Proceedingsofthe1989NationalCaveManagementSymposiumNew Braunfels, Texas U.S.A.EditedbyJayR.Jorden and RobertK.ObeleSymposium Hostedby:Texas Cave Management Association Texas Parks andWildlifeDepartment Sponsoredby:U.S. Bureau of Land Management National Park Service National Speleological Society Texas Speleological Association American Cave Conservation Association Richmond Area Speleological SocietyJohnM.Walsh, Program Chair Texas Cave Management Association New Braunfels, Texas U.S.A.
21989CaveManagementProceedingsDRAFTCOpy1992Texas Cave Management Association Publishedby:Texas Cave Management Association P.O. Box310732New Braunfels, Texas78131U.S.A.Allrights reserved, including the right to reproduce this bookorportions thereofinany formorbyany means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recordingorbyany information storage and retrieval system, without permis sioninwriting from the publisher.Allinquiries should be addressed to the Texas Cave Management Association.ISBNPrintedintheUnited States of America Cover Photo: Cave Without a Name,byJames Jasek, Waco, Texas. Inside Photos: Kickapoo, Old OrienteMill,Molasses Bat, Barnyard, and Hutto Bat Caves,byJames Jasek, Waco, Texas.
Contents4. Jay Jorden--Forward: National Cave Management Symposium 6 Natural Heritage of Texas -1989 Symposium 9 George Veni IntroductiontoCaves, Management Problems 19 John M. Walsh--Texas Cave Management21Mike Herring--TPWD Cave Management Activities 22 Joel Stevenson Systems for Management of Civil Uability 33 Kurt Menking --Texas Caver-eave Owner Relations 34 Jay Jorden -Panel Discussion: Government and Land Owners 44 Russell Gurnee--Restoration of Show Caves 49 Rex Wahl Important Mexican Free-tailedBatColonies 54 Jim Robertson--Ezell's Cave 57 Ernst and Karen Kastning -Sinkhole Management 73 JayA.Jorden--Public Relations and Cave Conservation 80 WilliamA.Elliott Endangered Species, Austin Area Caves 84 John Ahrns West Cave: Management, Problems and Solutions 87 DavidG.Foster Overused. Abused Cave Resources91Matthew Stafford Managing Bat Caves 97 JamesR.Goodbar--BlM:Solving Cave Management Problems 102 CharlesG.Graf Hydrogeological Report. Kartchner Caverns 128 Russell Gurnee--State-Owned Show Caves 133 GaryF.McCracken -Cave Conservation:BatProblems 142 Warren Netherton -Mystery Cave Trails j 50 Jim Pisarowicz--High-Tech AnswerstoManagement ProblemsDAFTCOpyBANNEDINSALEM3
41989Cave Management ProceedingsFORWARD %989 NationalCaveManagementSymposiumbyJay JordenNight paths winding beneath walls of rock, Old winds blowing through halls of stone, Water, remembering long dead reflections, gathersincalm pools ... and new light shines toward the unknown. Ronal C. Kerbo,1989Itwas with a renewed earnestness that about50cavers and friends of caves (scientists, government agency representatives and con servationists) gathered in the TexasHillCountryinthe late summer of1989.Opti mism was evident; the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act, for which the National Spe leological Society and other groups had lob bied several years, had been enacted, and a movement to try to commercialize a caveina surface wilderness area on national parkland had been defused, although not entirely. Yet, challenges remainedforcave conservation and management. Though lobbying contin uedfora cave wildernessbillin Congress, previous efforts to establish such a designation had failed. And the cave conservation and management movement itself had lost some momentum.Ithad been some time since the last National Cave Management Symposium had been held. The organizers of the1989Symposium, realizing that, had fashioned a slightly different approach to the Texas event, minglingfieldtripsandcase study (cave study!) approachestomanagement problems with the usual lecture hallandaudiovisual program fare. Participants visited more than a dozen cavesinBexar, Comal, Kendall, Hays and Travis Counties. At these sites, which included commercial and private caves in various types of management environments, experts used case studies to examine specific issues. For instance, cave gatingandbiology were dis cussed at the entrance of Ezell's Cave, man agedbythe Nature Conservancy and its volun teers within the city limits of San Marcos, Texas. There, the Conservancy and volun teers had successfully battled vandals who wrecked a succession of gates to gain entry to a window the aquifer underlying the city. More than a dozen speakers addressed the four-day Symposiumonproblems and solutions in managing caves and their contentsongovernmentandprivate lands. About50representatives from the Nature Conservancy and government including the National Park Service, United States Geological Survey, Bu reau of Land Management, and U.S. Forest Service attended, as well as speleologists and other interested persons.Oneof the Symposium's highlightswasafieldtrip to Bracken Bat CaveinSouth Central Texas, which contains the world's largest population of Mexican free-tailed bats.
There, technical papers were presented as participants watched the spectacular night bat flight.TheTexas Parks andWildlifeDepart ment and the New Braunfels-based Texas Cave Management Association were pleased to co-sponsor the Symposium.TheTPWD, stewards of a park system totaling434,000acresin129units, are managers of hundreds of caves. With each new acquisition of parkland comes the possibility of new cave manage ment challenges. The state officials were able to share their expertise on the subject and recount their cooperative effort with cave explorersinthe stateinhelping to preserve and protect these subterranean treasures for future generations. From those who volun teered their efforts to plan and execute the programs of the Symposium to those who participatedinit,the feeling was universal that the events were a success. A symbiosis of thought and practice developedincave con servation and management thatwascarried back to each participant's workplace and hometown.Bythe Symposium's end, every one was busily looking forward to the next one and actively planning forit.5
61989CaveManagementProceedings NationalCaveManagementSymposiumOctober 3 7, %989 TheNaturalHeritage 01Texas ThelifeoftheEdwardsPlateauisdividedbetween thedaylightandthedark,betweenthewetandthedry.The weatherbeaten surfaceofthePlateau,blisteredbydroughtandcutbyflashfloods,isoneoflimestones and granites.Itisalandofmanyrare plantssuchasTexassnowbells,basinbellflowersandrockquillwort.Anditisalandofmanysprings,whosesparklingwaters are soughtbymanandanimalalike.ThepUrityand constant tempera tureofthe waters are theidealhabitatforspecializedspringdwellerssuchasClearCreekLocation:Rora:Fauna:Rainfall:Rarities:EdwardsPlateauAlkaJinesoilsinlimestoneingranite areas. Oak savannahs, oakwoodlands,juniper breaks,manyendemic plants.Variedmixofnativeanimals.From15to33inches.Blindcatfish,cavesalamanders, Clear CreekGambusia,SanMarcosGambusia,LargeSpringGambusia,Fountain Darter, Golden-cheeked Warbler,BlackcappedVireo,basinbellflower,Texassnowbells,rockquillwort,EdwardsPlateau cornsalad, bractedtwistflower,EdgeFallsanemone, Texaswildrice.Gambusta,theSanMarcosGambusia, the Large-Spring Gambusia, the Fountain Darter and theSanMarcosSalamander. Themoist river corridors arelinedwithcypress, pecan, hackberry and sycamores.WithintheriverscanbefoundtheuniqueGuadalupeBassand Cagle'sMapTurtle.Onthe slopes above, the Golden-cheeked Warbler,whichwintersinthe tropical forestsofMexico,nestsinthicketsofAshe juniper and Texas oak. The limestonesofthe Plateau, cutbysprings and rentbyflashfloods,are honey combedwiththousandsofcavesofall Sizes. Manyanimals,suchas cave shrimp andblindsalamanders, live onlywithinthe confinesofthesecavesystems. Othersvisitthisinterme diateworldforspecial purposes,suchasnursery coloniesoffree-tailed bats. BrackenCave,nearSanantonio, contains anestimated30millionbatsduringthe breedingseason.Awet,darkworldliesbeneath thewestern edgeofthe Plateau. ThishiddenworldofundergroundlakesisknownastheEdwardsAquifer.Itisa seriesofunderground reservoirs thatisreplenishedbysurface waters thatsinkthrough the porous limestone. TheEdwardsAquiferishome to a hostofcurious creatures,includingtwokindsofblindcatfish, ablindsalamander and a plethoraofinvertebrates allblindand without any pigments togivethem color.
But. whilethere aremanymore species remaining tobe dlscowred In thissubterra nean worki, itS wryexistence isbeingthreat ened. As dtiesand towns alongtheBaJconesFault drawever increasing amountsofwaterfromthe Edwards Aquiferfortheir domestic andmunicipal use, theyincreasinglythreaten the existence ofthe worki's most diverse coUecttonof aquifer fauna. New Braunfels The host dtyforthe1989National CawManagement Symposiumis NewTexas. Locatedmidway betweenAustin andSanAntonio,thiscityisonthe eastern edge oftheEdwardsPlateau. This picturesquecommunity,foundedbyPrinceCarlof tn1845,7 takes youonanenchantingtripbacktothe past. You'llseedozensof quaint homes,builtof theoki German fachwerkconstruction, alongwith "gingerbread" onthe gables and verandas. A numberofthe homes aredesignatedas offidal Texas HistoricLandmarks,andafeware opento visitors.
9Introduction to theCavesandCaveManagementProblems 01Texas Keynote Address -1989National Cave Management Symposium,NewBraunfels, TexasbyGeorge Veni George Veni& Associates 11304Candle Park San Antonio, Texas78247ABSTRACTTexasisa large and diverse state, containing nearly3000caves and many varied aspectsintheir management.Karstgroundwater Issues are the primary management factors invoMng Texas caves. These issues include water quality, water quantity and water rights, in both urban and rural settings. Management of cave ecosystems has required habitat study and protection from loss of habitat area, contamination, invasionby non-cave competitive species, andbyhuman visitation. Style and ease of cave ecosystem management varies. Endangered cave species are grudgingly protectedbylandowners who see little practical benefit from the animals. Bats, however, are morewillinglyprotected as the general public becomes better informed to their many beneficial aspects. Caves' geographic locations also affects management style; urban-avoidance versus rural-exploitive. Special uses of Texas caves include State-owned caves, commercial caves, and caves with archaeologicandpaleon tologic materials. Texas cave managementisinfluxandisbeing influenced from many directions as state and local agencies set new rules and gUidelines.IntroductionWelcome to the great State of Texas! Despite the Hollywood stereotypes, Texasisa land richincultural and physiographic diver sity.Thatdiversity extends to its caves and the many ways in which they are managed. Cave management techniquesinTexas are developedasa combination of four primary factors: geology, biology, geography and special use. Thispaperwilloutline these factors, discuss their pertinence to cave
10managementinTexas, and hopefully provide someusefuJinsight for similar situations else where.GeologyAbout25%of Texasisunderlainbykarstified rock. Most of this arealiesina300kmwide belt which extends from east-central Texas almost1000krnwest toEIPaso.TheTexas karst contains nearly3000caves and has been divided into13regions based on the geologic conditions which have a distinct ef fect on cavern development (Figure1).A detailed description of these regions can be foundinSmith (1971) and Fieseler (1978). For a more generalized discussion, however,itisadequate to say Texas contains limestone karst, gypsum karst, and pseudo-karst. Examples of varied cave development for each karst type can be found among some of Texas' most noted caves: Honey Creek Cave,oneof the longest cavesinthe U.S. with30kmof limestone stream passages; the Devil's Sinkhole, a tremendous limestone shaft which opens to a chamber nearly200mindiameter; River Styx Cave, the state's longest gypsum cave; and Enchanted Rock Cave, possibly the longest granite pseudo-karst caveinthe world. Of these three karst types, however, the limestone karst of Texas containsbyfar the greatest number of caves, aswellas the largest, longest and deepest caves.Itoccurs over the greatest geographic area and shall be the primary karst type discussedinthis paper. Limestone caves have the most significant impact on human activities and are conversely the most significantly impactedbythem. The caves' primary importance to Texans are as1989CaveManagement Proceedingssources of water.Karst GroundwaterMost of the Texas karst occursina sub arid climate. Surface waterisscarce and groundwaterisinconstant high demand. Along the southern and eastern boundaries of the karstic Edwards Plateau thereareseveral citiesandtowns whose sole reason for settlementwaslocation next to the perennial springs which wellup alongtheplateau's Balcones Escarpment.Thecity of New Braunfels grew up around the Cornal Springs. Austin, the state capitol, has long reliedonwater from Barton Springs. And inSanAntonio more than a million people currentlydependon karst groundwater as their sole water supply.Thegeologic occurrence of limestone caves as conduits for groundwater gains im portanceasvarious private and governmental agencies seek ways to manage these resources. Many of the current karst groundwater prob lems are arising inSanAntonio and Austin where development ontothesource areas, or recharge zones, oftheaquifersisrapidly occurring.Thetwo primary issues of concern are water quality and water quantity.Karst Groundwater QualityKarst aquifersarenotorious for offering littleorno purification to groundwater, and then rapidly transmittingthatwater over large distances. Many oftheengineering technolo gies used to prevent groundwater contamina tion have often been demonstrated as being ineffectiveinkarst. Landfills, underground storage tanks, sewer lines, septic.systemsandurban runoff aresomeof the common factors
"Figure 1 (Fieseler,Jasek&Jasek, 1978)*LEGENDA.COf'ftCIDChel'tcMau L IaJcon-FaultZone Nor1tI C. GvadaJupe/BiancoArea D. lalconesFaultZoneSouth E. EdwardsPlatllau Sou1h F. Uc.1oArea G. EllenburgAna H. EdwardsPlateau North I. BiIIMd J. TransP.cosI(.Pennian Mountains L GypsumPlain M. Northw.t T uali'---._ __ .-_..-_ .: :&iii.it.....-ilIH6-:__ ..---:".1 I . ...--.......... ..11contributingtokarst groundwater pollution.Inorder to minimize contamination, the Texas Water Commission has developed rules fortheuseanddevelopment of groundwater. Ofmorerecent and of greater implicationsis.anewlaw (effective9/89)stating that Texas has adopted a non-degradation policy towardthemanagementof its groundwater. While theseareimportant steps,thereal difficultyisin adopting measures whichcaDfortheevalu ation of karst aquifers with methodsbestsuited to karst.Someprogressisbeing made in this direction, but alltoooften techniquesbestsuited to sandstoneandothernon-karst
12aquifers arestillbeingused,and caves are usually evaluated only from a look at their entrances. Local geologic factorsinthe Balcones Escarpment area have often re sulted in very significant caves having very "insignificant" entrances (Veni, 1987); this factor has led to the mismanagement and destruction of several important caves.KarstGroundwaterQuantityThe issue of water quantityismuch more complex than that of water quality. Ground waterinTexasissubject to "the right of free capture," whichisthe right to pumpvirtuallyunlimited quantities without regard to the consequences. Comanche Springs yielded an average1200liters per second and put the West Texas town of Fort Stockton on the map as a pleasant water resort town. However,inthe late1940s,increased pumping of ground water for irrigation caused the karst springs to cease flowingby1961(Brune, 1981). Similar concerns occurinthe EdwardsAqUiferarea. The communities of New Braunfels andSanMarcos fear that overdrafting the aquiferbyagricultural activities andbythe city of San Antonio may cause the Comal and San Marcos Springs to rundry.Downstream communities which rely on that springflow are also concerned.Inresponse to this concern the Guadalupe-BlancoRiverAuthority(GBRA), whose rivers are largely spring-fedbythe Edwards Aquifer,istaking legal action to prove the aquiferisan underground river. Should the GRBA win its case, the aquifer's waterwillnot be subject to the right of free capture, anditwillfallunder thefulljurisdic tion of the Texas Water Commission which has control over the surface water of Texas -1989CaveManagementProceedingsthe Edwards Aquifer would simply be recog nized as a subsurface extension of certain surface rivers. While some Texas caves can be easily defined as underground rivers,itiscurrently uncertainifthe complex Edwards Aquiferwillgain such recognition. Notallkarstwater quantity issues involve groundwater depletion.Inone case, a cave has been usedto increase recharge into the Edwards Aquifer.In1982adamwasbuilt across Seco Creekbythe Edwards Under ground Water District, and a diversion chan nelwascuttodrain floodwaters into Valdina Farms Sinkhole. Astudyfollowing a major flood in1987showedthecavewasable to efficiently recharge the aquifer, transmitting more than12million cubic meters of water underground. More than four months after the flood, water levels in wells8-14kmaway werestillrising. Although the hydrologic t..tSe of the cavewassuccessful, the cave's biotawasdessimated and further studies were rec ommended to determineifandhowwellthe fauna would recover (Veni and Associates, 1988).Insome instances, water quantity issues often overlap issues of water quality.Inareas where groundwater pollution through cavesisa major concern,ithas beeneasytorecom mend sealing a caveordiverting its inflow elsewhere. Yetinareas such as TeXas, where another major concernistomaximize the volume ofthegroundwater reservoir,itisrecognized that preventing contaminated streamflow from enteringtheaquiferisalso preventing the replenishment of that water supply. Additionally, sealing of -cave en trances or diversion of flow does not assure that significant contaminationwillnot enter theaqUiferthrough solutionally enlarged frac-
tures adjacent to and connectedtothe cave.Whileregulations are being enactedtoprohibithigh contaminationriskactivities on the recharge zones, the ideaofsimplystayingoffthe karst and diverting urban expansiontolessenvironmentally sensitive areas does not seem aviableoption to mostpublicofficials.In rural areas the water issues surroundingcaves aremuchlesscomplex. For many ranchers, caves serveaswater supplies, either through their springflow orbywellsplaced to intersect undergroundlakesand streams. The raisingoflivestock, the most commonlivelihoodinthe Texas karst, posesfewwaterqualitythreats. On occasion, caves andsinkholes are used as trash dumps,buttheirwidespacing andlowtoxicityhavehadlittleeffect on the area's sparse population. Texas cavers have served as the primary resourceinlocatingsubsurface streamsforranchers, andineducating those cave owners that "outofsight, outofmind"canbea dangerouspolicy.BiologyThediversity,richness and range ofT exas cave fauna has beenwelldocumented, andisnicelysummarizedbyLundeliusand Slaughter (1971). The state's cavernicole fauna repre sents a major crossroadsofgeologic pro cesses, climatic changes, animal migration patterns, and troglobite evolution.Manyofthe cave species are relictual ancestorsofclimateswhichno longer existinTexas andofsurface species whichmaynowbe extinct. The management concernsofcavefaunainTexas canbedividedintotwogroups: endangered species and bats. The same setoffactors, however, adversely impacts both groups. These factors are:lossofhabitat,13contamination, invasionbyforeign fauna, and visitation.LossofContaminationofCaveHabitatOfthe abovefourfactors.lossofhabitatisthe most significant. Cave faunahaveevolvedtosuriveina particular type ofhighlyspecialized environment. Troglobites, the mosthighlyadaptedofallcave fauna, arebydefinition creatureswhichmust complete their entireUfecyclesunderground and are unable tosurviveon the surface. Thefillingand destruction of caves are obvious examplesofhabitatlosswhichoccur as cities expand onto the Texas karstlands.InSanAntonio alone, nearly50caves areknownto have been destroyedbyurban expansion.Lessobvious examples of habitatlossoccur when the caves remain intact but the surface significantly changes and no longer supports certain cavelife.Thiswasa major pointofconcernin1988 when caves harboringendangered species were threatenedbythe urban expansion ofAustin.These species included beetles which depend on cave cricket eggs as their main food source. The crickets'survival,however, depends on the preserva tionofthe surfaceflorauponwhichtheyleavethe caves nightlyto feed. Another concernfortheAustinendan gered cave species was the impact of contami nation on the caves. Groundwateristhe most effective meansoftransmitting contaminants into a cave ecosystem, anditwillreadilyenter the cave along zones where thefoodsources are highest: the entrance, collapse areas, and streams. These areaswillalsohave thehighestconcentrations of cave fauna. Significant
14contamination canalsooccurbymaterial dumped into a cave or sinkhole,byfumes from nearby roadways, and from pollutants such as pesticides which can be sprayed into cavesorcarriedinthrough plant root systems.Invasion and VisitationofCave HabitatUrbanization around the caves of San Antonio and Austin has introduced species which are highly adaptive, and are either competitive withorpredatory upon cave fauna. Good examples of such invertebrates include cockroaches, sowbugs andfireants. Fire ant nests have been reported as deep as 15-20 m into some Texas caves. Some of the invaded areas containorarelikelyto contain rare and endangered species. A potentially effective treatment for thefireants, and which might not harm the cave species,isa product called LOGIC. LOGICisa growth hormone whichisconsumedbythe ants and renders them sterile.Itsuseinand around cavesiscurrently under experimentation. Another type of invasionbyforeign spe ciesishuman visitation. Deliberate destruc tion of bat populations has occurredinsome cases, but most visits that are damaging to cave fauna have innocent intentions. Com mon impacts include disturbing nursing or hibernating bats, trampling of floors to reduce usable habitat for invertebrates and crushing those invertebrates sheltered under small rocks, leaving potentially harmful trashincaves (such as batteries), and leaving other trash which may not be poisonous but may upset the cave's ecologic balance. Examples of these various type of disturbances occur throughout Texas, but the way they are perceived and managed has depended on whether the spe-1989Cave Management Proceedingsdeswere endangeredorwere bats.Endangered Cave Species There are currently 5 species of Texas cave invertebrates which are federally listed as endangered.Allof these are isolated to the small Jollyville Plateau near Austin. Stream dissection has separatedtheJollyville from the parentEdwardsPlateau. Genetic isolation of the cave species within the Jollyville has re sulted in the speciation whichsetsthemapart from the mainEdwardscavemicole fauna. Similar dissection along otherpartsof the Balcones Escarpment has created many other locations where isolation and speciation of cave fauna may have occurred. These areas, however, lack sufficient study to list any such apparently isolated faunaasendangered. Endangereddesignation requires not only a faunal uniqueness, but also entails a poten tial threat to the species' very limited popula tion.Thethreat couldbefrom either natural or human origins.Theendangered designa tionisgivenbyfederalorstate authority anditisthose authorities whoareresponsible for species and habitat management. This man agement often works jointly with private landowners.IOnce the endangeredTexas cave inver tebrates near Austin became listed and con struction was imminent, they received a federallyand privately funded studytodetermine the caves' hydrologicandbiologic zones of influence. Much oftheprojected develop ment near the caveswasconsequently occu piedbythese zones,andthere has-been no further constructionontheproperties since late1988.Alsoas a result of these studies, the U.S. Fish andWildlifeService required the
landowners to install gatesonthe caves known to house endangered species, and has recom mended limiting development near caves which donotcontain such fauna, but which may be important to the endangered caves' ecosys tems.Theonly other currently listed endan gered cave speciesinTexasisthe famousTexasBlindSalamander,TyphlQmQlge rathbuni,fQundin Ezell's Cave inSanMarcos. Managed bytheTexas Nature CQnservancy,thecave is gatedandits PQPuiatiQnisstable. AnQther salamander, Eurycea tridentifera,ismQre widelyspreadamQng several Texas cavesandhas only a state designatiQnasthreatened rather than endangered. As yet there have beennQattemptstQmanageQrprQtect this species, other than to prQvideitwith threatened listing.FQrthemost part, the listingQfa cave speciesasendangered has provided substan tial meansQfprQtecting and studying certain cavesandtheir eCQsystems. While landQwn ers have cQQperated with themanagementrecommendatiQns, they have Qften dQne so only under federal pressureandotherwise "wQuldn 't give adamnabout thQse damn cave bugs." Without this pressureitisdQubtful any protectiQnQfthe cave lifeWQuidhave oc curred.BatsWhile still subjectsQfmisinfQrmatiQn and malfeasance, bats have gained a certain levelQfacceptance amQngthegeneral public in Texas. Within150kmQfSanAntQniQthreeQfthewQrld's largest bat PQPulatiQns occur within caves. AlthQugh the rabies scare has given batsSQmebad press, aIQtQfgood press15has been given to the bats' tremendousCQntribution to insect control. A major factorinTexas cQntributing to the protectiQn of bats,andtQthe educationQfthepublic about them, has been the establishment of Bat Conserva tion International's headquartersinAustin. Withsomeof BCl's most active membership consequently occurringinTexas, many bat studiesarebeingdonewith bat cave owners learninghowthey benefit from their nocturnal tenants. As a result, protectiQnQfbat habitat has proved easier thanthatof invertebrates which havenodirectorappreciable value to practical-minded cave owners.GeographyThelocationorgeographyQfcaves playsanimportant role in their use and mangement.Thegeographic zonesandusescanbe classi fied as: urban-avoidance and rural-expIQitive. Cavesarerecognizedbyurban planners, and engineers as being important groundwater resources. Yet they consider finding a caveona piece of property they are developingasfinding trouble. Special consid erations mustbetaken for water pollution abatement plans.Extraresearchisneeded. Overall costs increase. And whatifendan gered speciesorarchaeologic materials are foundinthecave?Theproject could be postponed, severely alteredorcanceled. With so many potential difficulties sur roundingtheurbanization of caves and sink holes, many have been quietlyfilledand left unrepQrtedtoavoid potential problems and excess costs. A few hoursspenttalking with construction creVJS willreveal the location of many such lost caves. Stricter regulations and caver communication of data to city and state
16agencies has resultedina slight declineincave destruction. While some developers are re porting caves out of sincere concern, others do soforfear of getting caught violating state water commission regulations. Other incen tives for compliance include conservation ease ments which can be used as tax breaks for landowners who protect their caves.Inother cases, as in Austin, not building near a cave may gain a developer some compensationinthe form of higher-density constructioninless environmentally sensitive parts of their prop erty.Theother geographic zoneincave man agementisthe rural-exploitive.Inthese areas cave owners have generally been unaffectedbythe state regulations governing urban de velopments. Caves have instead been used or exploited for whatever resource they may provide. Groundwater has been the main cave resource exploited, but caves have also been used for commercial tours (discussed further below), mining bat guano, raising mush rooms, disposing of trash, hiding illegal aliens, hiding moonshine stillsdUringprohibition,andminingarchaeologicartifactsandspeleothems (whichisillegalinTexas). Most rural caves, however, .are simply ignoredbytheir owners. Rural cave managementisat the discre tion of the cave owner, andislittle impactedbyoutside influences. Some caves are being managedbycavers who run mapping projects at the caves and screen visitors for the owners. This system has worked verywellinTexas where landowners do not want to deal with a hoard of strangers wanting access to their land. These owners are often happy, how ever, to cooperate with one caver whowillmanageallmatters concerning their caves.1989CaveManagementProceedingsSpecialUseSpecial use of caves refers to manage ment situations which do not clearlyfallinto the above discussed categories. These include caves on public lands, commercial caves, and caves containing archaeologic/paleontologic materials.CavesonPublicLandsWithin the past few years the Texas Parks andWildlifeDepartment(TPWD)has been purchasing substantial tracts of land which contain some of the premier cavesinthe state.Someof these caves include the Devil's Sinkhole, Kickapoo Cave, Fawcett's Cave, and the Gormanareacaves. Prior to these acqUisitions TPWD owned few caves and, with the exception of commercial Long horn Caverns, none were of any major signifi cance. Since the acqUisition of these caves, TPWD has actively pursued development of a best-use cave management strategy.In1986,a Memorandum of Under standing (MOV) was developed between TPWD and the Texas Speleological Associa tion [[SA). The memorandum recognized "the participatory management contributions of the TSA on ... cave resources" and encour aged the continuedorincreased participation of the TSAinthe inventory, management and stewardship of these cave resources" (Walsh, 1986). Because most of the TPWD lands con taining caves had not yet been developed for public use, the MOU allowed cavers access to most of the caves under special use permits. Projects were set up, similar to-those of the Cave Research Foundation within National
Park Service lands, for the exploration, survey and inventory of caves and related features. Although some cavers did notlikethe idea of working within the state bureaucracy, many sawitas an opportunity tovisitcaves they would not otherwise see and to have some impact on how those caves would be man aged. Thus far many caves have been found and surveyed, and TPWD has been very pleased and impressed with TSA efforts and coordina tion.In1989the Texas Cave Management Association (fCMA), along with the TSA, developed management and use plans for TPWD caves. TCMA and TSAiscurrently assessingallstate caves for placement into management categories. These categorieswillbe usedbyTPWD personnel as guides to permitting or restricting access to caves when the landiseventually opened to the public.CommercialCavesTexasisproud to have 7 of the country's finest commercial caves within its borders. Management of these caves has, of course, been to maintain them as viable business ventures. Some of the caves have recently expanded or are considering expansion of their tours. Recreational cavingisnot allowedinmost of these caves, although accessissometimes allowed for scientific research and cave rescue training sessions. A detailed discussion of the caves' managementisbe yond the scope of this paper, but their geo graphic range and geologic variations make themallvery difficult so that each caveisa unique experience for the visitor.17CaveArchaeologyandPaleontologyMany cavesinTexas contain significant archaeologic and paleontologic remains. The Texas Antiquities Law provides some degree of protection to these caves, but their ultimate fate rests with their owners. Where significant materials are found, the profit motive spurs many cave owners to discreetlyselleither the artifacts, or the "rights of excavation and sale" to someone else.Inmany rural areas such activities are difficult to monitor, and even more difficult to enforce applicable laws.Aswith the biologically important caves, some positive influences on owners are madebycavers but their problem remains: "so much karst, so little time. SummaryThewide expanseofTexas lends itself to an equally wide varietyingeologic, climatic and cultural landscapes in which caves occur. Consequently the hydrology, biology. archae ology and paleontology of the state's cavesisalso incredibly diverse. This paper has touched upon only a few ofthemany aspects of this diversity, the factors affecting management, and the varied means by which the caves are managed. No attempts have been made here to solve problemsorprovide new insights, but this paper does illustrate that generalizations can seldom be made in cave management, and that each cave reqUires its own individual assessment.
