I did say that I wouldn't take any further part in this thread, but under the circumstances..... that's not quite correct. There are a fair number of people on here with considerable professional experience; Tamarmole, knocker and agricola come to mind, for a start.

There are also people who are involved with preservation groups at mines such as Snailbeach. There are others who are involved with, for example, steam railway preservation, hence the occasional threads about locomotives or track-bed walks.

the crux of the matter is, that this is an ambitious project involving a very large abandoned mine. It is very different from the narrow limestone workings at Smailbeach, for example.

there is a parallel thread to this on Mine Explorer, where ( among other things ) you will find a post from the former Mining Agent, to the effect that he considers the project over-ambitious and distinctly 'fraught'

Anyway, it's Roys' project so I don't really have anything further to say on the subject

---

Derrickman wrote

the crux of the matter is, that this is an ambitious project involving a very large abandoned mine. It is very different from the narrow limestone workings at Smailbeach, for example.

I assume you mean Snailbeach, an abandoned Lead/Barytes mine. Workings that extend roughly 3/4 mile by 250 yards and well over 1500 foot below day level. It also had substantial dumps. Quite similar in many ways

Brakeman,
Cwmystwyth was a Lead Mine,not Slate,and with Lead comes Arsenic,reason why most old Miners never got much past 40yrs,Arsenic Poisoning,thats why the river near the Mine is Dead of Wildlife.

Is this a joke?

---

Is this a joke?

Must be roy.... Laugh?? I thought my pants would never dry!

---

It’s OK laughing but Mr Ty Gwyn whoever he is has no real business attempting to contribute to the intelligent debate on this website.

For what its worth and I lower my dignity to reply to such utter tosh, the only county in Wales where the presence of this has been noted is Caernarvonshire.
(Memoirs of the Geological Survey, Vol 15, Henry Dewey)
This is the first volume in my considerable library that I happened to pick up at this time of night.

It does occur as a trace element with most minerals, however Cadmium is a trace element of sphalerite with usually occurs with lead and will usually on analysis show a much greater volume in this area.

As far as the river Ystwyth goes, I have better things to do with my time this evening to even comment.

To return to the realm of intelligent debate the pollution problem at Cwmystwyth relates to the discharge from Pugh’s level which carries ochre and has a PH value as low as 2.8.
Issues arise where water of low PH run over spoil tips and leach out base minerals.

---

I have no information about the water content at Cwmystwyth, but I would certainly agree with the comments about ochre, leachate from tips and water pH.

sounds as though the problem is known, by those who need to know it

---

Mr Derrickman

For what its worth, I have always valued your input.

Kindest regards

---

Derrickman wrote

the crux of the matter is, that this is an ambitious project involving a very large abandoned mine. It is very different from the narrow limestone workings at Smailbeach, for example.

I assume you mean Snailbeach, an abandoned Lead/Barytes mine. Workings that extend roughly 3/4 mile by 250 yards and well over 1500 foot below day level. It also had substantial dumps. Quite similar in many ways

typos aside, there seem to me to be considerable differences. The description here on AN refers to the tips being landscaped to control pollution, for example. Look a bit further and there are various references to the land being owned by the local Council and managed by a trust, various stabilisation works funded by grants, etc.

looking through 105 photos here in the AN album, there are various underground pictures including a stope apparently supported with lengths of rail, but no pics like the massive stulls and stoping timbers shown in the Cwmystwyth photos.

I stand to be corrected on this because I've never visited either, and am basing my comments on publicly available material, but the impression given is of very different characters despite certain similarities

---

Brakeman,
Cwmystwyth was a Lead Mine,not Slate,and with Lead comes Arsenic,reason why most old Miners never got much past 40yrs,Arsenic Poisoning,thats why the river near the Mine is Dead of Wildlife.

Only recently joined,but have noticed on this thread how the majority ,who have no Real underground experience,are quick to dismiss Derrickman,the one that i can gather ,that has proper Mining Experience.

My mistake, in calling it a slate mine, probably thinking about somewhere else with a similar sounding name whilst typing, but non the less my other comments still stand.

