Caving on CRoW (Access) Land - from SWCC Committee

Hi folks. A couple of months ago we were asked by the BCA to give our opinion as to how our local caves might be affected if the CRoW Act (Countryside Rights of Way) were to be deemed to include access to caves.
Currently CRoW does not mention caves and considerable debate has recently grown up around this, culminating in the voting forms that most of us have now received. Here below is what we drew up and sent to BCA, and you may or may not wish to take it into account. Your Committee’s viewpoint is primarily based around cave conservation.

SWCC Response to BCA/CCC discussion on CRoW and CAVES:

Some background: Natural Resources Wales (NRW) is an amalgamation of the former CCW (Countryside Council for Wales) along with the Wales arms of the Forestry Commission and Environment Agency.
NRW is a statutory/regulatory body in relation to (amongst other things) SSSIs and National Nature Reserves in Wales. It has no connection with Natural England.
The CRoW Act applies to Wales as well as England. However there are separate Regulations - The Countryside Access (Exclusions or Restriction of Access) (Wales) Regulations 2003 - that can modify its effect in Wales.
Significant Caves in the Swansea Valley Area
There are three significant entrances on CRoW land in this area:

Ogof Ffynnon Ddu Top Entrance, Pant Mawr Pot and Tunnel Cave Top Entrance.
For the avoidance of doubt, Ogof Ffynnon Ddu 1 and Cwm Dwr entrances are not on CRoW land.

Ogof Ffynnon Ddu Top Entrance: This entrance is on CRoW land and is in a location which is readily accessible. The surrounding land is owned by NRW and the underlying cave is a National Nature Reserve (NNR), which was the first ever underground NNR in the UK. The area also lies within an SSSI but the level of protection applicable to an NNR is even greater than that applicable to an SSSI.

Access is controlled by the OFD Management Committee (OFDMC) which is joint between South Wales Caving Club (SWCC), other caving representation and NRW, and is under NRW Chairmanship. The arrangement was set up in 1976 in close collaboration with the then (UK-wide) Nature Conservancy Council and has worked well since. The entrance is gated to prevent casual public entry, for reasons of safety and conservation and, sadly, because of incidences of wilful damage to caves in the area. However, the access mechanisms appear to be widely respected and accepted by the caving community.

An area within the cave, the ‘Columns’ is further gated for conservation reasons. This was done, reluctantly, following incidents of damage in this area, both accidental and wilful. Access to this area is available on publicised dates and times under the supervision of NRW-appointed wardens.

Pant Mawr Pot: This entrance is a vertical shaft located in a remote area of CRoW land and within an SSSI. Its location and nature in themselves provide a reasonably effective means of protection for the cave. SWCC and the landowner are on good terms and the formal access arrangements require approach to the pot via Penwyllt and the use of the destination board at SWCC HQ.

Tunnel Cave Top Entrance: This entrance lies within an SSSI and is a vertical shaft that was sunk through solid rock to the roof of a high aven in a known cave below. Unless securely closed, it presents a significant danger to the non-caving public. The key is held by SWCC and access is available to bona-fide cavers.

Potential Effect of CROW on these caves: For reasons stated above, the situation regarding Pant Mawr and Tunnel Cave would appear to be unaffected by CRoW.

In relation to OFD Top Entrance, access is only available to cavers who are in some way BCA-affiliated. The provisions of the ‘Try Caving’ scheme extend this to some extent but inevitably there is a potential issue relating to non-BCA affiliated cavers. Because of the ownership (NRW) and high level of statutory protection (SSSI and NNR) to which this cave is subject, any change to this situation would require detailed negotiation with NRW.

Conclusions: The CRoW legislation if applied to caves would have little or no immediate effect on the three entrances considered above. Any potential changes in relation to OFD Top Entrance would be dependent on negotiations with NRW as landowner and statutory protection agency.

Conservation should be the prime concern in relation to cave access arrangements. Damage to surface features generally recovers over time. Damage to caves does not.
Even the three cases considered here illustrate the diversity of detail in relation to different caves and must throw considerable doubt on the feasibility of formulating an overall policy in relation to caves and CRoW other than in very general terms.
Given that diversity, it is not feasible to formulate any blanket policy as to whether or not to gate any caves that will be discovered in the future.

Individual landowners must be involved in discussions on relaxing access controls. Even if landowners potentially are exempted by the CRoW legislation from personal liability in relation to caving, this would have to be tested in the courts and in the meantime it would not be unreasonable for landowners to insist on cavers holding BCA or equivalent insurance. Furthermore, it would seem that, as now, landowners could in principle be prosecuted for damage caused to caves that lie within an SSSI or NNR.

