Reports

Is it ok to post sites but omit the name of the location?

  • Yes - But give a general region

  • Yes - Keep it as anonymous as you'd like

  • No

Results are only viewable after voting.
FreddoChomp said:
Interesting topic this - as you have explorers who are connected and in the know of locations/access and so on. Then you have potential new explorers or explorers wishing to expand there portfolio of mines and so on. If you have to go around Wills mother's to see a man about a dog to just get a vague answer about a location or access - then yes I can see it putting fellow or new explorers of.
From experience, 9 times out of 10 if a new or unknown enthusiast was to ask about a location or access. The person in the know in general will be rather vague on his reply. Mostly for the part of not knowing who he is sharing sensitive details with. Thus lies the problem.

I vote for a big sign above Pandora.
A bigger one above CRTT
Then an even bigger one above Cae Coch.
Click to expand...
We do not know how lucky we are having access to the sites we do. The more naming the more u tube vids with names and totally obvious info is totally bad news . N wales in the last few years has lost above ground sites ( not mines ) due to being more popular and being shown and named. Restrictions are a higher priority with many land owners and land management. No names at all. We need to keep sites for as long as possible and next generation
 
You seem to be losing sites all the time anyway, as mines need active maintenance, and beyond the mere flooding, collapses seem common. So it would seem good to document the sites for posterity. I guess good individuals and local groups do this, but if they keep the information to themselves, that's a big barrier to researchers, and you are at risk of the vagaries of club management, or "lets chuck out Dad's mine stuff". We seem to be in a golden age for documenting these sites, with excellent small cameras and lidar phones and easier mapping, and I'd be a lot happier if when landowner closed access to a site if I knew it had been recorded and propagated. And fore-warned is fore-armed for dangerous sites.

I guess a lot depends on how happy you are with the vicarious experience of reading some-one else's report, and how much the hobby is about going yourself.

You could run a private members club of like-minded people, but I didn't think that was the intent of the forum owners.
 
Very interesting read.

There are a number of aspects which include the authorities (NRW in particular), Youtubers, Explorers and Armchair visionaries …

Authorities
If they have decided to “block it off” they will do so regardless of how “secret” the site is or not. If they are in the process of making that decision, they will not be influenced by any kind of petition, tacit or otherwise, from people like ourselves. I have witnessed this first-hand with NRW and CADW during my tenure with Cambrian Caving Council. Further, I have seen a body of cavers (management committee) persuade a landowner to allow them to concrete an entrance to prevent other cavers from getting in and “having a look” (more than once actually). Trying to prevent this action is utterly futile, you couldn’t make it up.

Youtubers
If they know about it and fancy going, they will.

It isn’t just places like Aditnow, UKc and Buddlepit that they see things, there is a wealth of information on t’internet. Attempts by “you and me” to keep a site sacred will quickly be undermined (pardon the pun) by Google & Co. I appreciate there may be good reason not to blare out the location of sites (especially if the site boasts things of great interest) but, again, there is an ocean of futility in keeping quiet.

Posting reports (and pictures) of a trip without naming the site creates a challenge for would be youtubers – one that they can very quickly overcome.

Explorers
Genuine explorers – by that I mean folk like the majority on here (and other forums) who would respect the site, may genuinely like to visit. I suspect no one would object to that? If the location is to be kept “secret”, how does a genuine explorer go about learning its location? Who decides who a “genuine explorer” is? What injunctions are laid down to those “genuine explorers” and are they enforceable? Of course, withholding a site location creates the same issues as it does for youtubers and may be overcome just as quickly – except that, a “genuine explorer” may feel aggrieved (and rebel?).

Armchair Visionaries
I have seen the same “secrecy” on Walking Forums. That is to say, folk have posted pictures of walks, often with features (a waterfall is a good example) and then they refuse to identify the location when asked. The reader usually feels aggrieved that the “poster” is playing “God” and has no right to withhold this information and prevent the reader from visiting themselves. After all, they laid out the temptation and beans to follow. This invariably causes a “row” and the warrior inside of folk lashes out with proverbial swords and fireballs.

I have often thought it disingenuously ostentatious of the “poster” to bung up pictures of walks with nice features and then refuse to tell any of the million people who clicked “like” where it is so that they could also enjoy the walk. The same is true of every activity, including scuba diving, canoeing, climbing AND caving/mine exploring.

