I am writing again about cave conservation, and would like to better understand what values are most common among cavers.

If I could get lots of answers to a few basic questions, hopefully a "cultural" view would emerge.

What are "cave resources"?

Which are the most important?

Why, plainly stated, is cave conservation consequential?

Amusingly, in a question requesting plain statements, I don't understand the questions.

Are you asking what I believe needs conserving, how I rank them in order of importance, and why I think it is important?

Kenilworth said:

What are "cave resources"?

Which are the most important?

Why, plainly stated, is cave conservation consequential?

Click to expand...

Ok, I'll try, from the perspective of a recreational caver, not a cave scientist, who I'm sure would have a different view.

Cave resources are presumably natural formations, archeological remains and the habitat provided to natural flora and fauna.

Importance will vary greatly from site to site, so it is hard to put them in order.

Why is it important? To me, as a caver, I like to think others will be able to enjoy what I do, for years to come. Quite franlky, the bats don't care about a muddy or broken stal and I'm not sure of the scientific importance. What I do know is that cavers like to see it and it's nice to keep it that way, for other cavers.

As far as conserving natural habitats go, in a very vague way, I understand that we don't understand how everything gets along, but it is important not to upset the natural status quo. As such, it seems to be important to preserve the natural flora and fauna in all or environments, including caves.

This feels outside my comfort zone of things to hold forth on...

What are "cave resources"? I would suggest the caves themselves, then features within them, eg speleotherms, sediments, passage morphology, hydrology, geology, biology etc

Which are the most important? To who and why? I think in terms of vulnerability fauna, sediments and formations would be viewed as most at risk, and therefore higher priority for protection.

Why, plainly stated, is cave conservation consequential? I dont really understand what you are getting at here? Do you mean more people = more damage = greater need to conserve features

I could waffle on but is this the kind of thing you are after?

Brains said:

Which are the most important? To who and why? I think in terms of vulnerability fauna, sediments and formations would be viewed as most at risk, and therefore higher priority for protection.

Click to expand...

"Vulnerability" must be an important part of the equation and a basis for setting priorities, I would think?

Brains said:

I think in terms of vulnerability fauna, sediments and formations would be viewed as most at risk, and therefore higher priority for protection.

Click to expand...

No intention to mis-quote you Brains, just highlighting you mention of "sediments".

Forgive my ignorance, but simply put, why are sediments important? I know they are because I've been told they are, but nobody has ever explained why.

Is it simply a point of interest, part of the history of the cave, or is there some scientific importance too?

I was involved in a project whereby a Uni Grad needed to sample some sediments that had been laid down over many hundereds of years.

We took a core sample from a mud bank in Bagshawe that gets flooded a few times a year.  His thesis makes interesting reading. He was able to identify and date different layers that indicated the start of the lead mining area, and even the point at which cupola style smelting started.

I'm sure, to the right eyes, and with the right tests, much more information could be gleaned. Climate change, geological changes etc etc. Who knows what could be found out. 

However, its no good if its been rolled up into little balls, thrown at the walls and moulded into little mudmen.

From the sediments paleo magnetism at the time of deposition is obtainable, giving age
The contents may include pollen, giving climate at time of deposition
Make up may indicate source, which may change with time, or indicate other passages
Flow directions and strengths
Periodicity of flooding
Stratification can reveal history
Sedimentary formations such as mud cracks are very delicate
Formation of gypsum/selenite
etc...
All may give clues to formation, age, climate, glaciations, magnetic variations, cyclicity of climate, climate change, etc...

Hope that helps?

For me this highlights the point that conservation can also protect natural assets that we don't even know are assets - like Pete I knew not to disturb sediments, and assumed that they could provide some timeline with depth perhaps, but nothing specific.

Caves are uniquely valuable because of the protection that they offer to the things within them; they're developed and eroded far less rapidly and in a more predictable fashion than most topside land, and this means that their contents can offer historical insight that we'd be unable to draw from more exposed sources.

