and fiction? People believed in "Piltdown Man" for many years before the truth became known.

There are thousands of ways to deceive or to mis-represent the truth, but only one way to present true facts. That's why life is so much simpler if we stick to facts and leave fiction to playwrights, authors and politicians.

 

[hole_in_the_rock]

For the record, I have spoken to two owners of Quarry Dean Farm other than the Mr Harrison in Devon. I challange any WCMS member to prove this to be incorrect.

Quarry field and home meadow have small workings under them, the top fields have some workings though the extent of these are largely unknown and should still be mainly unexplored. You do know that they own much more than the lower land?

I apologise for using the word gated when indeed it is a manhole cover. It is sealed to prevent access, so "locked" is possibly more politically correct.
However a shaft did collapse and a new one was built. WCMS's own internet news letters tells of this, it is already a matter of public record, and ever so easy to look up. Perhaps WCMS members should know that I have had access to letters WCMS members wrote to one of the owners in 2004.
One letter expresses regret that they had not contacted him before, told him of a new access shaft that WCMS built in 1995. This letter states that WCMS keep an eye on the place. No mention is made of their other activities, and no permission or inference to permission is in the letter or the reply that WCMS got. They keep an eye on it, that's all, just a casual eye.

A second letter states how a prerequisite of WCMS, is that people wanting to use the land have to get permission from the owners first.

What happened WCMS? Why do your members actions contradict what you write to owners, and what you write in your news letters and what you put up on your club internet site?

Oh what a tangled web they weave when WCMS practise to deceive!


So after we read on this long thread that WCMS did not know it was not sole ownership, they knew in 2004. So why did they not take a leaf from their own book of rules and ask permission for the Christmas piss-up in the workings?
Did they forget, having recently had contact with this owner? Or was it something more sinister with a hidden agenda?

So please WCMS and their friends, stop being economical with the truth.... when your committee wrote to the owners lawyer and told them that WCMS have removed all the data and photos of Quarry Dean from the website, why is it WCMS were then caught with over 130 photos still on their site?
Is it because WCMS are honest upstanding citizens, who would really like to put and end to the problems WCMS members created?


I then come to the claim:

my old late friend Mullens Harrison.

Just how old are you? You must be at least 80 years old. MW Harrison died in 1972, and he would turn in his grave if he knew that his friends had decieved his family after his death, and exploited the land for their own benefits.
I hope you are ashamed of yourself!

And the Internet accounts of these matters is hardly dead, with yourself being a new member to the forum just to talk about it. So if it is not dead, it must be alive.
You obviously have not seen the QDF website then? So it is your ignorance that leads you to make an old fart of yourself then?
Perhaps at your age you are a tad to old to be thinking for yourself?


Whilst it can be seen that several people are willing to enter into communication with me, why will no WCMS member contact the owners other than harrasing for access?

 

[Roger Cook]

For the record, I have spoken to two owners of Quarry Dean Farm other than the Mr Harrison in Devon.

Current owners or past owners? If current owners, I would like you to tell everyone who they are instead of hiding behind a wall of intrique.

You do know that they own much more than the lower land?

The mines to which the owners are refusing access lie solely beneath land south of the motorway.

MW Harrison died in 1972

I know, sadly, I couldn't attend the funeral, but the presence of my friends in Unit Two was much appreciated.

Your rude comments about my supposed age? Water off a duck's back, pal.

Mullens W Harrison would never, repeat never, have spoken to anyone as you do, and would be mortified to read the vitriol that you use to represent the family's interests. I suspect you did not know him very well. Perhaps you were too young at the time.

 

[Mine Explorer]

As 'Roger Cook' pointed out, in the absence of demonstratable facts it is very hard to believe what one is told online is the truth. Bearing in mind that with one exception your only posts here have related to Merstham, threads you have started on each occasion, it is clear you are deeply interested in the area.


You categorically stated that the legal land owners have never given WCMS permission to visit the site, and the landowners only became aware of WCMS's activities through the internet. You then tell us that "you have heard" that permission hadn't been given to WCMS. Then you told us that WCMS wrote to the landowners in 2004 - so at least some of the landowners were aware of the situation without reference to the internet.

Having told us that WCMS were not given permission to visit the site at any time, you don't seem to refute the suggestion that one of the landowners might have given the society permission! You have even said yourself that "the newer surveys could not have been made without the owners allowing them to be made".