What do “we” do about it?
In short, I don’t know. I guess the administrators either allow trip reports (with pictures) or not. If they are to be allowed then should they be policed? If they are policed, who polices them? Do we allow people to make up their own minds and trust them to be sensible when posting trip reports? (everyone is different, right?), do we risk firefights when temptations are put in front of us and details withheld?

If this were a democracy (which it isn’t) it would likely be an unanswerable problem. Since it isn’t, must rely on a decision by the owners of the forum …

Ian
 
a recent report has been shared around on a large discovery with no name, this is what sparked the idea regarding “allowing” it on here .

Myself it’s a community forum, i like input on making these decisions. It appears no one is against it ??

I completely agree if some one wants to find something they will. I also believe if you put a name on here like maenoffern with a photo of the winch house on the front page with a drop pin more traffic will go ? Since this is well out there then it’s kind of acceptable, in my eyes .

A decision will be made on this so I like the input .

I will post a report if this is “allowed”.

if people feel these sites need protection,
Regarding the database side of things they will have to go into the appropriate section.
 
Ian Adams said:
Very interesting read.

There are a number of aspects which include the authorities (NRW in particular), Youtubers, Explorers and Armchair visionaries …

Authorities
If they have decided to “block it off” they will do so regardless of how “secret” the site is or not. If they are in the process of making that decision, they will not be influenced by any kind of petition, tacit or otherwise, from people like ourselves. I have witnessed this first-hand with NRW and CADW during my tenure with Cambrian Caving Council. Further, I have seen a body of cavers (management committee) persuade a landowner to allow them to concrete an entrance to prevent other cavers from getting in and “having a look” (more than once actually). Trying to prevent this action is utterly futile, you couldn’t make it up.

Youtubers
If they know about it and fancy going, they will.

It isn’t just places like Aditnow, UKc and Buddlepit that they see things, there is a wealth of information on t’internet. Attempts by “you and me” to keep a site sacred will quickly be undermined (pardon the pun) by Google & Co. I appreciate there may be good reason not to blare out the location of sites (especially if the site boasts things of great interest) but, again, there is an ocean of futility in keeping quiet.

Posting reports (and pictures) of a trip without naming the site creates a challenge for would be youtubers – one that they can very quickly overcome.

Explorers
Genuine explorers – by that I mean folk like the majority on here (and other forums) who would respect the site, may genuinely like to visit. I suspect no one would object to that? If the location is to be kept “secret”, how does a genuine explorer go about learning its location? Who decides who a “genuine explorer” is? What injunctions are laid down to those “genuine explorers” and are they enforceable? Of course, withholding a site location creates the same issues as it does for youtubers and may be overcome just as quickly – except that, a “genuine explorer” may feel aggrieved (and rebel?).

Armchair Visionaries
I have seen the same “secrecy” on Walking Forums. That is to say, folk have posted pictures of walks, often with features (a waterfall is a good example) and then they refuse to identify the location when asked. The reader usually feels aggrieved that the “poster” is playing “God” and has no right to withhold this information and prevent the reader from visiting themselves. After all, they laid out the temptation and beans to follow. This invariably causes a “row” and the warrior inside of folk lashes out with proverbial swords and fireballs.

I have often thought it disingenuously ostentatious of the “poster” to bung up pictures of walks with nice features and then refuse to tell any of the million people who clicked “like” where it is so that they could also enjoy the walk. The same is true of every activity, including scuba diving, canoeing, climbing AND caving/mine exploring.

What do “we” do about it?
In short, I don’t know. I guess the administrators either allow trip reports (with pictures) or not. If they are to be allowed then should they be policed? If they are policed, who polices them? Do we allow people to make up their own minds and trust them to be sensible when posting trip reports? (everyone is different, right?), do we risk firefights when temptations are put in front of us and details withheld?

If this were a democracy (which it isn’t) it would likely be an unanswerable problem. Since it isn’t, must rely on a decision by the owners of the forum …

Ian
Click to expand...
Good old IAN. I do love your posts😂😂😂
 
Having some info viewable only after a login, even if that's not a carefully layered secret would mean that stuff can be posted without Google search (etc) indexing it.

From the conversation above it seems to be that we shouldn't post all details about very sensitive sites especially ones not yet on the goontubers radar, because that might cause damage and lost access.