For this reason I think that the caves and their contents should remain as unaltered as possible (whilst still enabling recreational caving, needless to say) even when we don't understand their scientific/historical value.

First thing that jumps out of this is that conservation issues can be a lot more far reaching than just safeguarding delicate formations. Thanks people for putting me on the learning curve.

Possibly an aside / off topic, but old mines or other underground workings have a different set of concerns
First to note is all such man made features are temporary and are returning to an inaccessible state, unlike caves.
The features of interest would be natural things like geology, mineralisation, geochemistry etc but also more human related things like miners graffiti, artefacts, walling and supports. Once abandoned formations begin to form, some at a very rapid rate, of calcite, ochre, evaporite minerals, and even snottites if the conditions are right.
Owing to the speed of growth in mines, the formations are of lower priority - they will recover fairly quickly, but artefact theft or damage, obliteration of miners graf, and the pulling down of stacked deads is more of an issue.
Mineral collecting has been suggested as a big item of concern, but also remember that it is the collectors who have maintained access in many cases, and also helped the mine exploring community alive and garnered interest and new blood. The miners spoil has some interest as it shows the techniques used and can hint at now closed off sections. In some places internal walling has had material brought in, as at Nenthead, to build secure levels and arching. Older workings, or where timber was too hard to obtain, are stone supported, later workings have timber. This does not survive so well...
Access attitudes vary greatly - in the Peak they are viewed as part and parcel of caving, in the N Pennines thaey are a separate item and generally quite open of access. In Cornwall they are viewed with fear as a thing to be kept secret and filled with rubbish. Other areas vary...

Warning - some heavy reading taken from NCA Cave Conservation Policy.  I would also add that scientific capabilities move on, so given this was written over 20 years ago, even more can be learned from features as noted by SamT.

4.2.1 Cave passage

Studies of the gross form of a cave system, and of the morphology of individual cave passages ('macroscale' feature), and features within cave passages ('microscale ' cave deposits such as speleothems and clastic sediments, and cave erosion features such as fossil exposures and speleogens) are important in understanding the relationship between a cave and the factors which influenced its development (e.g. structural geology, lithology, and hydrology). Macroscale features are usually robust and only susceptible to external impacts (Section 1.3) such as removal of the confining rock by quarrying. However, microscale features are more sensitive, and susceptible to damage and destruction by physical use of the cave and other internal impacts.

4.2.2 Speleothems (Chemical Sediments)

Speleothems or 'cave decorations or formations' are aesthetically pleasing and constitute an important scientific resource. As they are dateable, they are invaluable for the study of cave development (speleogenesis), and also for the study of palaeoenvironments because of the palaeoclimatic information which may be retained within them. Speleothems can be very delicate and thus sensitive and susceptible to physical damage, they may also be damaged or degraded by changes to cave microclimates (e.g. opening up or blocking of cave entrances) or to the overlying land surface (e.g. vegetation or drainage changes, or agricultural fertiliser applications).

4.2.3 Clastic Sediments

Clastic sediments are an important scientific resource as they often represent material eroded from caves, or material moved into them from the surface by palaeoenvironmental processes (e.g. erosion and transport by ice, water or air). Caves thus act as museums, preserving evidence of landscapes and past human activity, long removed from the surface. Such sediments are sensitive and easily damaged, particularly due to carelessness by cave users, as unlike speleothems, they are usually of little aesthetic value.

4.2.4 Speleogens (Erosion features)

Speleogens such as flow markings on cave walls (e.g. scallops) are aesthetically pleasing and form an important scientific resource. They are invaluable in palaeohydrological studies as they indicate the direction of water flow during passage formation. Although formed in limestone rock, they are sensitive and susceptible to erosion by cave users, particularly along passage floors.

4.2.5 Palaeontology

Some caves have important deposits of bones and other fossil materials which are dateable and may provide a unique insight into the past fauna, flora and human activity of a region. Such deposits most often occur near the entrance to caves as a result of inwash, because the cave was a den for carnivores, or because it was inhabited by Man. Sometimes talus deposits form in association with surface openings. These deposits are very delicate and susceptible to damage both physically and from changes in the cave microclimate.

