Caves without pitches with great formations?

[paul]

I wonder if most cavers' attitudes to conservation (gate or don't gate, etc.) is coloured by past experience.

On the one hand Pitlamp's example of a well-decorated cave which is easily accessible but remains undamaged maybe persuades him that obscurity is the answer.

Then someone such as Bograt who had seen the total damage to something he once saw originally in its original state leans towards the idea that there should be more protection?

What if each had the opposite experience, Pitlamp and Bograt? Would they then hold the opposite opinions as well?


This is not meant as a criticism of Pitlamp's or Bograt's opinions, just a question which may shed more light on the matter.

 

[Pitlamp]

I take your point Paul but your question is hypothetical.

I was one of the six discoverers of the first example I alluded to. It's extremely well decorated and is very near a popular "trade route" in a well known cave. On the day of the breakthrough we were already deep into discussions about how it should be looked after, long before we got back to the surface.

We decided not to make a big song and dance about it but we did describe it to various kindred clubs. Many of these clubs paid their own visits and they were very careful to ensure no damage was caused. In fact it was quietly published a few years later and, as a result, it slipped under many cavers' radars. But experienced cavers will have read between the lines, so no-one can argue we're not reporting our finds properly. The place in question is still in superb condition, even though it was discovered well before the turn of the millennium.

By contrast Gimli's dream was pretty well described in popular publications right away and I also remember going to a very good illustrated lecture about it soon after it was found (from memory at a BCRA Conference, or it could have been a DCA Congress, which were still occurring at the time some years).

Maybe there's something we can all learn from these two approaches? I'm unwilling to give any more detail than the above as this would compromise the conservation efforts which were deployed from the outset and which have clearly been successful.

In my view there is a case for a gate in exceptional circumstances but it should always be the last resort - when all other strategies have been properly looked at (and rejected for very good reasons).

 

[graham]

Bureaucracy is all very well but there are many experienced and careful cavers who aren't comfortable with paperwork and actually find it a bigger obstacle than perhaps you and I realise.

Poor them. I've known a few (very few) expert drivers (in their opinion) who rather disdained the paperwork required to get a licence to drive & get insurance.

Sometimes - more often than is perhaps recognised - the bureaucracy is there for extremely good reasons.

In one well-decorated Mendip cave the discoverers and explorers but put in considerable time, effort and cash to secure a bypass to an extremely pretty section of passage.

And yet one, enthusiastic, quite hard, young caver was heard to say "Why can't they just accept that the passage will get trashed?" Education hadn't made its mark on him & as Peter has said, it has to work on everybody if it is not to fail.

 

[TheBitterEnd]

But in the case MRODoc cites in Gaping Gill  the presence of paperwork and bureaucracy did nothing. 

 

[bograt]

I feel that people are putting words in my mouth, where have I advocated gating on this thread?

 

[paul]

I feel that people are putting words in my mouth, where have I advocated gating on this thread?

OK, I agree you didn't mention gates. I didn't say you advocated gating, per se, but you did mention "Derbyshire Diggers philosophy of not publicising before access controls could protect formations".

What I was trying to say, perhaps not very well, that one's opinion on conservation might change after having witnessed the damage to a cave not long after having found it in its pristine state. I was comparing Pitlamp's point on seeing a decorated section of cave he was involved with finding still in a good state of conservation because it's location wasn't widely publicised, and that should be good enough to ensure it remain undamaged, with your point on the damage to Gimili's Dream after a month.

 

[graham]

But in the case MRODoc cites in Gaping Gill  the presence of paperwork and bureaucracy did nothing.

What practical access controls cover the GG system?

 

[Pitlamp]

'Morning Graham - I've just sent you a PM about this.

 

[David Rose]

Look, instead of getting involved in an intense ethical discussion, let's just point out the truth. There are no well-decorated caves that do not require pitches anywhere in the Dales. It's a futile quest. The furthest reaches of Mossdale Caverns might, however, have potential of this kind.

 

[graham]

None?

I can think of some that are on the other side of long sumps.

 

[David Rose]

Very true. Actually there are some pretty bits at the bottom end of Langlcliffe Pot. Only two pitches to get there. Not much more tackle needed than for a tsrip down Manor Farm Swallet  :

 

[The Old Ruminator]

Do you publish or keep it quiet? Seemingly both have their dangers. Cannington Cavern in Somerset was kept quiet. A major bat roost and hugely important archeological site. When the quarry owners decided to blast it all away where was the outcry? Perhaps Willie Stanton had the right idea when he found a well decorated passage. Block it off unsurveyed and dont tell a soul. There it secretly resides in its pristine glory untouched and for ever unvisited. Ultimately you just cant trust cavers and have to treat them like children. Why are there muddy hand prints on some out of the way formations in certain Mendip Caves? Photographers can be the worst culprits ( yes that includes me ) as the feel they have more of a right to go places other cavers dont. Perhaps the OP should come down to Mendip. We still have a few places worth visiting.