18BibliograohyBrune, Gunnar.1981.The springs of Texas,vol.1. Branch-Smith Inc., Fort Worth, Texas,556p.Fieseler, RonaldG.1978.Cave and karst distributioninTexas.inAnintroduction to the caves of Texas. RonaldG.Feiseler, James andMimiJasek, eds. Texas Speleological Survey, National Speleological Society Conven tion Guidebook no. 19, p. 15-53. George Veni&Associates.1988.Valdina Farms Sinkhole: hydrogeologic and bio logic evaluation. Report prepared for the Edwards Underground Water District,103p.Lundelius, ErnestL.,and Bob H. Slaughter.1971.Natural history of Texas caves.GulfNatural History, Dallas, Texas, 174p. Smith,A.Richard.1971.Cave and karst regions of Texas,inNatural history of Texas caves. ErnestL.Lundelius and Bob H. Slaughter, eds.,GulfNatural History, Dallas, Texas,p.1-14. Veni, George.1987.Fracture permeability: implications of cave and sinkhole development and their environmental assessments,inKarst hydrogeology: engineering and environmental applications.BarryF.Beck and WilliamL.Wilson, eds. Ronda Sinkhole Research Institute, University of Central Ronda, Orlando,p.101-105. Walsh,Mike.1986.Memorandum of understanding. The Texas Caver,v.31,n.1,p.12.1989Cave Management Proceedings
19 Texas CaveManagementbyJohnM.WalshP.O.Box310732NewBraunfels,Texas78130Inthe early1980's the Austin-San Anto nio area began growing rapidly with the de struction of many caves as a result.TheTexas cavers saw the system where the rancher protected the natural resource failinginthe urban areas. Over50caves were destroyedinBexar County alone.Itwastime for a new Texas revolution.In1985,several Texas cavers spoke with Russell Gurnee concerning the large scale destruction of Texas caves and the need to take action. Acting upon his advise, action was takenin1986,when the Texas Cave Management Association was created. The TCMAisa non-profit Texas corporation dedicated to the long term pro tection of caves, cavelife,and the aquifer as related to caves. For a group of cavers who had little use for "officials", this amounted to a Texas cave revolution! The TCMA found that rather than talk ing to land developers about saving speleo logical resources, they could save cavesbycontacting the engineering company on the development. When both caves and money could be saved, they were ready to listen. The TCMA motto, "Solutions to Cave Related Problems" and their desire to work with thoseinchage of caves, began to make a difference. The TCMA found that among those who must deal with caves, information was eagerly re ceived.Asmore and more land management groupsfindthey must deal with caveresources, the desire for quality information grows. This often presents a problem since cavers are often a closed group. Many cavers consider themselves the cowboys of the1980's.They are a close group and they are a group dedicated to the protection of caves and cavelife.Inthe past, often they have been viewedbyland managers as a nuisance. This hasledto problems. Now that the laws, on some occasions, reqUire the consideration of cave resources, the big questionis"How to protect an unknown resource?" There are two ways to deal with this situation. Thefirstisto hire cavers to collect the necessary information. Since this could cost thousands of dollars,itmay not be an option.Inorder to map afairlysmall cave, many man hours are required. multiply this costbydozens or perhaps hundreds of caves and the problem becomes apparent. The best solution to your information problemisto work with the caversina volunteer situation. You may discover that they have a great deal of information on the caves under your control. They mayhave been collecting cave information for the last30-50years. How do you make contact with this group of experts? Checkfirstwith your ownfieldpeople. They may know some of the cavers and may even be working with them. Many of the cavers are members of local clubs
20known as "Grottos".TheNational Speleo logical Society, Cave Avenue, Huntsville, Ala bama,35810,willassist in contacting local cavers. What is thebest way to deal with cavers? First, realizethattheyareextremely dedicated totheprotection of caves.Inorder to protect the caves, theyarereluctant to discuss caves or their location. Since there has been littleorno protection for this valuable natural re source, inonepartofthecountry the caversarequoted, "Arizona has no caves tospeakof". Respect their dedication when you work with them. Writeorcallandinvitethemto meet with you to discusstheprotection of the caves. Take off yourcoatandtieandkeep the meeting informal. Letthemknow you would like their assistance and present no pressure. Outline your needsandask for their opinions.Bepreparedtomodify your requests as you gain information. Often their inputoncavemanagementwillprove valuable. Givethemtime to discuss your requestsandto present their viewsata future meeting.Ifitappearsthatboth parties could work together, a Memorandum of Understanding often assists inthedefinition of the goals. This may help prevent problemsandmis-under standing. Youwillbe most successfulifyou provide leadership. Appointoneperson, whoiseasily reached, to be their contact. Do what youcantoassist them.Ifpossible, provide rest rooms, showers,andcamping away from the general public. After a14hour cave survey trip, they like togetaway fromitallandunwind around a campfire. Caversareusually easy to deal with but nothingwilllose their support like broken promises. Recreational cave accessisoneof their main goals.Ifthis can be worked out,itwillmakeiteasier to1989CaveManagementProceedingsreach the understood goals.Toquote RussellandJeanneGurnee, "The interior of a caveisperhapsoneof nature's most fragile environments.Thein trusion of mancantipthebalance, causing massive changes inthecave biota, in the growth of formations,andinthevery nature of the cave architecture.Thecontinued suc cessandpreservation ofeachcavewilldependonthe cooperation ofthecave owner, as custodian of this fragile landscape ... "
21 Texas Parksand Wildlife CaveManagement Activities byMike Herring Texas Parks and Wildlife Department4200Smith School Road Austin. Texas78744ABSTRACTTheTexas State Park Systemiscomprised of129units totaling434,000acres. Prior to1985,the Parks andWildlifeDepartment's cave management involvement had been limited to the operaton of one commercial tour cave. Since1985,several cave-related park resources have been added to the system and a cooperative agreement has been developed with the Texas Speleological Association to assist with cave inventory and management. Currently under studyisa cave c1assificaton system and user access procedures.
221989Cave Management ProceedingsSYSTEMS FOR MANAGEMENTOFCIVIL LIABILITY FOR CAVE RELATEDINJURYbyJoelStevensonABSTRACT Before any commitmentismade for any specific development proposal, a comprehensive, written management plan for the cave should be devised and adopted. Caves, being unfamiliar and some times dark and foreboding,appearto have a high potential for liability, but thisisa misconception. With the implementation of reasonable steps to prevent foreseeableinjUry,cave propoerties should have no greaterliabilitypotential than any other properly managed natural area.Civilliability for personalinjUryand wrongful deathisa complex subject. This paper attempts only a general discussion of the theory and the application ofcivilliabilityincontemporary American law.'Thediscus sionisnecessarily both general and superfi cial.Itisintended for an audience of non lawyers spread across thefiftyAmerican States, each of which has its own distinct jurispru dence.Thelawineach of thesefiftyseparate jurisdictionsissubject to change, sometimes to drastic change, at each Session of the State Legislature and on each day that the Appellate Courts sit for the dispatch of their business. Thispaper can,inno way, serve as a substitute for a lawyer or legal advice. Itcan, only at best, help you recognize situations of potentialliabilityand furnish you with the componentsofa system to help manage liability situations. Several forms, including releases, that can be reproducedandusedinattempts to reduce and control potential liability are avail able. These formsarestrongly worded and make their intentasclear as languagewillallow. They have been adapted from various forms that have been developed and used in various parts of the United States over the past ten years. Although these forms are designed to afford the maximum protection to the caver and to the landowner who seek to avoid liability, you must remember that no legal documentisentirelyanduniversally effective and the use of these forms does not guarantee the avoidance ofallliability Contemporary Americaisa society that litigates. Our Courts, over the past thirty years, have expanded the scope ofcivilliability for personalinjUryand the awards of Juries have increased at least as sharply as has inflation. Although the scope and the cost of
liability has expanded, and despite the fact that therearedifferences, sometimes substan tial differencesamongthefiftyAmerican juris dictions,thebasic principles upon whichliabilityisimposed have remained the same for generations.Thebranch of law that deals with claims for wrongful deathorforinjUryto personsorpropertyiscalledtheLaw of Tort.Theconcept of tortissogeneral that no inclusive definition has ever been successfully fashioned by any court, but, for the purposes of this discussion, a tort can be defined as: Acivilwrong, arising from a breach of duty, for whichthelawwillprovide a remedy.Inthe following pages, wewillexamine the basic rules of tort liability andwilldiscuss how they can be used as guidelines forthereductionorelimination ofcivilliabilityinthe context of cave exploration and cave owner ship. Liabilityintort can be based either upon intentional actsoromissions or upon negli gent actsoromissions. Intentional torts, such as assault or defamation, are outside the scope of thispaperwhichisconcerned only with the liability thatcanbe incurred for negligent actsoromissions.Thereisno rigid or specific definition of "negligence"inits legal sense. Legal negli genceissimply the failure to use reasonable care to avoid causinginjUrytosomeoneto whom a duty of reasonable careisowed.Inany situation,ifyoucandetermine what con stitutes reasonable careandifyou can ascer tain to whom a duty of reasonable careisowed, youwillhave analyzed that situation from a standpoint of potential tort liabilityandyouwillhave identified those things which you need to do to controloreliminate the potential23for liability.Inorder to be fairtoall,thelaw must have consistency fromonecase to another. This requires a uniform standard which canbeappliedinany conceivable caseandwhichwillproduce predictable and replicable results. Thereisaninfinite possibility of different fact situationsanda policy of pigeonhole catego ries and specific rules wouldbeunworkable because of size and complexity.Thesolution that has been developedbythe Courtsisa fictitious standard against whichallconductismeasured. This fictitious standardisknown as "the Reasonable Man of ordinary prudence".TheReasonable Man has been describedas "a model ofallproper qualities, with only these human shortcomings and weaknesses whichthecommunitywilltolerateonoccasion".TheReasonable Manisnot infallible, but his only errors are those unavoidablebycareful planning.Thestandardtowhich each of usisheldissimply to act astheReasonable Man would act underthecircumstances as theyappearto himatthetime.Thestandard hastheflexibility tofitany case which might arise.Theconduct of the Reasonable Manwillvary with the circumstances with which heisconfronted.IftheReasonable Man has superior knowledgeortraining, hewillberequired to utilize that superior knowledgeortraining in conforming his actions tothecircumstances. Likewise,ifthe situation involves increased dangerorrisk ofinjUry,theReasonable Manwillconformhisconducttothat greater riskordanger.Ifthe Reasonable Manisaware ofanunguarded elevator shafthewillgive warning.Ifheisinvolvedinblasting operations hewillremove people from the area, post lookoutsandtake other steps to preventinjUryordamage.Ifthe
24Reasonable Manisaware that children areinan area he will increase his lookout, decrease the speed of his automobile or take other steps to compensate for children's known propen sity to not take care of themselves. If a dangerisnot reasonably foreseeable, the Reasonable Manisnot required to foresee that actorguard againstit.For example, the reasonable proprietor of a motelinwhich there have never been a criminal assaultisnot required to foresee that there might possiblybeone.If,however, the motel had a history of multiple criminal assaults on guests, the Reasonable Man would take steps to increase security. This does not mean that ignorance of dangerisa universal defense. Intentionally remaining ignorant, as, for example,byfailing to investigate land for hidden dangers (when thereisa duty to warn) would be no defenseinan action for failure to warn.Incases involving enhanced risk thereisa duty to acquire the knowledge necessary to recognize the dangers involved.Ithas been held, for example, that the operator of a ferris wheel cannot successfullydefend an action brought after the wheel collapsedbypleading that he had no knowl edge of the phenomenon of metal fatigue.Itisthe duty of the landownerorland manager to provide against dangers which can,inthe exercise of reasonable care, be discovered.TheCourts and the commentators speak separately of "duty" and "foreseeability". These are merely components of the Reasonable Man standard, not separate or additional standards to which a managerisheld. Duty can ariseintwo ways.Itmay arisebyoperation of law, thatis,through the enactment of statutes orbythe decisions of1989CaveManagementProceedingsCourts. Duty can also arise whenitisvolun tarily assumed.Theact of undertaking to fence the edge of a precipice, for example,isthe assumption of the duty to provide a rea sonably safe and secure fence. If the dutyisdischarged with the perfec tion of the Reasonable Man (nothing else appearing) this will constituteanabsolute defense to an actionatlaw. Foreseeabilityissometimes spoken of as that element of tort law which keeps liability within acceptable bounds.Ingeneral,ifa consequenceisnot reasonably foreseeable,itdoes not give risetoliability.Inother words,ifthe Reasonable Man would not foresee injury, thereisthen no legal duty to provide against such injury. Conversely,ifthe Rea sonable Man could foresee theinjUry,thefact that a conscientious and competent managerfailsto foreseeitoffersnodefense.Thecaveat hereisthat Courts, Judges and Juries have twenty-twenty hindsight. The duty thatwillbe owedwillvary with the circumstances.Themore important cir cumstances includethelegal status of the person involved, whetherornot children are involved, the nature ofthedanger to be guarded against and whatisphysically (and to a far lesser extent, economically) reasonable. We are concerned with three situations, each of which has its own distinctive liability potential. We are concerned with the liability which can arise from cave ownership; that which can result from organized caving activi ties; and, with our own potential liability as cavers ourselves. The basic concepts discussedinthis paper are equally applicable to each situation. Traditionally,theownersnip, useormanagement of land gives rise to certain
duties that are owed to those who come ontotheland.Thelegal status of the person comingontothelandwilldefine the minimum duty owedbythelandowner to that person. The first classificationisthat of the tres passer.Theduty owed to a trespasserissimplytheduty nottowillfullyinjure him. This dutynottowillfullyinjure includes a duty not tosettraps which would cause injury to the trespasser.Thereisno duty to warn the trespasser of dangerous conditions existing onthelandandthereisno duty to modify the land in order to makeitsafe for trespassers.Thereare, of course, exceptions to these broad rules. Frequent known and tolerated tres passers maybeowedthesame duty aslicensees. For example, where trespassers wear a trail across a portion of land and no steps are takentoprevent continued use of the trailbytrespassers,someadditional duties may becomeduetothem anditwould probably be prudent, for planning purposes, to look uponthemas licensees.Inthe states whichstillrecognize the doctrine of attractive nuisance, children attractedontothe land are not, strictly speaking, treated as trespassers.Thesecond classification of persons en teringontolandisthat of the licensee. A licenseeisonewho enters land with permis sion oftheowner but not for benefit oftheowner.Thereisa duty to warn licensees of known dangersonthe land. Thereisno dutyonthepart ofthelandowner to inspect the landanddiscover unknown dangers in order to warn them.Thereisno duty on the part ofthelandownertomodify the landandputitinsafe condition for the benefit of the visiting licensee. Permission to enter the land can either be direct orbyimplication.Thethird class of persons who enter25onto the land ofanotherare invitees. Invitees are those whoenterwith the permission of the owner for purposes beneficial to the owner. A paying tourist in a campground would be an invitee as would a customerinthe business of a park concessionaire.Itispossible that one who enters a cave on park land for the purpose of mappingthe cave would beaninvitee,ifthe park authority receivesthebenefit of the resulting map.Theduties which the landowner owesaninvitee includethedutytowarn of unsafe conditions,thedutytouse reasonable care to inspect and discover dangerous conditions,andtheduty to take reasonable steps to puttheland in safe condition. Children, whatever their legal classifica tion whileontheland,areowed a higher duty than that whichisowedtoadults.Thereasons for thisaretwofoldandobvious. Children cannot be expectedtoappreciate danger with thesamediscernment as adultsandchildrenareneither physically nor mentally as able to take care of themselvesasare adults. Because ofthespecial and peculiar cir cumstances which children present,theCourts developed the doctrine of attractive nuisance.Thedoctrinewasdeveloped to allow recovery by children who were injured while trespass ingontheland of another.Thetheory conclusively presumes that the childisattractedbysomethingontheland. Originally, this had to be something createdbythelandowner, the classicexamplesbeing quarries, railroad turntablesandartificial farm ponds. Most American jurisdictions have aban doned the doctrine of attractive nuisanceinfavor ofaneven broader new rule whichisbased upon foreseeable consequences. Basi cally, this rules posits that children can be
26expectedtomeddle, to use poor judgment andtoexplore. The fact that achildisinvolvedinthe particular circumstance makes special dangers foreseeable. The standardofthe ReasonableManisthen applied and accept able conductinwhich the ReasonableManwouldhave engagedinsimilar circumstancesinvolvinglikechildren. The traditional distinctionsoftrespasser, licensee and invitee are, to some extent, being blurredbythe Courts. More and more often, especiallyincases where strict applicationofthe traditional approachwouldlead to a harsh result, Courts are applying the ReasonableManstandard to the acts and omissionsoflandowners.Asthis trend continues, the distinctionsoftrespasser, licensee and inviteewilltend to become more an elementofforeseeability rather than the controlling elementofthe case. The prudent owner or manager cannolongerrelysolelyon the traditional distinc tions. The duties and the potentialliabilityofthe ownerofan unimprovedwildcaveforwhichadmissionisnot chargedissharply different than theliabilityofa commercial cave operator. The potentialliabilityofshow cave operationsisbeyond the scopeofthis paper. Duties andliabilitiesarisingfromthe explora tionofthe"wild"portions of commercial caves are substantially the same as for unimproved caves. Thereisnowaythat a landowner can totally avoidallpossibleliability.Evenifhesimplyforbidsentry into a cave, a trespassercouldenter, receiveinjuryand demand com pensation. Blasting the entrance shut, or putting a gate onitdoes not guarantee that entrywillnot, nevertheless,bemade.Itisnot1989CaveManagementProceedings,farfetchedtoimagine a scenario where rescue effortscouIdbehampered orinjuryexacerbatedbysuch modifications. Probably the best solution to theliabilityenigma from the land owners' pointofviewisa simple management planwhichwouldinclude somepolicyforlimitinguseofthe cave, a means of informing cave usersofknown dangers, and the re quirementofthe reading and signingofa strongly wordedliabilityreleasebyallvisitors. A release, sometimes called a waiver,isbasically a contract where the caver,inex changeforthe right to enter the cave,sellsto the landowner the caver's right to sueforinjuryreceivedin the cave. The most impor tant thing to remember about a releaseisthatitisnotalwayseffective.Asindicated,itisa contract anditmust, therefore, have consid eration. The consideration should not be money becauseinmost jurisdictions thatwillconstitute the caver an invitee andwillplace the landowner under a higher duty tohim.The consideration, the exchangeforwhich the permissionisgiven, should be the releaseofthe right to sue and nothing more.Insome jurisdictions,itmaystillbe necessary to recite a nominal consideration,usuallyone dollar. A blanket discharge for any andallnegligentlyinflictedinjurywould probably notbeeffectiveifitwas the subject of a Court challenge.Itisimperative that the release contain language indicating that the land owner has advised the caver of specific known dangers, that the caverisawareofthese dangers andofthe general dangers involvedincaving, and that heisknowingly exchQIlging hisright to sueforinjuryforthe right tolegallyenter the cave.Ifa release has any significant chance of being enforcedbythe Courts,itmustbe
clearly written and it must appear, from the document itself, that the parties agreed and understood their transaction at the timeitwasmade. The documentwillbe construed against the party draftingit,usually the landowner, and itisto that party's benefit to avoid any ambiguityinthe language of the release. Atallcosts "legalese" should be avoided insofar as possible. A releaseisa contract anditcan only be effectiveifitisentered intobya person whoiscapable of contracting. A release signedbya minor(inmost jurisdictions, anyone under18years of age), orbyonewhoismentally incompetent,willhave no legal effect. Any timeitisnecessary to obtain a release from a minor the release should be signedbyboth parents of the minor or,inappropriate cases,bythe guardian of the minor. The signature ofonepatientmayormay not be sufficient to effect a release of possible claims. Thiswillvary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction andwillalso vary with the facts of the individual case.Thebetter practice therefore,istorequire the signatures of both parents when attempting to release the rights of a minor.Insituations involving a minor, the Courts,ifthey are called upon to construe a release,willview the language of the release very narrowly andwill,wherever possible, usually interpret the document to allow recoverybythe minor. ForthiSreason, careful draftsman ship, whichisalways important,isabsolutely imperative for documents which may be ex ecuted on behalf of a minor.Thesignature of the minor should also be required on the release. Although the signatureisof no contractual effect,itcan be used to show that the minor was actually aware of the risks and dangers involvedincave27exploration and this can,inmany cases,furnish a defense contributory negligence or assumption of the risk -inthe event that a claimismade.Itbears repeating that asinthe caseofany other release, the parents or guardian of a minor and the minor who signs the document, mustallbe reqUired to read the document they are signing andItisabsolutely imperative that the document be drafted so as to be under standable. No releasewillbe legally effectiveifitisnot understoodbythe parties entering intoit.Theeffectiveness of any release canbegreatly improved by adding additional legal theories.Thetheory of joint venture has been utilizedinthe context of caving related releases for a number of years. Members of a joint venture enjoy a degree of Immunity fromliabilitytooneanother.Thelegal theoryisthat each member of the joint ventureisthe agent of the other and that the negligence of eachIsimputed to each. Four elements are necessary to constiMe a joint venture. Rrst, it must arise from a contract. A release, properly worded, would be a sufficient contract. Second,allof the members of the joint venture must have a common purpose.Thepurpose of exploring a given cave,orengagingina given caving triporcave project, wouldbea sufficient common purpose. Third, there must be what the Courts call a "community of interest". This means that each of the members of the joint venture must have some real stake or Interestinthe outcome of the joint venture. Fourth, there must ben a equal right of con trol, that is, each member of the joint venture must be given the right, whetheritIsexercised or not, to have a voiceinalldecisions. Clearly, members of a cave trip or of a
28survey project canmeet the four requirements of a joint venture. Whetherornot a land owner can, unless he becomes a caver, enjoy this additional protectionisnot as obvious. The requirement of a "community of interest"iswhere this problem would usually arise.Inmost instances, the landownerwillnot engageinthe cave exploration andwillnot have any great interestinthe exploration of his cave.Ifitcan be shown that thereisa legitil1Jate interestonthe part of the landowner, such as an interestinlearning about possible water resources, then the "community of interest" requirement could probably be satisfied.Itwould seem that the requirement of an equal right of control would be metinthe average situation where the landowner always has the right to forbid further entry into the cave and where the cavers are not subject to being dispatched into the cave against theirwillby the landowner.Ifitisattempted to include a landownerinthe joint venture,itwillthen be imperative that a clause be drafted into the written document makingitclear that the landownerisnot to incur liability of any sort for any of the acts of the other members of the joint venture.Thedrafting ofanagreementbywhich a non caving landowner would become a member of a joint venture should only be attemptedbya qualified attorney. Another legal doctrine thatwillafford additional protection against potential liabilityisa doctrine knownasassumption of the risk. The basis of this doctrineisthat when some one assumes for himself a specific risk he thereby relieves others of the duty to protect him from that risk and they thereafterwillowe him no duty as to the risk thatisassumed.Inany situation where no dutyisowed, thereis1989Cave Management Proceedingsnoliabilityconsequence because the element of dutyisessential to a finding of liability.Theparties must recognizeanidentifi able risk whichisbeing assumed and the risk must specifically be assumedbythe party who undertakesit.Theassumption of the risk should be tied to the consideration for the release. Other principles, whichareof lesser value, but which may nevertheless afford some additional protection, include a convenant not to sue andanagreement for indemnification.Thecovenant not to sueisnot a release.Itisa contract not to bringanaction in the event of injury.Itdiscouraged litigation because the Plaintiff may be liable for the costs of the defense of the liability lawsuitina separate action for breach of contract. Because the covenant not to sueisa contract, it must have a specific reference to consideration.Theconcept of indemnification is alSo borrowed from the law of contracts.Itisa contract to pay damages recoveredbya third party.If"A"contracts with"8"to repay"8"whatever amount of damages "C" might re coverinalaWSUit,"A" has entered into a contract of indemnification with"8".Ukeany other contract, a contract of indemnification would reqUire specific consideration. Obvi ously, a contract of indemnificationisof no valueifthe agreeing partyisnot solvent.Thedocuments discussed here can be of great valueinmanaging the risk of liability, but the primary tool of the land owner, manager or caver who wishes to limit liability exposure to acceptable levels must be the implementa tion of the Reasonable Man standard into the cave management plan.Somespecific sug gestions follow, but no listing can be,complete.Inthe final analysis the manager and the caver
