Two Stories with Lessons.
The High Cost of Caving - Casterton Fell.
Casterton
Fell is a gentle remote stretch of hillside tucked away in the far South
Eastern corner of
Mile for mile
the caves beneath Casterton Fell probably offer a more intense and exciting
caving experience than in any other of the world’s great caving systems such is
the complexity and youthfulness of the caves. Unlike the grouse moorlands of
Kinder, Bleaklow, Barden and Simons Seat there has been no long term access
pressure from ramblers on Casterton and access for caving has always been very
difficult. Before 1960 the relatively small number of cavers and known caves
caused little problem but with an increase in both, the land agents, Davis and
Bowring, acting for Whelprigg Estates actively prohibited access to the fell
for caving. After years of difficult negotiation an access agreement was
formulated between the agents and the Council of Northern Caving Clubs, a representative
body specially set up to deal with the agents. Access to the caves was to be by
permit issued in limited numbers (i.e. one party per cave per day by the
C.N.C.C.) All went well until recently when new cave discoveries necessitating
new access routes, and increased numbers of cavers resulted in some
renegotiation of the agreement. The agents, who were proving very difficult to
negotiate with claimed that grouse breeding was being affected (there are in fact
very few grouse on the moor) and that a closed season was required. Suddenly,
after months without communication from the agents a statement notified the
cavers council that in future a fee of £2 per caver per trip was to be levied
and collected by the C.N.C.C. on behalf of the agents.
The council
refused to co-operate and the access negotiated became moribund, since then the
agents changed their fee to one of £10 (plus VAT) per party per cave, payable
directly to themselves - few have paid up so far; given the general outdoor
pursuitists antagonism towards payment of fees for access to ‘the wilderness’
non-payment is hardly surprising.
In a surprise move last month it was announced that access at weekends was to
be controlled by a local caving club with a more limited number of cavers. This
is proving a source of great consternation in Northern caving circles who have
always been determinedly opposed to the control of caving access by a single
club or individual. Rumours indicate that the club in question, whose hut is
owned by Whelprigg Estates, are keen to co-operate with the landowners because
their hut lease is due for renegotiation soon.
The rationale
for changing as far as the land agents concerned is inescapable - here they
have a piece of land to manage profitably for recreation (grouse shooting)
which is in demand for a second recreation - caving. I think it is the scale of
the contemporary usage that prompts the agent’s commercial interest (they were
unavailable for comment when I contacted
them). What is more, a significant proportion of the users are professional;
they are being paid to lead caving parties on the fell and cavers are paying to
be led - why should not a proportion c-f that -fee go to the landowners?
The Profits
of Caving - Bar Pot.
Bar Pot is
the slightly squalid easiest entrance to the Gaping Ghyll system which has four
other more difficult entrances.
In June last
year a planning application was submitted to the
The caving world’s reaction was swift and unanimous — the planning authority
received countless objections to the scheme from cavers and caving
organizations. Other groups were reeled in, the National Caving Association;
the Cave Rescue Organization: - “rescues would be impeded”; the Nature
Conservancy Council “The site is an SSSI containing protected bats” and many
other similar points. Some objections were in fact somewhat self-defeating - on
the one hand it as argued that the pot was a classic (i.e. well used) sporting
trip that would be lost, but on the other hand the proposal would destroy a delicate
wilderness environment.
It seems
perhaps that it the commercial exploitation of the natural environment, like
the Casterton story, that is so disliked by the amateur sporting caver. In fact
the application was temporarily withdrawn for revision at the last minute
delaying the planning committee’s potentially embarrassing decision - for which
they would probably have rejected the scheme on conservational grounds it had
already been pointed out that that the very same committee was in the business
of providing trips for tourists down caves (from their Whernside Manor Centre).
It could also be said that the building of paved ways and step systems through
rocky or difficult wilderness features by the authority was only the surface
equivalent of the Jarman proposal. The objections from the caving fraternity
could also be scrutinized for a degree of hypocrisy; one of the reasons that
Bar Pot is so well used is that great mass meets are held at the Gaping Ghyll
over some five weeks a year by two major clubs who fix scaffolding gantries and
winches down the 360ft. entrance shaft. Hundreds of non-cavers are transported
easily down and up the difficult part of the system to them wreak their
destruction through ignorance of the caverns below. The cavers have also
objected to the permanent unnatural fixtures required for Jarman’s scheme while
quietly ignoring the massive proliferation of bolts at just about every pitch
head and traverse throughout northern caves, or the blasting of caves that is
carried out under the guise of
exploration. The lessons for the hills are obvious the professional use
of the above ground wilderness is already rife, as is waymarkinq and footpath
construction Via ferrata are already well established elsewhere in the world;
how long before we have a handrail and steps up Jacks Rake, a scenic raised
walking in andamong Shepards Crag or a railway up Snowdon?
The above article appeared
under the heading ‘Pete Livesey’s Column”
in the February 1968 edition of Climber magazine. I accept responsibility for
any copying errors, but not, I hasten to add, the contents of the articles. Ed
Back
to: Contents