Author Topic: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things  (Read 117858 times)

Online Badlad

  • Administrator
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1671
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #800 on: April 04, 2013, 04:25:39 pm »
Think on this.

Most of the caves under Leck and Casterton Fells are part of the Three Counties System.  A permit is required for the entrances on these fells.  Yet easy and unpermitted access can be gained if you access this same system via Link, Pip, Boundary, Mistral, Bull Pot, Ireby, Large or Rift. 

You can park at Bull Pot Farm, get kitted up in full caving gear, walk over the CRoW open access land, walk past Lancaster Hole (but you can't go down it), continue to the entrance of Link Pot, go caving, end up underneath the entrance shaft of Lancaster Hole (but you can't go up it) and exit via Boundary Pot and walk back to the car over Casterton Fell.  This doesn't make sense.


Offline blackholesun

  • menacing presence
  • **
  • Posts: 223
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #801 on: April 04, 2013, 04:29:39 pm »
Chris, I can't speak for Ian, but for me;

Yes.

Just like walkers can walk without first checking the wishes of the landowner, there are cavers who desire to know if the same is possible (on CROW land)

Surely you'd at least like to know?

Offline Ian Adams

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1227
  • UCET
    • UCET Caving Club (North Wales)
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #802 on: April 04, 2013, 04:33:18 pm »
There is a basic premise of whether or not, as a British citizen, I, you or A.N.Other can legally visit a cave on land covered by CRoW. This premise is not subject to the whims and wishes of certain people/bodies but is a matter of “law” (ie. legislation). This is what we are trying to establish.

Do you mean there is a basic premise of whether or not, as a British citizen, I, you or A.N. Other can legally visit a cave on land covered by CRoW, whether or not the legal owner of the land either directly, or via a designated access control body, wishes or whims to allow that access?

Or, put another way, you'd like to find out whether the law can be interpreted such that it allows you over-rule or ignore any wishes of the landowner.

You know perfectly well what was meant and it is precisely this kind of inflammatory and reprehensible attempted destruction of a serious debate that causes so much trouble on forums.

I am especially surprised by such an action from you being a moderator.

Ian
A door, once opened, may be stepped through in either direction.

Offline Cap'n Chris

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 12274
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #803 on: April 04, 2013, 04:36:45 pm »
Perhaps you'll be less surprised if I was to inform you that I'm also a CRoW landowner with a cave on it, thus meaning I'm on multiple sides of the same equation. Hence my interest.

Being a moderator has NOTHING whatsoever to do with posting valid comments etc.. Please don't muddy the muddy waters.

Offline graham

  • Retired
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10943
  • UBSS, Speleo-Club de Perigueux, GSG, SUI
    • UBSS
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #804 on: April 04, 2013, 04:38:41 pm »
Think on this.

Most of the caves under Leck and Casterton Fells are part of the Three Counties System.  A permit is required for the entrances on these fells.  Yet easy and unpermitted access can be gained if you access this same system via Link, Pip, Boundary, Mistral, Bull Pot, Ireby, Large or Rift. 

You can park at Bull Pot Farm, get kitted up in full caving gear, walk over the CRoW open access land, walk past Lancaster Hole (but you can't go down it), continue to the entrance of Link Pot, go caving, end up underneath the entrance shaft of Lancaster Hole (but you can't go up it) and exit via Boundary Pot and walk back to the car over Casterton Fell.  This doesn't make sense.

Although what you describe is physically possible, what makes you believe it is legally so? What is it about accessing the cave via Link Pot that gives you the right to visit the bottom of the Lancaster Hole entrance shaft?
Caving is for Life not just for Christmas

Offline graham

  • Retired
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10943
  • UBSS, Speleo-Club de Perigueux, GSG, SUI
    • UBSS
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #805 on: April 04, 2013, 04:39:10 pm »
Perhaps you'll be less surprised if I was to inform you that I'm also a CRoW landowner with a cave on it, thus meaning I'm on multiple sides of the same equation. Hence my interest.