Surely if one of the landowners gave WCMS permission to visit, then it is a matter for the landowners amongst themselves to sort out the historical aspect. Perhaps rather than give permission on their own, that person should have said "I don't mind, but I need to check with the other partners first', especially as you state that the deeds of the land state all owners should give permission before activities can take place on it. But how would WCMS know the finer points of the land deeds unless the owner told them?



You have told us that ownership of the land is shared between at least two people... how many people do own the land? We've been told elsewhere that it is only owned by two people, we have no way of knowing which report is correct, your latest suggestion seems to be at least 3 partners. Do any of the landowners live anywhere near the site, what about tenant farmers or land agents? Surely if a shaft collapsed, WCMS reopened it, fitted concrete rings and a manhole cover in 1995 then the landowner (or their local agent) might have noticed this new feature on their land and asked questions 10 years ago, it could hardly come as a shock earlier this year that people had been there.


You seem to be suggesting that the land owned by these people is more extensive than might otherwise be assumed. Surely the landowners have given WCMS precise details of their land boundaries, if only in the process of telling them to "keep out"?


You tell us that the landowners are interested in seeing a survey of the mine to see if family rumours of interconnecting mines are true. You have also told us that the family already hold historical surveys of the workings. From experience I find that connections between mines rarely open up over time - they usually collapse and get sealed. The best way to find if workings interconnect is to look on old historical surveys, not modern ones! Surveying uncharted territory in caves can point out possible connections previously unknown. The easiest way in mines is to look at the old maps and see if a connection was dug. You have also gone to great length to tell us about the wealth of information WCMS had in the public domain.... presumably if there were any connections these too would have been photographed/mentioned/reported in WCMS literature/websites?



You clearly have a great interest in the site, and appear to have a personal axe to grind with WCMS. The landowners (or at least some of them) have taken you into their confidence showing you no end of documents relating to WCMS (documents you originally implied never existed - because the owners found out about WCMS on the internet). You have had explained to you the finer points of the land ownership, which means permission from all landowners needs to be obtained prior to entering the land. You are obviously in a very privileged position and I suspect the landowners may be prepared to give you permission to visit the site even if the rest of humanity is barred. If I were more internet savvy I might even be tempted to cry 'troll', but as a self confessed luddite, I'll resist the urge and simply chuckle to myself!

 

[Roger Cook]

Mine Explorer: You wrote

your latest suggestion seems to be at least 3 partners.

Hole_in_the_rock said:

I have spoken to two owners of Quarry Dean Farm other than the Mr Harrison in Devon.

But he did not tell us whether said owners owned the land at the same time, or whether one of the owners he has spoken to inherited it from the first one that he has spoken to when he died.

If I have spoken to the person who owned the land before 1972, and also to the two who jointly inherited it, and then once again to those who inherited it after either of them, I could quite legitimately state that I had spoken to up to four of the owners of Quarry Dean Farm, even though no more than two people owned the property at any one moment in time.

We may just be talking 'truth economics' here.

 

[Roger Cook]

the top fields have some workings though the extent of these are largely unknown and should still be mainly unexplored

More factually perhaps

"the top fields are believed by a few to have some workings, but there is as yet no substantial evidence for their existence, and furthermore the geology of the area would indicate this to be highly unlikely."

However a shaft did collapse and a new one was built. WCMS's own internet news letters tells of this, it is already a matter of public record, and ever so easy to look up

Oh really? Easy for anyone 'to look up' who saw the documents before they were withdrawn from public view, and who would therefore have had the opportunity to print them out or to save them to their own hard drive. Unfortunately, we no longer have the opportunity to do this. Check out www.wcms.org.uk and see for yourself.

One letter expresses regret that they had not contacted him before, told him of a new access shaft that WCMS built in 1995. This letter states that WCMS keep an eye on the place. No mention is made of their other activities, and no permission or inference to permission is in the letter or the reply that WCMS got. They keep an eye on it, that's all, just a casual eye.

A second letter states how a prerequisite of WCMS, is that people wanting to use the land have to get permission from the owners first.

These sound like interesting letters, but, of course we only have YOUR word for it, and have to rely on YOUR interpretation of what they say.

So why did they not take a leaf from their own book of rules and ask permission for the Christmas piss-up in the workings?