must develop the attitude and the outlookofthe ReasonableManinasimilarsituation. The landowner should never require the caver to demonstratehisability,asinrequiringhimto demonstratehisabilitytorappel, or place artificialaid.Ifthemanagerengagesinjudging such demonstrations,heis,ineffect, judging the competenceofthe cavertoperformthe demonstratedactivityandispassing judgement upon whether the demonstratedlevelofskillissufficientforsafe traverseofthe cave. Theliabilitypotentialofthisshouldbeobvious. The prudent managerwillrequire the caver to demonstrate experience andwillprobably want to take a written historyfromthe caverinorder toavoid,asmuchaspossible, passing judgementonskilllevels.The manager should adopt written criteriaforcavers wishing to enter thecave.These shouldbesimple, non-judgmental andrealistic.A managerwithresponsibilityfora vertical cave might develop criteria thatwouldincludethree yearsofverticalcavingexperi ence and the successful completionoften vertical caving tripsinvolvingpitchesofseventy feet or more.Ifthe manager goes beyond a general screening criteriasuchas this, he runs theriskofbeginningtocertify the caver.Likewise,the manager should notgivean opinion regarding specificcavinggear. A specific brand or generic typeofgear should notberecommended orreqUired.Atthe other extreme, themanager cannotallowa caver to enter the cavewithobviouslyinadequate gear, orwithgear thatisclearlyworntothe pointofunreliability.Thisisan areaoffinedistinctions and the managermustdevelop notonlya real understandingofthe Reason ableManconcept,butalsoa genuine expertiseabout technical caving andclimbinggear.29Thesuccessfulmanagerwillknowwhat types of gear are generally acceptedinthecavingcommunity and what typesofequipment are generally considered tobeunsafe orinadequate. Hewillthen require those whomheallowsto enter the cave tousegearwhichgenerallyfallswithinthe classofgear thatisacceptedinthe caving community.Asinthe caseofcavingskills,the manager should neverallowhimselfto certify the adequacyofcaveequipment.Asa generalrule,artificialclimbingaidsshould neverbeprovidedbythe manager or owner.Ifan artificial anchor orsimilaraidisprovided andifitfails,causinginjUry,alawsuitisalmost inevitable. For this reason,artificialclimbingaidsorrigginganchors shouldonlybeprovided when theriskofinjuryfromnot providing themishigh.Anexampleofthiswouldbea situationinvolvinga deeppitwhere there arenogood natural anchors and there are numerous unsafe natural anchors.Inthat situation, the bestriskmanagement decisionmightwellbeto provide the best possibleartificialanchor system, design sufficientredundancy into the system and to inspectitcarefullyandregularly.Exceptforsuchextreme situations,artificialclimbingand rope-riggingaidsshould notbeprovided.Inthis respect, whenartificialanchors are providedbycaverswhoare not associatedwiththe cave ownerormanager, thereisverylittleriskto the owneruntiltheaidhas beeninthe cavelongenough to have become generally acceptedbyvisitingcavers.Atthat point, the managermayhaveunwittinglyadopted theartificialaidandmayberesponsibleforitsmaintenance. Forthisreason, a strict prohibition against the placingofpermanent anchorsisprobably awiserule.A landowner,indetermining whowillbe
30allowed to enter hiswildcave, should never pass judgmentonthe question of whetherornot the caveriscompetent. The landowner should not,inany way, indicate that the caver has the ability to attempt the exploration of the cave. Rather, he should require that the caver demonstrate that he has the requisiteskillor experience to enter the cave.The landowner should never certify the caver, but should make the caver certify himself to the landowner.Ingeneral, any modification to the en tranceorto the passageways of a "wild"orunimproved cave should be avoided. Anytime a modificationisundertaken, a duty arises to see thatthemodificationisdone withallreasonable care.Ifa modified entrance collapses causing injury, the liability situationisprobably much worse thanifan unmodified entrance had collapsed. Any modifications that are done should not be done haphazardly, but with due consideration for the engineering principles that are involved.Ifthe owner or cave manager does not have access to the expertise needed to make modificationsina sound manner, then the modifications should not be attempted. There are two primary exceptions to the prohibition against modifying the cave.Oneisfor situations where thereisobvious danger from the natural situation.If,for example, thereisa large unstable boulder over the entrance, prudent management policy would reqUire removal of the boulder. The cautions giveninthe preceding paragraph to consider the engineering principles involved would, of course,stillapply. The second situation would be modifica tion of the cave entrance,orof a specific passage,bythe erection of a gate. A gate,1989CaveManagementProceedingsproperly designed, can be an effective toolinlimitingliability.Gates present many potentialliabilityproblems and no gate should be erected without giving consideration toallof the po tentialliabilityproblems that canflowfrom such a modification.Thegate must be se curely anchored to the cave walls so thatitcannot be pulled loose tofallon a trespasser whoistrying to breach the gate. The bar spacing must be proper so that the risk of a child becoming stuckinthe barsisavoided. The doortothe cave gate must be of sufficient dimension to allow passage of a litter in the event of an injury requiring evacuation. Impediments meanttoretard entry must be carefully considered and usually should be avoided altogether.Ifthey are going to be effective, theywillprobablyfallinto the cat egory of traps, the liability consequences of which are obvious. For this reason, industrial fences, or fences of any type, should be considered only as a last resort as a means of controlling access to caves.Thestandard industrial fence has barbed wire at the top to impede entry. The barbed wire can be consid ered a traporan instrument intended to injure and can have serious liability consequences.Ifno barbed wireorother impedimentisat the top of the fence, then the fenceisso easily breached that its valueisquestionable. Gen erally, when access should be restricted,itshould be restrictedbyafullorifice gate. At the present time, state of the art information regarding cave gating practices can be ob tained from the American Cave Conservation Association, Post Office Box409,Horse Cave, Kentucky42749.The responsibility bornebycave owners and cave managersinregard to "potential liability cannot be delegated or transferred by
them.If,for example, a cave owner turns overthemanagement of a cave to a group of cavers, he does not thereby escape liability. From a management point of view, there are numerous advantages to including the caving community in the management ofwildcaves, but from a liability standpoint, the owner or the manager must retain the ultimate direction oftheoutside group in order to retain control oftherisk management duties discussed in this paper. These concepts of risk management have been employedinindustry for decades. Po tentialliabilityisanaspect of land ownership that is notunique to cavernous lands.Alllands carrythepotential for liability, andalllands, including cave and karst lands, can be safely and productively used with a minimum of riskifa comprehensive management planisused to assessandaddress situations of potential liability.31
33 TexasCaver-eave OwnerCaveManagementRelationsByKurt MenklngTexas Speleological Association San Antonio, TexasTexas land ownersareoften extremely protective of their land and,asa result, there are few caves in Texasopentothepublic. For years, cavers have worked to develop relationships which allow for access to these private caves.Asa landowner gets to knowonegroup or individual,itisoften easier to have all access go throughthecavers.Insomecases, the land owner has turned over complete control to the group. Honey Creek Caveisanongoing work projectandallaccessisarranged through the San Antonio cavers. This system works fairly wellaslong as most cavers feel they have access through the arranagement.Thehistory oftheHoney Creek Cave workwillbe discussed.The"caver-manager system"willbe examinedinmore detail.
341989Cave Management ProceedingsPanelDiscussion:GovernmentandPrivateLand CaveRelationseditedbyJay Jorden Editor's Note:What followsisa transcript of a meeting during the1989National Cave Management Symposium at New Braunfels, Texas. On Thursday, Oct.5,1989,Ron Kerbo of the National Park Service led the "Panel Discussion: Government and Private Land Owner Cave Relations" following a lun cheon at Guadalupe StatePark near Boerne.RonC.Kerbo:Carlsbad Caverns National Park: If you lookinyour little gUidebook here, you'll see that what we're going to discussissomething that's very near and dear tomyheart, especially during the last six months. Anditisverymildlystated herebysaying that from the early proolemsinthe Mammoth Cave, Ky., area up to today, there have historically been problems between federal land management agencies and the private sector, and that sometimes those relation ships have been strained.Sothereare repre sentatives here from three government land use agencies: the Texas Parks andWildlifeDepartment (TPWD), the American Cave Conservation Association(ACCA),and then there's George Veni. ...Sohe and Russ andJeanneGurnee and Jim Goodbarwillpartici pate. And wewilltryto address some of our concerns andtellyou of our experiences. I think the way to start thisisbyway of introduction, and thenI'lllet each of the rest of these people introduce themselves and make a state ment. And then we would like to justopenitup for general discussion. Many of you know that at Carlsbad (Caverns National Park) for the past two years, since1986,therewasa cave discovery that has turned out tobea relatively major cave.Itisnow longer and deeper than Carlsbad Cav erns.Itisinacomerof the park that contains surface-designated wilderness. The cave comes within1,200feet of a common boundary with the Bureau of Land Management.Ithas also extruded out into a non-wilderness road corri dor between two segments of designatedwilderness. Thereisalso a little north of the cave and a little west, private land around. We thought the park service thought that having that cave designated as wilderness. But as with a lot of good ideas, perhaps we should have thought aboutita little more. Butina proposal, we suggested not an official proposal, just some material that went to our legislative people and to our regional office that this wilderness would have the opportu nity to expand.Itwould get bigger as the cave was explored. Where else besides undergroundisitpossible for wildernesstoget bigger? On the surface, everything seems tobeshrinking, getting smaller and impacting the natural en-
vironment.Butina cave, atleastphysically,. the wilderness had the opportunitytoexpand.Now,ifthe surfaceisdesignated wilderness,whybother to have the cave designated as wilderness,belowthe surfacewilderness?Well,whatifitleftthe protectionofthe surface wilderness;woulditcontinuetobewilderness evenifitleftthe protectionofthe surface wilderness parkland? Those were someofour concerns, but then thelocalcommunity and business leaders thought thatifthe caveextruded under their land,wouldthat mean that the surfaceoftheir landwouldbedesignated as wilderness automatically as this cave came underit?Sothere arose, as theysay,ahueandcrythat the park service just wanted to take thelandadjacenttoittheBLMland,forest service andus,and privateland-bysurveyingthe cave beneath these variouslands.Relationships became..,well,itstarted outwithjust afewlettersinthelocalpaper about those "land grabbing,idiotparkservicepeople out there."Andthat expandedtosome people going through ourfiles,findingwhat they thoughtwasveryincriminatingevidence that anNPSofficialwasallegedlyalobbyist,thathehadallegedlyliedto Congress andwasa propogandist....So aswetryto explainthisunderground wilderness concept,wejust got ourselves into deeper and deeper trouble anditresultedinthe formulationofa task forceinthelocalcommunity, appointedbythe mayor to examineallthe evidence ... and then theywouldmoveonfromthere to grander things,likedeveloping the cave(commercially).Sotosaythat the relationship between thelocalcommunity and the parkwasstrainedwasto putitmildly.Whatwethought thatweshould have done, andinfacthad done,wastogoto thelocalcommunity anditscivicclubsandgive35talksabout the conceptofundergroundwilderness.Butwhatwedidn'tknow,whatI didn'tknow,wasthe intense reactiontothat word, "wilderness." I hadnoideahow people wouldreact; hadwecalleditan"areaofcriticalenvironmental concern," or hadwecalledita "primitive area," orhadwecalleditanything,butwhenwecalleditwilderness and whenwesaiditwouldget bigger -wow!I think that those peoplemustnotbefromthisplanet because they so abhoritina natural state. I think theymustcomefroma placecalled"Plastic Land."ButI'm digressingfromthisrelationship.Anyway,ithas gotten worse and worse and worse. And Iwillcomebackalittlelater and answer any questions aboutit.Butsufficeittosaythat this task force'sfindings and Iwasa member of the task force, askedtoparticipateitinbythe mayor.AndIwastheonly... no, there weretwooutofthe 10ofuson the task force who said the cave oughttobeleftalone.Andthe others reportedtheythought thatweoughttoseek appropriate usesforthe cave, evenifthat meantdevelopingitand delegislating the surface aswilderness. Sowereallyopened up a box there, andweopeneditupby,I believe, being ignorantofthe reactionitwouldhave and notknowingthelocalcommunity. Ignoranceisokaybecauseitcanbereviewedbyeducation,butthat's oneofthe biggest problems I seebetween caves and the private sector under standing them,isthat thereisno constituencyforcaves, other than the cavers, mostofwhom want to keep them a secret and nottellanyone aboutthem.Sowhenyouapproach someonewitha concern about a cave, they don't evenknowwhat they are:they think they are nasty, eerie,dirtyplaces under the ground whereyouought not to go, or that they
36should have trails and lights putinthem, and that there's no medium ground for consider ing the management of that cave.LarrySansom:U.S. Forest Service: I think Ron putitinvery good perspective, that the controversyinCarlsbad really stemmed from the word "wilderness." We have ours, and have had some controversy, before Lechuguilla was discovered, and thatwaswith our wilder ness study area.There'sa good number of cavesinthat wilderness study area; offhand, I don't know how many therearethat are there. The caves were not a part of the controversy then, not up front at least.Thecontroversy was that the local folksfeltthat wilderness was a bad word there'd been enough ofitdesignated throughout the west so the Forest Service changed its recommendations on wilderness because of the public outcry.Wefound that wilderness had a bad connota. tion there. Somyrecommendationis,that as a result of our experience, as much as I know about Lechuguilla, that you should take wilder ness out of consideration up front, and decideifyou are talking about a cave or on the surface. You could take that out of consider ation up front, and talk about what that re source exactly needs. And then, when you go throughallthe considerations, wilderness could be the best way to handleit,and that could be the result at the end. And hopefully, that would take out some of the hard feelings that have been inthe wilderness battle these days. I think the lines have been drawn so clearly ...MikeHerring:Texas Parks and Wildlife Department: The issue goes beyond caves, really. The issue revolves around two areas. As1989CaveManagementProceedingsa land acquisition person, I've dealt with land acquisition for15years. I've dealt with a lot of landowners and sensitive situations. And I've seen a lot of these situations come and go. We can talk about wilderness, but it's not the sameinTexas asitisinthe west. Take awildand scenic river; throw that outinTexas and you're dead.Theproblemiscommunication and education, and our own planning process. ... Ron, the park service should be learning from their past experiences. ...Thedepart ment makes the same mistakes. This West Texas situation therewasa situationinWest Texas where abillwaspassed by a local congressman to do a study of the Davis Moun tains area for preservation alternatives.Ithap pened to coincide with the purchase of Big Bend State Natural Area, whichwasvery well politically laid, which absolutely has to be done, especially when working with rural West Texas counties anywhere. You have tolayboth the groundwork with your local people so that they understand what you are doing, but more importantly, you have to deal with the local politicians. You havetohave the support of that local senator,thatlocal congressman, because those are the people who make the difference. We had that groundwork laid before we acqUired theBigBend Ranch.Therewere some dealscut, needless to say.Incoming back, the Park Service talked to us. They knew from us the situation they were walking intoinWest Texas, but did not benefitfrom past experience and did not take the advice about what they were going into. Hence, that study that study that was publicly funded -onepublic hearing, andindefense of the local landowners, those local landowners, regard less of where they are, have a sayinwhat goes
onintheir areas. Regardless of whether they represent five or one persons, whatever hap pensintheirareahas an impact on them: economically, socially, financially, heritage, tradition. West Texas people turned outinthe town of Fort Davis,SOO-plusstrong. They could notfitinto the church. They were standing outside, lookinginthe windows, and inside testifying. Withonepublic hearing, the next day that appropriation for that Federal studywascancelled, and the Congress re neged, and the moneywaspulled back and that studywaskilled. That into acquisition, butwasmishandled.Thekey,inmy estimation,isin communication.Thestate rivers protectionbillwasintroduced this last session.Theinformation, the rumors, the misinformation gets out to the people, to the public, to the potential beneficiaries of the proposal. They develop their own opinions, and their own network, which works much better than any official network. And once those incorrect opinions have been made, amongst the opponents, no matter what youtrytodo to combat that, they have been made.There'sno way to correct that. So thebestway to fight thatisto get the correct informa tion out.Inthe case of the wilderness designa tion, we could use some other word, some other designation and have thought that out so that our information was made before the public made its own opinions.Tome, sharing the proper informationinas public and asopena forum as possibleisthe key.DavidFoster:American Cave Conservation Association: I havetoagree withMikeonthat. Iamnot totallywellversedonthe Lechuguilla situation. But we have problems between the Park Service and the public in the Mammoth37 Cave area.Inthe American Cave Conserva tion Association, we are typically caughtinthe middle. We have a lot of friends on both sides and we have to figure out what thebestthing to dois.They flirted with the underground wilderness concept out there a numberofyears ago, butitwouldn'tflybecause the people were convinced thatitwould hurt their business, their tourist business. The under ground wilderness designation would protect areas of the Park, butitwouldn't bringintourists.Ofcourse, we've got a number of other problems out there. We've got that sewer project, whichismakinganinteresting topic. There's a situation where you've got a lot of sewage that's polluting a national park, and the controls fortheproject to prevent itare in the hands of local politicians, mostly, with the park service only havingonerepre sentative, less than one-fourth representation on that. And it's really in the park service'sbestinterest it's not just the park service we're talking about but a number of agencies to get out and educate those people and to build bridges bridges of communication with these peoplesothat they understand thatthiSisnot just somebody who came in from the outside thatisgivingthema hard time. They have a job to do but they are also interestedinthe community.Somany of these people haveanattitude with the parks that they are not really interestedinbeing a part of the commu nity. And there's very much that attitudeinthe Mammoth Cave Community, and these people can really help you outifyou have a problem,ifyou can build those bridges and get behind that. We recently have had a landfill issueinour county, which threatens Mammoth Cave National Park's water supply, or may threatenitwedon'tknow yet. Some800citizens
38came out to protest that landfill. So they're not always going to be screaming about your environmental protection efforts. Sometimes they'll beonthe same side of you andifyou can use those same things the groundwater arguments you can build bridges, start making friends and start educating them about what this groundwater conservationisallabout.Kerbo:I thinkitisreally important that everyone up here gets a chance to say some thing, and then give you the chance to ask questions.Sowe'll go over here toJeanne(Gurnee) and then we'll go over to George.JeanneGurnee:Cave Management Associ ates Inc.: It's unfortunate that I don't representanyonegroup, although I dointhe sense that I have been for many years a member of the National Speleological Societyina landowner situation andallthese things arewellknown amongus.I have been an environmental commissioner and worked with historians and other figuresingovernment, so that I've gone through those kinds of hearings and know how agonizing they can be. And I've also worked with National Caves Association. Harry and Clara Heideman were some of the found ing members of this group that's trying very hard to represent show cavesinthebestway that they can for business interests. So I feel that I have a perspective and can approachitfrom the standpoint of some of the things we have been involvedinwithout partisanship or bias. And I think it's very, very hardforanyoneinan agency situation to not have bias. I don't mean biasinan unpleasant way, but you know how you feel aboutitalready. But thebigchallengeisto show that there are a number of ways to go, and that's why Iamvery much1989CaveManagementProceedingsinfavor of whatMikesaid, that it's a diplo matic job, it's a listening job, and it's an informing job. I see that so many of you have gone through this, that I shouldn't be doing the talking. You should. These are the things that are going to keep a project moving along.Itwon't happen as fast as we wantitto. Cavers particularly can be impatient at times. But from what I've seen, it's a case of moving on, being persistent, with as much background and information as you can bring to it, so I very much support what Mikeissayingintackling these problems.Russell Gurnee:National Speleological Foundation: Ownershipisa basis for a lot of the things we've talked about. A number of years ago, I chaired a panel on cave gating, so we had a whole number of people-caverstalking about gates. And so I said,'Howdo you feel about public lands and cave gates?Howmany feel we ought to have gates on public land caves?' A few hands went up around the room. And so then, I said, 'Okay, now we're going to visualize that everyoneinthis room has a favorite cave. Okay, now you've won the lottery, and you ownit.But you can only go there once a month because it's out of state. Now, how many want to put a gateonthat cave?' And everyone's hand went up.Sowe're talking about whether you ownitorsomeone else ownsit.And here, we are talking about ownership that's difficulttocom prehend. The government ownsitso it'smycave. And that's difficult comprehension. But when you own the caveandyou're going to put a gate onit,the difference whether it's on public land or you ownitisreally the basis of what we're talking about today on public and private lands.
JimGoodbar:Bureau of Land Manage ment: Well, I think that from the bureau's standpoint, we are a multiple-use agency and there are a lot of competing uses out there. I think, re'-emphasizing what Russ has just said and what Mike was saying earlier this morn ing, wearea familyinthe United States, and whether youliveonthe east coast or on the west coast,orrightinCarlsbad, New Mexico, that to develop a relationship with thePark Service, theBLMorthe National Speleologi cal Society, thatthememoranda of under standingarea very good way to do this.Itsets out very clearly whoisto participateinthat memorandum of understanding and,inturn, whateachof the participantswillprovide for thatendresult.That'swhere you get down to the specifics of what are we after, who's going to be involved,andthen the public participa tion of howarewe going to get together to workonandpolish this memorandum of understanding where it's acceptable to every one?JerryTrout:U.S. Forest Service: I'm going to admit who I am. I notice these other people haven't introduced themselves.Soyou'll know who to blameifI say something wrong. I'm Jerry Trout, with the U.S. Forest Service.Someoneelse had mentioned about expertsinthebeginning.Mytitleisnot expert, it's cave resource technician. I've been to a lot of these meetings where it's one-upmanship and the first questions cavers askis,'What caves have you been in?' I'm not here to impress you, but hopefully can share whatmyexperiencehas been. I have been caving for about35years. I was lucky enough and blessed enough to have been cavinginthe Guadalupe Moun tains for about10years, before anyone else39discoveredit,so I was pretty much on the ground floor there. With the Forest Service,itismore or less mandatedbyNEPA, National Environmental Protection Act, that we go through a process of involving the public before any decisionismade.AsI understand it, that has not been the outgrowth of the Forest Service or anyone else making the wrong decisions but making the decisions without looking at other options and without asking the public of the surrounding area aboutit.Sowe are mandatedatthis point to do that with every project we are involved in, whether we are trying to do grafitti removal, or restoration, or whatever.Oneof thebig prolr lems you have here,ifyou get a big rain and a lot of mud and it's justlikea big commode,itwashesitout. That's not our situation. People go into our caves and get dusty and dirty and then they go elsewhere and clean themselvesoff.We have one situationinone cave, near the entrance, where the floor has risenfivefeetinthe last20years. They get dirty, they come out and golikethis ... and that has createdfivefeet of extrafill.Sothat's one of our problems. And we would like to have your water.Sowhat we do -I even brought one of these we have a calendar like this. We've reached a point where this summer, we had an average offivegroups of cavers a day we deal with. Each one of those groupsisan average size of about six, so we're dealing with about30cavers a day who use our caves.Sothat's going to be one of our major problems,isspreading that traffic out and being sure that when people do go caving that they have a quality and a safe experience while they are there.