But we shouldn't also keep all info hidden as a private secret, like the concrete it up cavers mentioned. And genuine explorers or historians need to be able to find out stuff, or what's the point of explorer sites

The only sensible conclusion is that there needs to be (in my humble opinion) 2 layers of access.

1) open to everyone without login -- and this can be scraped by search engines
2) sensitive stuff that needs more careful sharing and avoid Google etc search (but not getting silly about that) -- and that can't be seen by search engines

Maybe there's also a third category for super secret-squirrel stuff, I don't have any, but probably useful for the site owners themselves at some point
 
cantclimbtom said:
Having some info viewable only after a login, even if that's not a carefully layered secret would mean that stuff can be posted without Google search (etc) indexing it.

From the conversation above it seems to be that we shouldn't post all details about very sensitive sites especially ones not yet on the goontubers radar, because that might cause damage and lost access.

But we shouldn't also keep all info hidden as a private secret, like the concrete it up cavers mentioned. And genuine explorers or historians need to be able to find out stuff, or what's the point of explorer sites

The only sensible conclusion is that there needs to be (in my humble opinion) 2 layers of access.

1) open to everyone without login -- and this can be scraped by search engines
2) sensitive stuff that needs more careful sharing and avoid Google etc search (but not getting silly about that) -- and that can't be seen by search engines

Maybe there's also a third category for super secret-squirrel stuff, I don't have any, but probably useful for the site owners themselves at some point
Click to expand...
Like I said AN had quite a few layers of”secrecy’s “ . But that did create a bit of a problem with some
 
I voted yes, but give it a general region.

IMO one of the great things about AN was if I was visiting an area (usually on a family holiday or whilst travelling for work) I could bring up the map and look at the dropped pins and get a good idea of what was practical to visit and exactly how to find it, along with some sort of idea of what a visit would involve.

This may seem unadventurous to some but with limited time available it meant I usually got to see something worthwhile.

Also if there is a serious aim to record sites/artifacts/deterioration etc. then knowing where you are talking about is probably useful?
 
@IanAdams has raised some good points, in particular the conclusion that there simply isn't an obvious solution that will be unanimously accepted by everyone.

I have had a look over the Wilkinson dataset that is available within the Welsh sub-forum areas. There are markers for sites that I'm sure many could deem sensitive, and could be described that way for a number of reasons, but more on that in a moment. The sheer number of map pins combined with not knowing; which ones "go", what is required to access each one, what is even there to be seen, what systems they may connect to etc, is already offering some "protection". The maps are already out there complete with marked shafts etc. As are books with surveys, rigging guides and descriptions.

With regards to what information we (posters on BP) give out, I would like to give some responsibility back to the individual/groups to gauge what is appropriate, as in many situations, you will be the experts. You will have a better idea of what makes a site "sensitive";
  • Rare minerals - I can think of a few sites in Shropshire that were pillaged by mineral collectors.
  • Fragile access arrangements - inc. tenuous agreements with landowners or requirements for spec-ops commando crawling under cover of darkness
  • Artefacts/Level of preservation - In such a way that increased traffic would place these at risk. Footprints, fingerprints etc.
  • Historical significance (and concurrent lack of online presence?)
  • Dig sites - potentially unstable structures e.g. "I know which rocks/scaff to touch in this deadly house of cards", or ongoing digs with potential breakthroughs
The list is not exhaustive, and there will be a good degree of subjectivity with these; including whether you even regard all of them as valid variables worthy of consideration. Ideally it will be "self-policing" and common-sense discretion is applied. I know there are sites within every region that will not be shared with anyone, and that will be the case no matter what we conclude here. Some regions are historically more secretive than others and it's not my aim to change that.

Buddle Pit is intended to unite mine explorers across the UK and permit networking. There are messaging capabilities on the site if you wanted to reach out to someone and ask for information that the OP may not have wished to make public. It has been nice to see some people already offering to show other members around the mines in their area if they were in the region.

- These are my personal opinions on this sensitive matter and may not represent the views of the other members of the Buddle Pit core team -​
 
All good points here, I definitely don't think it should be required that an exact location is given.