You haven't mentioned this here before. Why should anyone require special permission to drink something in the mine anymore than just exploring or surveying? Piss-up implies drinking to excess. How can you be sure? All the cavers I know reserve their generous consumption of alcohol to Saturday night in the pub, and I don't suppose members of WCMS are any different. So kindly tell us the whole story, if it is so important.

why is it WCMS were then caught with over 130 photos still on their site?

Caught by whom? And how? Why is this a problem?

You obviously have not seen the QDF website then?

Please provide the URL and perhaps this 'old fart' might work out how to type it in, or even 'click' on the link!

And finally for now, I notice that this subject has really caught the attention of the caving world. Let me count those interested enough to add their thoughts to the thread (apart from hole_in_the_rock) ... 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ..... Oh, only 5 (so far). Not bad I suppose, but hardly headline news.

 

[hole_in_the_rock]

Just what is everyones problem here?

I am not the people who trespassed, are you?

I am not a member of a caving club claiming to hold the access rights to someone elses private land.
I have not built a reputation whilst using others property.

If WCMS had this great relationship that they claim they had with the owners:
there would not be an access problem at the moment. But there is an access problem.

However, it transpires that WCMS may not have known that the lower workings (and the upper ones that extend under the M23 motorway and beneath QDF's upper lands, lands to the east and lands to the west) were owned jointly. They asked one Mr Harrison if they could use his land. He owns (solely) a small plot large enough to build a house on that does not have underground workings beneath it. Chosen for it's stabiltiy no doubt? But land many acres either side of this small plot are owned jointly, and as such permission was needed from all landowners (possibly even from the Highway Agency when going under the motorway in the caves and mines).
This oversight of the people using the land can hardly be attributed to any failing of the owners. Private land, means private land.

Now consider WCMS using land for 14 years before they let an owner know that they have been "keeping an eye" on the property.
How neighbourly! I keep an eye on my neighbours house when he is away, but I do not let it out to people, or allow anyone to enter his property whilst he is away (or even when he is there). I do not advertise his land and property on the Internet, nor do I make false claims about having the "access rights". I do not repair anything of his unless he asks.
Perhaps "keeping an eye" should read KEEPING LOOKOUT FOR OWNERS.

Dont believe everything that a WCMS member may write, and dont believe everything you read on the Internet when it relates to WCMS. They are known to distort the truth.

I dont have an axe to grind at all. I just asked for a few surveys and was drawn into a conversation about them. Should I have made up a story like WCMS have done in the past to cover my real reasons? Is this why the caving expression this year is: "there must be a hidden agenda"?

Would there be any hidden agendas if everything had been approved?

But he did not tell us whether said owners owned the land at the same time, or whether one of the owners he has spoken to inherited it from the first one that he has spoken to when he died.

If I have spoken to the person who owned the land before 1972, and also to the two who jointly inherited it, and then once again to those who inherited it after either of them, I could quite legitimately state that I had spoken to up to four of the owners of Quarry Dean Farm, even though no more than two people owned the property at any one moment in time.

We may just be talking 'truth economics' here.

No he did not say, but using your economics I count 5 (five).

If you know so much about the ownership, you could have let WCMS know who they should contact. If you were a member of the club, who knew, why did you keep this valuable information from the others? Or did you share the information and they ignored you?

But how would WCMS know the finer points of the land deeds unless the owner told them?

They have to make contact with the owner before he can tell them anything.
MWH could not have told them as he died 19 years before WCMS formed. However if WCMS members claims of having a good relationship with the owners is to hold any weight to their arguement, they would have already known who the owners were after his death, wouldn't they? As they quite clearly had no such relationship, they were responsible for finding out who the owners were prior to using the land and were responsible for making contact with them. Is an owner expected to pick names out of a phone book and ask people at random if they wish to use the land, or is it more practical for the people wanting touse the land to make contact?
You cant just go around doing whatever you like on private land then saying you did not know who the owner was to ask. It's just not the done thing and gives the sport a really bad name.


If WCMS or it's members contact the owners with the information they require, there will be no need for them to ask outside peoples and agencies for help, and the Internet will get a fair bit quieter regarding these things that have happened, and we might just get some sort of thread about access being reinstated.


The question on other cavers lips should be :are we going to be hammered for using the land when WCMS let us use it, saying they had acess rights?

This surely should be a more important question than some already posted? Add to this the question about who elses land have they laid claim to whilst pretending to have a proper agreement with the owners?