40GeorgeVeni:SanAntonio:Iwasasked totryto represent the interests of the private landowner. I have workedasa geologist con sulting with both private landowners with caves and with the publlic cave owners aswell.Andoneof the things I see that'5a long-term problem that's never beenfullyresolved, and impacts Lechuguilla going under from one property to another, that impacts the Honey Creek (Water Cave) situation going from pri vate land onto public land, and that's tying togetherina legal fashion the relationship between what's going on underground and what's going on above the ground. Who owns the cave?JohnnyGoss owns the entrance to Honey Creek Cave. Does that give the (Texas) Parks and Wildlife Department the right to the portion of the cave that goes underneathitsproperty, even though there's no entrance there? Legally, that hasn't been resolved yet. It's an old problem that's been argued out and screamed about, and shotgun battles have been going on for years, but that's notfullyresolved. Water rights issues are a very similar thing. And using Honey Creek asanexample because it's a very local cave -I don't want to harp onitbut the parks department can be concerned, thatifJohnny's pumping water out of the cave, that water's going downsteam and so it's affectingus.InTexas,itsays thatifyou're using groundwater, you have the right to pump as much as you please.Sothat means that at the part of the cave that goes off Johnny's land, they have the right to pump as much as they want, regardless of what hap pens downstream. And that's the way Texaslawisset up. So what happensinNew Mexico? Lechuguilla Cave might go under theBLMproperty, butitdoesn't have an entrance there. Of course,inthis situation,itmight1989CaveManagementProceedingshave another entrance. I understand they're digginginanother cave and might, ah, con nect into the cave from another entrance. Butifthey don't haveanentrance, does that giveIthem the right to claim thisastheir cave? How.1do mineral rights apply to caves? How do water rights apply to caves? These are ques tions that need to be dealt withinthis legal sense. A gentleman herewastalking about that small minority that gets very upset when the park service or government wants to do their thing, but oftentimes it's that smallminority that's going to be directlyorindirectly impacted. Weallthink it's a good idea when we're stuckintraffic to say,'Hey,let's put a new highwayinhere.' But you're mad as hell when they tell you, 'We're going to put this through yourlivingroom, so you need to move.' You say, 'Well, this house has beeninmyfamily for150years.'Sowhen it comes down to a personal level, you tend to get hot aboutit.And what rights does the state,orgovernment, haveinterms of emminent de main, when claiming the property for the public good. So thesearea lot of problematic questions that go beyond any individual cave or site, and would have to be worked out by a state-by-state basin on mineral and water rights. When I was working on my bachelor's degreeingeology, someone suggested that what would be an excellentfieldto go intoisto go ahead and get your Ph.D.ingeology and then become a lawyer. Because groundwater lawisthis bag of worms that noonehas messed with. Noonehas a good handle onit.We have a lot of lawyers out there trying to work without a good feel for geology. We have a lot of geologists trying to make some kind of legal statements withoutanunderstanding of thelaw.And that's something that's going to take
a lot of work and a lot of time. It's notjusta groundwater problem, but our overall prolr lem, whether it's wilderness or not. Once you haveanunderground wilderness or a stream underground, what effect does that have on the political boundary aboveit?Kerbo:Letmejustsay afewthings totryto wrap this up so we can get out of here, although I understand we've been given until 2 o'clock. There aren't any good guys or bad guysinallof this, I think. It's more a matter of perception on what you're trying to do. For instance, I wouldn't wantitconstrued that I would apologize for advocating wilderness, because I'm a Federal employee. I didn't see that my status as a Federal employee had anything to do withmyfreedoms as an Ameri can.So,Idon'tbelieve we made a mistakeinour planning for the cave. We certainly made a mistakeinour approach toit,and informing the public aboutit.But they have economic interests, they have personal interests and biases, and sowillpeople who work for Federal agencies. Whether state agencies or conservation groups, everyone has an idea of the proper way to doitand how to proceed withit.What Itryto do, what wealltryto do,isthe best job that we can. Butitseems to me that, upon listening here, that we're supposed to solve these problems. But I think the solu tion to some of these might be to getridof the National Park Service andifyoufinda cave, keepitto yourself. (laughter). No, that's not what we're going to do. Anyway, does anyone out there have any questions or comments?(WilliamElliott of Austin mentions that Roy Davis, a commercial cave owner, advised the mayor's task forceinCarlsbad not to commer-41cialize Lechuguillla.)Kerbo:That's exactly right. And what has grown outofthis,isthat twobillshave now been passedbythe Senate, one of whichisto establish a National Cave Research InstiMeinthe Guadalupe Mountains,inCarlsbad Cav erns National Park, andNo.2isabillto re evaluate and to do a new general management plan for Carlsbad Caverns National Park, whichitvery badly needs.Soallof that controversy has led to two very valuable, positive steps.(Anaudience member made another com ment about Davis saying that Lechuguilla wasn't worth a "plugged nickel" for develop ment.)Kerbo: )"hat's true, but I might also say that that (decision not to proceed)wasalso the result of everything else thatwashappening. The task force totally impeacheditsown witness and went offinits own direction, saying'fillthe cavefullof trails' and such. Therewasno reason to their logic.(Twoother audience members make com ments, including details on the Lechuguilla debate and problems withSanAntoniourbandevelopmentinkarst regions and pollution at Horse Cave, Ky., with developers having ignored potential problems which later came home to roost.)David Foster:I'm not quite as prepared to goasfar as Ronisand abolish the National Parks. I think we need our national parks but we need to quit thinking about our national parks as islands that are separated from the
42rest of the world. That's our probleminthe Mammoth Cave area, that asfaras research funding and everything else goes, that it's been very hard to get government help to do the kinds of things off the park that are necessary to protect the park.Ifyou don't have that kind of thing when you have a natural resource and virtuallyallof your re charge comes from off the national park, you really have no way of protecting that resource.Kerbo:Allright, ...bythe way, it's only the battlefields and recreation areas that I don't give a guano about. (Laughter).(Anaudience question refers to contingency planningbygovernment agencies.)Kerbo:Yes, each agency has processes Steps 1, 2 and 3but that does not mean that you are not going to run into opposition along the way. But yes indeed, there are processes that they go through.Trout:Justquickly, the NEPA process I mentioned a while ago, Step 1isthe project proposal. Step 2isthe reconaissance. Go and look atit.Iswhat you are looking at what you intend topropose?Itispossible?Isitreason able? Take the public with you. What are the issues? What are the options? What are the concerns? What are the opportunities? Anditisa ... 13-step process, with Step13monitoringwhat you did. And I think Step12isinitiate the project. Thatwaswhat Iwasaddressing a while ago, that we are mandated at this point.(Anaudience member mentions the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act and land man agement agencies' role. Closing caves to pro tect themisnot the answer, he said. The public1989CaveManagementProceedingsmost often heard fromincontroversiesisthat section directly affected by a change. Elliott then mentions the accessabillty to Lechuguilla, noting that mostly experienced cavers get access, and adding that alloVJing members of the general public inside at some point who could relate their experience to other non cavers would be useful.)Kerbo:And we've done that. Understand that we have75cavesinthe park. Two of them areopento anyone.Oneofthemisevenopento wheelchairs. Carlsbad Caverns and New Cave. Then we have10caves where you can get a permit and go caving.Infact,oneof those you can even go caving with scouts in. Then we have Lechuguilla. Thereisa problem with doing what you said. But we wanted to do what you said.Sowe sent in a video team. And some of the finest cave photographersin.theworld have beeninthe cave.Allyou have to do to interact with thisistobe able to rappel down the drops and havethestamina to stayinthe cave.Sowhat did the video concentrate on and what did the still photographers con centrate on? The Chandalier Ballroom. You don't even have to have seenitto imagine that thatissome kind of a spectacular place. (pictures were taken) whereallthe draperies were, whereaUthe rimstonewas,whereallthe hangy-downs and sticky-ups were. No body took pictures of the thousands of feet between there that didn't have anything.Sothat constiuency, as wetrytotell thembyshowing them the beauties, as a non-eaver would think ... When people lookatthat shot of Honey Creek that George took, withallthe glistening water and British techniques and bare(flash)bulbs, here's this magnificent pas sage. But you don't seetheperson's face. You
don'tsee they're ready tofallontheir faceinthewaterifthat idiot takes one more picture.Sowe createthese beautiful picturesandthen we show them to people, but we say youcan'tgo unless you can getinthere. So part of the problem VJith Lechuguillawasconcentratingontheaesthetic valuesinthat cave rather than its geologic, mineralogic importance tooiland gas exploration,andthe fact that developing the cave would destroy the very things that we ... we havedonethis to ourselves, cavers, by concentratingonthebeauty, by not wanting people to know what's in them,andthen when they go totheshow caves,andwe showthemthese pretty thingsinthe VJild caves, then they think that you can necessarily build a trail into everyoneof them. And probablysomeonelike Cousteau hasdoneas much toopenthe eyes of the public to the plight of the seas as any living person.Isthere anyoneinthe caving community who out of selfishnessinwanting to keep caves to himself, would want toopenthemup to the public through a medium like Backpacker magazine? No,because openingthemupisgoing to destroy the cave.Socaves are a very unique part of the resourceandinany park, stateornationalorwhereveritis,that we have to drawn back as a cultural resource, like apotoranarrow point,orwe'regoing to destroy the thing.Soit's difficult to develop that constituencyinthe broad sense of the word because when you get down to specifics, halfthecaversinthe world are going to start calling you a heretic. And it's time to cut it off.Theseare emotionally charged issuesandI'm glad we hadtheoppor tunity to talk aboutthemtoday. And I VJish we had more time. I'dbeglad to talk VJith anyone further about these. And anyone else up here (panelists) VJiIl beglad to discuss this for the43rest of the week thatwe'regoing tobehere. I VJish we had more time, we could then talk more about these things. But we don't have any more time. Just30seconds.Foster:Letmetake30seconds tojustmen tiononething about that constituency thing. Carlsbad Cavernsisuniqueinthat. But a large percentage ofthe cave areas that we do have also have the opportunity to develop a con stituency.Thatistheir relationship VJith the groundwater.Sothatisa way that you can developthatpublic constituency, by convinc ingthemthat by protecting the caves, they protect their groundwater.Kerbo:That'sall.Thankyou.(Applause.)
441989CaveManagementProceedingsRESTORATIONOFSHOWCAVESbyRussellGurneeABSTRACTTechnologyisavailable to the engineer, designer, and contrac tortoprovide safer and more satisfying conditions for the visitor, but any modificationsinthe cave must consider the impact on the environment. This requires knowledge outsjde of the traditional tradeskillsand engineering handbooks. The decision to modify a caveissometimes madebymanagers and administrators withouttheadvice and recommendations of experienced professionals. Careful review of the Design, Construction, and Display aspects of any changes should be made before any workisbegun.Ecl1tor. Note: Reggie Wuest of Natural Bridge Caverns and Jack Burch of Caverns of Sonora presented talks on commercialization, including trail development. Before a decisionismade to convert a natural cave to a show cave, the owner should ask the following questions and be able to answer yes toallof them:Isthe cave scenic, superior and safe?Isthe location convenient to travelers?Isthe site accessible and large enough to accommodateallvisitorsincomfort? Can I obtain profes sional adviceinthe design of trails and lightinginthe cave? Am I prepared to provide continu ous maintenance, security and control of ac cessforthe protection and preservation of the cave? Their oral presentations addressed the questions above aswellas discussing the details of engineering,lighting and trail devel opment. What followsisMr.Gurnee's pre sentation. There are hundreds of thousands of natural cavesinthe land areas of the world, but only about700of them have been modified to permit public exhibition as Show Caves. This modification, which provideseasyaccess for the visitor, variesinsophistication from self guided "spelunking" tours to visits using mo torized vehicles and trams. The selection of caves for public exhibi tionisgenerally based upon some significant and outstanding feature withinthecave that setsitapart from other caves. The first caves to be "exhibited" were probably the painted caves of prehistory where the use of artificial light permitted artists to mark with natural earth colors the walls and ceilings of deep caves.Itisnot clear whether the drawings were for exhibitionorreligiouspurposes,butitisevident that they were visitedbymany thousands of persons who left visible trails worn into solid rock.
Theexhibition of caves forthebeautyofarchitectureoccurredat the endoftheMiddleAgesin ElD'ope when caves located on the property-of locallords were visitedas "curiosi ties." Thisledto the popularityofartificialgrottoesbuiltinthe gardens of castles. These representations of nature were enhancedbyactual stalactites and stalagmites takenfromnatural caves. The practice continuedfor several hundredyearsandwasunfortunately a factorinthe destruction of manyfine caves that were stripped of their decorations. The "developed" caves, exploitedbythe gentry, were onlyforthe enjoyment of afew.Therewasno tourism asweknowIttoday. Only the wealthy aristocrats were able tovisitand with he exception of caves near the spas, watering places, and stops on the "Grand Tour," these private show placesdidnot provide employmentforthelocalpeople .. Other caves were openedbythe clergy as parishioners made pilgrimages to the sites, but the caves were not open toallpeople.Itwasnotuntilthe beginningofthe 18th century that a middle-class merchant group aroseinEurope and challenged thefeudalsystem of land ownership and church authority. The building of roads, canals, boats, and improved transportationfacilitiesgenerated a new industry of tourismforamuch larger group of people. The advent of the railroad and the subsequent industrial revolutioninthe 19th century opened new meansoftravel and created a generation of mobile common people. The most recent advancedinthiscenturyusingautomobiles, airplanes, and super highways have made the most remote placesinthe world accessible. This revolution of mass travel has an impact on natural resourcesineach country and oneverycontinent.45Thestudyof cavesisa comparatively recent science.Earlyinformation about the underground camefromthe mining industry where natural caves were considered worthlessasthey hadlittleeconomicvalue.This negativeviewchanged aspubUcinterestin caves grew; and severa! caves, discoveredbymining, were opened as tourist attractions.BlueJohnMineInYorkshire, England,wasreportedly minedbyRomans two thousand years ago, and three hundred years agoBritishminersfollowingthe same veins discovered the main chambers exhibited today asBLUEJOHNCAVERNS.Scientific interestincaveswasledbynaturalists who specialized ingeology and archaeology.Mostly "gentlemen" enthusiastls, they stirred up great controversy Inthelastcenturywithdiscoveries of early man that predated the concept of theBiblicalflood.This heretic discoverywasfocused on the siteofKents HoleInTorquay, England.indisputable evidenceofman's occupancyofthe cave before thelastIceagecovered the BritishIsleswasfound and started a search through out Europeforother artifacts. Today,KENTSCAVERNisa show cave featuring ancient bones and weaponsinsitu. Today speleologyisa recognized scientificstudythat touchesallaspectsofcaves,karst, and caveUfe;and thousandsofpapers, books, and photographs have beenpubUshedaround theworld.Inaddition to thescientificaspect, thereisa technical area of interest that has attracted thousandsofpeople to map, explore, and photograph caves. This weddingofscience/sport interest has resultedInama teur groups springing upInforty-fivecountries reporting on work doneIntheirlocalcaves. Thisisserious work, butifallof the dedicated
46speleologists were counted, they would numberless than100,000ina world offivebillion people.Thepublished output of these people and organizations circulates primarly among themselves. Their reports are available to the public but are usually so specialized that they have limited readership. Some caves are so remarkable that they have become national treasures for the citi zens who now take prideintheir exhibition. POSTOJNA CAVE, Yugoslaviawasfirst ex hibitedin1818asa show cave andisstillrespected asoneof the great caves of the world. Millions of people have visited this caveinthe past170years, and the impres sions receivedbythose visits have influenced attitudes about caves for generations.MAMMOTH CAVE and CARLSBAD CAVERNSinthe United States have been seenbymore than forty million people since they wereopened.JENOLAN CAVE, Australia; EISRIESENWEL T, Gce Cave), Austria; AVENO'ORGNAC, France; HOLLOCK CAVE, Switzerland; GUACHARO CAVE, Venezuela; and CACAHUAMILPA, Mexico areallfamous cavesincountries where they are located. Each of these caves represents to manymillions of people an impression of what a caveisand lookslikebut eachisdifferent and features a special aspect of speleology.Thecurrent ability to travel has made natural attractions points of destination for tours and organized outings. Because of the costs and time limitations, only a cursory isgiven of the cave's features.Itisleft to the scientist and naturalist tostudy,analyze, and public scholarly reportsinscientific journals. Unfortunately, these are readbyonly a small number of people; visitors outnumber scientificreadership a thousand-to-one. Four-color 1989Cave Management Proceedingsbrochures are more attractive than charts and tables; legends andfolktales more interesting than geologic history. A vacationer wants to be entertained, not lectured, so the cave manager concentrates on the pleasurable aspectsof the trip. Show caves are only a minisculepartof the current tourist industry, but they havealsobeen affectedbya great surge of visitors. Many show caves have been overwhelmedbynumbers of guestsinexcess of the physical carrying capacity of the tours. This has caused unpleasant personal experiences which destroyanotherwise enjoyable trip. Most of the major show caves of the world are ownedbythe state. They usually have park status andareadminiSteredby specialists with career incentives and direct authority to protect and preserve the cave. Usually the cave has beenanattraction for many years and the modifications made within the cave (lights, trails, and stairways) predate the present administration.Thecondition of outmoded facilitiesispresentinmost show caves today whether private or public.Theneed for conservation of these caves requires the immediate attention ofallconcernedifwe hope to pass on this natural heritage to our children. Recent advancesintechnology provide many more tools for the designer, engineer, and contractor. Periodic reviews of cave lighting, trails, and safety conditions should be madebyany show cave managementona regularbasis.Ifany major workisplanned within the cave that might change the to!1l' or carrying capacity of the cave the following steps should be taken to avoid damage to the site.Theconservation and preservation of
any naturalpubUcsitereUesuponmaintenance. This maintenanceincludes adminis tration, security, and protection.Thisresponsibilityrests upon threeunderlyingfactorsthat support the conditions necessaryforoptimum sustained useofthecavebythepublic.These factors,likethelegsofa threeleggedstool, areDESIGN, CONSfRUcnON, ANDDISPLAY.They areequallysupportiveofthe whole and mustbeconsideredwheneverpolicydecisions aremadeaffectingthe cave.Ifany are neglected; the protection and securityofthe cavemightbejeopardized.1.Design:Before changes aremadewithinthecavethere shouldbeinputandadviceofspecialistswhoareknowledgeableofallthe conditions affecting thecave.ThisIncludesengineering, hydrology,biology,geology, speleology, and environmentalimpact.Plans,specifications, and cost estimates are partofthe design stage and are partofthedecisionmakingprocess.2.Construction:Workwithinthecavemusthavecarefulsupervision andberespectfuloftheenvironment. Safeworkingconditions are essential to preventinjuryand constructionmaterialusedmustnot adverselyaffectthecave.Onlyskilledworkmen shoulddoeletricalandstructuralwork;onlyexperienced artisansshouldattempt to restorecavefeatures.3.Display:Exhibitionofacaverequiresskillsnot47usedInthefirsttwo stages. Interpretative programs,guidetraining, supervision ofpersonnel, andschedulingareall people-oriented skillsnecessary to administer ashowcave.Marketing,publicrelations,advertising,andpublicityarealsoessentialtoa masterplanfortheguidanceofalladministrators.Ifthe managementofanexistingshowcavedoes not consideralloftheaboveunderlyingrequirements whenever amajorrevisionismadewithinthecave,therewillbeanimbalance.Allthree conditionsmustbeaddressedandappliedIfthe administrationIstobeproperly supported. Thelogisticsofmovingthousandsofpeople through acaverequires organizationalskillandadministrative expertise. Theshowcavemanager becomes expertinhandlingpeople and controls the access to thecave.Healsodecidesupon the balance betweenenvironmental pressures tolimitaccess and the tourist demandsforIncreasedvisitation.Lefttohisowndevicesa manager caneasilyrationalizetohimself:"Iftheywant tobeentertained-provide entertainment.. "Thismightleadtodecisions that are detrimental to the cave, or thequalityofthecaveexperienceforthevisitor.The"enter tainment" quotientIsapowerfulargumentofpopular appeal. However,itisthe responsibilityofa prudent and responsible managertoconsideralldisplays,anecdotes, statementsoffact,and informationissuedbythe personnel and literatureofthecavetobefactualandcorrect.Thiswillassure that the tourwillbeinformative and "educational"aswellaspleasurable.
