Access Arrangements

I am not a UCET member, but I see that Batmancavers reply above (as a GCC member) seems to be reasonable and balanced. In particular I agree with him that, as with any club who re-opens anything underground, they are severely hampered by a land-owners demands. Most 'new' entrances are the result of gaining a land-owners trust, and in the cavers adhering to any request in order to get permission to dig.
Consequently, any long-standing club will of course have numerous holes that depend to a large degree on continuing trust with land-owners.
It's easy to see therefore, how such a club will naturally feel that a particular site might be jeopardised by cavers entering land without permission and / or advertising the fact on-line.

I feel that there's plenty of room for discussion on the topic of how to broaden caver access and would welcome constructive suggestions here.

One possible suggestion could be that all clubs might consider contacting the land-owner of each particular site (over which they have historically had some measure of control) and ask them if access might be broadened to allow general caver access. This would have TWO possible benefits:
1: Open access might be restored.
2: It could release the club from its obligations at that site.

The downside is of course, that open access could possibly lead to entrances being left open and in a dangerous condition.

Anyone else have any ideas?

Noodles

PS

Perhaps I should have apologised in the post above for reaching the age of three score years and one.

I see that somewhere in this thread there's more than a small degree of ageism.

Noodles

Noodles wrote:

PS

Perhaps I should have apologised in the post above for reaching the age of three score years and one.

I see that somewhere in this thread there's more than a small degree of ageism.

Noodles

Don't need to aplogise for that, some of the youngers ones still have a lot of catching up to do yet!

Not to mention that half of em arn't as fit as some of us older lads

On a more serious note , some of your comments over multiple access arangements actually make good sense, even if this
cannot be achieved, I'm sure plenty of us would welcome the oportunity to help with creating a more caver friendly approach
to access in the area as a whole in the future.

one thing i liked about ODB a couple of years ago was that there was a little sighing in book in there so everyone who traveled the system,and not only knew who had been in there but could also use it as a archive for future ref . i think this would be a good idea in all caves and mines , although there would be a degree of honesty involved but you have to start somewhere

The thing that annoys about the insurance thing is the lack of understanding about how it works.

BCA indemnifies ALL landowners against all the risks of allowing cavers to explore on (and under) their land (above and beyond those covered by their occupiers liability cover that they already hold).

This is UK wide blanket cover and does not rely on the landowner or even BCA being aware of such sites. ALL land owners are indemnified for their (limited) risks.

Any organisation that insists that people who enter a particular cave or mine must have BCA insurance, are not giving themselves any extra protection. BCA caver insurance ONLY insures that caver against any third party risks. It does not afford any extra cover to the land owner, they are already covered, it is part of the same policy.

If a body other than the land owner controlls access on behalf of the land owner they are not insured unless they take out BCA Access controlling body cover. Insisting on the individual caver having BCA insurance does not indemnify the access body at all.

I see that apart from GCG, the FC (Forestry Commission I assume) also require cavers to carry insurance to visit (as does Peak Cavern and DYO. I am sure there are many others as well).

It annoys me as this is completely down to misunderstandings on how this insurance policy works and is an unnecessary extra tier of bureaucracy placed upon access.

Quote :

I feel that there's plenty of room for discussion on the topic of how to broaden caver access and would welcome constructive suggestions here.

One possible suggestion could be that all clubs might consider contacting the land-owner of each particular site (over which they have historically had some measure of control) and ask them if access might be broadened to allow general caver access. This would have TWO possible benefits:
1: Open access might be restored.
2: It could release the club from its obligations at that site.

The downside is of course, that open access could possibly lead to entrances being left open and in a dangerous condition.

This would be a good way forward.
Maintenance issues are easily alleviated through the original club "adopting" the site and all visitors having open communications with them about any issues. Addittionally the adopted club has a regular ""H&S"" inspection visit. This way any problems can be dealt with when they arise.

Access issues could be alleviated through some sort of common lock system being in place. With the purchase of a set of locks where one key opens all, then these could be placed on open sites so allowing access to anyone who purchases a key, but not access to local children or animals! The purchase price of the key being so as to cover the costs of supplying the keys.

I don't want to see us going the way of certain cave sites that operate a permit system, but that is another way forward with a local "access officer" being agreed between the local clubs/interested parties who deals with visit requests and issues keys accordingly.

What does anyone else think as regards to other solutions?

Karl

Brakeman wrote:

Don't need to aplogise for that, some of the youngers ones still have a lot of catching up to do yet!

Not to mention that half of em arn't as fit as some of us older lads

So true, I've been in Peak and seen guys older than both of you acting younger than I am... bloody impressive

rather than quote all of LES W, thread i think the problem starts when caving clubs approach land owners to gain access , and use the insurrance as a bargaining tool to convince the land owner that they are the good guys , if everbody was up front with the land owners in the first place there would not be so much s.h.i.t. hitting the fan all the time ,cavers and mine exploreers just want to do" exactly what it says on the tin !!!" if you get my drift

Mr LeahyMike, please remember the forum rules in respect of swear words and don't be showing off being a smart**** by giving everybody ideas and spelling them out!!!