Work out how many visitors went to the land from the Internet based adverts, look how many clubs went with permission from WCMS only, and not the owners, and you will soon see a picture develop of many clubs, societies and groups using this area with the blessing of WCMS,who are only just realising that they did not have permission to go themselves let alone allow anyone else.

So do the owners also pursue these clubs, and then let them deal with WCMS? Just how many clubs would that be (if you include BT engineers, Scouts, caving clubs, Historical societies, railway enthusiasts, and all)?

And what would become of WCMS if that happened?
Still no Blue peter badges then?

 

[Roger Cook]

Hole_in_the_rock

A quiet word in your ear.

I get the impression that nobody is really taking your posts seriously all the time you do not substantiate your serious claims about what may or may not have happened.

I notice that you have carefully avoided answering most of the things the other posters want answers to. Without such answers, like Mine_Explorer, they will all go away chuckling to themselves.

 

[Roger Cook]

Oh, sorry, Hole_in_the_rock, did you not know that one of the two sons that inherited the land from Mullens W Harrion is still alive. That makes 4 owners including MWH, not 5. Unless, of course, you know something the rest of us don't.
:wink:

 

[hole_in_the_rock]

roger cook did write:

Quote:
However a shaft did collapse and a new one was built. WCMS's own internet news letters tells of this, it is already a matter of public record, and ever so easy to look up


Oh really? Easy for anyone 'to look up' who saw the documents before they were withdrawn from public view, and who would therefore have had the opportunity to print them out or to save them to their own hard drive. Unfortunately, we no longer have the opportunity to do this.

All cached pages gone then? all printed copies of your newsletters been destroyed then? all library copies destroyed as well I presume?
Ok you made it more difficult, but not impossible to find. Your answer suggests that the opportunity was there to read the information of which I speak. Thank you, for an honest admittance!

These sound like interesting letters, but, of course we only have YOUR word for it, and have to rely on YOUR interpretation of what they say.

Oh so the Surrey Mines Agent does not keep copies of his letters sent on behalf of WCMS? It is just as well that the owners have kept it then. I think that if you would like to see the letters that WCMS SMA wrote, you could always try making contact with them. You claim to know them, so it shouldn't be a problem for you should it?

You haven't mentioned this here before. Why should anyone require special permission to drink something in the mine anymore than just exploring or surveying?

You missed the point. I shall try to explain a little simpler for you:

I couldn't care less if they were drinking milk. It is stated here because it is another event that had no permission for. It happened after WCMS told the owner that the "keep an eye" on the property. It just is here to show that WCMS hid their activities from the owners. i suppose that you have had this removed as well? Yet again it is a blessing that the owner had the foresight to copy the entire WCMS website to both hard-drive, DVD, Cd-rom and paper copies.
Please do not worry, they are in no way lost, and are fast becoming material in the public domain.

Caught by whom? And how? Why is this a problem?

Is it a problem when WCMS write to the owners saying that all info about their land has been removed from the internet site, and WCMS are found to be making false statements, and the material is still on their site?
I do not know if it does make a problem actually, however it does show WCMS to be untruthfull, and incapable of the simplest requests. It also did nothing towards making any kind of attempt at resolving the problems.

[/quote]Please provide the URL and perhaps this 'old fart' might work out how to type it in, or even 'click' on the link!

As you know the owners so well, they can give you the url, and you have no need to ask me. Or are we to find out that you are telling "porkies" and you do not know them as well as you would have people believe you do?


Headline news could be arranged, It would take a pretty big newspaper though. You are assuming that I mean that this is the only part of the internet or country where this is being discussed. I have never suggested that this forum is the only place in the world that QDF is talked about. Nor are the other messageboards, forums and groups that have caving or exploring interests. And the QDF website is not the last place either.
Come on, get with the programme! The owners are "on a mission" to find out what has been allowed by WCMS to go on at their property, do you think that a few threads asked by others on messageboards are the only ways open for them to find out? Do you not think that they will contact everyone known to have used their land for an explanation, and that all the members of those clubs will then talk about it? What about the non-caving clubs, scouts and the like? Dont you think that the owners will want to know what they thought they were doing on this private land, and that WCMS's name will be in every correspondance?

You are meant to get wiser as you get older, unless the grey matter is failing?

 

[Mine Explorer]

LOL!! You really crack me up!!!

...landowners and they want to know of one's actions on their property (because one had never gained permission)...

