Untopping in Blaenau · AditNow Community

Mine exploration, photographs and mining history for mine explorers, industrial archaeologists, researchers and historians

a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z

danswift
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie Topic Starter

8 years ago

I've been thinking recently about the untopping works at Maenofferen and Votty...

Was this ever challenged? Or was it a case of 'we own the land, we'll do what we want'?

I'd be interested in hearing others views on the subject...is there any further reading that can be done on this?

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your AditNow Community forum account or Register a new forum account

RAMPAGE
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

8 years ago

As far as I know its licenced as a quarry so they can pretty much work the quarry as they see fit, within the Mines and Quarrys act.

You don't really get underground mine workings receiving legal protection against destruction, but that's a whole massive subject on its own.

Beneath my steely exterior beats the heart of a dashing hero

Graigfawr
50.2% (Neutral)
Newbie

8 years ago

"RAMPAGE" wrote:
You don't really get underground mine workings receiving legal protection against destruction, but that's a whole massive subject on its own.

A Cadw Inspector stated to me that any surface protection through Scheduled Ancient Monument status automatically includes the subsurface including mine workings if the Scheduling Designation is as an historic mine site. This is why Cambrian Mines Trust has had to apply for and receive Scheduled Monument Consent for any works that alter or change the underground workings. If the Scheduling Designation is as a different sort of site (e.g. castle, prehistoric earthwork) then it is implied that any underlying mine workings do not fall within the Scheduled subsurface - e.g. a Scheduled abbey in a mining field would not include any underlying mine workings.