dowbergill navigational aids removed!

[SamT]

yup - gates, leaders and tape is the only way it would seem. Has worked well in South wales. 

Its all a question of "impact"

ten nutters razing round Scafell on a say motocross bikes - will have a very small impact. and the mountain will soon recover.

just one dickhead that that flings mud around and smashes stall - Huge impact that is totally irreversable.

Our caves are on the whole, exceptionally delicate places, the beauty and the detail is often over looked, and my be small. We all have a duty to do our utmost to conserve those features for future generations.

In the UK - pretty caves are a precious and finite resource

 

[caving_fox]

I've certainly no problem with conservation using permits/gates and tape, leaders where required for exceptional bits. And while I can understand the motivation for not publishing a full survey, it does seem a bit odd to go to all that work and then hide it mouldering in a cupboard.

Equally, it seems odd or confusing to deliberately leave passages off the survey. Mark them as not surveyed if you wish, but if you draw a solid wall, and there is in fact a route there, you've made navigating a great deal more complicated rather than less. When using a grade 5 survey I expect it to be as accurate as possible, not deliberately misleading.  Again, not naming something "the pretty bit" or leaving the name off the survey is fine, but making navigation more difficult (particularly in a complex cave like OFD) just seems perverse.

 

[gus horsley]

If I see a passage which is not mentioned in a guidebook or shown on a survey, curiosity often gets the better and I'm more inclined to see where it goes.  However, if I follow it to a point where there are pretties which could be damaged by my bulk, I don't go any further and I would hope others don't either..

 

[Les W]

I've certainly no problem with conservation using permits/gates and tape, leaders where required for exceptional bits. And while I can understand the motivation for not publishing a full survey, it does seem a bit odd to go to all that work and then hide it mouldering in a cupboard.

Equally, it seems odd or confusing to deliberately leave passages off the survey. Mark them as not surveyed if you wish, but if you draw a solid wall, and there is in fact a route there, you've made navigating a great deal more complicated rather than less. When using a grade 5 survey I expect it to be as accurate as possible, not deliberately misleading.  Again, not naming something "the pretty bit" or leaving the name off the survey is fine, but making navigation more difficult (particularly in a complex cave like OFD) just seems perverse.

With respect to the sites I alluded to, one site on Mendip that has been completely left out of the guide books actually has a very high grade survey that was published elsewhere and is in the public domain, just not well known.
Another Mendip site has part of the cave omitted from the description in the guidebook, if you were right by the passage concerned but didn't know of its existence you wouldn't know it was there so it doesn't confuse people. I have not seen a survey of this cave so I don't know if it is on a survey or not.

In OFD as far as I am aware, nothing has been left off the survey, just the name of a particular passage.

It seems to work as I believe the locations concerned are much better protected despite being quite fragile. The solution otherwise would be yet more gates and leader systems.

 

[graham]

Another Mendip site has part of the cave omitted from the description in the guidebook, if you were right by the passage concerned but didn't know of its existence you wouldn't know it was there so it doesn't confuse people. I have not seen a survey of this cave so I don't know if it is on a survey or not.

I can let you have a copy.

 

[Les W]

Ooh, thanks Graham