48 SUMMARY A show caveisa long-term investmentinour natural heritage. We may not see the changes that naturally occur in normal cave growth as they exceed the period of a lifetime; however, changes are possible with our present technologytopreserve (or destroy) any of the cave featuresatwill.We can duplicate them but we cannot create them exactly as they occur because we do not control time.Somespeleothems require thousands of years to form. Show cave managers should balance their desire for the public to be "entertained" with a responsibility to "educate" by stressing good consetvation practices. A careful peri odic review of the cave tour should be madebyallshow cave owners to seeifconditions can be improved. Thisisan opportunity to pro mote public awareness of the need for conser vation and protection of our natural cavesbypersonal example. Show caves provide an opportunity for the public to be introduced to an environment thatisunusual, mysterious, intricate, and in triguing.Itcan also be beautiful and awesome. This combination,ifpresentedina factual and interesting mannerwillalso be educational as well as entertaining. Review of the present conditions within existing show caves and preparing a plan using today's technology would be a good formula to follow to assure that the next generationwillbe able to enjoy these secret chambers of the underground. Russell Gurnee, 231 Irving Ave., Closter, NJ07624,November 3,1988,(presentedinPostonjna, Yugoslavia, November 11, 1988)1989Cave Management Proceedings
49Important MexicanFree-tailed BatColoniesin Texas: asummarybyRex Wahl ABSTRACTNoonehastrulysampledTexas caves unlestheyviewoneofthe most impressivecavesightsinthe state -alargebatflight.Bracken BatCaveisa superlativesitetoviewthis,sinceitcontains oneofthe larges coloniesoftheMexicanFree-tailedbatsintheworld.ItisalsohistoricaUyinteresting because sinceithasbeenusedforguanominingsince theCivilWar.Itisoneofthe caves usedbyDr.LytleAdamsduringhisProjectX-RayduringWorldWarn.Recently,a representativeofBatConservation International estimated the Bracken bat population at 35million.Othersignificantbat caves and details aboutfree-tailsarealsonoted. A summaryofthe largestMexicanFreetailed Bat ITadaridabrasiliensjsmexjcana)coloniesinTexasisprovidedforuseinplanningconservationofimportant breeding and roosting locationsforthis species.Thisinformationiscompiledfromvariousliterature sources, knowledgeableindividuals,fieldworkbytheAustinChapterofBatConservation International and The TexasNaturalHeritage Program. Reported colonysizesarebasedonthe cited source. Thereis,asyet,noreliablemethodofestimatinglargenumbers of batswithany confidence.Mostofthese estimates are based on measuresofroost area occupiedbybats (Constantine,1967).These numbersmustberegarded asmaximumestimates. TheMexicanFree-tailedBatisoneofthemostabundant batsinthe southwest,yetthere are relatively fewlargematernityroostsknown.Oneofthe functionsoflarge,tightlypacked roostsisconservationofenergylostasbodyheat, and, perhaps, elevationofroosttemperaturesfornurseries. Caves suitableforlargepopulations,withphysicalcharacteristicsthat areconduciveto heat retentionmaybescarce, and thus,limitthe numberofbatsinan area(Tuttleand Stevenson,1977).Texashasthemajorityofthelargefreetailedbat roosts(Eadset.al.,1957andDaviset.al.,1962).Severalwellknown,andlargeroostsinother stateshavesufferedmarkeddeclinesinnumbers.EagleCreekBatCaveinArizonadeclinedfroman estimated 30millionbatstonearzerointhe19705(McCracken,
501989Cave Management Proceedings Table1.Mexican Free-tailed Bat population size and status for Texas' largest colonies. Where two numbers are listed, the secondismore recent. Quany Colony 4 million Congress Ave. <1 million BridgeColonyBracken Cave1,532,31,41,81,31,21,6,71,2111,4Sourcel1957,19881958198819581988 198919884 million,oSize Date20million1957,198812million195810million19578 million1958<2 million198814million,19576 million198810million1958,19886 million1957,1988bat colony variedin size from about750,000inmid-summer to about 3 millioninlate summer.Itisnot known whether this differ ence represents actual changesinpopulationorerrors in earlier population estimation. The Devil's Sinkholeisnot a maternity colony. Population estimationiscomplicatedbythe 4 million 6 million, <1 million Davis Cave Rucker Cave Frio Cave Devil's Sink Hole Fern Cave Ney Cave Beaver Creek Cave James River Cave Valdina Sinkhole 1986).CarlsbadCavern's famed population declined fromanestimated 7 million to200,000inthe mid-1960s (Altenbach, et. at., 1979). McCracken (1986) documents loss of populations in Mexico aswell.The only documented colony abandonmentinTexasisValdina Farms Sinkhole, whichwasmodified to provide increased recharge to the Edwards Aquifer through surface water diversion, result inginthe loss of a Mexican Free-tailed Bat colony of an estimated 4 million bats,aswellasa colony of Ghost-faced Bats(Mormoopsmegalophyla)(Veni, 1987).AnotherlargeTexascolony, Fern Cave, hadanestimated 8 million bats, but the owner states thereare far fewer bats present now. A visit to Fern Cave this summer con firmed that there were fewer than a million bats present, and guano deposits do not indicate a large population (Wahl, pers. comm. 1988). Determination of colony declineiscomplicatedbytheabsence of any reliable estimation method, and lack of confidenceInthe large popula tion sizes reportedinthe earlier literature. For instance, the Devil's Sinkholeisreported to house up to 6 million bats, yet thereisno statement of how these numbers were determinedinreports citing this number (NPS, 1947). Wahl (1988) found that the Devil's SinkholeI
swellingofcave populationsinlate summer bymigrant batsfromother caves andyoung-ofthe-year recruited into the population. Areliablemethodofbat populationestimationisbeing developedbytheNationalPark Service(NPS,1987),but,isdependentonclearvideotapesofthe bat'soutflight,difficultto obtaininmany cases duetocharac teristics of the cave andoutflight(Fletcher,pers. comm., 1988).Allthe largestfree-tailedbat maternity caves inTexas remaininprivate ownership. Private owners areusuallyprotectiveoftheir bats and cave, often due to thevalueofguano producedbylarge numbersofbatsinthe roost. Carlsbad CavernsisprotectedbyNPS,yet the populationstilldeclined.Another large roostinNewMexico(3million)is "prO tected"byan agreement(non-binding?)withThe Nature Conservancy.Nootherlargematernity colonies are ownedbyanyconser vation agency or organization. The private ownersofthe Texas maternitycaves are tobecommendedfortheirablestewardshipofsuch an important resource. Recently, several conservation organizations have begun to planforthe continued protectionofseveral importantlargematernitycoloniesinTexas,incooperationwiththelandowners. The occurrenceofsomanylarge,and currently occupied, maternity roostsInTexas make possible theultimateprotectionofa significant portionofthe entire breeding rangeofa species. Organizations andindividualsinterestedIntrue protectionofananimal community,aswellasamajorportionofa specie's range, should consider theprotectionofalllarge maternity roostsinTexasasan obtainable long-rangegoal.51Sources:1-Davis,et.al.1962; 2Tuttle, pers. comm. 1988; 3-BCIAustin;4-Wahl,1988; 5-McCracken,pers. comm. 1988; 6-Kunz,pers. comm. 1988; 7-Elliott,pers. comm. 1988; 8-Veni1987.BIBUOGRAPHYAltenbach, J.S.,K.N.Geluso,andD.E.Witson. 1979. PopulationsizeofTadaridabrasiliensisat Carlsbad Cavernsin1973.Genoways,H.H. andRJ.Bakereds.1979.Biologicalinvestigationsin theGJadalupe MountainsNational Park, Texas. National Park Service ProceedingsandTransactions SeriesNumber4:341 348. Constantine,D.G., 1967.ActivitypatternsoftheMexicanfree-tailedbat.Univ.N.M.Bull.BioI.Ser.7:1-79.Davis,RB.,C.F.Herreid,IIandH.L.Short. 1962.Mexicanfree-tailedbatsinTexas.Ecol.Monogr.32: 311-346.Eads,RB., J.S. Wiseman andG.C.Menzies.1957. Observations concerning theMexicanfree-tailedbat, Tadarida mexicaoa,inTexas.Tex.Jour.Sci.9: 227-242. Humphrey,S.R1971. PhotographicestimationofpopulationsizeoftheMexicanfree-tailedbat,Tadaridabrasiliensjs.Am.MidI.Nat.86(l):220-223.McCracken,G.F.1986.WhyarewelosingourMexicanfree-tailedbats?Bats4(3}.NationalPark Service. 1947. Unpublished reportonDevil'sSinkhole. National
52Park Service, SantaFe,N.M.NationalPark Service. 1986.Finalreportfor "Research StudyofMethodologytoCountFree-UvingBats"Phasen.UnpublishedreporttoNationalParkService.Contractno.CX7029-Q025. Sept. 8, 1986. National ParkService,SantaFe,N.M.pp.23+appendix. Tuttle,M.D.andD.E.Stevenson. 1977. Variationinthecaveenvironment anditsbiologicalimplications.NationalCaveManagementSymposiumProceedings.AdobePress,Albq.,N.M.pp. 108-1989CaveManagementProceedings121.Veni,George, 1987.ValdinaFarmsSinkhole:HydrogeologicandBiologicEvaluation.UnpublishedReportforEdwardsUnderground WaterDistrict.SanAntonio,TX.Wahl,C.R.1988. Batcolonyobservations at the Devil's Sinkhole and Management and Interpretive Recommendations.UnpublishedreportforParksDivision,TexasParks andWildlifeDepartment,Austin,TX. -.I"'........ I tc&'& 'tt' ACKIN.ATCAV.c-.c..-r'.,.......r.-.,.,..,"...._"." _.. -
541989Cave Management ProceedingsEzell'sCavepresented byJimRobertson Texas Nature Conservancy Ezell's Cave:Just a holeinthe ground of the TexasHillCountry, Ezell's Caveisactually a window into the Edwards Aquifer and home to a group of diverse and highly specialized organisms.Location:The entrancetoEzell's Caveislocated on a 2 acre tract of land in the western part of San MarcosinHays County. Because of the delicate nature of the cave's ecosystem and the potential danger of personal physical in jury, the caveisnotopento the public.Historical Overview:Thecavewasdiscov eredin1870byGreenberryB.Ezellon property owned by J.H. Bishop.In1893,Ezellpurchased the cave and less than 1 acre of the land which contained its entrance.Heoperateditcommercially for several years. Truman T. Saltonstall bought the cave and land fromEzellin1929,believing that the air fromitwould help his lung condition. The first Texas blind salamander known to science was reported to have been from Ezell's Cave. Interestinthis salamanderwasshown not onlybyzoologists, butbyenterprising individuals who collected unusual animals for commercial sales.Thepresence of the salamander and other cave creatures, com bined withanurban location, caused an in crease in visitation aswellas vandalism and over-collecting from the1930sto the 1950s.In1955,the Texas Herpetological Society became so concerned over the decreaseinnumbers of the salamanders that they pur chased an easementtoprotectthecave and to regulate admission. For 5 years the Society's trustee, WilliamK.Davis, fought a losing battle with the vandals.In1962,J.T. Mostyn purchased the cave and part of the land for commercial operation, but, since the opera tion proved unsuccessful,hesealed the en trance and put the cave up for sale.ItwaspurchasedbyNorman Elder anditwasfrom Elder that the Nature Conservancy boughtitin1967.The cave entrancewasthen reopened and measures were instituted fortheprotec tion of its fauna.In1972,Ezell's Cave was designated by the National Park Service as a National Natural Landmark.Natural History Geology:Thecaveissituated at the edge of theSanMarcos Springs Fault of the Ba1cones Escarpment. The Edwards Plateauistothewest; the upper edge of the coastal plain to the east. Ezell'sisentirely in Edwards limestone of Lower Creta ceous age, and provides direct access into the San Marcos Pool oftheEdwards Aquifer.Itwasformed as a result of underground solu tion of blocks of the limestoneandthe subse quent collapse of various sections of overbur den into the solution voids. Enlargement continues to occur as falling rockisdissolved and moved awayinthe ground water.Thenarrow entranceis204.2meters above sea
level, about 6 meters above the first room and about15meters above the second. Water levels in the lower room fluctuate with chang ing rechargeand pumpage. The second roomisthe first ofaninterconnected series of chambers, most of which are waterfilled. Thefullextent of the cave has not yet been mapped.Aora:Thesurface vegetationistypical of the eastern edge of the Edwards Plateau. Clusters of live oaks, Texas persimmon, aromatic sumac, Ashe juniper, sugar hackberry, andhOgplum make up the bulk of the woody species.Thecleared areas are a riot of bluebonnets andgaillardiainthe spring. Dove weed, vetch, chili petin, and Englemann daisy are among the other forbs, and, together with three-awn,Johnsongrass, burmuda grass and other graminoids, form the herbaceous surface of the cave area.Fauna:Animal species associated with caves are loosely grouped based on their degree of cave adaptation. Troglobites are those cave dwelling organisms which complete their en tirelifecycle within the cave and cannot survive in surface environments. Troglophiles generally complete theirlifecycles within caves but can survive outside of them. Trogloxenes frequent caves, but complete at leastsomepart of theirlifecycle outside of cavesandgenerally feedinsurface habitats. Of the98species reported from Ezell's,16are troglobites,22are troglophiles, and25are trogloxenes.Therest are considered accidental.Thetroglobites include thewellknownTexasblind salamander(Eurycearathbuni),rare,endemicshrimps(Palaemonetesantrorum,andP.holthuisi),an amphipod(Stygonectes jlage//atus),a malacostracan(Mondode//a texana),and an endemic flatworm(Sphalloplana mohri).The55troglophiles include a beetle (Belonuchus moguinus), a scorpion(Vejovisn.sp.), and another salamander(Plethodonglutinosus), aswellas spiders, isopods, and booklice.Snails, cave crickets, frogs and a toad consti tute the trogloxene fauna. This rich endemic faunaischaracteristic of, and primarily specific to, theSanMarcos Pool of the large and complex Edwards Aquifer. Most of the spe cies of this animal community originateddUringthe Pleistocene, and the present unique eco logical assemblage has evolved slowly over thousands of years.Itssurvivalisdependent on the quality and quantity of the waterinthe Aquifer. The cave itselfisone accessing point through which the Aquifer's subterraneaninhabitants can be viewed and studied.Itishoped that such an importantlivingbarom eter to the environmental health of the regionwillcontinue to be viablewellinto the future since the survival of the cave organismsisintimately tied to that of the humans on the surface.Texas Nature Conservancy P.O. Box1440San Antonio, Texas78295(512)224-8774
561989Cave Management Proceedings rt. N,-. ...'"COUOln.T1:llAS .. UOOTOII r _SUlNC'I'OCToertloMT o K ..... C .. 'CITEZELL'SCAVE -nEZEll'5CAVE FENCE AND GATE COSTSGene@1ComQOundSecurity ChainUnkFence, Trespass Warning Signs, Vaodal Proof Mercury Vapor Ught Total Monetary Cost:$600.00TotalLabor: (1X>Iunteer) 50hoursCaveGate Construction' Cement,RawSteel Stock,Locks,Equipment Rental, Galvanization of Gate Components,WeldingSupplies, Heat Treating,Misc.Construction Expenses Total Monetary Cost:$875.00Total Labor (1X>Iunteer): 325hours Total Monetary Cost:$1,475.00Total Labor(Volunteer):375hours Gate Fabrication and Construction TimeSpan:11/83to02/84
57SinkholeManagementbyErnstH.Kastning and KarenM.Kastning DepartmentofGeology Radford University Radford, Virginia24142ABSTRACTAppropriate sinkhole management must includeanassessment ofthevulnerability of the integrated karst system to changes incurredatsinkholes. SInkholes serve as discrete points of recharge to the karstic aquifer and care must be taken to prevent the introduction of any toxic substances into them. The most comon sources of contamina tion to caves are dumping of waste into sinkholes, concentrating chemicals from accidental spills of hazardous materials in the vicinity of Sinkholes, andbyrunoff from agricultural land where chemical fertilizers areinheavy use. Cave restoration projects have become increasingly popular among concerned cavers and others. Restora tion of sinkholes has also been attemptedinrecent years. Removal of trash and restoration of original contoures around cave entrances have been very successful, but such efforts require considerable effort andinmany states, the sheer number of sinkhole dumpsisstagger ing.Oneof the most effective means to alleviate sinkhole problemsisthrough public educaton, wherein the sensitivity of the karst environment to sinkhole degredationisstrongly emphasized.IntroductionSinkholes (known internationallyasdofines)are closed depressions on the land surface thataregenerally conicalinshape. They are prevalentinregions of karst. where surficial water percolates into the ground and migratestosubsurface drainage paths(seeMonroe,1970,for definitions of karst terms). Likeallkarstic landforms, they are formedbythe dissolving of rock such as limestone, dolostone, marble and gypsumbymildlyacidic groundwater. Sinkholes are typicallyinhydro logiccommunicatonwithundergroundsolutional conduits such as caves. These con nectionsmayormay not be traversableby
58human explorers,butinanycase, waterinfiltrating at sinkholeseasilymakesitswayto the conduits. Sinkholes pose several typesofenviron mental problems thatultimatelyaffectcavesand groundwaterinkarstterranes.Environmental concernsinclude:(1)catastrophiccollapseand gradual subsidence,(2)introductionofcontaminants and pollutantsfromvarioussources into sinkholes,(3)floodingdUringorfollowingintense storms, and(4)modificationstocave entrances thatdisturbdelicate spelean ecosystems.Propercave managementrequirespropersinkhole manage ment. asbothfeaturesarecomponentsofintegrated hydrogeomorphic systems.Duringcavemanagement, speleologicalpro-1989Cave Management Proceedings cesses inherentincavesshouldnotbeconsid eredtobeisolatedfromthoseofthe interactingsurficialenvironment.TheNatureof Karst Karstischaracterizedbysinkholes,caves,sinkingstreams, springs, and solutionvallyes.Thestudyofkarstisarelativelynewscience thatdrawslargelyonthe principlesofgeology and geography. A thorough understandingofthe processes that occur both at the surface and and appreciationforthe totalhydrologicsystem necessitates aglobalfamiliaritywithscientifickarststudies. Thelevelandscopeofmodemkarststudiesisdemonstratedbythe recent proliferationofMineral Physiographic Biologic andSetting Setting Soil Economic and(Vetetation Resources 0nIin0ve)andFauna) SurficialWater crdGroundwater Figure 1: Cause-and-effect relationships amonggeologic,biologic,geographic and human factorsinkarstterranes.Arrowsportray directionsofeffects.
textbooks ont he subject (Kastning, 1989a). Recent textsinEnglish include those of Bogli (1978), Dreybrodt(1988), Ford and Cullingford (1976), Ford and Williams (1989), Jennings (1985), Sweeting (1973), Trudgill (1985) and White (1988). Moreover, the number of scien tific journal articles and graduate theses on karstisexpandingata phenomenal rate(seeforexamplethe bibliographies of Lamoreaux and others[1970,1975,1986], White and White ,andHuppert ).Environmental ProblemsKarstic landscapeisparticularly sensitivetoenvironmentaldegradation (LeGrand, 1973). Stresses inducedbymankindinkarstic terrane result in environmental problems that are much more acute than those that would occurinterranes underlainbyeither crystal line (metamorphicorigneous) or klastic (other sedimentary) rock. Problems such as supply and contamination of groundwater and land stability abound, primarilyinpopulated karst regions. Much of the karstic terrane of the United States lies in rural regions where environmen tal impacts are generally limited to those imposedbyagricultural practices and high ways (Davies, 1970).Insome cases, karstlieswithin the confines of public land (parks, forests and thelike).However, urbanizationisrapidly encroachinginmany karst areas and economic developmentisresulting in severe karst-related environmental problems.Thescope of problems related to the karst environmentislarge (leGrand,1973;White,1988,pp. 355-405). An appreciation for the complexity of the subjectisbest gainedbyconsulting proceedings volumes of recent59conferences that have specifically addressed karst-related environmental problems(e.g.Beck,1984,1989;Beck and Wilson, 1987; and Dougherty, 1983). The interaction among various natural elements of the karst setting and man's roleinthe systemisillustrated conceptuallyinFigure 1. Not that the systemisfar from simplistic and thatitconsists of a series of nested loops with feedback that represent direct and indirect causes andeffects. Making changesinanyoneelementofthe systemwillhave consequential impact on the other elements.Itisnot the intent of this paper to addressallof the possible impacts that man and karst have on each other. Rather,itisinstructive to select a few situa tions where karst may be important as an environmental concern. Thisisperhapsbestillustratedbythe role of sinkholesinenviron mental problems. Among the most severe and immediate environmental problems associated with karst include groundwater supply, groundwater quality and land instability. Karst terrane, par ticularly that of moderate to high sinkhole density, thus imposes constraints on land use.Mismanagementofkarstlands,whetherthrough unsupervised economic development, poor farming practices, improper wastedisposal, or other meanswilloften damange groundwater supplies, cave ecosystems, or man-made structures built on karst.Groundwater SupplyUnlike in other types of terrane, ground waterinkarst regionsischannelized within a natural underground system of interconnected "pipes" that collectively transmit water from input points (recharge zones) to output points
60(dischargepoints).Rechargeinkarstterrane occursintwoways.Arst,rainwater percolate through thesoiland into fracturesinthe carbonaterockoverlargeareasofthe countryside. Thisisknownasdiffuserecharge.Secondly, surface streamsmaybeentirelyswallowedupwhere theyflowintocavesor sinkholes.Thisiscalleddiscreterecharge.Mostkarst regions are characterizedbyboth mechanisms occurringsimultaneously.Dischargeoccursinseveraldifferentwaysaswell.The natural releaseofkarsticground waterfromsprings canalsobeeitherdiffuseor discrete.Diffusesprings aremerelyplaces where water seepsfromthe groundoverawidearea. Discrete springs are those whereanunderground river orcavestreamexitsfromalargeopening. Springsmayissueanywherefromafewto thousandsofgallonsperminute.A quantityofwaterisalsodischarged through man-madewellsdrilledtoobtain waterfordomestic, commercial,agricultural,orindustrialuse.The natureofsubsurfaceflowincarbon ate rock canbestudied throughtracingofwaterbythe injectionofharmless fluorescentdyes.The techniques andknowledgegainedfromvariousinvestigations arewell-documentedinthe aforementioned textbooks onkarst.Subsurface water tracing has been per formedinmanylargekarstgroundwatersystems. Obtainingusableamountsofwaterfromkarsticaquifersisoften a"hit-or-miss"opera tion. Waterishighlylocalizedbecauseitisflowingthroughsolutionallyenlargedfractures and partings betweenbedsofrock.Incontrasttosandstone and other porous-mediaaquiferswhereflowisdiffusethroughout,1989Cave Management Proceedingskarsticgroundwateriscoursingmainlythrough asystemofnatural pipes. Obtaining waterina porous-mediaaquiferisusuallynomore complicated thandrillingawellwherever oneisdesired;inkarst,however,wellsmayoften notyieldsufficientwaterunlessa solutional conduitisintersected. Springs andwellsinkarst arehighlysensitiveto changing weather patternssuchaswetperiods and draught. The responsetoweather trendsisrapidbecause waterisquicklyconveyedalongthesolutionalconduits.Karstlcgroundwater supplies areflashyandallowancesmustbemadeforthis erratic behaviorinthe allocationofwaterderivedfromsprings orwells.Man-madechanges to thesurficialdrain age and to sinkholesmayeasilyalter therateatwhichtheunderlyingaquifer receivesitsnormalrecharge. Vegetation andsoilcoverslowtherunoffand absorb some moisture,providingaslowerrateofrunoff than impermeablematerialswould(e.g.cement drains, asphalt roads or parkinglots,and roofsofstructures).Sinkholes that areinfilledbecomelessefficientorblockedinputs.Anincreaseinthe rateofrunoffand/or theblockingofinput pointsmaycausesurficialwatertopond orbackflood,unlessitisdivertedawayfromitsnaturalsinkpoint(therebyaltering the recharge atyetanothersinkpoint).Thismaydrasticallyaffectthe amountofgroundwateravailableforuseinthe immediatevicinity.Groundwater QualityIfthereisonesingleenvironmentalissuethat stands outinkarst,itwouldhavetobethesensitivityofthekarstaqUifersto groundwater contamination. The effectofman on karstis
most severeincases where polluted surface waters enter karst aquifers. This problemisuniversal amongallkarst regionsinthe United States that underlie areas of economic growth. The good news, relative to the karst of the United States,isthat most ofitliesinrural areas.Thebad newsisthat the country's karstic groundwater problems are accelerat ing with the advent of(1)expanding urbaniza tion,(2)increased production of environmentallyunacceptable artificial chemicals,(3)short age of repositories for hazardous wastes (both household and industria!), and(4)ineffective public education on waste disposal and the sensitivity of the karstic groundwater system. Before any further comment, please consider this excerpt from a recent newspaper story regarding a toxic chemical spill on Interstate81near Salem, Va., on1988: More than3,000gallonsofdiesel fuel spilled nearSalem Wednesday whenatanker truck flipped onto its top and split openonInterstate 81. Hours after the spill, the fuel had not contaminated any streamsorwater supplies, but Roanoke County and Salem hazardous materials workers said they could not find whereithad gone."Itflowedabout50feetandthenitdisappeared,"said Larry Logan, emer gency services officer for Roanoke County."Inthe20years I';ve beeninit,I've never seen anything like this. Logan saiditwaspossiblethatahiddencavernabsorbedthematerial.Aprivate companywillcleanupthe spill and hazardous materialsworkers will continue to try to find the fuel.Theamountthatescapedwasenoughtocausea "bad situation"Ifthespillhadbeennearastream,river61ormajorwatersupply,Logan said.Anydiesel spillofmore than50gallonsisconsideredapotential majorproblem, he said.(lovegrove,1988.Article con tinues.Boldemphasisismine.)This quotation makes two important points. First, eveninrural areas, karst can easily be contaminatedbyaccidental spillsoftoxic substances. Secondly, thereisa general lack of public understanding of groundwater behavior, particularlyinkarst. Karst aquifers cannot filter contaminated groundwatersufficiently to render it potableatthe discharge sites.Asdiscussed above, water travels rapidly through solutional conduits because recharge points are directly connected to discharge pointsbya natural system of pipes ( Figure2).Not only does the "garbage in, garbage out" principle apply to karst groundwater, but the conveyance of contaminationishighlyefficientinthis type of terrane. Because sinkholes are natural holesinthe ground surface, they have been inviting sites for dumping of trash, a procedure prac ticed for a long timebylandowners and passersby.Thepresence of a sinkhole obvi ates the need to dig a pitinwhich refuse can be dumped. The number of active and inactive sinkhole dumpsinkarst regionsisstaggering. For example, over260such illegal dumps have been inventoried for Rockbridge and Botetourt counties, alone (Slifer,1987;Slifer and Erchul,1989).Itisconceivable that each county with karstinthe Valley and Ridge province has hundreds of such sinkhole dumps. The profusion of these dumpsisthe resultof(1)a lack of a refuse removal serviceinrural areas and the expense and inconvenienceoftrash haulage on the part of the landowner,(2)the convenient proximity of Sinkholes, and(3)
621989Cave Management Proceedings Figure2:Groundwater contamination in limestone terrane. Pollutants enter the karst system through improper waste disposal and from surface runoff through fertilized cropland. ignorance of the karst groundwater systemonthe part of the landowner. Sinkholesarenatural funnels that con vey toxic substances directly into the karstic plumbing system (Kastning and Kastning,1990).Inmany cases, chemicals maybetransmitted directlytodomestic wells,Ina matter of a few hours and without filtration. A farmer who places a carcass of a deceased farm animal into a sinkhole(acommon proce dure) may very wellbedrinking water from that sinkhole! Or, his neighbors maybe-,Sinkhole dumpingisonlyoneway of contaminating a karstic groundwater supply(Aley,1972;Aleyand others,1972).ChemIcalfertilizers applied to fields overlying car bonate rockwillenterthe aqUifer through diffuse infiltraton and contaminate springs and wells. Runoff from feed lotswillalso. Improper siting of municipal landfills onornear karst causes leakageorrunoff from these landfills to easily contaminate karst waters. Chemicals introduced in this fashion may include many of the most hazardous, including hydrocarbons, heavy metals, and others. Ad ditionally, leaky septic systems, sewage lines, or effluent from faulty sewage-treatment facili ties introduce coliforms and other disease-
bearing organisms into thekarstsystem.Manyof today' s streams,includingthoseinrural areas, are polluted.Manyofthe surface streamsinkarstterranereadilylosewater to their beds(e.g.Sinking CreekinGilesCounty,Virginia-seeSaunders and others, 1981 and Kastning and Lenhart, 1989).Contaminated surface waters entering carbonate rocks introduce toxic substances to subsurface streams Theonlydifference between surface and underground watersinkarstisthat the latterisout of sight(andoutofmind!)Chemically,theymaybeidenticaLAccidentalspills,such as the Salem,Virginiaexample above, and runofffromhighwayssaltedinwinter to prevent freezing are justtwoexamplesofcontamination along transportation corridors (Werner, 1983).Effluentfromcommercial and industrial operations along such corridorsisalsoa problem.Cavescontainfragileorganisms thathaveevolvedinthe naturalcaveenvironment. There are many inhabitantsofcaves.Mostpeople thinkofbats as the most common creatureofcaves. On the contrary, thereisan amazing numberofcave-adapted organisms. Because these animals arehighlyadapted to their constant ecological surroundings, they are particularly sensitive to disturbances. Fore most of theseisthe introduction offoreignsubstances into the groundwaterflowingthrough the caves.Even"clean"fiU,such as brush, hay, sawdust, or dirtmayleadto chemicalimbalancesinthe karstic groundwater and adversely affectbiologicalecosystems. Thisislargelydue to the rapid decay of the vegetative matter and consumptionofoxygen.Itisinthe interestofconservationofspecies endemic to caves, rare or otherwise, thatmanbecon cernedwithmaintaining clean groundwaterin63karstregions.Cavesare esthetically pleasing andwondrous places tovisit(prOvidedproperknowledge and techniquesofcaveexploration areacqUiredfirst).Manywhovisitcavesoncommercialtours oroncavingtripstowildcavesareintriguedbythemyriadofcaveformations.Mostcommon among these arestalactites, stalagmites, columns, draperies,andflowstone.There are, however,manyunusual,fragile,and often rare formationsincaves(Hilland Forti, 1986).Caveformations arehighlysusceptible to contamination and derangementofgroundwaterflow.Itisimpor tant that formations thattakecenturies that take centuries andmilleniatoformbepro tectedintheir natural settingfromman'sinfluence.SubsidenceandGround InstabilityThe potentialforthe surfaceinkarstregions togivewayincollapseisbrought homefromtimetotimeinthemedia.Massivecollapsesinwhichhomes or businesses areswaUowedbynewlyformed sinkholes make excitingnews.Insome states,suchasAOrida,Alabama,Texas, and Pennsylvania, suchoccurrences are somewhat frequent.Mostof these events are triggeredbyman's interven tionwiththekarsticenvironment(Waltham,1989). The most common causefor cata strophic sinkhole collapseisan overpumping of groundwaterfromkarstic aquifers, resultinginarelativelysuddenlossof buoyantforcesthat uphold roofs of cavernous openings. A second cause of collapse occursinresponse to changesinthe position of the water tableduetomodifications tosurficialrunoff and infiltra tionto thekarsticgroundwater system. Fortu-
64nately. notallkarstareas have problems with sinkhole collapse, becauseinmany cases the bedrock overlying cavesishighly competent and can withstand the stresses. Sinkholes pose another instability prob lem, however. Sinkholes have sloping walls and like valley slopes, they are prone to slides and creep of surficial materials that canultimately cause damage to structures builtonthe slopes. Although seldom having a catastrophic effect, the long-term damage can be quite costly.Inareas undergoing development, sink holes are viewed as unwanted holesinthe ground. Consequently, thereisa great desire tofillthem in.Thepotential for ensuing environmental problemsistwofold: Rrst, naturallydeveloped paths of infiltration are often blocked, leading to potential ponding and floodingonthefill.Secondly, over the long run,fillmaterialswillbe sapped into the subsurface and settling may occur. These disturbances easily impact any structures built on thefill.Additionally, the increased weight of water,filland structures upon the cavern ous bedrock could cause catastropic collapseinthe future.ManagementofSinkholesAppropriate sinkhole management must include an assessment of the vulnerability of the integrated karst system to changes in curred at sinkholes. Sinkholes serve as dis crete points of recharge to the karstic aquifer and care must be taken to prevent the intro duction of any toxic substances into them.Themost common sources of contamination to caves are through dumping of waste into Sinkholes, concentrating chemicals from acci-1989Cave Management Proceedingsdental spills of hazardous materialsinthe vicinity of sinkholes, andbyrunoff from agri cultural land where chemical fertilizers areinheavy use.Inventorying SinkholesinKarstManagementLarge sinkholesarereadily identifiable on standard U.S. Geological Survey 7 .S-minute topographic maps (scale 1:24,000).Itisa simple mattertolocate sites of potential con tamination prior to economic development of these regions. However, notallsinkholes appearontopographic maps; many are simplytoo shallowtobe represented within the contour interval usedona particular map,orinsome cases sinkholes have simply been overlookedinthe surveyingorcartographic process. Precise inventory of sinkholes neces sitates additional work, including use oflowaltitude aerial photographyandsurface recon naissancebyvehicleoronfoot.Todate, there are very few areas of the country where systematic iiwentories of sinkholesandother karstic features have been made. A noteable effortinaccomplishing such a task includes recent surveying bothona statewide and countywide levelintheCommonwealth of Virginia(seediscussion that follows). Delineation of sinkholesona map may readily indicate potential subsurficial flowpaths (Kastning,1984,1989b).Inmany situations, sinkholes are aligned as lineamentsinthe topography (Figure 3). This indicates a structuralorstratigraphiccontrolinthehydrogeologic setting wherein groundwater moves along straight flowpath segments formed along bedding planes and 'fractures.