...no-one had ever been given the access rights to their property...

...If any contact had been made with the legal owners, they would not be asking others to try to obtain the information for them...

...when wcms were not known to them...

...wcms never contacted the legal owners of the land prior to many visits...

Having told us all this, you now tell us:

They asked one Mr Harrison if they could use his land. He owns (solely) a small plot large enough to build a house on... <snip> ....But land many acres either side of this small plot are owned jointly, and as such permission was needed from all landowners

Perhaps WCMS wrongly assumed Mr. Harrison might talk to his fellow co-owners of the acres either side of the bit of land he owned on his own. Or are you telling us Mr Harrision isn't one of the joint owners?

...the owners discovered the use on the Internet....

Yet you've told us:

...I have had access to letters WCMS members wrote to one of the owners in 2004...

Oh, you mean the owners didn't discover WCMS' use on the internet then, they received a letter a whole year before they decided to stop all access?

...told him of a new access shaft that WCMS built in 1995...

So the landowner was aware in 2004 that WCMS had been going on his land for at least the previous 9 years.

...the reply that WCMS got...

Oh, you mean following the letter WCMS actually got a reply in 2004 as well? Did this tell them they couldn't visit the site? Bearing in mind the owner (sorry joint owner) had just been told WCMS had been on his land for the previous 9 years it sounds a perfect time to ask what had been going on ...or did these question only start being asked during the Spring of 2005 - a year later?




I'm sorry, but if you expect me to take any of what you're writing seriously you really need to stop contradicting yourself.


LOL!!! Please yourself, I can't belive anything you've written.

 

[hole_in_the_rock]

Mine explorer:

I'm sorry,

you really need to

Please yourself

Thank you so much!
It is so easy to try to change the wording of someones posts to suit when you grab just a few words of each sentance or paragraph.


Obviously you had not worked out that one owner did not have much chance to look into WCMS's activities after receiving their letter because he went and died suddenly very shortly afterwards.
It is pretty unreasonable to expect a dead person to be able to deal with trespassers on his land.

And after finding out that this owner had died, did WCMS ask the new owner for access? Of course not.

 

[hole_in_the_rock]

roger Cook reported:

I notice that you have carefully avoided answering most of the things the other posters want answers to.

perhaps I have been writing to too many WCMS members then, they avoid answering too. It must be catching.

That makes 4 owners including Mullens, not 5. Unless, of course, you know something the rest of us don't.

Well I still make it 5 no matter how hard I try. And for the record, friends never called Mt MW Harrison, Mullens. I know a few things more than you quite obviously.

 

[Roger Cook]

And for the record, friends never called Mr MW Harrison, Mullens. I know a few things more than you quite obviously.

Pardon me, please, for being set in my ways. In all the correspondence I had with the much-missed Mr Harrison, he always signed his letters "Mullens W Harrison". That is how I came to think of him, and still do. After much delightful correspondence, I was able to meet him in person, and discovered what a truly remarkable man he was. Anyone who showed an interest in his mines would be welcomed like a friend and it became almost impossible to tear oneself away. But when we met, he was always "Mr Harrison", but still no less a friend, because that's the way he was. Unforgettable. As it seems to be important to you, I have edited my posts. I hope it makes you feel better. But I am too old now to think of his name in any other way than I came to know him in his letters.

All cached pages gone then? all printed copies of your newsletters been destroyed then? all library copies destroyed as well I presume?
Ok you made it more difficult, but not impossible to find. Your answer suggests that the opportunity was there to read the information of which I speak.

Why do you think I would know? All I know is that the newsletters I used to browse on line are no longer available, as I am not a member with access to the inner sanctum. Sorry, sonny, your repeated use of "you" tells me you haven't a clue.

Oh so the Surrey Mines Agent does not keep copies of his letters sent on behalf of WCMS? It is just as well that the owners have kept it then. I think that if you would like to see the letters that WCMS SMA wrote, you could always try making contact with them. You claim to know them, so it shouldn't be a problem for you should it?

'sma' may well have copies of the letters for all I know, but he isn't the one making an issue of them, you are.

And now I see you are really confused: now you think that I am not a member, and just someone who knows them. If I did make contact with them, I would certainly be a little more tactful and friendly than you in my approach. Your methods to obtain information from them seem to have singularly failed, by your own admission.