 

[bograt]

I feel that people are putting words in my mouth, where have I advocated gating on this thread?

OK, I agree you didn't mention gates. I didn't say you advocated gating, per se, but you did mention "Derbyshire Diggers philosophy of not publicising before access controls could protect formations".

What I was trying to say, perhaps not very well, that one's opinion on conservation might change after having witnessed the damage to a cave not long after having found it in its pristine state. I was comparing Pitlamp's point on seeing a decorated section of cave he was involved with finding still in a good state of conservation because it's location wasn't widely publicised, and that should be good enough to ensure it remain undamaged, with your point on the damage to Gimili's Dream after a month.

Fair enough, its not my opinion on conservation that has changed, more my attitude towards publicising finds, at one time I was of the opinion that if you find it, tell everyone about it, Pitlamps approach seems to be a better option.
Maybe the DCA cave discovery fund conditions need a re-think since they do stipulate publishing finds, or maybe it would be better not to overplay the "superb formations" card?.

 

[Pitlamp]

That's what I was driving at Bograt; it's possible to report a discovery in such a way that doesn't draw attention to its sensitive aspects.

 

[Cave Mapper]

In an attempt to give a constructive and helpful answer to the OP, don't forget that some of the most popular well trodden beginners caves have great formations. There may not be any delicate straws or helictites, but the bigger more robust formations that you get in places like Upper and Lower Long Churn can be very photogenic with the right lighting. Some fabulous cave photographs have been taken in Long Churn.

 

[shanma]

I am shocked and pretty upset at the responses and accusations I have received to my (photography based) query.

I had never been on a caving forum until a few weeks ago, and have not been a member of a club, always preferring to go caving alone. As a result I suppose I have been unaware of a lot of caving culture, and so had no idea my posts would be so provocative. After getting some less than helpful and discouraging responses to an original thread, I decided to register with a new user name and post in a different part of the forums in order to try and get some more helpful responses.

I realise now I have been naive, and all I can do is apologise for the concern I have caused. I can assure you my questions were completely innocent, I was simply looking for recommendations for well decorated caves that I can go into alone to photograph - i.e ones that don't contain pitches. If you look at the original post at the top of this thread, I even request people private message me with suggestions as I realise some people might not want to share such information on a public forum.

I have never damaged a cave in my life, and would consider such an idea appalling. I have always taken an active interest in conservation (i've been a volunteer with both the National Trust and the Suffolk Wildlife Trust) and I have been taking photos of the outdoors, wildlife, mountains, caves and other natural subjects for over 12 years. If anyone wishes some evidence of this, I have tens of thousands of photographs that I can supply as proof.

In the last few days on this forum, I have been accused of being a potential vandal and I have been marked as a suspect if any damage is caused in the future to caves that I have mentioned, based on absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

I doubt I can do much to convince people that I'm telling the truth, but if I can I'm extremely eager to rectify this whole situation. I've posted this on the Elderbush Cave thread too.

 

[zomjon]

Hi Shanma, I have to admit I haven't been too impressed with the way in which some of the posters have phrased their worries, but they are generally concerned for these fragile environments. I know that you have already expressed a preference for solo photographic trips, but if you fancied some company, I would be quite happy to show you some of the more accessible treats the Peak has. Drop us a PM if interested.

 

[shanma]

Hi Zomjon,

Many thanks for your reply. I know that the responses are based on a preserving caves and their formations, it is the being labelled as a suspect vandal which concerns me.

For the record, I'm a fairly well respected photographer in certain circles, and I'm now genuinely concerned I'm going to have my reputation tarnished for absolutely no reason. I also suspect I will be denied access to some of the caves I have requested access to or was planning to in the future. I was also giving serious thought to joining a local caving club, but I seriously doubt that will be happening now either.

If anyone wants evidence of my "innocence", please private message me and I can provide it in abundance. I can not believe how far this whole thing has gone.

And thanks for your offer.

 

[Peter Burgess]

Please don't tar all caving clubs with the same suspicious and unfriendly brush. I can assure you that the great majority of club cavers do not use UKCaving and will welcome you with few reservations. If you were based in the London area, I would happily arrange to meet up and find out what you are interested in from a photographic perspective. There's nothing like a face to face to clarify how genuine someone is.

 

[shanma]

Thanks for that, and I appreciate your offer. It is the fact that it appears my email address is going to be shared with various interested parties labelling me as suspect and recommending prosecution if any damage is done to any of the caves I have mentioned. So I doubt any of the local caving clubs would want me.

I am supposed to be visiting a Peak cave on thursday which requires borrowing a key, and I suspect I'm going to be denied it now.