65 N A part ofthe SINKHOLE PLAIN.EASTERNPULASKI COUNTY. VIRGINIA\ AfProx1mateboundartes ointernally dra1nedareas FIgure3:Inventoryofsinkholesina partofPulaskiCounty,southwesternVirginia.Onlythose sinkholesvisibleonthe 7.S-minuteUSGStopographic quadrangle are shown. Note the alignmentsofsinkholesinvariousplacesonthe map.Thissuggests that groundwatermovesalongwell-integrated,dendriticflowpaths.The implication thenisthatinfiltrationenteringan aquifer through such sinkholes contrHr utes water to an integratedflowsystem.The surface arrangementofsinkholes therebyprovidesahintofthe configurationoftheunderground drainage.CaveandSinkholeRestorationCaverestoration projectshavebecome increasingly popular among concernedcaversand others. Restorationofsinkholeshasalsobeen attemptedinrecentyears.Removaloftrashandrestorationoforiginalcontours aroundcaveentranceshavebeenverysuccessful,butsuchefforts requireconsiderableeffortandinmanystates the sheernumberofsinkholedumpsisstaggering.Itisveryimportant that thelandimmediatelysurroundingsinkholesbedesignatedaszonestobeleftina natural state.Thisprovidesabufferzone protectingthequantityandqualityofrecharge entering theaquiferatthatlocale.The recommendedsizeforabufferzonewouldvaryfromsinkholetosinkholeandwouldhavetobedeterminedforeachparticu-
66lar case.Karstand Public EducationItisimpossible for those concerned with preserving the karsttosingle-handedly con frontallof these problems through remedial action, including cleanups of caves and sink holes, legal action to prevent development or to seek restitution from violators of environ mental law,orother reactionary measures. Although these effortswillhelp on a casebycase basis, theywillnot keep pace with the impact ofprogress.Perhaps the single most effective pro gram to prevent the abuse of karst and pro mote sound environmental awarenessiswithin the context of primary and secondary educa tion. The characteristics and mechanisms of karst and how they differ from other terranes must be made graphically clearinthe class room, particularlyincountiesorcities thatliewithin karst areasorareinclose proximity to them. Another avenue for contact within this age groupisthrough youth programs includ ing scouts, 4-H Clubs, high school science clubs, and other outdoor-oriented organizations. Secondly, the news media can be effec tively employedincarrying environmental messages to the public at large. Graphic expla nations of active karst processes in layman's terms can go a long way toward conveying the need to preserve fragile karst features, water supplies, and cave ecosystems. the use of photography, video recordings, graphic arts, and writing, especiallyinconjunction with case histories, has been shown to be effectiveinreaching citizenslivingon karst. Distribu tion of this informaton can beinvarious1989Cave Management Proceedingsforms, including presentations of papers or multimedia programsatlocal, regional or national meetings, posters(e.g.the recent cave conservation poster published by the Virginia Cave Board), local cleanupandfund raising events with attendant publicityinthe media, exhibitsatcommercial caves, muse ums, scout shoVJS and other community events, and literature for distribution to the public and to landowners.TheVirginias'ExampleThekarst of Virginia and West Virginia lies largely within the Valley and RidgeandAppalachian Plateau physiographic provinces andischaracterizedbya high density of sinkholes (HerakandStringfield,1972;Hubbard,1984;Kastning,1986,1988).Thedistribution of large sinkholesisevidenton7.S-minute USGS topographic maps. A se ries of three maps showing exposures of soluable rock and the distribution of sinkholes and cavesisbeing published forthestate of Virginia (Hubbard,1983,1988).Thedataisderived from topographic maps, aerial pho tography, and the speleological literature. Karst maps for two of the counties in this karst region have recently been published(Millerand Hubbard,1986;Hubbard, 1990). Karst terrane occasionallyappearsas a mapped environmental unit in local geological map ping aswell(e.g.Schultz, 1981). Recent effortsbythe Virginia Cave Boardandthe Virginia Speleological Survey have identified caves considered to be highly significant based on geologic, biologic, hydrologic, archeologic, and historic criteria (Holsinger, -1985). Inventories of cavesandother significant karst features are being maintained by pri-
vately operated speleological surveysinboth states. These surveys have beeninoperationforsome times(Davies,1958; Douglas, 1964; Holsinger 1975; Virginia Speleological Survey,1987-present). Significant caves (those having unique attributes, contents orvalue)are being identified (Holsinger, 1985;Gulden, 1989).Karstisbeing mapped as an environmental unit(e.g.Hubbard, 1983, 1988;Millerand Hubbard, 1986). These sources of data should help planners and managersinassessing environmental impacts of projectsinkarst regions. The inhabitants of cavesofWest Virginia and Virginia have been investigated and docu mented (Holsinger and others, 1976; Holsinger and Culver, 1988). Additionally,newlydiscovered species are being added at a regular rate. Researcl;l and publication on cave habi tats and ecosystems should be among thefirststepsinthe conservation and management of karst regions. Fortunately, steps are being taken to protect the karstic environmentinthe Appa lachian Region. Both West Virginia andVirginia have enacted statelawsthat protect caves and their natural contents from vandalismand contamination. Chapters of theNational Speleological Societyinthe Virginias have placed special metallic signs inside the cave entrances informing the visitor of thelawsand penalties for violations. The Com monwealth of Virginia has established the Virginia Cave Board as partofthe Depart ment of Conservation and Recreation to take up matters relating to cavesinthe Common wealth, to advise other agencies, and to par ticipateineducation related to caves, cave science and cave conservation. The geology and hydrology of the karst67ofVirginia and West Virginiaisbeing systematicallystudied. Determinationofgroundwa ter flowpaths at specific sites has been underwayforsome time. Several important ground water tracings have been madeineach state(e.g.Jones, 1973, 1983; Saunders and oth ers, 1981; Ogden, 1976; Werner, 1981).Asmoreofthis data becomes availablelocalcommunitieswillbe better able to makedecisions on land use and economic developmentLocalchapters of theNSSinconjunctionwithother groups(e.g.Boy Scouts andlocalwaste disposal agencies) have beenactivelycleaning trash-filled sinkholes.Ofcourse, this taskismonumental given that thousands of contaminated sinkholesexistinthe region(Slifer,1987; Slifer and Erchul, 1989). ever theless,publicawarenessofthe problemisheightenedbythese efforts and any ensuingpublicity.Problems of sinkhole contamination and efforts at remediation have recently caugh the attention of the pressinVirginia(Slifer1987; Kittredge, 1989).Thishas led tonumerous contacts with landowners who are concernedwithproperly maintaining their water supplies. Local chapters of theSSreguJarlyclean caves and sinkholes, leading 0favorablepublicityin the press (e.g. Farrar, 1989). The Commonwealth of Virginia, through the Virginia Cave Board, produced a large, fulkolor posteronkarstgroundwaterprotectionthat wasdistributed toaUomgrade Earth Science classesinthe Common wealth (Kastning and Kastning,1990).TheVirginia Division ofineraJ Reso ces has likewisepublished materials on karstdesi edto educate thepublicand pro .de basicdata forlocalcommunities (Hubbard 1988,199,1990Millerand Hubbard 1986).
68References CitedAley,T.J.,1972,Groundwater contami nation from sinkhole dumps:CavesandKarst, v.14,p.17-23. Aley, T.J.; Williams,J.H.; and Massello,J.W.,1972,Groundwater contamination and sinkhole collapse inducedbyleaky impoundmentsinsoluable rock terrain:Missouri Geological SurveyandWaterResources, Engineering Geology SeriesNo.5,32p. Beck, B.F. (editor),1984,Sinkholes: Their Geology, EngineeringandEnvironmentalImpact: ProceedingsoftheFirstMultidisciplinaryConferenceonSinkholes,Orlando, Florida,15-17October1984:A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam and Boston,429p. Beck, B.F. (editor),1989,EngineeringandEnvironmentalImpactsofSinkholesandKarst: Proceedingsofthe Third MultidisciplinaryConferenceonSinkholesandtheEngineeringandEnvironmentalImpactsofKarst,St.Petersburg Beach, Florida, 2-4 October 1989: A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam and Boston,384p. Beck, B.F. and Wilson, W.L. (editors),1987,Karst Hydrogeology: EngineeringandEnvironmentalApplications: Pro ceedingsoftheSecondMultidisciplinaryConferenceonSinkholesandtheEnvironmentalImpactsofKarst, Orlando, Florida,911 February1987: A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam and Boston,467p.1989Cave Management Proceedings BogU, A.,1978,Karst HydrologyandPhysi cal Speleology(translated from the GermanbyJ.C. Schmid): Springer Verlag, New York,284p. Davies, W.E.,1958,Caverns of WestVirginia:WestVirginia GeologicalandEconomicSurvey,volume19,350p.(reprintedin1965with 72-page supplement as volume 19A). Davies, W.E.,1970,Karstlands, in United States Geological Survey,NationalAtlasoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica,sheet 77. Dougherty, P.H. (editor),1983,EnvironmentalKarst(papers from karst symposium at the Association of Ameri can Geographers meeting, Louisville, Kentucky, April 1980): GeoSpeleoPublications, Cincinnati, Ohio,167p. Douglas, H.H.,1964,CavesofVirginia:Virginia Cave Survey, Falls Church, Virginia, 761 p. Dreybrodt, Wolfgang,1988,ProcessesinKarstSystemsPhysics,ChemistryandGeology:(Springer SeriesinPhysi cal Environment4):SpringerVerlag, New York,288p. Farrar, B.,1989,Cave becomes an area time capsule:TheSouthwestTimes(Pulaski,Virginia),v.86,no.73(27 March 1989), p. 1-2. Ford, T.D. and Cullingford, C.H.D. (editors),1976,TheScienceofSpeleology:Academic Press, Academic Press, New York,593p. Ford, D.C. and Williams, P. ,1989,KarstGeomorphologyandHydrology:Unwin Hyman, Winchester,_ Massachustetts,320p.
Gulden,R.1989.Listsof long caves of the United Statesandtheworld(unpub lished): National Speleological Society CommitteeonLongandDeep Caves. Herak,M.andStringfield, Victor T. (editors),1972,Karst:Important Karst Regionsofthe Northern Hemisphere:Elsevier Publishing Co., New York,551p.Hill, C.A.andForti, P.,1986,CaueMineralsofthe World:National Speleo logical Society, Huntsville, Ala.238p. Holsinger,J.R,1975,Descriptions of Vir ginia caves:Virginia DiuisionofMineral Resources Bulletin85, 450p. plus seven plates.Holsinger,J.R,1985,Annotated ListofSignificant Caues and Karst AreasinVirginia:Virginia Speleo logical Survey (limited distribution document, revised April1985), 251p. Holsinger,J.R;Baroody,RA.;and Culver, D.C.,1976,Theinvertebrate cave fauna of West Virginia:West Virginia Speleological Suruey Bulletin,No.7,82p.Holsinger,J.RandCulver, D.C.,1988,Theinvertebrate cave fauna of Virginiaandapartof eastern Tennessee: Zoo geographyandecology:Brimleyana rrhe Journal oftheNorth Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences),. no.14(June1988),p.1-162.Holsinger,J.R;Baroody,RA.;and Culver, D.C.,1976,Theinvertebrate cave fauna of West Virginia:West Virginia Speleological Bulletin,no. 7., 82p.69Hubbard, Jr., 0 .A.,1983,Selected karst features of the northern Valley and Ridge province, Virginia:VirginiaDiuisionofMineral Resources Publication,no.44,onesheet (scale1:250,000).Hubbard, Jr., D.A.,1984,Sinkhole distribu tioninthe central and northern Valley and Ridge province, Virginia,inBeck, B.F. (editor), Sinkholes: Their Geology, Engineering andEnvironmental Impact: Proceedings of the First Multidisciplinary ConferenceonSinkholes, Orlando, Aa.,15-17October1984:A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam and Boston, p.75-78.Hubbard, Jr., D.A.,1988,Selected karst features of the central Valley and Ridge province, Virginia:VirginiaDIuisionofMineral Resources Publication,no.83,one sheet (scale1:250,000).Hubbard, Jr., D.A.,1989,Sinkholes:Virginia Division of Mineral Resources brochure,2p. Hubbard, D.A.,Jr.,1990,Geologic map of Clarke County, Virginia Plate1;Map of hydrogeologic componentsforClarke County, Virginia Plate2:Virginia DiuisionofMineral Re sources Publication,no.102, 2map sheets (scale1:50,000).Huppert, G.N.,1988,Cave and karst related thesesinUnited States and Canadian universities:1899-1988:CaueGeology,v.2,no.1,82p.Jennings, J.N.,1985,Karst Geomorphol ogy(revised and expanded edition of Jennings,1971):Basil Blackwell, Ox ford and New York,293p.
70Jones, W.K.,1973,Hydrology of limestone karstinGreenbrier County, West Virginia:WestVirginia GeologicalandEconomicSurveyBulletin,no.36,49p. plus 2 plates. Jones, W.K,1983,Karst hydrology in West Virginia (1983),inMedville, D.M.; Dasher, G.R.; and Werner,E.(editors), An introduction to the caves of east-central West Virginia;National SpeleologicalSocietyGuide.bookSeries,no. 23, p. 25-34. Kastning, E.H.,1984,Hydrogeomorphic evolution of karsted plateausinr esponse to regional tectonism,inLaFleur, R.G. (editor),GroundWater asaGeomorphicAgent: International Series,no. 13, Allen and Unwin, Inc., Boston (Proceedings of the 13th Annual ("BinghamtonIt)Geomor phology Symposium, Rennselaer Poly technic Institute, Troy, New York, Sep tember, 1982), p.351-382.Kastning, E.H.,1986,Cave regions of the United States of America, in Middleton, J. and Waltham, A.,TheUndergroundAtlas:AGazateeroftheWorld's Cave Regions:RobertHale, Limited, London, p.203-220.Kastning, E.H.,1988,Karst of the New River Drainage basin,inKardos, A.R. (editor),Proceedings,SeventhNewRiverSymposium,OakHill,WestVirginia,April7-9,1988:New River Gorge National River, OakHill,West Virginia, p. 39-49. Kastning, E.H.1989a,Karst Geomorphol ogyandHydrogeology:ABibliog raphyofPrincipal References:Lim1989Cave Management ProceedIngsited private printing, 8 p. (available from the author). Kastning, E.H.1989b,Surficial karst pat terns: Recognition and interpretation,inBeck, B.F. (editor),EngineeringandEnvironmentalImpactsofSink holesandKarst: Proceedingsofthe Third MultidisciplinaryConferenceonSinkholesandtheEngineeringandEnvironmentalImpactsofKarst, St. Petersburg, Florida, 2-4 October 1989:A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam and Boston, p.11-16.Kastning, E.H. and Lenhart, S.W.,1989,CavesandKarstoftheNewRiverValley, Virginia:Guidebookfora Geologic Fieldrip, EighthAnnualNewRiuerSymposium,Radford,Virginia, 21April1989:Radford University, Department of Geology, Radford, Virginia,26p. Kastning,K.M.and Kastning, E.H.1990,InKarstlands ...WhatGoes Down MustComeUp!:Virginia Cave Board, Department of ConservationandRecreation, poster22by28inches. Kittredge, K.,1989,No place for trash: NewRiuer Current,v.1, no.279,(13 January 1989), p. 1-2 (section of theRoanoke(Virginia)TimesandWorld-News).laMoreaux, PhilipE. (editor-in-chief); Tan ner,J.Mark; and ShoreDavis, P.,1986,Hydrology of limestone terranes: annotated bibliography of carbonate rocks (volume3);Interna tional AssociationofHydrogeologists, Internatonal Con tributionstoHydrogeology,v.2,
341p.laMoreaux,P.E., Warren, W.M. and others,1970and1975,Annotated bibliography of carbonate rocks and hydrology of limestone terranes:Geological SurveyofAlabama Bulle tinno.94,parts A andE,242p. and168p. LeGrand, H.E.,1973,Hydrological and eco logical problems of karst regions:Science,v.179,no.4076(2March 1973), p.859-864.Lovegrove, R.,1988,Tanker spills3,000gaIlons of fuel:Roanoke(Virginia)Times and World-News,v.25,no.21(21 July 1988), p. B6. Miller, E.V. ,andHubbard, Jr., D.A.,1986,Selected slope categories and karst featuresmapof Giles COunty, Vir ginia;Virginia DivisionofMineral Resources Publication70,map, scale1:50,000,1 sheet. Monroe, W.H.,1970,A glossary of karst terminology:United StatesGeologi cal survey WaterSupply Paper 1899K,26p.Ogden, A.E.,1976,The hydrogeologyofthe central Monroe County karst, West Virginia:Ph.D. dissertation (unpublished), West Virginia University,263p. Saunders,J.W.; Ortiz, R.K.; and KoerschnerIill,W.F.,1981,Major groundwater flow directions in the Sinking CreekandMeadow Creek drainage basins of Giles and Craig Counties, Virginia, U.S.A.,inBeck, B.F. (editor),Pro ceedingsofthe Eighth Internatonal CongressofSpeleology, Bowling Green, Kentucky, July18-24,1981:71National Speleological Society, Huntsville,Alabama,v.I,p.398-400(reprintedinThe Tech Troglodyte,1985,v.24,no. 2, p. 54-60). Schultz, A.P.,1981,Geology of theCItyofRadford: up published map (scale 1: 7200), 2 sheets (copies available from the City Engineer's office, City of Radford). Slifer, D.W., 1987, Rockbridge'sillegaldumps:FocusonWater(Virginia Water Re sources Research Center), no.2,8p.Slifer, D.W. and Erchul, R.A.,1989,Sinkhole dumps and the risk to ground waterinVirginia's karst areas, in Beck, B.F. (editor),Engineering and Envi ronmental ImpactsofSinkholes andKarst:Proceedingsofthe Third Multidisciplinary ConferenceonSinkholes and the Engineering and Envi ronmental ImpactsofKarst,St. Petersburg Beach,Florida,2-4October1989:A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam and Boston, p. 207-212. Sweeting, M.M.,1973,Karst Landforms,Columbia University Press, New York,362p. Trudgill, S.1985,Limestone Geomorpho-l ogy(Geomorphology Texts,No.8),Longman, London and New York,196p. Virginia Speleological Survey,1987-present:Virginia Cellars,v.1-.Waltham, A.C.,1989,GroundSubsidence:Blackie and Son, London,224p. Werner, E.,1981,Guidebooktothe karstofthe central Appalachians: Prepared for the Eighth InternationalCongressofSpeleology, BowlingGreen,Kentucky, U.S.A., July18to 24,
721981:National Speleological Society, Huntsville, Alabama, 51p.Werner, E.,1983,Effects of highways on karst springs -Anexample from Pocohontas County, West Virginia,inDougherty, P.H. (editor),EnvironmentalKarst:GeoSpeleo Publica tions, Cincinnati,p.3-13. White, W.B.,1988,GeomorphologyandHydrologyofKarst Terrains,Oxford University Press, New York,464p.White, W.B., and White,E.L,1984,Cave and karst-related papersinthe mainstream scientific literature: A bitr Iiography:Cave Geology,v.1, no. 9,p.291-392.1989Cave Management Proceedings
73PUBLICRELATIONSANDCAVE CONSERVATIONbyJayR.JordenPublic RelationsCommitteeChainnanTheNational Speleological Society1518Devon Circle Dallas,Texas75217-1205ABSTRACTInan eraofincreased awareness concerning natural resource conservation,publicrelations andallofitsrolesinpublicityand helping an organization anditspublicsaccommodate to each other has an important role. Although environmentalistshaverealizedforsome time that the earth and treasureswithinitrepresent nonrenew able resources,onlyrecentlyhasthe generalpublicbecome awareofthe needforcaveconservation.Publicityintheformofnewspaper and magazine articles andtelevisionandradiostories has surrounded effortstosave a numberofcaves, and at times, the organisms thatlivewithinthem. These efforts and thepublicitythey generate are raising thecaveconservation awarenessofthe generalpublicat a time when thefutureofmany cavesinurban areasisthreatened.Publicityhas also surrounded passageofthe FederalCaveResource ProtectionActand a proposaltocreate acavewilderness designa tionbycongressional act. I.EnvironmentalAwarenessIt's perhaps hard tofindanyone who, when questioned,wouldnot wanttosave the earth's resourcesforuseand enjoymentoffuturegenerations. However,itremains afactthat general public awareness on the environmentissomewhatlimited,and certainlyinthe caseofcaves and karst resources. The beginnings of the cave conservation ethic canbetracedtothewell-publicizedenvironmental reform movement that beganinthe 1960s andswelledtoa crescendobytheearly1970s. However, some researcherswouldputtheoriginofenvironmental concernmuchearlier,tothe 1930s and 1940s.In1941,theNational Speleological Societywasorganizedforthe purposeofadvancing thestudy,conservation, exploration andknowledgeofcaves.So, too, theNSSwascaughtupinan environ mental movement that has grown since the 60sfromasmallgroupofconservationists,
74scientists and government officials to a world wide consciousness. Activities of both busi ness and industry have been impactedbypassage of far-reaching state and federallegislation and loca1laws regulating air and water pollution, soUd waste disposal, land use, haz ardous substances and noise, among other environmental problems. The official NSS policy on conservation states:"Caveshave unique scientific, recreational and scenic values. These values are endangeredbyboth carelessness and intentional vandalism. These values, once gone, cannot be recovered.Theresponsibility for protecting caves must be assumedbythose who study and enjoy them. Accordingly, the intention of the Societyisto work for the preservation of caves with a realistic policy supportedbyeffective pro gramsfor:the encouragement of self-disci pline among cavers; education and research concerning the causes and prevention of cave damage;andspecial projects, includingcooperationwithothergroups similarly dedicated to the conservation of natural areas. "TheSociety believes, specifically, that a cave's contents formations,lifead deposits -arecrucialtoItsinterpretationandenjoyment. Cavers, therefore, should leave a cave asitwasfound.TheSociety motto is, "Take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but footprints,killnothing but time." (Some cavers have, tongue-in-cheek, proposed that the word "vandals" be substituted for "time".) Cavers should provide means for waste removal; limit marking to a few, small, removable signs as needed for surveying; and exercise extreme care against accidentally breaking or soiling formations, disturbinglifeforms or unnecessarily increasing the number1989CaveManagementProceedingsof unsightlypathsthrough a cave room or passage. Further, scientific collection should be minimal, professional and selective.Itisnot justifiable to collect mineral or biological materialfordisplay, including previously brokenordeadspecimens,sinceothersareencouraged to collect and the cave's interestisthereby destroyed. Over the years, the NSS has encouraged conservation projects, such as creating cavepreserves;gatingentrances;opposingspeleothem sales; restoringandcleaning vandalizedor"trashed" caves and backing effective protection laws and other measures. The Societyalsourgescooperation with private landownersbyproviding knowledge about their cave and aiding them in protectingitand other property from damage during visits, and encourages commercial cave owners to help educate the public to understand caves and the need to conserve them.Theorganization has traditionallyopposedpublication of cave locations where thereisreason to suspect thatitcould lead to vandalism before adequate protections can be put in place. Surveys over the years have indicated that many people have discovered the needs oftheenvironment,andwantto"save"it.Butfewhave knowledge of specific resources or the information on how to go about the task of conservation. For example,in1971,air pollutionwasconsidered a problemby41percent of the general public.By1975,that number had dropped to25percent, along with a corresponding decreaseinthe number of people concerned about water pollution.Inthe early 70s, a number of challengesinair and water pollution were met and _great efforts made to overcome them. Rgures show that industry expenditures to clean up airand