4.2.6 Archaeology

The importance of caves as a focus for past human activity is widely recognised. Cave entrances are particularly sensitive being where important deposits may be found, but both inside and outside the entrance may be susceptible to damage by excavations.

4.2.7 Fauna&Flora

The biota of British caves is less rich than that of southern Europe but includes some unique species, most of which inhabit ground waters and small diameter cracks and conduits inaccessible to cavers. The principal threat to such biotas is from dumping of toxic wastes into swallets and shakeholes, and organic enrichment and deoxygenation of ground water by chemical fertilizers and slurry.

Caves provide important hibernacula and breeding sites for several species of bat in Britain. As it is against the law to kill, remove, or even disturb bats, specific measures may be required at certain sites, such as restricting access during winter months or gating entrances.

Thanks for all the info on sediments etc. I knew stal was usefull for looking at past climates etc, but had never made that connection with sediments  :-[


That being the case, is it not of primary impotance for the original explorers of any cave to collect samples or cores to safegaurd this timeline before any damage can occur? I'm obviously not advocating destroying the features afterwards, but it does seem the best time to collect any samples is as soon as possible within the exploration of a cave. I suppose the issue here would be examination, testing and storage of the samples, which may be quite low down the list of priorities for researchers, depending on the site...

Working from the engineer's position that you cannot control something if you cannot measure it, I think we need to come up with a way of measuring the importance and status of particular sites. This would allow us to set priorities, allocate resources, measure our success and may even help to develop a consensus on our approach to issues such as leadership systems and gating.

nickwilliams said:

Working from the engineer's position that you cannot control something if you cannot measure it, I think we need to come up with a way of measuring the importance and status of particular sites. This would allow us to set priorities, allocate resources, measure our success and may even help to develop a consensus on our approach to issues such as leadership systems and gating.

Click to expand...

Isn't this what Cave Conservation Plans strive to achieve ??

PeteHall said:

Brains said:

I think in terms of vulnerability fauna, sediments and formations would be viewed as most at risk, and therefore higher priority for protection.

Click to expand...

No intention to mis-quote you Brains, just highlighting you mention of "sediments".

Forgive my ignorance, but simply put, why are sediments important? I know they are because I've been told they are, but nobody has ever explained why.

Is it simply a point of interest, part of the history of the cave, or is there some scientific importance too?

Click to expand...

The palaeomagnetism and magnetic fabric of cave sediments from Pwll y Gwynt, South Wales by Mark Noel:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248215620_The_palaeomagnetism_and_magnetic_fabric_of_cave_sediments_from_Pwll_y_Gwynt_South_Wales

This was the first instance of evidence being found in Quaternary cave deposits in Britain for the reversal of the magnetic pole. Such a reversal had previously only been detected in lake deposits.

Detailed core-sampling work has also been done in Agen Allwedd by Pete Bull.

There's a lot more left to do.

SamT said:

. . .

However, its no good if its been rolled up into little balls, thrown at the walls and moulded into little mudmen.

Click to expand...

This is a classic example of where well-intentioned 'conservation' measures are proposed that help collapse the actual implementation of good cave conservation practice underground.

Hard-hitting rules that are blankly applied across the spectrum do little to help advance notions of good cave conservation.

For a start, I put a considerable length of the first marker tapes down in Jigsaw Passage in Daren Cilau and was absolutely dumbfounded later to see that one person had decided to cross the tapes and put their bootmarks across an otherwise pristine section of clay sediments for everyone else to see . . . and emulate? Was this in order to be contrary against what was considered 'normal', to be the first person to place bootmarks on otherwise untrampled cave floor, or simply just out of ignorance and/or tiredness and not looking where they were going?

If cave conservation measures are not reasonable, then how are you even going to start dealing with the people who are likely to do unreasonable things?