 :bow: :bow: :bow:
Caving is for Life not just for Christmas

Offline blackholesun

  • menacing presence
  • **
  • Posts: 223
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #806 on: April 04, 2013, 04:45:40 pm »
Chris, as such a land owner, would you have concerns about cavers going down it? If so, can I ask what they are?
We've not had any input from land owners here, AFAIK so I'd be interested.

Offline Cap'n Chris

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 12274
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #807 on: April 04, 2013, 04:47:37 pm »
Unfettered/open access concerns? Yes, most definitely. Conservation of archaeological artefacts is hugely important.

Cavers can/do have access. But not on their own terms.

Offline Stuart Anderson

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Yorkshire Subterranean Society - A.N.U.S.
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #808 on: April 04, 2013, 04:49:31 pm »
Or, put another way, you'd like to find out whether the law can be interpreted such that it allows you over-rule or ignore any wishes of the landowner.

Yes. That's what the law is. A means with which to apply a test or run a rule over to see whether a situation or position is equatable. Climbers and walkers can access CRoW land. The caving omission at best was through lack of organisation at national level. I don't want to consider the alternative reasons.

The landowners I suspect didn't want CRoW. But they got it.
I've roamed and rambled and I've followed my footsteps
To the sparkling sands of her diamond deserts
And all around me a voice was sounding
This land was made for you and me

Online Badlad

  • Administrator
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1671
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #809 on: April 04, 2013, 04:50:23 pm »
Think on this.

Most of the caves under Leck and Casterton Fells are part of the Three Counties System.  A permit is required for the entrances on these fells.  Yet easy and unpermitted access can be gained if you access this same system via Link, Pip, Boundary, Mistral, Bull Pot, Ireby, Large or Rift. 

You can park at Bull Pot Farm, get kitted up in full caving gear, walk over the CRoW open access land, walk past Lancaster Hole (but you can't go down it), continue to the entrance of Link Pot, go caving, end up underneath the entrance shaft of Lancaster Hole (but you can't go up it) and exit via Boundary Pot and walk back to the car over Casterton Fell.  This doesn't make sense.

Although what you describe is physically possible, what makes you believe it is legally so? What is it about accessing the cave via Link Pot that gives you the right to visit the bottom of the Lancaster Hole entrance shaft?

Well there lies another interesting debate.  The complexities of which make a mockery of the system and one which is, of course, impossible to control or police.


Offline graham

  • Retired
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10943
  • UBSS, Speleo-Club de Perigueux, GSG, SUI
    • UBSS
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #810 on: April 04, 2013, 04:51:48 pm »
The caving omission at best was through lack of organisation at national level. I don't want to consider the alternative reasons.

Maybe you should. Maybe there were wholly valid alternative reasons. Maybe they remain valid today. To refuse to even consider this is to close down debate.
Caving is for Life not just for Christmas

Offline graham

  • Retired
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10943
  • UBSS, Speleo-Club de Perigueux, GSG, SUI
    • UBSS
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #811 on: April 04, 2013, 04:54:13 pm »
Think on this.

Most of the caves under Leck and Casterton Fells are part of the Three Counties System.  A permit is required for the entrances on these fells.  Yet easy and unpermitted access can be gained if you access this same system via Link, Pip, Boundary, Mistral, Bull Pot, Ireby, Large or Rift. 

You can park at Bull Pot Farm, get kitted up in full caving gear, walk over the CRoW open access land, walk past Lancaster Hole (but you can't go down it), continue to the entrance of Link Pot, go caving, end up underneath the entrance shaft of Lancaster Hole (but you can't go up it) and exit via Boundary Pot and walk back to the car over Casterton Fell.  This doesn't make sense.

Although what you describe is physically possible, what makes you believe it is legally so? What is it about accessing the cave via Link Pot that gives you the right to visit the bottom of the Lancaster Hole entrance shaft?

Well there lies another interesting debate.  The complexities of which make a mockery of the system and one which is, of course, impossible to control or police.

So, you agree that you do not know that what you describe is legal. Fair enough. As to whether it can be controlled or policed, of course it can be. Whether the required methods would be considered acceptable in all quarters is another matter.
Caving is for Life not just for Christmas

Offline Stuart Anderson

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Yorkshire Subterranean Society - A.N.U.S.
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #812 on: April 04, 2013, 04:55:28 pm »
The caving omission at best was through lack of organisation at national level. I don't want to consider the alternative reasons.