We may not all have professional underground experience, but many of us have been working in mines for a very long time, clearing levels, miles of them, emptying shafts, replacing roof supports, relaying miles of track, building deadwall packs, laying drainage, driving new levels, albeit short ones, the list is endless really. Amatuers, yes maybe, but bloody good ones. Don't knock us, this is the only way a lot of these old mines survive.

I fully understand where Simon is coming from & Derrickman too for that matter, they have both obviously worked in mines and would not now want to take on a project of this magnitude, no of course you wouldn't, but others would, nowt wrong in that, we're all different, that's what makes the world go round.

---

well, quite so.

I quite enjoy letting ttxela drag me along to Godstone or Masson occasionally, but there's rugby to be watched and occasionally played, banjos to play, grasstrack racing to take part in.. I even show my face at home occasionally, to prove I'm still on the ration strength.


I think the subject of amateur and professional methods has been more than covered elsewhere. Standards of work in amateur digs varies enormously, and it's not helpful to generalise. A lot of 'owd mans work' was hardly up to modern standards when current. Resourcing levels, now that's a different issue.

---

My appologies for contributing,
I did`nt realise i needed permission.

Like Derrickman has mentioned,Cwmystwyth has had several grant funded stabilisation projects over the years,
I remember both the Barracks and the Mill standing,these were demolished several years ago,as they were in an un-stable condition.
The Barracks at this mine used to house a lot of Foreign Miners,from Italy or Spain i believe.

I will try and find the book i have,where this info was read from,including the Arsenic in the water.

Question,
How do you volunteers fare under Employers Liability Insurance working in these old mines?
Or are you all percentage share holders,so technically self -empoyed?
As this is a major concern with HM Inspectorate.
Well ,at least in Coalmines.

I suspect it's a bit like the Brownes Quarry access, explorers are OK but bat society volunteers come under the HSE as a place of work?

The proffesional/amateur debate: From my point of view it's a question of hats. Wearing my work hat I recently produced a report on an abandoned level in the Tamar Valley for a film company; my conclusion was that the level was unsafe and should not be touched with a barge pole. Yet, wearing my amatuer hat, I have done a lot of digging in the same level with the Tamar Mining Group including pushing a wormhole dig through a run in shaft - in my report I refered to the dig as unsafe and unstable, yet, wearing my caving hat I am quite happy to work in it.

I think the real advantage of the amateur is that, as an amateur, I can take risks based on informed decision making wheras as a "professional" (moot point!) I would always err on the side of extreme caution.

this has been covered elsewhere in some depth, although with some rather different interpretations on offer.

Roy and I appear to differ on this, for our various reasons.

as far as I understand it;

(a) a landowner with a cave or mine on his land, has various common law, MASHAM or HSE obligations, depending on the original nature of the entity, and the use to which it is put, or allowed to be put to.

These used to be largely disregarded - an extreme example would be the Mossdale cavern disaster, where six cavers were drowned in the 1960s. At the time, the principle of volenti non fit injuri was regarded as definitive - ie that the landowner was not responsible for the results of exploration of this kind - but it would be most unwise to rely on that now

(b) a caving club controlling access to a system will to some extent, adopt those liabilities, probably by requiring a commonly accepted insurance scheme. There is much dispute in some quarters regarding inter-club politics and mutual exclusion ( actually I don't feel that caving suffers any more or less from this than any other enthusiast-led, mainly voluntary activity - try junior rugby :surrender: ) but on the whole, it seems to work as well as anything could be expected to

(c) a 'tourist' mine, operated using some combination of paid and volunteer staff ( eg Big Pit, Morwellham, Wheal Mexico ) is run under MASHAM as a producing mine would be

(d) a volunteer trust, like Snailbeach if I properly understand what has been posted elsewhere, is run under MASHAM as a producing mine by agreement with HMIM

(d) a show cave such as, say, Blue John or Wookey Hole, may be either run under HSE or MASHAM depending on its history and the view of the relevant local Inspector of Mines.