The potential differences in CRoW legislation between England and Wales need to be recognised and could lead to the need for different ‘national’ policies.
In all specific cases the interests of the relevant stakeholders need to be considered and these include cavers and landowners, along with such bodies as National Parks, regulatory and environmental protection bodies and possibly other Government agencies. Any ‘national’ policies should take full account of this.

The Elephant Trap Ladder - from SWCC Committee

Many of you will have seen the recent Facebook discussion on the subject of the Elephant Trap and the recently installed ladder. For the benefit of those who are new to the club, as well as those who have simply managed to avoid the politics, the committee would like to add some context to those discussions. [The Elephant Trap is a tricky sandy climb up from a traverse at the end of Edward's Shortcut in the direction of Shattered Pillar]

The entrance to Ogof Ffynnon Ddu 2 lies on land owned by Natural Resources Wales (NRW), a government body made up by the recent amalgamation of a number of other bodies including the Countryside Commission for Wales, Environment Agency Wales and Forestry Commission Wales.

Both the land and the cave are in a designated Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). This SSSI designation brings with it some very strict conservation rules regarding what can and can’t take place.

The management of the SSSI relating to the cave is run by the Ogof Ffynnon Ddu Cave Management Committee (OFDCMC or CMC). This committee is made up of representatives from a number of bodies including NRW, Cambrian Cave Council (CCC), SWCC, and other caving clubs. The day to day running of the cave, i.e. the issuing of cave keys, replacing marker tape and maintaining fixed aids – both caver aids and conservation aids, has, for several decades been carried out by SWCC on behalf of the OFDCMC.

At the SWCC committee meeting in December 2013, the Conservation Officer reported that the Crystal Pool between Northern Canyon and Edwards Shortcut (known as the Elephant Trap) was in danger of being undermined by cavers climbing up the overhanging sand which supports the false calcite floor. It was suggested that a traverse line be installed to encourage cavers to avoid this climb.

Opinion within the committee was strongly divided and the debate on the issue was vigorous to say the least. It was decided that the matter needed further discussion so a decision was deferred to the January 2014 meeting. Those committee members who also sit on the CMC were asked to keep options open during the CMC meeting in December and an agreement was made for a site visit to take place.

At the January 2014 SWCC committee meeting, it was reported by the OFDCMC representative that a decision had already been made on how to protect the area. There was, naturally, some disappointment in this but there was also an understanding that, whilst SWCC hold committee meetings every month and can sometimes defer decisions, the CMC only meets twice a year and felt that they could not defer the decision for a further 6 months. It was decided that the SWCC would produce a recommendation in any case in the hope that the CMC’s decision could be reviewed at their next meeting. After much discussion and a very tight vote, the SWCC committee decided to forward a recommendation that “the area should be fitted with appropriate signs warning of the problem and the climb should be taped off for evaluation over a six month period. If this solution could be seen to be not working after that period then a traverse line could still be installed”

A letter outlining that proposal was sent to a CMC member for circulation to the rest of the CMC. It would appear that, through a genuine oversight, this letter did not reach all of its intended recipients. The CMC member in question attached the letter to an email to send around the committee. However, it would appear that, instead of selecting “reply to all” the email only went as a “reply” meaning that only one other CMC member received it. This mistake did not come to light until several months afterwards. However, the SWCC committee is of the opinion that there are enough people who have a seat on both committees that the SWCC’s position on the matter would be known and understood by the CMC.

There was no movement on this matter by either party for some months until the matter was discussed, at length, during the 2014 SWCC AGM. Some club members were unhappy that the club’s recommendations to the CMC had apparently been disregarded. Others saw evidence of a breakdown in communications and in the relationship between the two committees. A proposal was made that the incoming committee “be instructed to look into the relationship between the club’s committee and the OFD Management Committee and the process by which people are appointed to the Cave Management Committee.”

This proposal was approved by the majority of those present at the meeting.

It should be noted that the AGM, whilst disagreeing with the decision to install a fixed ladder, did not specifically instruct the committee to attempt to debate or overturn that decision. Instead, it looked to improve communications and transparency surrounding the discussion and implementation of any future fixed aids, conservation or otherwise.

As a result of the AGM’s instruction, SWCC is playing its part in a review of the OFDCMC constitution. This is ongoing and it is hoped that a full report will be made to the 2015 AGM.

This review, whilst it may be crucial in future debates, cannot, however affect decisions made under the old constitution and work continued to install the fixed ladder that the CMC had agreed on.

A suitable ladder having been located, it was taken to the OFDII entrance on 31st May 2014, for later movement to the correct site and installation. There was some delay from after that due to one of the primary individuals sustaining a knee injury and being unable to go ahead with the planned installation for some months.

