Dear List

It would be good to have some definitive guidance on this I feel (probably a
NAMHO matter - A future guidance note perhaps?)

If a group or individual is exploring or excavating a site (either out of
personal interest or as part of an organised  project) and a something is
discovered that could be a danger to others (eg a shaft of drift entrance)
..
a) what are the legal responsibilities?
b) what should then happen?

We probably all know of examples where signs have been deemed to be not
enough and even cases where because fences "could" be taken down or climbed
these have been considered to be insufficient.  Ultimately as it is not
impossible to cap/fill the opening it could be argued that to do so would be
reasonable. Arguments that the individual that fell down the hole should
have been more responsible when the reason for not making the item 100% safe
were historically or archeologically based could be irrelevant.

My understanding (which could be wrong) is that if the landowner knows of
it, it is their call as to what needs to be done and their neck on the line
if something happens - but that also could just be viewed as passing the
buck.  This leads to the view that any sensible owner on hearing that there
is something he needs to be concerned about would be well advised to
instantly arrange for it to be removed/filled etc.  Which clearly mining
historians would be opposed to. If a group is successful in negotiating
otherwise (eg an access agreement) the group must surely take some
accountability. But is this legally true?  A landowner who has agreed an
access procedure with a reputable group who he/she/it has checked has
insurance and they are responsibly checking that those accessing the site
are suitably qualified/experienced/insured etc could perhaps argue they has
acted reasonably but I don't know of this ever being tested in a court of
law.

With Coal mine related matters, as the Coal Authority have legal
responsibilities, they may also want/need to take action.

I know of an open colliery shaft (flooded to nearly the surface in dense
brambles & walled around) which was filled at about 3.00 in the morning
following a call from a well minded member of the public the evening before
that it "might" be dangerous.  I can also show you a tunnel which
correspondence from the CA predecessors clearly says may have nothing to do
with the colliery and they don't think it is their responsibility and they
have no liability - BUT was built up with concrete blocks anyway.

I don't know WHEN it is necessary to call in the CA and their website and
guidance doesn't make it clear.  With stories like the ones above there is
obviously a reluctance to contact them too soon for fear that the
opportunity to record and preserve might be lost.  In an ideal world a CA
contact who could be sensibly approached with a view to ascertaining a
sensible and realistic approach so that investigative interests could be
maintained whilst minimising risks and liabilities for all concerned.  Sadly
I don't think this is realistic.

If anyone does have answers to the questions I pose or thoughts generally I
would like to know


Regards

David Hardwick