AdminJ wrote:

Mr LeahyMike, please remember the forum rules in respect of swear words and don't be showing off being a smart**** by giving everybody ideas and spelling them out!!!

oops sorry boss boo hoo .

there's always one and you're always forgiveable when you call me Boss!

Leahy Mike wrote:

rather than quote all of LES W, thread i think the problem starts when caving clubs approach land owners to gain access , and use the insurrance as a bargaining tool to convince the land owner that they are the good guys , if everbody was up front with the land owners in the first place there would not be so much s.h.i.t. hitting the fan all the time ,cavers and mine exploreers just want to do" exactly what it says on the tin !!!" if you get my drift

Mike,

I feel your statement above needs clarification...... what do you mean: "If everybody was upfront with the land-owners"? Not sure what you're getting at there.

Let me put you in the shoes of an explorer approaching a land-owner to ask if you can have permission to go down any mine on his land. From my own experience, a tiny minority will tell you to get lost immediately. If willing to listen, the next thing he will do is weigh you up! If you seem sensible, then most are happy to let you go down without any further ado.
BUT things change when permission for regular visits or digging is requested. Most owners and farmers are well aware of modern day litigation issues, and are likely to ask "what insurance do you have?". The next questions are usually "How often are trips likely to occur?" and ""What about the entrance.... I don't want any open holes on my land?".
At this point Mike, you have several options:
1) Suggest to him that you don't want to get involved with insurance issues... In which case he'll probably politely refuse further access, or
2) Explain to him that you have purpose-built public liability cover that indemnifies him as the owner, or
3) Mention your insurance cover AND offer to ensure that the entrance is kept safe (No club WANTS this but it IS a useful bargaining tool).

Having been made aware of a potential problem, I have known two cases where farmers have immediately filled the entrances to surface!

Well....... Can you suggest any way in which this scenario could be improved?

One or two people reading this may favour the "I have the right to go down without asking permission" approach, which may be acceptable at a few sites, particularly if only one trip is planned. But what if a long-term dig or regular trips are required at a site where the owner will be fully aware of explorers on his land?

I for one would love to find a better way to secure access for all. Perhaps Mike has the answer?

Noodles

i was just wondering if maybe we mentioned to the land owner that he was already insured anyway by the bca and approach it from that angle first , im not suggesting that people just run gun ho about the place , that would'nt help the already frigile position cavers and mine exploerers are already in , i was just throwing something up in the air hoping to get some imput into the situation, i think you should always ask permision im just wondering if we can go about it in a different way ! regards mike

Noodles has a good point.

Personally, I am not certain there is a “right” answer but it is a really good idea to thrash out access issues and solicit opinions. I think doing this can only bring about a better and perhaps consensual understanding which we might all (mine explorers & cavers) benefit from regardless of which club (if any) we are in.

Land owners are, as Noodles already pointed out, somewhat of an unknown when they are first approached. I know of one land owner who flatly refused us permission to enter some caves on his land even though our approach to him was benevolent and professional (we even offered him a trespass fee) and then, 6 months later, he invited us to come and “investigate” why his stream had dried up (his land was karst – precisely the reason we first approached him). On another occasion, a land owner we approached expressed a great desire to come down with us but when we offered to take him he “bottled it”.

I think that most private landowners are not aware that the BCA already cover them with insurance and I also think they will immediately consider their own legal position if someone was to get hurt “on their land” and default to the obvious No, sorry, I don’t want to be sued when the thing collapses on you and kills you. I think that this is probably the greatest hurdle for all of us.

Noodles also has a good point with the distinction between just visiting once and returning over and over for a “dig”. These two scenarios present completely different perspectives to the land owners. This becomes even more convoluted if a club (or group) have permission to “dig” and the hole is explored as a one off by another club (or others) who may not be aware of the existing arrangements (it’s not always possible to find out or know). It would be very easy to end up in a position where the land owner is simply fed up with hassle and shuts everyone out anyway.

So, what is the solution ?



Ian

Ian wrote:

Noodles has a good point.


So, what is the solution ?



Ian

only smarties have the answer .i think showing the land owners your green card to indicate you are a bonafide ! caving club as a starting point but to piont out to him that he was already insured in the first point , this might hopefully help him to believe how open and upfront you are with him ,you never know a bit of honesty might go a long way

..............

im trying to be serious for a change you CAVE LEADER YOU.

................

I agree with Mike. When approaching a landowner, you need to be tactful and approach him with all the necessary paperwork already in hand. If he plainly refuses to talk to you, then be ready to give him some documents that he can read at his leisure. Give him something that has our contact details for the club (telephone/email/website/BCA insurance etc) and then he can contact us if he wishes at a later date.

It may also be helpful for us to add a page to our website ***: 'Information for landoweners', that concisely gives them the facts with links to further reading if they are interested.

Marc

marc wrote:

It may also be helpful for us to add a page to our website : 'Information for landoweners', that concisely gives them the facts with links to further reading if they are interested.

Marc

I agree entirely ... assuming no one has any objections, can you make that happen please ?

We'll do it together. I'll help to put something together but I couldn't hope to do this on my own as I'm not the most knowledgeable on these issues. Perhaps we can use this thread as a base for ideas and then put something together that covers all the issues raised within.