water exceeded $1.5billionin1975 alone.So,interestinconservation appearstobecyclicaland dependent uponsuccessofefforts.Another .. laterstudyshowed that 75 percentofthose surveyed adopted a pro-environment attitude andbelievedthat more effortsshouldbeexpended.Caveconservation effortshave,toalimitedextent, beenpulledalongbythe bootstrapsoflarger environmentalissues.Concern over groundwater pollution,forexample, hasspilledover andintocavers' efforts to educate landowners about dumpingofrefuse into sinkholes and other problems. A brochure, "You andYourCave," explored some of these concerns. Worries aboutpollutionand rechargeintheEdwardsAquifer,whichprovidesdrinkingwater to a Texas metropolitan areaofmore than 1millionpeople, andincaves nearPindall,Ark.,whichformpartofa recharge zoneintotheBuffaloNationalRiverhave generated regional and nationalpublicityinthelastthree years. Aplanin1989fora government agencytodetonate explosive chargesintheDelRio,Texas area to test methodsofwithstanding nuclear attack prompted a petitiondrivebyresidents and debate on CapitolHillthatresultedinthe project's abandonment. Another possible controversy loomsintheformofaplanto locate atoxicwaste dumpinthe area .ofoneofTexas' deePest caves near the state'sfarwestern mountainous region.II. PubUc RelationsandCave ConservationProblemsPublicrelations practitionerEdwardL.Bernays,inhis"The EngineeringofConsent" wrote,"Publicrelationsisthe attempt,by75information, persuasion and adjustment,toengineerpublicsupportforanactivity,cause, movementorinstitution."Inthisdecade, caversonlocal,regional and nationallevelshavebeenusingPRtomoldpublicopiniononcaveconservationissues.Aswithother environmental problems, reactionsofbusinessand governmentofficialstocaveresource threats runs the gamut,froma totaldenialthat a problemexiststo apartialadmissionandagreementwithconservationists.Takinga middle ground, though, many leaders confrontedwithcaveconservation threats are reluctant toimmediatelyadmita problemexistsbut,inthe eventitcanbeprovenbyclear andconvincingevidence, arewillingtoworktosolveit.Thiswasthe caseintheDelRioblastingplan,wherefederalofficialswerereluctanttofacetheproblemuntilitwasshowna strong likelihoodexistedthatexplosivechargeswouldfracturerocklayersthatcouldalter or stoptheflowoflargesprings thatsupplymunicipaldrinkingwater to thecommunity.And,inthe caseoftheBuffaloNationalRiver,TomAleyoftheOzarkUnderground Laboratorywasinstrumentalinmounting apublicitycampaign against the proposedtoxicwaste dump,includingcompletionofdyetracingthatshowedwaterfromcavesnear thesiteflowedintothewaterway.Thepoliciesoforganizations thathavecoped successfully with environmental challenges,whenreviewed,show that uppermanagers,innearlyeveryinstance,haveplaceda high priority on environmental considerations. A rankingofthesuccessfulorganizations' prioritiesshowsconservationgoalsget topbillingalongwithprofits,capital equipment, manpower,rawmaterials,sales
76and taxes. Other organizations, less successfulat dealing with environmental threats, may focus on the costs associated with meeting them. With the profit motive one of the foremost considerations in a free-market economy, some companies take a balanced approach, weighing the need for continued economic development with improvement and preservation ofthenatural environment.Today,manyconfrontedwithglobalenvironmental issues-thegreenhouse effect, global warming, ozone layer depletion, etc. realize we indeedliveon a fragile space ship and that, eventually,itmay be shown that no costistoo great to preservelifeon earth.Inpublic relations, environmental issues are considered difficult because they have many ramifications and are often intertwined with additional socioeconomic problems. Because of this fact, some of the standard "textbook" PR techniques and procedures don't always work. Practitioners have had to devise new approaches to some of theseproblemsandadaptother,time-tested communications techniques. Even more complicated are cave conservation issues, because they are often comprised of other, distinct environmental problems.Incave conservation, a problem may involve any orallof the following: vandalism, water pollution, solid waste disposal, land use, pesticides, toxic wastes and other substances, air pollution and others.Uketarget markets in advertising, the publics or audiences that conservation publicistshopeto reach are many. They include specialized and general media organizations, business management, corporate stockholders, employees, governmental officials, community leaders, citizens' and environmental groups,1989Cave Management Proceedingsand even academic and scientific groups.Totacklea cave conservation problem, the issues must, of course, be identified.Allof the available factsonthe situation must be assembled, preferablythrougha "public relations environmental inventory."Itbecomes a specific checklist for developing cave conservation PR. It's also a good idea to prepare "backgrounders"indepthonevery aspect of the conservation problem. Hopefully, some sort ofan"early warning system"isalreadyinplace so that caversarenot caughtbysurprise when a caveisthreatenedbydevelopersorsome other problem arises.InAustin, some of the local grotto members have established contacts with municipal agencies and others who informthemwhen a caveisindanger of being bulldozed in a new housing developmentorsome other threat appears.Italso helps thatthecity has a watershed ordinance that protects caves and recharge zones to some extent. That said, the establishment of contactswithappropriategovernmental,environmental, scientificandacademic groupsisimportant.TheNSSisaffiliated with the American Association for the Advancement of Science and, as such, possesses potential resources in the scientificandacademic areas. Also, many cavers are professionalsinvarious scientific and academiC roles and their expertise can be brought to bear in many cases. Cavers mustbepreparedtomeet threats and criticism promptlyandforcefully. Media organizations often have tight deadlines, and news releases that arrive too latesimply have no impact.Inlight of that, cavers seized the opportunity for some positive publicity this year when a member of the Carlsbad, N.M. mayor's task force on Lechuguilla Cave accused
caveexplorersofcuttingadealwith government agencies and obtaining their own "private Disneyland" through the Lechuguilla Cave Pr-oject Inc. An NSS news release, mailedandfaxed promptly toallappropriate New Mexico media groups, knocked down these allegationsandquoted a respected New Mexico geologist who,asithappened, planned to addressthecity panelthenext week.Sothe release containedanothergood news angle as a bonus! Preparation of news rl;!leases goes beyondthecourseandscopeof this paper, butthetechniquesofthesePRtools lend themselves quite welltocave conservation. Usingthe"nobrag, just fact" approach, it's agoodidea for cavers to publicize anysuccessesingatingprojects,vandalism deterrence, etc. earlyandoftenthrough every available means. Daily and weekly newspapers, magazines, electronic media (television and radio stations), wire servicesandother media are hungry for news. Caves, and especially emergencies involving them, have good news valueasa general rule.Organizationsthatleadincaveconservation have discovered that, through many methods, it's wise to haveanongoing environmental inventory.IntheNSS, an active Conservation Committee oversees a Cave Wilderness Subcommittee, concerned with passage of legislation to create such a designation. Lobbying, a PR tool,isusedinthis regard,asitwas with passage of the Federal Cave Resource Protection Act.TheNSS created a professional multimedia showonunderground wilderness and presented it to members of Congress and others. Society members testifiedinhearingsonCapitolHilland aidedinthelegislation's passage.TheNSS Conservation and Management Section77and its members have also been instrumentalinthisandotherenvironmental efforts. Memberstryto keep abreast of every major developmentinthe cave conservation scene and anticipate changes that may affect the Society and cavers.Aswasmentioned earlier, the NSS has promulgated a conservation policy statement. This helped its members as a wholesetprioritiesinconservation.TheConservation Committee has also designed and printed two sets of cave brochures, one for cavers and another for non-cavers.Theycontainstrongcave conservation messages. To helpinassembling, analyzing and interpreting dataonthe caveenvironment,theConservationandManagement Section publishes a newsletter,TheCave Conservationist.Ithas a mailinglistof hundreds andisalso distributed frequently to grottos and other NSS internal organizations. Other informational materialsoncave and bat conservation are also available from the NSS, including the "Bats Need Friends" series.Itincludesbrochures,T-shirtsandotherpromotional items.TheSociety strives throughvariouspublications,includingTheConservationist, to keep members informed of cave conservation programs and plans, and especially of their rolesinsuch projects. Many experts are available both from NSS membershipandallied groups to helpincave conservation.Onetask of public relationsisto communicate technical information to laypersons. Geologists, biologists, hydrologists and others may mean what they say but they can't always say that they mean so that thegeneralpubliccancomprehendit.Incommunicating with the scientific community, cavers can use(I)publication of scientific materialsinappropriate journals,(2)letters to
78the editors of such journals,(3)journaladvertisements,(4)articlesinthe semiprofessional press,(5)directmailtowelltargeted groups,(6)seminars, symposia and other scientific meetings and(7)personalvisitstoselected scientific leaders. Throughallthepublicity,toolsavailable,theNSSand cavers candoalotto establish their reputation for credibilityinthe conservation area,byacts aswellaswords.Onebywordinpublicrelationsisto demand strict accuracyinallmaterials relating to cave conservation.Itisimportant that every major pointincave conservation communicationbesupportedbyscientific documentation. Thatmakesitmucheasier tofendoffsensationalized attacksinthe press andtomaintain goodwill.Cave publicists dealing withtheenvironmentalpressconfront special problems. Several rules are keptbysuccessful.PRpeopleinsuch dealings.Firstistheoldadage,"Knowyour editor andknowhisbook."Publicistsshould take time to readuponthe publication anditswriter so that there won'tbeany surprises. Secondly, conservationistsmustknowtheir subject matterwell.Some have beenleftfeelingstupidbysharp-witted andqUick-tonguedreporters and editors.And,finally,lookfornewsangles that the prosmaynot have thoughtof.Thenewscanbehowdirty,polluted orvandalizedthe caveis.Buta more far-reaching storyiswhat are the clean-up costs and methods, whatiseffectiveand what isn't andwhowillpayforit.Askingmore questions thanyouanswer to a reporterisa good guidelineforhowthings are going.Inthis decadeofrenewed environmentalactivism,there are more controversial tacticsincave conservation. Surprisingly, some1989Cave Management Proceedings beleaguered caves have theirownchampions,akinto the Greenpeace organization.InAustin,Texas, when Tooth Cave and other nearby caveswerethreatenedbydevelopmentfora shopping center, membersofEarthFirst!staged asit-inofsorts at the cavesinprotest. Themovewaseffectiveinthatitdidgrab headlines andpublicizethe problem,inmuchthe samewaythat Greenpeace has gotten international attention and results -bystormingillegalfishingvesselsand confronting .babyseal clubbers.Butthere are dangersfromthis technique. On the down side,itisveryconfrontational and can createitsowncrisis.Inthe case of Greenpeace, ships canbeblownup.Inthe EarthFirst!instance, members werejailedon criminal complaints.Also,better coordinationwithcaving groupscouldhaveensured that the activists were better versed on the issuesinvolvedinsaving the caves.Atthe time, oneAustincaverpubliclycriticizedthe activists' methods, saying a more toned-downapproach might have worked.Inthisregard,publicityissometimes a gamble. Cavers andfriendsof caves have to decide whether the benefits are worth therisk.Asithappened, one outcome of the Tooth Cave controversywasthat cave gating projects were started and a government-backed project toidentifyany rare speciesoforganismswithinthe caveswasbegun.
m.Conclusion Over thepastdecade, cave conservation has progressed from a little-known offshoot oftheenvironmental movement to attain a place of its own, withtheattendantpublicity whichthatposition generates.Perhapsthe best examples of thisphenomenonhave occurred overthelastthreeyears, initially with nationalnewscoverageofasmallArkansascommunity's effortstofight a toxic wastedump'splacement in a caving area. More recently,atleast two ofthethreenational television networks carried enterprise stories about Lechuguilla CaveinNew Mexico andcavers'effortsbothtosaveitfromcommercializationandalso to help createanunderground wilderness within. Garnering national publicity for a causeiscrucialtomolding public opinion.Fromthat, practicesandlawscanbe conformed with conservation goals. Caversadntheir organizations, withthehelp of businessandgovernment,aremakingthesechangeswith a campaign that comes, literally, from belowthegrassroots.79
801989Cave Management ProceedingsENDANGEREDFROMCAVES NEAR AUSTIN,TEXASbyWilliam R. Elliott,Ph.D. Texas Speleological Survey12102Grimsley Drive Austin, Texas78759 ABSTRACT Fivetroglobitic species from the Austin, Texas region were listed as endangeredin1988.Subsequentfieldstudies have expanded the known ranges of some of the species, but most are very limitedindistribution and vulnerable to numerous threats. Karst presetves may be set aside to protect the species. A study was conducted of32cavesinthe Austin, Texas, area to clarify the status and range offiveendangered arthropod species. The study was supportedbythe Texas Parks andWildlifeDepartment and the Texas Na ture Conservancy as part of a group of endangered species studies for the Austin Regional Habi tat Conservation Plan, now called the Balcones Canyonlands Conservation Plan (BCCP). The BCCPisa committee of state and local agen cies, developers, and conservation groups begun on the recommendation of the U.S. Fish andWildlifeSetvice(Elliottand Reddell, 1989). Thefivespecies of endangered cave arthropods are:Texella reddelliGoodnight and Goodnight (1967), the Bee Creek Cave Harvestman;Microcreagris texanaMuchmore (1969), the Tooth Cave Pseudo scorpion;Neoleptonetamyopica(Gertsch) (1974), the Tooth Cave Spider;RhadinepersephoneBarr(1974), the Tooth Cave Ground Beetle; andTexamauropsreddelliBarrandSteeves(1963),theKretschmarr Cave Mold Beetle. These spe cies had long been known and studiedbya number of researchers under the auspices of the Texas System of Natural Laboratories (Reddell, 1984).Thespecies were listedbyUSFWSinresponse to a petition initiatedin1986bythe Travis Audubon Society (Cham bers and Jahrsdoerfer, 1988). Since thelisting, several hydrogeological and biological studies have been commissionedinthe Austin area (Veni, 1988b,c; Reddell, 1989). Texas has a diverse cave fauna with over900species recorded (Elliott,1978a;Reddell,1965,1966,1970,1971). About210species are troglobites, but only102of these troglobites are described. Tooth Cave has the most diverse cave faunainthe Southwest U.S. and contains four of the endangered species under study. The known distribution of most
of thefivespecies seems to be limited to a portion of the Jollyville Plateau. The Jollyville Plateauisanirregularly shaped outcrop of Edwards Limestone, about 5 milesindiameter, located just northeast of the Colorado River and Lake Travisinnorthwest ern Travis County. Based on the Texas Speleological Survey database and Veni (1988a), at least 5% of the approximately2,500known cavesinTexas have been destroyed orfilled.How ever,inthe areas around San Antonio and Austin, intense urbanization has resultedina20%loss of known cavesinthe last20years. A projection of this 20-year destruction rate for Travis County indicates there may be only 73% of the caves leftinthe year2000.Bythe year2010there may be about 66%left.Bythe year2100there may be only 7% (12 caves) remaining.Therestricted distribution of many troglobites resultsintheir extreme vulner ability to extinction. Physical destruction of thecave, pollutionbypesticides and other substances, introduction of foreign species such asfireants, disruption of groundwater, and loss of habitat for species such as bats and cave crickets which provide food for the ecosys tem mayallplay important rolesinthe extirpation of the cave fauna. Habitat protection and land use planning are much more effective methods of conserving arthropod species than are last-ditch rescue efforts. (Elliott,1978b,1981). Results of the study are asfollows:1.Therange ofonespecies of beetle(Rhadine persephone)was found to extend beyond the area ofTheParke subdivision on81the Jollyville Plateau to three caves near Cedar Park, about 6 miles north. However, these caves are imminently threatenedbyland development. 2. The range of one species of spider(Neoleptoneta myopica)wasextended to a cave about one mile south of The Parke. However, this caveisthreatenedbyitsprox imity to a new highway under construction. 3. The range of the harvestman species(Texella reddelli)has been tentatively revisedbyrecent taxonomic study of old and new material, which indicate that this speciesisactually limited to three caves south of the Colorado River. One of these cavesisunder secure protection and oneismoderatelywellprotected. The status of the thirdisuncertain.T exella reddellidoes not occurinthe Tooth Cave area as previously thought. There appear to be other, as yet undescribedTexellaspeciesinthe Austin area. The Tooth Cave harvestmanisa new species that appears to range from The Parke area to West Austin to near Round Rockinperhaps nine caves. Few of these caves are protected from land development and human disturbance. 4. No individuals could be found of the pseudoscorpionMicrocreagris texanaand the mold beetleTexamaurops reddelli.These species are typically rareinnumbers and therefore difficult to study. However,itispossible that unfavorable ecological condi tions have already affected their abundance, or else they are actually Iimitedto only afewcaves. 5. Several possible new species were revealed during the study:sixnew species ofCicurina (Cicurella)spider, one newMicrocreagrispseudoscorpion, and a cave adaptedEuryceasalamander.
826. The study increased the understanding of Texas cave biogeography, which has had a long and complex evolutionary history. 7. A number of different habitat manage ment remedies are proposed and their relative merits considered. The proposed rem edieswillbe further consideredbythe BCCP. Actions could include negotiating the donation or purchase of landforsmall preserves around some of the caves, fencing and berming these preserves and protecting the native vegation, gating some entrances, public education and cave stewardshi p pro grams supportedbythe City of Austin and the Texas Nature Conservancy, and long term ecological studies of some of the caves. References Barr, T.C., Jr. 1974. RevisionofRhadineLeConte (Coleoptera,. Carabidae).I.The subterranea group. Amer.Mus.Novitates, No.2539.30pp. Barr, T.C., Jr. andH.RSteeves, Jr. 1963.Texamaurops,a new genusofpselaphids from cavesinCentral Texas (Coleoptera:Pselaphidae). Coleopterists' Bull., 17: 117-120. Chambers, S.M., and S. Jahrsdoerfer.1988.Fed. Reg., 53(180),16September, pp.36029-36033.Elliott,W.RI978a.The cave faunaofTexas. pp.59-63inFieseler,RG.,J. Jasek, andM.Jasek (eds.),Anintro duction to the caves of Texas.Nat!.Speleo!. Soc. Convention Guidebook, 19. Elliott,W.R1978b. The New Melones cave harvestman transplant. Report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,1989Cave Management ProceedingsSacramento, California.62pp. Elliott,W.R1981.Damming up the caves. Caving Internat!. Mag., 10: 38-41. Elliott,W.R,andJ.RReddell.1989.The status and range offiveendangered arthropods from cavesinthe Austin, Texas region. A report on a study sup portedbythe Texas Parks andWildlifeDepartment and the Texas Nature Con servancyforthe Austin Regional Habitat Conservation Plan. i+103pp.Gertsch, W.J. 1974.Thespider family LeptonetidaeinNorth America. J. Arachno!.,1:145-203. Goodnight, C.J. andM.L.Goodnight.1967.Opilionida from Texas caves (Opiliones, Phalangodidae). Amer.Mus.Novitates, No.2301.8 pp. Holsinger,J.R1967.Systematics, specia tion, and distribution of the subterranean amphipod genusStygonectes(Gammaridae).Bull.U.S.Nat!.Mus., 259.176pp. Muchmore, W.B.1969.New species and records of cavernicolous pseudoscorpions of the genusMicrocreagris(Arachnida,Chelonethida, Neobisiidae, Ideobisiinae). Amer.Mus.Novitates, No.2932.21 pp. Reddell,J.R1965.A checklist of the cave fauna of Texas.I.TheInvertebrata (exclusive of Insecta). Texas Journal of Science, 17: 143-187. Reddell,J.R1966.A checklist of the cave fauna of Texas.II.Insecta. Texas Journal of Science, 18:25-56. Reddell,J.R1970.A checklist of the cave fauna of Texas.N.Additional --. records of Invertebrata (exclusive of Insecta). Texas Journalof
Science,21:389-415.Reddell, J.R.1971.A checklist of the cave fauna of Texas.V.Additional records of Insecta. Texas Journal of Science, 22:47-65. Reddell, J.R.1984.Report on the caves and cave fauna of The Parke, Travis County, Texas. Unpublished report submitted to Texas System of Natural Laboratories. Austin, Texas.25pp. Reddell, J.R.1989.Austin Outer Parkway, State Highway 45, Segments 3 and 4, Environmental Impact on Cave Fauna. Report prepared for Texas Department of Highways and Public Transportation. Veni,G.1988a.The caves of Bexar County. Speleol. Monogr., 2. Tex. Mem. Museum.300pp,184maps,42photographs. Veni,G.and Associates. 1988b. Hydrogeologic investigation of the Jollyville Plateau karst, Travis County, Texas. Report preparedforParke Investors Ltd.,620Investors Ltd., and U.S. Fish andWildlifeService. Veni,G.and Associates. 1988c. Hydrogeologic and biologic investiga tion of McDonald Cave, Travis County, Texas. Report prepared for Murfee Engineering. Co., Austin, Texas.83
841989Cave Management ProceedingsWestCave:Management,ProblemsandSolutionsbyJohn AhmsWest Cave Preserve AbstractA deep, cool canyon with a cave and waterfall cuts into the oakandcedar grasslands of theHillCountry. West Cave Preserve, a moist sanctuary for cypress, moss and ferns that line spring-fed pools, seems out of place in the drier surrounding land.Leftundeveloped through the years, West Cave acquired a reputation among campers who crept in, sometimes illegally. Also known asHammett'sCave,itwasrapidly vandalized.In1974,JohnWatson bought the cave and founded West Cave Preserve. Due to funding problems,theland had to be sold in1981to the Lower Colorado RIver Authority, who then leaseditback to the corporation for99years. Startingin1974,when West Cave was purchased, funding has been a problem for this private cave preserve.Theland would havetobe restored beforeitcould be open to the public. Under the caretakers' supervision, volunteers carried out trash and built and maintained trails.DUringJohnAhrns' stewardship, the preserve became more beautiful each year. Dedication alone was not enough to prevent the land from being sold to the Lower Colorado River Authority, who leaseditback. Problems and low-cost solutionsarepart oftheWest Cave heritage.