(e) an otherwise abandoned or derelict mine with no obvious management or ownership, will probably be deemed to be, by default, under the ownership of the local authority or landowner for MASHAM purposes. This depends largely on whether it is wholly within the boundaries of one landowner.

the main workings at Combe Down were defined as being under the ownership of the local authority because there was no credible way in which anyone else could be held to be the Owner, and under MASHAM, someone must be the owner.

this becomes a problem where there are clear safety issues, and can be exacerbated where there are features which either never conformed to MASHAM when in use, or are life-expired ( eg rotten timber or unsafe accesses ), or have developed into problems ( eg progressive delamination and collapse of the roof over time )

there can also be third-party issues, of which the earlier postings about mine water run-off are a good example. Disregarding the exact nature of these problems, there is a apparently a potential problem of some kind.

the Land Stabilisation Agency or Environment Agency, or some other body, may, or may not, provide funding at this stage.


This is where, and why, Roy and I differ. Our respective goals and backgrounds lead us to differing views of where the balance between current liabilities, potential liabilities, available resources and the possible and/or likely goals and future actions of third parties, could be expected to lie, and how these could be addressed. The posting on ME by the former Mining Agent is also related to this issue.

Hence, previous comments regarding the apparent differences between Snailbeach and Cwmystwyth. If SMT are acting as managing agents for the local authority, who own the land and have a clearly stated policy of conservation and a history of conservation ( eg shaft stabilisation and tip landscaping ) from public funds, the potential liabilities are pretty clearly defined and to a large extent, in the hands of people who might be regarded as having sufficiently common goals and overall views of this.


ultimately, I would not care to be in the position where it might be held that it was my professional opinion that access at Cwmystwyth could be granted to, say, the area under the stull which appears in the photographs.

Similarly, I wouldn't care to give any sort of professional opinion as to the possible effects and implications of the run-off water, especially with regard to whatever views the surrounding tenant farmers might take.

Roy isn't constrained by this to the same extent, because he isn't a professional within the meaning of MASHAM or HSE, at least as far as I am aware. I don't mean by this, the implications of disparagement or other slights that are sometimes imputed, but that his appointment is not subject to approval by HMIM. I would also mean that in the event of an accident or other mishap, he would not expect to find himself in court being asked if he had been employed, there or elsewhere, specifically for his expertise in such matters; and maybe following that with a letter from the standards committee of his particular professional institute, inviting me to justify my actions.


I have, for example, done cave surveying in the past, using equipment borrowed from work and and reducing the data at work; but I can't feel justified these days in either making such a request to my employer, or 'borrowing' several thousand pounds' worth of equipment to use in such an environment, in the expectation that I would probably be refused, and held to be in breach of professional standards if I acted without their consent. O tempores, or mores, but there it is.


Roy presumably knows the law relating to obligations and liabilities of company directors at least as well as I do, and seems to feel that his proposed structure covers the relevant issues. I'm less convinced, although this could be because I don't have the necessary information; possibly because it is felt to be confidential to the various parties directly involved.


I would entirely agree with Tamarmole ( above ) regarding the difference between 'professional' and 'amateur' hats. I've done things while caving which have no professional basis, because they are not in a professional context.

---

A full, and carefully worded response Derrickman. Although you used the acronym MASHAM quite a number of times not once did you say what it stood for. Could you elaborate please.

MASHAM = Management & Administration of Safety & Health at Mines Regulations 1993

superseded the various Mines & Quarries Regulations prior to that date

defines, among many things, the positions of Mine Manager and Mine Surveyor, and the various duties of the Owner.

go to

http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/BathNES/environmentandplanning/majordevelopments/combedownstonemines/factsheets/Ownership+and+Responsibility.htm 

and you will see an illustration of how it functions in this context

---

Thanks for that, very interesting.

at the risk of appearing a :smartass: , knowing MASHAM might be a pretty good definition of the distinction between 'professional' and 'amateur' in this context...

---

Thanks for the very detailed response Derrickman

As an amatuer, and one who has never been involved with this side of things, this has made fascinating reading.

Look forward, I hope, to reading more about Cwmystwyth as the situation develops, all power to Roy.

---

I wasn't being facetious about knowing MASHAM, well not entirely anyway.

any experienced miner would be familiar with at least those parts of it, or its preceding legislation, which affected his duties. This is why ttxela keeps referring to my proverbial aversion to scaffold poles....

anyone qualified as overman, deputy, etc would be occupying a role defined under it

There are in fact, significant differences between coal, shale and miscellaneous mines, in the sense that some parts specifically refer to coal, shale and fireclay ( as distinct from fireSTONE ) but not to miscellaneous mines

---