The best way to conserve cave passages is to make access as difficult as possible - not by introducing gates and the human politics of 'control', but preferably by leaving natural obstacles as intact as possible and not providing blasted crawls, blasted squeezes, handlines and ladders, except where such things are essential for safety or good caving practice.

Yes, do mark off important and vulnerable speleothems and clay sediments, but be aware that there are idiots around who might treat excessive cave taping as a red rag affects a bull.

But no clay sculptures in caves?! I know of a number of places underground where such artistic works have been created, where there has been no threat to sediments that would in any way be considered important for sampling work and so I'd suggest that being a spoil sport is absolutely not the way to encourage good cave conservation. However, start sculpting anything with the clay in places such as Agen Allwedd Main Passage, where the sediments are not only important for future sampling work but also have an aesthetic quality in their own right, then expect to be duly reprimanded!

As for clay balls, that's how we disposed of the mud dug out the passage at The Armoury in Trident Passage, Agen Allwedd, to enable the next breakthrough, if you can find them.

And as for throwing mud around in a muddy part of a cave where water regularly inundates the passage - what's the point in introducing draconian 'do as I say' regulations where the situation and reasonableness suggest otherwise? There is a recording somewhere of three women having somewhat of a mud fight in a muddy section of cave passage, somewhere, and it went out on Woman's Hour on BBC Radio! I was there when it happened and saw them do it of their own volition and can vouch that there was no danger to the cave or 'cave formations'. Just don't get it in your eyes, that's all!

I was also there when Mark Noel did his sampling work, in fact I drove him to South Wales on a number of occasions around the time this experimentation was carried out, and so I can suggest that it is well worth taking cave sediments seriously and helping to protect areas that have been marked out for conservation purposes or simply appear that they should be protected, using your own common sense and initiative.

See: Discovering Cave Sediments by Laurence Thistlewood in Caves & Caving (90), Spring/Summer 2001, pp.20-3:

http://bcra.org.uk/pub/candc/v90.html

I commissioned the piece.

Clive G said:

The best way to conserve cave passages is to make access as difficult as possible - not by introducing gates and the human politics of 'control', but preferably by leaving natural obstacles as intact as possible and not providing blasted crawls, blasted squeezes, handlines and ladders, except where such things are essential for safety or good caving practice.

Click to expand...

I think that is a seriously good point.

As a mining person who is keen to get involved in the caving community and also to learn, something that is emerging in my mind is that conservation with regard to caves V mines is at exact opposites. Cave conservation revolving around minimising human impact while the primary issue with mines is as Brains explained, natural decay. So mine preservation primarily revolving around human intervention, even to a degree that can drastically alter the fabric of a mine such as the work I am currently doing at Cwmystwyth.

As I have said, I am learning, so wonder if there is an instance where cave passage has been blasted out etc and then the cave safeguarded against the effects of excessive human footfall by the fitting of a gate. Show caves out of the equation.

I am sure that if there is someone will soon tell me about it.

Water Icicle Close Cavern was reccently extended , and a gate fitted at the breakthrough due to the nature of the passage found. Access is via a leader system. The rest of the cave is open

bograt said:

nickwilliams said:

Working from the engineer's position that you cannot control something if you cannot measure it, I think we need to come up with a way of measuring the importance and status of particular sites. This would allow us to set priorities, allocate resources, measure our success and may even help to develop a consensus on our approach to issues such as leadership systems and gating.

Click to expand...

Isn't this what Cave Conservation Plans strive to achieve ??

Click to expand...

Well, if so then it's failed to gain recognition as such. It's fairly common for people to refer to caves as (for example) grade 4 in terms of 'difficulty', which I guess is a measure of objective danger, but I've never heard of anyone trying to group caves on conservation grounds in a similar way.

I know of a cave that suffered "an unfortunate collapse of the entrance" forcing access via an alternative and very narrow connection from a nearby cave, thus conserving a recenetly discovered and rather delicate and beautiful area.

I fit through the alternative route, so don't need to worry, but while effective,  is a "fat-selector" really a fair means of access control?