Maybe you should. Maybe there were wholly valid alternative reasons. Maybe they remain valid today. To refuse to even consider this is to close down debate.

Think you misinterpreted my meaning of not considering the alternatives.

I've roamed and rambled and I've followed my footsteps
To the sparkling sands of her diamond deserts
And all around me a voice was sounding
This land was made for you and me

Offline Stuart Anderson

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Yorkshire Subterranean Society - A.N.U.S.
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #813 on: April 04, 2013, 04:56:42 pm »
As to whether it can be controlled or policed, of course it can be. Whether the required methods would be considered acceptable in all quarters is another matter.

What are the required methods Graham?
I've roamed and rambled and I've followed my footsteps
To the sparkling sands of her diamond deserts
And all around me a voice was sounding
This land was made for you and me

Offline graham

  • Retired
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10943
  • UBSS, Speleo-Club de Perigueux, GSG, SUI
    • UBSS
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #814 on: April 04, 2013, 04:57:08 pm »
The caving omission at best was through lack of organisation at national level. I don't want to consider the alternative reasons.

Maybe you should. Maybe there were wholly valid alternative reasons. Maybe they remain valid today. To refuse to even consider this is to close down debate.

Think you misinterpreted my meaning of not considering the alternatives.
Maybe you should express yourself with more clarity, then.
Caving is for Life not just for Christmas

Offline graham

  • Retired
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10943
  • UBSS, Speleo-Club de Perigueux, GSG, SUI
    • UBSS
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #815 on: April 04, 2013, 04:57:38 pm »
As to whether it can be controlled or policed, of course it can be. Whether the required methods would be considered acceptable in all quarters is another matter.

What are the required methods Graham?

Use your imagination, Stu. It's not rocket science.
Caving is for Life not just for Christmas

Offline Stuart Anderson

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Yorkshire Subterranean Society - A.N.U.S.
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #816 on: April 04, 2013, 04:58:53 pm »
The caving omission at best was through lack of organisation at national level. I don't want to consider the alternative reasons.

Maybe you should. Maybe there were wholly valid alternative reasons. Maybe they remain valid today. To refuse to even consider this is to close down debate.

Think you misinterpreted my meaning of not considering the alternatives.
Maybe you should express yourself with more clarity, then.

Pretty sure you get the drift.
I've roamed and rambled and I've followed my footsteps
To the sparkling sands of her diamond deserts
And all around me a voice was sounding
This land was made for you and me

Offline Stuart Anderson

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Yorkshire Subterranean Society - A.N.U.S.
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #817 on: April 04, 2013, 05:00:46 pm »
As to whether it can be controlled or policed, of course it can be. Whether the required methods would be considered acceptable in all quarters is another matter.

What are the required methods Graham?

Use your imagination, Stu. It's not rocket science.

Try and be at least a little bit constructive Graham.

Again, what do you see as required methods? Genuine, none hostile question.
I've roamed and rambled and I've followed my footsteps
To the sparkling sands of her diamond deserts
And all around me a voice was sounding
This land was made for you and me

Offline Jenny P

  • forum star
  • ****
  • Posts: 671
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #818 on: April 04, 2013, 05:01:58 pm »
The landowner normally owns whatever is directly below their land as far as the centre of the earth.  (The exception might be where they have sold the mineral rights to someone else.)  However, the landowner owns the walls of the cave but it's a moot point as to whether they own the space which makes up the cave

This also applies to the designation of Scheduled Ancient Monuments where these relate to mining remains on the surface - DCA has recently had occasion to query this and the answer is that the scheduling applies to the remains below ground as well as those above ground.

Interesting case is the Giants - Oxlow connection where the former owner of Giants refused people permission to do the connection, even if they had asked permission beforehand to exit onto his land and had paid his 'trespass fee'.  Theoretically the system has 3 owners:  the Oxlow end belongs to the owners of Oxlow House Farm;  the Giants Hole end belongs to the owner of Peakshill farm;  but there's a bit in the middle which belongs to Derbyshire County Council because it goes under the B6061 Sparrowpit to Castleton road.

Offline graham

  • Retired
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10943
  • UBSS, Speleo-Club de Perigueux, GSG, SUI
    • UBSS
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #819 on: April 04, 2013, 05:03:24 pm »
The caving omission at best was through lack of organisation at national level. I don't want to consider the alternative reasons.

Maybe you should. Maybe there were wholly valid alternative reasons. Maybe they remain valid today. To refuse to even consider this is to close down debate.

Think you misinterpreted my meaning of not considering the alternatives.
Maybe you should express yourself with more clarity, then.

Pretty sure you get the drift.

In which case my previous comment stands and there is no point in continuing to debate with closed minds.
Caving is for Life not just for Christmas

Offline jasonbirder

  • forum star
  • ****
  • Posts: 726
  • Orpheus Caving Club
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #820 on: April 04, 2013, 05:05:55 pm »
Quote
Use your imagination, Stu. It's not rocket science

I'm fairly certain given Graham's proclivities he's refering to Concrete ;)

Offline Stuart Anderson

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Yorkshire Subterranean Society - A.N.U.S.
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #821 on: April 04, 2013, 05:07:18 pm »
The caving omission at best was through lack of organisation at national level. I don't want to consider the alternative reasons.

Maybe you should. Maybe there were wholly valid alternative reasons. Maybe they remain valid today. To refuse to even consider this is to close down debate.

Think you misinterpreted my meaning of not considering the alternatives.
Maybe you should express yourself with more clarity, then.

Pretty sure you get the drift.

In which case my previous comment stands and there is no point in continuing to debate with closed minds.

For clarity: it's my suspicion that BCA and/or CNCC kept themselves out of the picture. Which is a pity. A useful and detailed debate at the time might have answered a lot of caver's questions and this subject might never have arisen. But maybe BCA and/or CNCC closed their minds to the possibility that cavers might understand the reasons for doing so.
I've roamed and rambled and I've followed my footsteps
To the sparkling sands of her diamond deserts
And all around me a voice was sounding
This land was made for you and me

Offline graham

  • Retired
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 10943
  • UBSS, Speleo-Club de Perigueux, GSG, SUI
    • UBSS
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #822 on: April 04, 2013, 05:07:43 pm »
The landowner normally owns whatever is directly below their land as far as the centre of the earth.  (The exception might be where they have sold the mineral rights to someone else.)  However, the landowner owns the walls of the cave but it's a moot point as to whether they own the space which makes up the cave

This also applies to the designation of Scheduled Ancient Monuments where these relate to mining remains on the surface - DCA has recently had occasion to query this and the answer is that the scheduling applies to the remains below ground as well as those above ground.

Interesting case is the Giants - Oxlow connection where the former owner of Giants refused people permission to do the connection, even if they had asked permission beforehand to exit onto his land and had paid his 'trespass fee'.  Theoretically the system has 3 owners:  the Oxlow end belongs to the owners of Oxlow House Farm;  the Giants Hole end belongs to the owner of Peakshill farm;  but there's a bit in the middle which belongs to Derbyshire County Council because it goes under the B6061 Sparrowpit to Castleton road.

I'd be fascinated to see someone do the connection without touching those walls and floors that don't belong to them.
Caving is for Life not just for Christmas

Offline Stuart Anderson

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
  • Yorkshire Subterranean Society - A.N.U.S.
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #823 on: April 04, 2013, 05:09:00 pm »
Quote
Use your imagination, Stu. It's not rocket science

I'm fairly certain given Graham's proclivities he's refering to Concrete ;)

Maybe, who knows? He did earlier on on this thread invoke a memory of a caver of yore suggesting all caves become show caves.
I've roamed and rambled and I've followed my footsteps
To the sparkling sands of her diamond deserts
And all around me a voice was sounding
This land was made for you and me

Offline Les W

  • Hard cavin'
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 5270
  • Wessex Cave Club, UCET
    • Wessex Cave Club
Re: Loss of cave access, CROW and other things
« Reply #824 on: April 04, 2013, 05:11:37 pm »
Just for a point of clarification - BCA came into being in 2003.
CRoW was 2000
NCA was the body in question during he CRoW consultations.
I'm a very busy person