On the other hand if someone simply posts up some photos of 'a mine' then it seems a little pointless other than to see a pretty picture if one doesn't know if it's in Abergavenny or Azerbaijan :unsure:
 
From David Bick:

"These places are worth a visit, not least for the croak of ravens and the wonderful views, and altogether in mid-Wales there is enough to keep archaeologists busy for generations. But if it is a closer communion with our remote ancestors that we seek, science can no more guide us than programme notes can convey the mastery of a Haydn symphony or the profound enigma of a late Beethoven quartet. In submission we must venture forth in hills where ‘the old men’ laboured, and where a sense of our own mortality and all eternity is never far away. The final communion may elude us, yet the spirit gains enlightenment by the endeavour, just as the alchemists sought salvation in the endless quest for the Philosopher’s Stone, which in their hearts they knew they would never find."

I hate the idea of hiding this stuff from others and creating effectively a members-only club.
It's everyone's history. But, as reflected by the very next section of his book, conservation is a serious consideration.

As has been mentioned, it might be best to allow users to exercise their discretion for the most part. I think most of us know when somewhere is more sensitive than another.
 
CJ said:
I have had a look over the Wilkinson dataset that is available within the Welsh sub-forum areas. There are markers for sites that I'm sure many could deem sensitive, and could be described that way for a number of reasons, but more on that in a moment. The sheer number of map pins combined with not knowing; which ones "go", what is required to access each one, what is even there to be seen, what systems they may connect to etc, is already offering some "protection". The maps are already out there complete with marked shafts etc. As are books with surveys, rigging guides and descriptions.
Click to expand...

To add to the above ...

All the information in Wilkinson is, to the best of my knowledge, taken from public (and published) sources. My understanding from discussions with Jeremy when he asked me to develop an online version for him is that he intended the data to be available to mining historians and I have endeavoured to develop the site in that respect.

Basically, the site is intended as a gazetteer (i.e. a geographical index) of mines and quarries and a bibliography of published sources in which information relating to the entries in the gazetteer can be found. The map display can be used to see what is in a particular area or, when used at the smaller scales, as a means of illustrating the distribution of mines for a particular product over the country. For instance, a query for gold mines with no other qualification will show up the Dolgellau gold belt plus some odd outliers.

Dave
 
  • Like
Reactions: CJ
lostwales said:
From David Bick:

"These places are worth a visit, not least for the croak of ravens and the wonderful views, and altogether in mid-Wales there is enough to keep archaeologists busy for generations. But if it is a closer communion with our remote ancestors that we seek, science can no more guide us than programme notes can convey the mastery of a Haydn symphony or the profound enigma of a late Beethoven quartet. In submission we must venture forth in hills where ‘the old men’ laboured, and where a sense of our own mortality and all eternity is never far away. The final communion may elude us, yet the spirit gains enlightenment by the endeavour, just as the alchemists sought salvation in the endless quest for the Philosopher’s Stone, which in their hearts they knew they would never find."

I hate the idea of hiding this stuff from others and creating effectively a members-only club.
It's everyone's history. But, as reflected by the very next section of his book, conservation is a serious consideration.

As has been mentioned, it might be best to allow users to exercise their discretion for the most part. I think most of us know when somewhere is more sensitive than another.
Click to expand...
I love this excerpt, along with the context with which you've shared it.
 
lizzie84 said:
I love this excerpt, along with the context with which you've shared it.
Click to expand...
I love David Bick's books, I also find this quote to be apt and in much the same vein:

"If we wish to gain a closer kinship with the Old Men — in a sense to step into their shoes - surely we must walk there, treading the old paths with the old winds in our faces. We lose a little time but we gain admission into another world."
 
To add my thoughts to an increasingly divergent topic...
The fundamental issue in my mind is that there is no right to go underground in old mine workings. Unless they are on open access land, there is no right to even visit the site. Some landowners are tolerant, others less so.

We are a group of people with an interest in an industry that was once very important in this country but has now mostly departed these shores.

There is a wish to document as many sites as possible.
There is also a pleasure in the exploration, whether following well trodden paths or visiting places unseen since the old men left.

I feel that the restrictive nature how we have worked in the past gave people the impression of an elitist group where strangers were not welcome. Not actually the case in general but I do feel that it has caused the surge in the social media mine exploration groups. Something along the lines of 'They won't let me join the gang so f@#& them and their rules.'

With this in mind, I think that we should be informative rather than restrictive. Simply put, document sites as fully as possible including any access issues and significant risks.
In addition, making it clear to people what is expected behaviour; the take only photographs, leave only footprints is a good start, along with absolutely do not draw arrows, etc. Extras like taking care in active dig sites, not fiddling with in-situ rigging etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back