In early November, a working party was put together to collect the ladder from the entrance series and install it at the Elephant Trap. On arriving at the cave, the party were somewhat dismayed to find that the ladder had been removed. A search of the cave was made along the route to the Elephant Trap in case someone had helpfully carried the ladder in but it could not be found. An email was sent around requesting the ladder be returned.

In early December, a replacement ladder was sourced and installed (see photo).

In the public debate surrounding this matter there have been accusations made suggesting that the installation of the ladder was a personal matter, driven by one or two individuals, and that this has been done in some underhanded way. It is the opinion of the SWCC committee that this is not the case. Whilst the committee suggested an alternative to the ladder and is understandably disappointed that this suggestion was not taken up, it is satisfied that the decisions were made in a clear and transparent way. Although there have been one or two errors in communication between the two committees, there is no evidence to suggest that there was any deliberate action on any part to de-rail the good relationship between the two committees.

The committee, whilst not being opposed in principle to fixed aids, is of the opinion that they should be a last resort and will continue to maintain that position when making any future recommendations to the CMC. We hope that the currently ongoing review of the CMC constitution will only serve to strengthen the relationship between SWCC and the CMC and indeed between all of the bodies represented on the CMC and that we can continue to work together to maintain good standards of access and conservation.

The committee also welcomes healthy constructive debate on this or any other issue. We would ask though that caution is exercised when carrying out these debates on a public forum or via social media.

There are two issues of particular concern. The first of those is the allegations publically levelled at individuals who have been working with the utmost dedication and integrity for many years on behalf of SWCC in particular and cavers in general. With the exception of those representing NRW, all of the members of both committees are volunteers, giving up time and, in some cases money to attend meetings on your behalf. It is a thankless task at best and is only made more difficult in this kind of situation.

The second is a recognition that social media is not in any way a secure forum. There are members of the SWCC Facebook group who are not SWCC club members. There is also the possibility that an inadvertent click can easily share the content of the debate, including any pictures posted, outside of the group.

The committee does not wish to stifle or censor any future debate but asks only that you bear these considerations in mind in the course of that debate.

There will be an opportunity to openly discuss any issues relating to the CMC at the 2015 AGM when the report requested at the last meeting is presented. In the meantime, please feel free to contact any member of the committee.

Summer Expedition - Dents de Crolles - France - from Gary Vaughan

Hi Everyone

I have now placed reservations for five camping pitches for the summer expedition next year. Three of these are without electricity and two are with electricity.

Each pitch will take two reasonable sized tents at a squeeze but only one car (according to the directions on the website)

Each pitch is designated as being capable of accommodating between 2 and 6 people. The minimum number of people required for the expedition is therefore 10 people.

The maximum number of people that can be accommodated is in theory 30 people but this would be subject to limitations about the number of cars brought onto site and our ability to physically squeeze tents onto pitches. Each pitch is between 100sqm and 130sqm so they should take between two and three three person tents. If you have a canvas palace you may want to let me know as this is going to take up a whole pitch.

The cost of the Reservation made on the club’s behalf is about £700

The campsite is possibly one of the most popular campsites that I have come across in over 25 years of organising these trips. My reading of the way the booking numbers are increasing today (14th December) is that there will be next to no scope for booking further pitches after the next week or so.

If you want to look at the website for the campsite here is the link.

I want to make sure that everyone who wants to come next summer can but at the same time I need to make sure that
if I have to turn anyone away that the process is fair and transparent. I think the fairest way to do this is on a first come
first served basis and to confirm intent I will need a deposit from you of £50 per head.

There is space available until the proprietor of the campsite says that we have reached the maximum number that he is happy
to accept. If you send me a deposit and the campsite rejects the increase in number then I will return your deposit straight away.

I will be at the club for New Year so if anyone want’s to talk this through with me or give me a deposit cheque they will be able
to do so there and save the cost of a second class stamp. Alternatively if you are of a modern internet compatible disposition
you can pay your deposit online directly to ‘CANTABRIA EXPEDITIONS’ sort code 20-96-96, account No. 50873179

If I am inundated with deposits between now and new year I will consider reserving additional pitches and or mobile homes
for any families that may be interested. Please help me to help the club. If you know you are most probably coming send me a
deposit so that I can better gauge final numbers. Please also let me know how ‘compact’ you intend to be.

See you all at New Years Eve I hope.

Best regards, Gary gary@dorsetland.co.uk

SWCC : 1-10 Powell St : Penwyllt : Pen y Cae : Swansea : SA9 1GQ
    Contact : Calendar : FrontPage : e-News archive : fb : FaceWall