Yet again it is a blessing that the owner had the foresight to copy the entire WCMS website to both hard-drive, DVD, Cd-rom and paper copies.
Please do not worry, they are in no way lost, and are fast becoming material in the public domain.

Oops! I'm not sure you should have said that. Anyone may make copies of copyright material for their own use, but if you or the people you represent are responsible for then making this information 'material in the public domain', then you should seriously consider the matter of copyright as discussed earlier.

As you know the owners so well, they can give you the url

I have not claimed to know any member of the family well other than Mr Mullens W Harrison. After the death of Mr Harrison and the completion of the motorway, I had work to do elsewhere, and I moved on. However, I kept my interest in the mines. Through the local cavers who continued to study the mines in the area, I sometimes asked after the family, but didn't really know them. It was obvious the cavers kept in touch with Mr Harrison who lived close by. They have always let me know what's going on when I have asked. A very friendly bunch.

You are meant to get wiser as you get older, unless the grey matter is failing?

Ah, more insults. Very good.

I'm not very good at those. How about this?

"I suggest you type more slowly and use a dictionary."

No, I think I'll leave the insults for you, you are so much better at it than me.

Oh, and just to let you know, I got my counting beans out - difficult with 'failing grey matter' you know.

MWH - One

His 2 sons. Two. Three.

The owner since one son died. Four.

Any more? No. That's four then. Good. Glad to see that a few brain cells still function. I had to make sure, you know.

[Hobbles off to bed with nice warm cup of cocoa, glad to think all those years of education weren't wasted.]

 

[Roger Cook]

Hello again! That cocoa wasn't strong enough. I lay in bed, and realised that something didn't quite add up. So I came back and read hole_in_the_rock's postings again. And then I worked it out.

"Obviously you had not worked out that one owner did not have much chance to look into WCMS's activities after receiving their letter because he went and died suddenly very shortly afterwards.
It is pretty unreasonable to expect a dead person to be able to deal with trespassers on his land."

"And after finding out that this owner had died, did WCMS ask the new owner for access? Of course not."

You have made a great noise about how important it is for people to ask permission of owners before doing things on their land. You expect those who want to do things to ask before doing them. I think we understand that.

But do you expect them to continually ask to find out if the owner is still alive? Of course not, it would the height of rudeness.

Do you know if the owners looked through recent correspondence to make sure all people who should know about their unfortunate loss were told of it? A loss in the family is a very distressing matter. Things get overlooked. But things also need to be addressed. One of those is to let people know. Its something I have had to do, more than once.

It seems to me that the first any caver (including those who wrote to the owner before he died) knew of the death was this spring, not last year. Even if we excused the new owner for not writing as it had been overlooked, there is still no excuse for making such outrageous accusations when it is quite plain the cavers simply did not know what had happened. How could WCMS ask the new owner for renewed access when they only became aware that they should do so AFTER access had been denied. Denied, that is, because they HADN'T asked for permission!

I've got some humble pie in the fridge. Would you like me to send it to you? Or are you going to work out a way to explain how perhaps I or the WCMS should eat it?

God, give me strength!

[wanders off to the kitchen to make another cup of cocoa]

[Shouts up from the bottom of the stairs] I'd still love to know what is in those letters!

 

[traff]

First of all i don't know anybody involved in this thread (for that matter anybody in this forum).

I have been reading this topic out of simple caving interest.
I had never heard of merstham and WCMS. Also i have never been to Surry.

So..... I did some research.....
I found this on the WCMS website

In an ideal world there would be no need for locks or secrecy, everyone could be trusted to observe other people's privacy.

But sadly the world is not like that at all, we have a had a spate of incidents recently where people have trawled large sections of our archives or misunderstood what they have read. Because of the actions of an ignorant minority we have to safeguard them from their own stupidity by denying a valuable resource to the majority of people.

No, the world is a long way yet from perfection...

My opinion.......
Put your handbags away and grow up.
I don't think anybody is going to benefit from missunderstood and poorly written posts on this forum.

 

[cap n chris]

Traff, you may previously not have heard of Merstham, WCMS, Surrey or Europe but that doesn't mean these topics are not of extreme emotive meaning to those people who have. The relevance of this thread to you is probably not high but its relevance to many other people is therefore I, for one, am keen to see the issue(s) resolved and if this thread can help achieve that, no matter how long it may take, then let things continue towards that ultimate goal.... all in a friendly way, of course. :wink: