Author Topic: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip  (Read 29861 times)

Offline JB

  • junky
  • ****
  • Posts: 906
  • Eldon Pothole Club
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #50 on: April 07, 2014, 09:26:26 pm »
Ropes are being left in caves where there is no sign of diggers or divers

Interestingly someone had left ropes on the down stream pitches of Winnats Head - seems like a really odd place to leave ropes.

I think you will find that it might be to do with this:- "Winnats Head Downstream Pitches Anchors - UPDATED". DCA have been working on them.


Hey Mel, can see why you've got confused here but it was me and SamT that recently re-bolted the upstream pitches in Winnats Head and these ropes (nothing to do with us) were in-situ on the downstream pitches throughout. The downstream pitches were equipped with eco anchors years ago and we didn't go down there during the recent work in the cave. I've confused you because recently I've re-drawn the topo for the downstream pitches and emailed it to you. In fact these ropes belong to a Daniel Lay (I spoke to him some time ago but have since lost his number). If someone could PM me his number I'll ring him again and see about getting them out.

Jules.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2014, 09:39:04 pm by JB »

Offline mmilner

  • Experienced digging / conservation juggling
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1169
  • Outside Handshake Cave, Manifold Valley.
    • Darfar P.C. web site
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #51 on: April 07, 2014, 09:38:58 pm »
but drilling away/capping etc established 'classic' squeezes, that once altered cannot be re-instated is a hugely selfish act and by all accounts, there seems to be one perpetrator acting outside the normal caving circles and ethics.

This needs putting in context:-

I can't comment on Youd's, etc. Yoga Hole (Dr. Jackson's, presumably) I have been through it though to the end, it was a hard trip with all the tackle.

I know not many of you go down Darfar Pot (I haven't been down for 2 years cos of the weather, sigh) or Ladyside Pot, but in the 1990's 'we' enlarged the really tight vertical section in Ladyside just before climb down into the main passage. It was then passable by normal sized people, not just Ferrets. (The cave was originally entered  in the 1970's by the OCC! Kango, etc.) But I had to personally rescue one person from it who wasn't physically able to get out on his own. He climbed out on my shoulders, that was hard work!

The squeeze into Darfar 2 from Glory Chamber will be enlarged by me as soon as I can get down there again, hopefully in the next few weeks. It's awkward, the cave is 175ft deep and can fill to the roof (river level) in 20 minutes if a big flood pulse comes down the valley, I've seen it happen!  :o  Trust me you want to be able to get out of there asap. That squeeze is 'unnecessary'. That squeeze was first passed by me in 1983, I believe, and originally it was desperate. It has since been enlarged a bit by me, but needs a bit more  'altering'. There are one or two others that also need 'altering'. There is a lot of high-level stuff I still need to survey after all these years. (Other things to do, don't ya know.)

Many caves have been enlarged by cavers to gain access or to extend the cave. (Most of the ones in the Manifold.) I am sure in other areas too, so don't carried away by this.

The amount of time a squeeze has been there does not affect the fact that someone might think it needs making a bit easier. They might be a bit bigger than you. And remember that they might have a dig beyond that squeeze and having to cart digging equipment though as well!

I was so skinny in the early 80's I could get through virtually anything, but these days I sometimes need a bit of 'assistance'. As long as it doesn't damage any features of scientific interest being monitoring by NE (us) or whoever, then so be it.

Remember, Owl Hole (Crystal Pallace, a lovely chamber) extensions was only got into by capping a few years ago.

Regards Mel. DCA Conservation Officer. (I won't ever alter things more than necessary, honest.)

« Last Edit: April 07, 2014, 10:07:14 pm by mmilner »
Norbert Casteret (Ten Years Under the Earth) and Pierre Chevalier (Subterranean Climbers) were my inspiration to start caving. (And I'm still doing it.) Secretary, Darfar Potholing Club, the Peak District.

Offline mmilner

  • Experienced digging / conservation juggling
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1169
  • Outside Handshake Cave, Manifold Valley.
    • Darfar P.C. web site
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #52 on: April 07, 2014, 09:40:54 pm »
Ropes are being left in caves where there is no sign of diggers or divers

Interestingly someone had left ropes on the down stream pitches of Winnats Head - seems like a really odd place to leave ropes.

I think you will find that it might be to do with this:- "Winnats Head Downstream Pitches Anchors - UPDATED". DCA have been working on them.


Hey Mel, can see why you've got confused here but it was me and SamT that recently re-bolted the upstream pitches in Winnats Head and these ropes (nothing to do with us) were in-situ on the downstream pitches throughout. The downstream pitches were equipped with eco anchors years ago and we didn't go down there during the recent work in the cave. I've confused you because recently I've re-drawn the topo for the downstream pitches and emailed it to you. In fact these ropes belong to a Daniel Lay (I spoke to him some time ago but have since lost his number). If someone could PM me his number I'll ring him again and see about getting them out.

Jules.

Yeah got it Jules. Will put it on the DCA web site on Wednesday. Am up Peak digging (and possibly doing more water tracing tmrw.)  :thumbsup:
Norbert Casteret (Ten Years Under the Earth) and Pierre Chevalier (Subterranean Climbers) were my inspiration to start caving. (And I'm still doing it.) Secretary, Darfar Potholing Club, the Peak District.

Offline JB

  • junky
  • ****
  • Posts: 906
  • Eldon Pothole Club
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #53 on: April 07, 2014, 09:43:30 pm »
Ropes are being left in caves where there is no sign of diggers or divers

Interestingly someone had left ropes on the down stream pitches of Winnats Head - seems like a really odd place to leave ropes.

I think you will find that it might be to do with this:- "Winnats Head Downstream Pitches Anchors - UPDATED". DCA have been working on them.


Hey Mel, can see why you've got confused here but it was me and SamT that recently re-bolted the upstream pitches in Winnats Head and these ropes (nothing to do with us) were in-situ on the downstream pitches throughout. The downstream pitches were equipped with eco anchors years ago and we didn't go down there during the recent work in the cave. I've confused you because recently I've re-drawn the topo for the downstream pitches and emailed it to you. In fact these ropes belong to a Daniel Lay (I spoke to him some time ago but have since lost his number). If someone could PM me his number I'll ring him again and see about getting them out.

Jules.

Yeah got it Jules. Will put it on the DCA web site on Wednesday. Am up Peak digging (and possibly doing more water tracing tmrw.)  :thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

Offline Chocolate fireguard

  • obsessive maniac
  • ***
  • Posts: 381
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #54 on: April 07, 2014, 10:30:37 pm »
Obvious troll is obvious?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I assume chocolate fireguard is trolling.



Trolling.

In my day it might have been called "gently taking the piss out of people who are starting to go off on one".

Now it seems that if the post isn`t marked with a =) or one of those silly smiley faces used by people who struggle to spell =) then it`s trolling.

I have read the 2 and a bit pages of this post and can`t see any evidence that anybody has done anything wrong (like damaging natural cave passage).

Come on you lot, get a grip.


Offline cavermark

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1382
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #55 on: April 07, 2014, 10:31:17 pm »

The amount of time a squeeze has been there does not affect the fact that someone might think it needs making a bit easier. They might be a bit bigger than you. And remember that they might have a dig beyond that squeeze and having to cart digging equipment though as well!


DISAGREE- The squeezes being discussed such as Winnats Head and Meccano Passage have been that size for many years.  I am "a bit bigger than you"  - if I can't get through something I will go elsewhere.

If getting digging gear through a squeeze is awkward then I'll man up and deal with it, or find a different dig.

Enlarging passage in a dig at the time of digging is fine - Enlarging a long standing squeeze is not.

Offline Anon

  • Nobody
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #56 on: April 07, 2014, 11:31:15 pm »
but drilling away/capping etc established 'classic' squeezes, that once altered cannot be re-instated is a hugely selfish act and by all accounts, there seems to be one perpetrator acting outside the normal caving circles and ethics.

This needs putting in context:-

The amount of time a squeeze has been there does not affect the fact that someone might think it needs making a bit easier. They might be a bit bigger than you. And remember that they might have a dig beyond that squeeze and having to cart digging equipment though as well!
Oh well, carte blanche then..
Dales based examples, as that what I'm familiar with:
Let's destroy every narrow section in Pippikin, Peterson, Quaking, Marble, Car, Strans, Langstroth.. And why not, just for the hell of it, destroy the Cheese Press in Long Churn because some people can't get through it. Conservation officer when it suits springs to mind.

If diggers aren't capable of passing awkward sections they should find alternative places to dig, end of!

Trolling.

In my day it might have been called "gently taking the piss out of people who are starting to go off on one".

Now it seems that if the post isn`t marked with a =) or one of those silly smiley faces used by people who struggle to spell =) then it`s trolling.

I have read the 2 and a bit pages of this post and can`t see any evidence that anybody has done anything wrong (like damaging natural cave passage).

Come on you lot, get a grip.
Because people who don't know you can tell what you mean by a faceless post on a forum. Not.
So what if it needs marking with a wink or a grin or whatever, this is modern life. If you can't handle that don't indulge in it, get a grip as some say.......

There is possible evidence of natural restrictions being modified, which is worrying. I'd like to believe that information is wrong and this hasn't happened.

Offline ah147

  • forum star
  • ****
  • Posts: 716
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #57 on: April 08, 2014, 12:40:21 am »

The squeeze into Darfar 2 from Glory Chamber will be enlarged by me as soon as I can get down there again, hopefully in the next few weeks. It's awkward, the cave is 175ft deep and can fill to the roof (river level) in 20 minutes if a big flood pulse comes down the valley, I've seen it happen!  :o  Trust me you want to be able to get out of there asap. That squeeze is 'unnecessary'. That squeeze was first passed by me in 1983, I believe, and originally it was desperate. It has since been enlarged a bit by me, but needs a bit more  'altering'. There are one or two others that also need 'altering'. There is a lot of high-level stuff I still need to survey after all these years. (Other things to do, don't ya know.)


This just about seems fair enough in the interests of safety.


Many caves have been enlarged by cavers to gain access or to extend the cave. (Most of the ones in the Manifold.) I am sure in other areas too, so don't carried away by this.


These aren't original digging trips/exploration or very soon after. These are classic routes and the squeezes in them well known. As a newer caver I go down these looking forward to the squeezes in a perverse way, looking to test myself, as I'm sure many others do, to have that taken away from me.


The amount of time a squeeze has been there does not affect the fact that someone might think it needs making a bit easier. They might be a bit bigger than you. And remember that they might have a dig beyond that squeeze and having to cart digging equipment though as well!

I was so skinny in the early 80's I could get through virtually anything, but these days I sometimes need a bit of 'assistance'. As long as it doesn't damage any features of scientific interest being monitoring by NE (us) or whoever, then so be it.


So anything I deem to require making easier is fair game? And anything your require making easier is fair game? I have a rather large 19 stone work colleague, he wants to cave but is worried about tight bits, can I now tell him he can come along as long as he brings some caps, a drill, hammer and chisel? The view you're supporting here will leave entire caves without squeezes which are a quintessential part of the sport in my, and many others opinion!

That said, the digging equipment argument is kind of fair game but in my experience tends to be done a bit more discreetly. Instead of Gentlewomans to Youds which used to be a flat out squeeze in water and is now on your hands and knees, and Meccano squeeze which had to be done without SRT gear on your back, and you can now get through almost on your knees with your SRT gear on.


Remember, Owl Hole (Crystal Pallace, a lovely chamber) extensions was only got into by capping a few years ago.


I don't think there's a single post on here objecting to enlargement of passage during original exploration. Just objection to enlargement of established passage/squeezes.


Regards Mel. DCA Conservation Officer. (I won't ever alter things more than necessary, honest.)

Does this mean that your post is the official standing of the DCA? Or is this just your attempt to make your post seem more authoritative? If it's the former I'm extremely disappointed.

Peak cavers on this thread, on the most part, are rather upset by the enlargement of these established passages. For a body that claims to represent peak district cavers to be taking the view of the minority is rather counter productive and very disappointing. Especially how when others are constantly moaning about CNCC or CCC I'm rather proud of all the hassle free caving I get to do thanks to brilliant work by the DCA.


Trolling.

In my day it might have been called "gently taking the piss out of people who are starting to go off on one".

Now it seems that if the post isn`t marked with a =) or one of those silly smiley faces used by people who struggle to spell =) then it`s trolling.

I have read the 2 and a bit pages of this post and can`t see any evidence that anybody has done anything wrong (like damaging natural cave passage).

Come on you lot, get a grip.



Taken in good faith mate. I nearly bit and went off until I thought "hmm, something seems a little funny here". Trolling is legitimate sport in my opinion!

That said, the subject of the thread is something I'm obviously emotive about. I haven't seen what's been done in Winnats, just Meccano and Youds level. I appreciate its mined passage and not natural cave being altered. Its the removal of a part of the mine for the benefit of few to the detriment of many that most of us, myself included, disagree with.

I know we all moan about tight passages, but I'd say most, if not all, of us actually gain perverse pleasure from it!

Offline mmilner

  • Experienced digging / conservation juggling
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1169
  • Outside Handshake Cave, Manifold Valley.
    • Darfar P.C. web site
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #58 on: April 08, 2014, 01:18:44 am »
Yes, well I expected that sort of response. You try helping a 15 stone caver out of a cave on ya shoulders. I had bruises for days, but I got him out. Now it's much easier. If  I had had to leave him down there, DCRO would have been called out and access might have been affected. ATM, it's completely open.  :coffee:

I am not advocating enlarging every squeeze every where, (or what appears to be being done by someone in the Peak), I'm just saying, judge everything separately, not just how long it's been there.

For  the person above suggesting that the Cheesepress be enlarged. How effing ridiculous, there is a big stream passage round it, no dig beyond it, (even Kate Humble got through it), it is a ludicrous addition to this thread. Get an effing grip.

Many 'digs' in my area (which you obviously know nowt of) have been ongoing for years off and on cos of lack of personnel, so it doesn't matter how long they've been known. The original entrance to Darfar Pot could be pretty desperate.  We created the top entrance, (via a natural cave), so people wouldn't get drowned trying to get out if a flood pulse hit.  :shrug:

Remember Mossdale Caverns?

I am not speaking on behalf of DCA, btw. Just my own opinion.

I look after dozens of caves in my area for the National Trust. Making sure they're not trashed, as one was a few years ago by an irresponsible cave digger, uncovering several human remains which cost the NT about £8K to sort out.

So don't say I'm only a conservation officer when it suits me.  :thumbsdown: (Insert swear word here!)
Norbert Casteret (Ten Years Under the Earth) and Pierre Chevalier (Subterranean Climbers) were my inspiration to start caving. (And I'm still doing it.) Secretary, Darfar Potholing Club, the Peak District.

Offline Anon

  • Nobody
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #59 on: April 08, 2014, 01:53:55 am »
For  the person above suggesting that the Cheesepress be enlarged. How effing ridiculous, there is a big stream passage round it, no dig beyond it, (even Kate Humble got through it), it is a ludicrous addition to this thread. Get an effing grip.
Just like your suggestion that destroying a long standing squeeze to suit your own ends is fucking ludicrous, look at the thread yourself and get a fucking grip!

Quote
Many 'digs' in my area (which you obviously know nowt of) have been ongoing for years off and on cos of lack of personnel, so it doesn't matter how long they've been known. The original entrance to Darfar Pot could be pretty desperate.  We created the top entrance, (via a natural cave), so people wouldn't get drowned trying to get out if a flood pulse hit.  :shrug:

Remember Mossdale Caverns?
No, I wasn't born but I know the story. So the weather is now being used as an excuse for destroying sections of cave? I can think of plenty of caves I haven't been to because the weather has prevented me from doing so, I don't find myself inclined to modify things just in case of accident or me taking a chance with the weather.

Offline Gollum

  • menacing presence
  • **
  • Posts: 231
  • I don't do high, wet, tight or dark
    • Twin Peaks Outdoor Activities
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #60 on: April 08, 2014, 07:14:55 am »
I spoke to the person who enlarged the gentle womans and he informs me it was an accident.
They started to pull gravel through to enlarge it to get through and durring the process the water started washing it down a little stream to the side. Suddenly the little trickle into the stream got out of control and it just started flow,tacking masses of gravel and it was too late.
Twin Peaks Outdoor Activities
Quality Instruction in the Peak District

Offline cavermark

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1382
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #61 on: April 08, 2014, 07:41:00 am »
Enlarging a squeeze by removing gravel isn't really an issue - gravel can can be replaced, and the size will vary due to traffic anyway.

It's enlarging squeezes in rock that need VERY careful consideration - the justification Mel gives isn't sufficient - so what if it resulted in a rescue call out? - it would be a demonstration to that individual and others that they shouldn't undertake certain trips lightly.

If access was lost due to a rescue, again, that's better than removing any challenging bits whatsoever from the cave just because a big lad got stuck once. Once it's gone it's gone.....

Online SamT

  • Global Moderator
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 6241
    • The Eldon Pothole Club
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #62 on: April 08, 2014, 07:56:41 am »
Mel. Im too am disappointed at your stance on this.  Using your position of conservation officer to try and add some sort of credence to your stance only rubs salt into it. 

The facts are this. Long established squeezes in caves with no current active digs have been modified significantly.

Youds was seemingly just gravel fill, which could arguably be reinstated.  Meccano passage albeit in a mined section of passage was a well established section of given mention in the guide book and seen by most as a sporting challenge.  Winnats head was a natural bit if cave that has always  had a reputation for being hard. Non of the digging teams of recent years felt it necessary to enlarge any of the technical bits on the way. 

Rumour has it that yoga hole in dr Jackson may have been modified too. Again a natural cave feature thas has almost iconic status.

The arguments you present seem to apply purely to your own digs on your own 'patch'.  As DCA conservation officer you represent all local cavers and it seems you're out of step with the majority.   Think carefully about the message you are sending out.  I personally find this trend as saddening and abhorrent as smashing stal.

Offline cavermark

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1382
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #63 on: April 08, 2014, 08:28:24 am »

The squeeze into Darfar 2 from Glory Chamber will be enlarged by me as soon as I can get down there again, hopefully in the next few weeks. It's awkward, the cave is 175ft deep and can fill to the roof (river level) in 20 minutes if a big flood pulse comes down the valley, I've seen it happen!  :o  Trust me you want to be able to get out of there asap. That squeeze is 'unnecessary'. That squeeze was first passed by me in 1983, I believe, and originally it was desperate. It has since been enlarged a bit by me, but needs a bit more  'altering'. There are one or two others that also need 'altering'. There is a lot of high-level stuff I still need to survey after all these years. (Other things to do, don't ya know.)


The appropriate course of action here seems to me to be - don't go there when heavy rain is forecast, NOT enlarging the squeeze.
The lesson that came out of Mossdale was - don't go into caves that flood to the roof, or where escape would be difficult, when wet weather is forecast.

You say this squeeze has been passable for at least 20 years - has anyone died in there yet? Leave it as it is.

Offline owd git

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1384
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #64 on: April 08, 2014, 08:41:31 am »
I spoke to the person who enlarged the gentle womans and he informs me it was an accident.
They started to pull gravel through to enlarge it to get through and durring the process the water started washing it down a little stream to the side. Suddenly the little trickle into the stream got out of control and it just started flow,tacking masses of gravel and it was too late.

Jon, please put all the worms back in the tin. :lol: :lol:
An accident? they happen, i s'pose.
pretty sure there will be a wee pool there again soon, or a pool  of wee  :ang:
Hen racer? 2000 world hen racing champion

Offline mr conners

  • stalker
  • ***
  • Posts: 272
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #65 on: April 08, 2014, 12:47:01 pm »
It is a bit of a shame that this is happening. I know caving, especially during initial exploration, can be a bit heavy handed . And some of these squeezes are in mines, which are a bit of a mess anyway but that aside its not really good ethics. You could also draw a rather vague line with the actions of chipping in climbing. It basically just a no-no.

 :furious:

Owd git and Zomjon, if you need a lift re-establishing the squeeze in Youds then let me know. But only if Zomjon is on the downhill side  ;D
"Life is a thankless struggle"

Offline ah147

  • forum star
  • ****
  • Posts: 716
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #66 on: April 08, 2014, 01:23:54 pm »
I view it as almost the same as chipping in climbing. Ruining the challenge for those who can (just) for the benefit of those who can't.

Political correctness gone mad I tells ya...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Peter Burgess

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
  • Left ukcaving by this name
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #67 on: April 08, 2014, 01:31:07 pm »
This is an interesting debate. What do people think about gardening the tops of pitches? Should people simply be more careful when descending shafts with loose material at the top?

Offline cavermark

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1382
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #68 on: April 08, 2014, 02:01:59 pm »
This is an interesting debate. What do people think about gardening the tops of pitches? Should people simply be more careful when descending shafts with loose material at the top?

I don't think that it's comparable - Loose pitch heads aren't a "sporting challenge" to those underneath - they are objective danger.  People don't come out saying "That loose pitch head was really challenging, I really enjoyed overcoming it" as they might for a classic squeeze.
I'd equate gardening loose stuff off a pitch head with putting scaffolding in a choke during digging - it reduces risk without a radical change to the physical nature of the trip.

It's like bolting - we accept that we couldn't get down some shafts without bolts - but we try to limit the impact by putting in eco hangers as soon as possible so we don't end up with a proliferation of bolts everywhere you look. (although in many places some stonking natural belays could be used instead of bolts if they were put in the rigging topos).

Offline Peter Burgess

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
  • Left ukcaving by this name
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #69 on: April 08, 2014, 02:05:46 pm »
Good point. What about Mel's plan to make Darfar 2 safer by enlargement? That's primarily a safety issue as presented. Just as falling rocks are a danger caused by a momentary loss of concentration on someone's part, an unforeseen storm, which do happen, would, as Mel suggests, render the cave dangerous as a rapid exit would not be possible.

Offline ah147

  • forum star
  • ****
  • Posts: 716
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #70 on: April 08, 2014, 02:11:17 pm »
I think the difference is whose safety is affected by your actions.

Loose pitch head? Your safety is affected by those above you.

Boulder choke? Your safety is affected by those going through the choke as well as yourself.

Going down a flood prone cave without checking the weather? That's your call.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline cavermark

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1382
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #71 on: April 08, 2014, 02:16:53 pm »
Good point. What about Mel's plan to make Darfar 2 safer by enlargement? That's primarily a safety issue as presented. Just as falling rocks are a danger caused by a momentary loss of concentration on someone's part, an unforeseen storm, which do happen, would, as Mel suggests, render the cave dangerous as a rapid exit would not be possible.

If it was enlarged for safety reasons at the time of first exploration then perhaps. When it has been established for 20years, and no one has died from a flash flood in there, I think it should be left.  Enlarging it is one way to reduce the risk from a flash flood. My preferred way is to put a warning in the guidebook and avoid it when there is a chance of heavy rain (leaving the cave intact). With modern weather forecasts, an avoidance of times when the ground is waterloggd or when you get afternoon convection storms, and a cautious approach, there is a very low risk of getting caught out by an "unforeseen storm" these days.

Yes, the safety argument for altering caves is the same in your two examples (pitch and squeeze), but the effect on the cave and people's caving experience is quite different.  Flood risk is one of the things that caves are graded by.


Offline Peter Burgess

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 9118
  • Left ukcaving by this name
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #72 on: April 08, 2014, 02:24:56 pm »
It's a valid view, of course. It's a balance between unavoidable risk and sport. The unexpected flood scenario might be very rare, and that rareness is a factor. However, although you might recover from being hit by a rock, I am not aware of many people pulling through death by drowning. Putting a value to severity of risk is never easy. No amount of warnings on signs or in guide books will protect you from unexpected flooding. Anyone caving in such a place when storms are considered a possibility is not going to be helped whatever you do. Anyway, stay safe. Just wanted to give a smidgin of support for Mel's idea.

Offline ah147

  • forum star
  • ****
  • Posts: 716
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #73 on: April 08, 2014, 02:33:09 pm »
In fairness. I'm not opposed to mels idea either. Just the unnecessary expansion of squeezes in general. I don't know enough about darfur to have a definite opinion on it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline Bottlebank

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1115
    • Power Tool Batteries
Re: Squeezes in Gentlewomans to Youds trip
« Reply #74 on: April 08, 2014, 02:34:55 pm »
Personally I think removing rock from established trips is a question of common sense. If you're thinking of doing it talk it over with other people who are familiar with the cave first. If it's simply to allow someone to the end of a sport trip you'll be doing something that others will disagree with.

That said I've always felt that widening or deepening a man made squeeze, essentially for comfort - is very different to enlarging natural passage. In my head at least widening a natural squeeze purely for comfort of sport caving is a no no, whereas widening a dug passage to continue or access a dig or for rescue, or even simply for comfort is easier to justify occasionally.

At the end of the day each digger enlarges a passage to suit him or herself. When you restart a dig, perhaps twenty or thirty years after it was last dug by someone a foot shorter and three stone lighter than you, it's not uncommon to decide to make the approach a little easier.

I'd also support Mel a little, he's been there and seen the risk for himself, and made a decision (I would guess possibly following some discussion), I haven't so wouldn't criticise him for it.

Most of us would support blasting a large loose boulder over a pitch head for example, a serious constriction that presents a risk in the event of flood is probably an equally dangerous hazard.
Drill and Power Tool Batteries - www.power-tool-battery.co.uk
Laptop spares and repairs - www.laptopbits.co.uk