85,, .. --.-=.. --:'!":... -. .--\ __ lIIIIIIl:::=>.....--1\d'Drafted..,....s-tl.12-17-02 . ,.... 1-23-n TS5 ."".,.ltaoeSur....,..SIMl\. J. IIecideIl. 6 1161.......9-9-n . F ......c.litmoIr..lwcCII WestcavePreserve T",,",Co.. T_
87TheOverusedorAbusedCaveResource:ProblemsandSolutionsbyDavidG.Foster American Cave Conservation Association Horse Cave, Kentucky AbstractTheoverused and abused cave resourceisa reflection of the way the American society views cave resources. For most Americans, caves are a recreational resource. The public does not relate caves with anything relevantintheir ownlives.A small percentage of the nation's caves are plaguedbyoveruse. Some are developed as publiclyorprivately operated show caves. Most major karst regions have a fewwildcaves, such as Virginia's New River Cave, which have become popular among the locals. High numbers of visitorstothese caves make adequate protection of the resource difficult. An even larger percentage of the nation's caves are being abusedbyactions occurring on the surface. Poor land management above a cave system often equates with destruction of the underlying resource. These two areas of overuse and abuse are examined.Theoverused and abused cave resourceisa reflection oftheway the American society views cave resources. For most Americans, caves are a recreational resource. The public does not relate caves with anything relevantintheir own lives. A small percentage of the nation's caves are plaguedbyoveruse. Some are developed as publiclyorprivately oper ated show caves. Most major karst regions have a fewwildcaves, such as Virginia's New River Cave, which have become popular among the locals. High numbers of visitors to these caves make adequate protection of the resource difficult. An even larger percentage of the nation's caves are being abusedbyactions occurringonthe surface. Poor land management above a cave system often equates with destruction of the underlying resource. These two areas of overuse and abuse are examined. The Overused and Abused CaveResourceisa reflection of the way the American society views cave resources. For most Ameri cans, caves are a recreational resource. The public does not relate caves with anything relevantintheir ownlives.A small percentage of the nation's caves are plaguedbyoveruse. Some are developed
88as public or privately operated show caves. Most majorkarstregions have afewwildcaves, such as Virginia's New River Cave, which have. become popular among thelocals.Thehigh numbers of visitors to these caves make adequate protection of the re source difftcuh. An even larger percentage of the nation's caves are being abusedbyactions occurring on the surface. Poor land management above a cave system often equates with destruction of the underlying resource.Itisthese two areas of overuse and abuse whichwillbe examinedinthis paper.Thedamage donebyactual visitors to cave systems includes everything from inten tional vandalism to lent left from the visitors clothing.Itincludes algal damage from poor lighting systemsinshow caves.Itincludes the three men whokilledseveral hundred batsina Kentucky cave several years ago.Itincludes National Park tours which run a hundred visitor per tour into the cave.Itincludes thefellowwho writes his name on thewalland the adventurer who leaves the first footprintinan unexplored area. Many of these problems can be ad dressedbyincreasing our educational efforts. Human nature makesitunlikely that we can ever completely stop vandalism from occur ring norwillwe stop cavers from being curi ous.Thebestwe can doiscreateanenviron ment that discourages vandalism and makesitharder to do actual damage.Insome places protective gates must be constructed. We must actively manage highly visited developed and undeveloped caves, dis courage overvisitation of undeveloped caves, and encourage the establishment oflowimpact trails. Conservation should be a main1989Cave Management Proceedingstheme of any novice trip.Thesame considerations apply to public and private show caves.Theshow caves must promote visitation to survive, however, thereismuch they can do to protect their invest mentbydeveloping lighting systems which reduce algal growth, incorporating conserva tion into their public message, and basically generatinganatmosphere that gives the publicthe impression that theyareina preserve or a museum, notanamusement park. Our nation's most highly visible national parks shouldbeencouraged to take a radical step. Caves such as Mammoth and Carlsbad Caverns are under a congressional mandate to promote and regulate their use ...bysuch means and measuresasconform to the funda mental purpose of said parks ... which purposeisto conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and thewildUfetherein and to provide for the enjoyment of the sameinsuch manner andbysuch meansaswillleave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future gen erations. (16 USC1)Some of our national parks apparently interpret the use of the word "promote" to mean running as many people through a cave tour as canbeconvinced to go! This cave management strategy leads to a low quality cave experiencebythousands of people each year. To the American mind, importanceisoften assigned to an object based on its rarity and its ability to entertain.TheMacdonalds approach usedbythe National Park service contributes greatly to the devaluation of cavesinthe public perception. This perception shouldbealtered. A larger problem affecting many cavesisthe impact of surface activities w@ch ignore underlying geologic conditions.Inrural
America dumpinginsinkholesisamajorproblem and onewhichisoften compoundedbywellmeaning solutions. Oneofthe bestknownexamplesofapollutedcave systemisHiddenRiverCaveintheCityofHorse Cave,Kentucky.Both thecaveand the City's water supply were threatenedbynumerous sewage dischargesinsinkholes and rockfissuresby.localhouseholds andbusinessesinthe 1930's and 1940's. The solution: The townbuiltawastewater treatment plantin1964 and begandisposingallofthe "treated sewage" into onebigholeinthe ground ... upstreamfromHiddenRiverCave. Over 10milliondollarsand 25 years later the problemisstillbeing corrected and citizensofHorseCavelivewiththe odorofsewageinthe downtownair.HiddenRiverCaveshouldbeviewedina similar manner as the canaryinthemine.The canary that dies when theairgoesbadserves as avisibleexample that somethingbadisoccurringinthemine.HiddenRiverCaveserves as avisibleexample that somethingbadishappening to groundwaterinAmerica's karst regions. The canarydiedinHiddenRiverCave more than40years ago. Thelocalsare justnowbeginning to see thelight.The dlfficultjobisto convince those that don'tlivewithinsmellingdistance. A similar mistakeisoften madeinthe nameofsolutions tosolidwastedisposalproblems.InHart Countyweareaskingcitizens to stop dumpinginSinkholes,yetouronlylegallandfillserves as rechargefora significant karst area. Thousandsofcommunities across the nation are under pressure tofindan adequatesitto disposeofgarbage. Rather thanpaythe89costofrecycling,mostwouldrather disposeofwasteina dump, preferablyinsomeoneelsesbackyard.Karstregions are poor places to putsolidwaste dumps.Soilsareusuallythin andgood.sites are hard tofind.To thoseunfamiliarwithkarstitseems natural todumpinasinkhold,afterall,they arefoundand deeplikea trashcan.Recentlya proposedlandfillwasnearlysitedwhichthreatened theBuffaloNationalRiver.Thelandfillwasdefeatedina court battlewiththehelpoftheACCA,NSS,the National Parkserviceand the OzarkUndergroundLab.The case should neverhavecometoingthelandfilltobepoorly sited, and strong oppositionbylocalsand the aforementioned groups, the Arkansas DepartmentofPollutionandEcologyapproved the permit. The AmericanCaveConservationAssociationisnowinvolvedwithasimilarsituationinHart County,Kentucky.Alandfillpermitinanarea pockmarkedbycaves,sinkholesandsinkingstreamsisunderreviewbythe StateofKentucky.Thislandfillmayaffect themainwatersupplyfor6 counties andMammothCaveNational Park. GreenRiverEnvironmental, thefirmdevelopingthelandfill,insiststhat the siteisnotlocatedinakarstterrain. Situationssuchas this arelikelyto become more commonplaceasavailablelandfillsites becomefilled,unless \Ale can mount a majorpublicawareness effort against thesitingoflandfillsinporouskarstterrains. Avarietyofother problems relatingtosurfaceusecontinue to beset cave systemsinhighlypopulated areas. Change the surfacerunoffbyconstructing a parkinglotandyou
90change the conditions that created the underlyingcave.Fillinsinkholesfordevelopment and you notonlychange the cave environ ment, you create a potentialfloodingor sulT sidence problem. Clearlyitisinthe nation's best interest to understand the nature of karst terrains and land use problemsin these areas.Byhelping thepublicto prevent karst related mistakes,wecan inadvertantly protect the caves aswell.Inconclusion, significant progress has been made since the1980National Cave Management Symposium highlighted ground water problemsinthe central Kentucky karstlands. Since that time there has been abigincreaseincooperative efforts among cavers and federal agencies. Numerous caves have been acquiredbythe Nature Conservancy,NSSGrottos, and various individualsforthe purposeof preserv ingtheir environmental and recreationalvalue.The American Cave Conservation Associa tion was establishedinthis decade as a new voiceincave conservation. The United States Congress recently signed federal cavelegislation intolaw.Muchhas been happening ...butnot enough! Despite the major increasesinavailable cave management information and expertise, the Americanpublicfor the most part remains ignorant of caves and problems associatedwithcaves. The maxim, "out of sight, outofmind"applies practically without exception to cavesinthepublicperception.Ifitistrue that scientists talk mostly to other scientists, the same canbesaidforresource managers. Twice a yearwemeet at the National Cave Management Symposium to present our "solutions" to cave manage ment problems.Ifweare going tosolvethe1989Cave Management Proceedingsproblemsofthe next century thepublicmustbeinvolved.Essentially,wethe "technicrats" must become the "communicators". Uke wise, America's communicators must become better informed. This themewasrecently addressedbyTomAleyat the1989convention of the National Cave Association, representing the nation's show cave operators. TheNCAas a whole reaches over 8milliontourists each year, yet thereislittlecontact between these professional cave communicators and scien tists, federal and nonprofit cave managers, and cavers. The show cave industry could helpusbuildthe bridgesweneed to reach thepublicwith our message. Additionallyweneed to focus moreeffort on improving the quality of earth science teachinginour nation's school systems.Inmany schools earth scienceistaughtonly'at the Jr. Highlevelandisgiven little emphasis. Perhaps every student doesn't need to know how tobuilda rocket engine, but everyone should understand the nature of the land upon which theylive.Anythinglessimplies more than scientificilliteracy,itimplies a basiclackofskillsnecessaryforsurvivalina world of finite and abused resources. I won't begin to address the needsforupdating our schools here, however, I suggest that thisisan area where most ofuscaneasilyhave abiglocalimpact. Educationisatbestalongterm solution which does not provideeasilydocumented results.Itis,however, the directionwemust go to protect caves. Thepublicdoesn'tgivea damn..about anything thatitdoesn't understand and value.
91MANAGINGBATCAVESbyMatthew StaffordU.S.BureauofLandManagement Carlsbad,N.M.ABSTRACTWhile the primary management concern for a known bat cave may be protection of the resident bat colony, carefully regulated recre ation and scientific use can be allowed. Restrictionsonthelevelorseasons of use can mitigate impacts on the colony. Several bat cavesonpublic landsinsotheast New Mexico have been the subject of bat population studies. These caves are used as examplesof managing caves for protection aswellas public use.Need for Special ManagementBatsarehighly beneficial to mankind andfilla vital ecological niche. A large colony of batscanconsume tons of night-flying insect pests each summer night.Thebats them selves often actasprimary energy producers foranentire spelean ecosystem.Theguano they produce and the bodies of dead bats provide a habitat and food source for hun dredsorthousands of insects which,intum,arefood for higher level consumers. Caves that provide habitat for cave-dwell ing bats need special management attention. Many species of batswillabandon a roost siteifunduly disturbed and may not be able tofindanothersuitable one. Hibernating batswillburn up important fat reservesif"disturbed enough to cause arousal from hibernation and may not survive the winter. Species such as the Indiana Gray Bat, and subspecies of the Big-Eared Bat are listed as threatenedorendangeredbythe U.S. Fish andWildlifeService. Several other species have been placedinCategory 2, which means that they are currently under study for listing.Inmany cases, habitat disturbanceordestruc tionislisted as a factorinthe declining population numbers. Thus,itisextremely important to addressanindigenous bat colonyinany cave management plans.UseofCaves by BatsBatswilluse a cave for the following reasons:1)Asahibemaculum.Bats that hibernatewillchoose a fairly cold cave as a winter roost.Inthe Southwest, theywillbegin entering the caveinlatefall,gradually increas inginnumbers up to a peak countinmid to
92late January. Then the populationwillde crease until they haveallleftbythe end of April.2)Asanurserysite.Nursery caves or rooms are generally warmer and may contain a high ceilingordome. Maleswillroostinanother room of the cave or a completely different location. The young are usually bornbythe middle of June.3)Asatransientortemporaryroost.Migrating batswilloccasionally 'stop off' at a cave along their migration route to spend afewdays before moving on. This occursinthe migration seasons andisthe reason why late spring and earlyfallpopulations are larger thanmidsummer. Some batswilluse a cave as a temporary night roost during their feeding forays. Hibernating bats are sensitive to the environmental factors of their roost site. Tem perature, humidity and airflowallmustfallwithin a narrow range to be acceptable.InFort Stanton Cave, New Mexico, the batswillmove from location to locationinthe early part of the season tofinda suitable micro climate. During deep hibernation, the bat's body temperature drops to within a few de grees of the surrounding temperature.Allmetabolic functionswillslow tremendously. When a batisdisturbed enough to cause arousal from this state, significant quantities of stored fat are used to facilitate arousal. Awak ening from and returning to hibernation over a several hour period uses as much fat energy as stayinginhibernation for 2 to 3 weeks (Poulson, 1975). There are no insects about to feed on so the fat reserves cannot be replenished and the bat may starve before spring. Another critical periodinthe bat'slives1989Cave Management Proceedingsisthe timejustbefore, during and after the young of the year are born. Human distur bance then may cause the colony to leave the nursery site or abandon the young. Bats may be observedinsome manner without negative effects. Hundreds of park visitors watch the batsflyout of Carlsbad Cavern each summer evening. This has been going on for sixty years but the populationisstable and may be increasing. Summer bat counts are most easily conductedbycounting the bats as they leave a cave.UseofCaves by HumansRecreational useisthe most common use of cavesinthe United States. There are four active Grottos and a Region of the Na tional Speleological Societyinthe vicinity of Southeast New Mexico. Several hundred people a year enter each of the more popular caves managedbyBureau oflandManage ment(BLM).Some of these caves also contain bat colonies at certain times of the year. Other reasons people visitBLMcaves are for educationalorscientific purposes.Thescience of speleologyisstill a youngoneand growing rapidly, so thereismuch to be learned about the world below. Researchers and educational groups visit caves as part of their studies. Studies of bat populations and their habitats are included.Management StrategiesA management strategy,or plan, willprescribe the management actions for a cave for several years.Theadvantage of having a written plan of actionisto provide a consistent management policyinthe event of personnel
changes. A first step in developing a management strategy for a caveisto evaluate the need for regulation of use. Current levels of use, future potentialandthe sensitivity of the resource (bats) to disturbance need to be assessed. The more valuable a caveisin terms of its scenic, scientific and recreational opportunities and the more vulnerableitisto damage, the higher the need for active use regulation. The higher the level of public awareness of the cave and its location, the greater the need for regulation (Thornton, 1986). If a management planiswritten,itshould contain a section on acceptablelevelsof change totheresourcesandthe consequent actions to take placeifthe levels are exceeded. An adopted management strategy shouldbedynamicandsubject to modification to meet any new situations which might arise. Several strategies have been usedbyBLMto protect bat roosts: Spatial Restric tions Closing off a room or passage to protect a nursery site. Thiswillworkifthe nursery siteissituated away from the primary travel routes.Theclosed areas are markedbyflaggingorexplanatory signs. Seasonal Restrictions Recreational useislimited to the times of year that bats are notinthe cave. For example, useisalloweddUringthe middle of the year for winter roost caves andinthe winter for sum mer roosts. Cavers are directed to other cavesdUringtheclosed season. Another type of restriction basedontimeisto allow caving tripsinonly at night after the bats haveleftthe cave for their nightly feeding flights. Guided Trips Having a caving triplefbyaBLMemployeeorvolunteer provides some control over the group's activities. This includes93avoiding undue disturbance and entrance to closed areas. Cave Gates To impose the restrictions stated aboveitisusually necessary to install a gate. Great care should be usedinthe design of the gate. A poor design can defeat the purpose of such a protective struc ture.Itmay cause alterationsinthe cave environmentbyinterruptingorchanging air and waterflowandbyinterfering or blocking the movement ofwildlifesuch as bats to and from the cave (Thornton 1986).Inone cave that acts as a nursery roost,BLMhas tried leaving the gate door open when the bats are absent and lockingitwhen the bats returninthe spring. Thisisoneform of a seasonal restriction. Interpretation Interpretive talks,gUidedtours, literature and displays can help to improve the public's appreciation of bats.Ifthe public appreciates bats, then theywillbemorelikelyto abidebyany restrictions en acted to protect them. An agency's roleinthe protection of endangered or threatened spe cies of bats can be the basis for an admission of prideinits program (Mohr, 1975).Allpersonnel that come into contact with the caving public should be informed about bats and cave management.MonitoringMonitoring the status of the bat colony and thelevelof useisimportantinevaluating the effectiveness of any management strat egy. The population should be censused periodically to determine its stability.Ifa declineisoccurring, possible measures to rectify the situation need tobedeveloped. These may include additional restrictions on use, modification of existing gates, restoration of excavated entrances or other methods
94depending on the situation.Ifa management planiswritten, the section on acceptable levels of change should describetheconsequent actions to take placeifthe levels are exceeded.BatPopulation StudiesI have been conducting hibernating batpopulationstudies in CrystalCaverns,Crockett's Torgac and Ft. Stanton caves. The species of bats involved were Western Big Eared (Plecotus townsendiD, Cave Myotis (My otis velifer) and Small-FootedMyotis (Myotissubulatusl. Thestudies were conductedbyentering the cavesdUringthe hibernation season (October-April) and manually counting the bats.Inthe case of the Cave Myotis, the bats were often too closely packed together to obtain an accurate count, so an estimate of the ceiling space coveredbybats was multipliedbya conversion factor of158bats per square foot (Barbour andDavis).Temperatures were measured for each hibernaculum area.Fort Stanton CaveFort Stanton Caveisa winter roost only, and counts have been taken here since1977.The resulting eleven years of data are pre sentedinFigure 1 (two species added to gether). These results seem to show afiveyear cycle of high and low population num bers. High peak counts were recordedinthe77/78season,fiveyears laterinthe82/83season and againfiveyears after that in the87/88season. Low counts were recordedinthe79/80season andin85/86(the low may have beenin84/85,but dataismissing).Ifthis pattern continues without extreme troughs1989Cave Management Proceedings(lessthan450bats) then the population would be considered stable. During the entire study, recreational cave trips were allowed.Thelimits were established atonetrip per monthdUringthe hibernating season, and guided tours only.Thepurpose of having a guideisto make sure that the party moves through the hibernating areaqUicklyandqUietly,so as not to disturb the bats.Torgac CaveTorgac Caveisunusual becauseitacts as both a hibernaculum and a summer nursery site. A warmer, remote room in the cave provides a nursery for about2,000Cave Myotis.Thenurseryisclosed to visitors andisfar enough from the primary travel routes that distrubanceisavoided.Inwinter, Cave Myotis, Western Big-Eared and Small-Footed Myotis are found hibernatinginalmostallaccessible passages. T eh Cave Myotisseemthe most easily dis turbed, so the areas of the cave that they prefer are avoided bytheBLM-ledtrips. VisitationisrestricteddUringthe hibernating season.SummerRoostSitesSummer censuses are being conducted at several cavesinthe Carlsbad area. The counts are takenbyobserving the bats as they exit the caves. Cave Myotisand Mexi<..::m Free-Tailed ITadarida brasiliensis) are the pri mary species here.Thesummer roostsinthese caves are generallyinisolated cave passagesorrooms away from the main travel routes. They are closed to visitation and roped off.Ifthe cave specialist determines that disturbance of the nurseriesisoccurring, fur-
ther protection measureswillbeimposed.Insummary, protectionofa resident bat colony anditscave habitatishighlyimportant and shouldbeaddressedinanycavemanage ment activities. Some typeofplanor manage ment strategy shouldbepreparedtosetpolicyfora particular cave.Whilemanyprotection actions require closing thecaveto visitation, some carefully monitored recreationalusemaybeallowed.BLMinsoutheastNewMexicohas managed caves containing bat coloniesforseveral years and has conducted studies to determine when the bats areinthe cave, how they areusingitand what disturbs them. Information gatheredfromthesestudiesisused to formulate cave-specific manage ment plansforfuture guidance. References Cited Barbour,R.,andW.Davis,1969.BatsofAmerica. TheUniversityPressofKentucky. Mohr, C., 1975. The ProtectionofThreatened Cave Bats.National Cave Management Symposium Proceedings.Speleobooks, Albuquerque,NM.Poulson, T., 1975. ManagementofBiologicalResourcesinCaves. NationalCaveManagement Symposium Proceedings.Speleobooks, Albuquerque,NM.Thornton,J.,1986. RegulatingUse-A Cave Management Tool.ACCACave Management Series,Vol.I,No.3.American Cave Conservation Association.95
961989CaveManagementProceedings Radio Surveillance 01 CaveResourcesbyBarryBennett TexasParksandWUdl1feDepartmentDel Rio, Texas AbstractBecauseofremotely located shelter cave rockartat Seminole Canyon StateHistoricalPark, the Texas Parks andWildlifeDepart mentinstalledsurveillancedevices.Thiscasestudydiscusses the system's detection and remote altertingofparkstaffofIntrudersInrestricted areasofthe park,whichisrichinprehistoric rock art and artifacts. Figure1.Seminole Canyon Cave IeU ii' N -"I ProfileLookin, North,.,-..... ......-
97BLM -SolvingCaveManagementProblemsThroUghthePlanningSystembyJames R.Goodbar-HLM Cave SpecialistCarlsbad. New MexicoABSTRACTThe primary methodforsolvingmajorissuerelated, problemswithinthe BureauofLandManagementisitsplanningsystem.The Bureauisdirectedtoinitiate a planning processbythe FederalLandPolicyand ManagementActof1976. The FederalCaveResources ProtectionActof1988 requires thatcavesare consideredinthat planning process. The BureauusesaResourceManagement Plan and anActivityPlanto address theissuessurrounding resource managementconflictsandprovidesolutionsinamultipleuseagency.Thispaperdiscussesthe processandcomponentsofthe Resource ManagementPlanand theActivityPlan.Oneofthe primary problemsoMngmechanismsusedbythe BureauofLandManagement(BLM)isits' planningsystem.The preceptsofthis system areoutlinedInSection 202ofthe FederalLandPolicyand ManagementAct(FLPMA)of1976. ThebasicfoundationoftheBLMplanning system takes into consideration several different con cepts and principlesinorder todevelopa coordinated plan. Theseinclude:1)the principlesofmultipleuseand sustainedyield,2)a systematic interdisciplinary approach,3)protectionofareasofcriticalenvironmental concern,4)considerationofpresent and po tential usesofpubliclands,5)considerationoftherelativescarcityofthevaluesinvolved,6)long-termversusshort-term benefits, and7)coordinationwithotherfederal,state,andlocalgovernments. Anothervitallyimportant component to the planning processispublicinvolvement.The FederalCaveResourcesProtectionActof1988identifiestheplanningsystemasamajormanagement action. Thesetwolawsalongwithother appropriatelawsand regulationsprovideaframeworktodeterminethe compatability betweenidentifiedresources and accomplishmentoftheBLMmission.The currentlyusedBLMplanningdocumentistheResourceManagementplan(RMP).
98The RMP uses a cross-programortrans disciplinary approach to interfacing various programs and solve complex resource man agementcOflflicts.Thebasic RMP processisas follows:1)identify the resources through an inventory of resource components,2)analyzethe current situation,3)evaluate the situation and identify the issues or conflicts between the various resource program,4)determine the importance of the competing resources,5)develop a set of preferred ac tions and alternatives, and,6)approval of the plan via a Record of Decision. This decision set administrative policy for the allocation of resources. Once the RMPisapproved, the next stepinthe planning processisto writeanactivity plan.Theactivity plan addresses,indetail, the site specific actions to protect the resource. Criteria for development of cave related activity plans are o1,.1tlined inthe Dis trict Cave Resource Management Plan. This criteria provides a framework for develop ment of management decisions of specific caves.TheDistrict Cave Resource Manage ment Plan ensures consistency within the decision making process forallcavesinthe district. Throughout the entire planning process therearemany opportunities for public input and involvement. Thisisaccomplished through public hearings and commentperiodswhich are requiredbythe National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA).Inmany casesthe public identifies the physical resources and the conflictsbetween competing resource programs. There are four points in the RMP process for public input.Thefirst pointisthe seoping and issue identification conducted at the beginning of the process and accomplished through1989CaveManagementProceedingspublic hearings.Thesecondisthe public review of planning criteria.Thethird pointisa review of the draft proposal alternatives and environmental impact statement(ElS).Thefinal pointisthe final planandIS.Thefollowingisanexample whichwillhelp illustrate how the planning system func tions: thestudyareaisa real karst area with real management problems. For the purposes of thispapera few hypothetical variables have been added.Thesettingisa sensitive hydro logic karstareawith many shallow caves.Thecaves are located inanimportant ground water recharge zone.Thelargest caveinthe area contains a permanent source of water which provides habitat for a suspected endan gered species of fish.Thefirst action oftheoverall planning processisto determineifa management planisneeded to protect this karst area. Within theBLMSection202oftheFLPMA reqUires development of land use plans for public lands.TheFederal Cave Resources Protec tion Act reqUires consideration of caves in land use plans.Thenext action istobegin moving the issue through the RMP process. Step 1 of the RMP process isto identify the resources. This includesthephysical setting, relative importance of caves and other re sources. This has beendoneover a period of several yearsinthis year.Theresource information hascomefrom avariety of sources ranging from university researchersandstud ies of regional geologyandhydrology to the local caving club which has provided cave surveys and topographicmapoverlaysandon the ground cave locations. Step 2:analyze the current Situation. Thecurrent situationisoneof expanding explora-
tion and development ofoiland gasfields.Thisincludes applicationsforpermit todrill,applications for rights-of-wayforroads, powerlmes, and pipelines. Thedrillingactivityitselfcan cause problemsforboth theoil comPanies and the karst area duetolossofcirculation anddrillingfluidintodownholevoids,pollutionofthe ground water system, and collapse ofdrillingrigs,access roads and pipelines into underlying cave systems. Other situations seen as posing a threat to the cave systems are increasedsulfurprospecting,historical over grazing, and increased recreationaluse.Step 3; evaluate the situation andidentifyissuesofconflict. Theissuesofconflictwithoiland gas arebasicallythe potentialpollutionofkarst ground waters and possible destruction of cave passages duetocollapse. Forsulfurprospecting the conflicts aremuchthe same. The conflictwithove,rgrazingisthat over grazing removes toomuchvegetation.Thisisturn decreases filtrationofrainwater and increases runoff,soilerosion,and siltationwithinthe cave. The documented increaseinrecreational useispossiblydetrimental to the aestheticsofthe cave,butmayhave a greater impact on the cavelifeand on the recreational experienceofother usersifthere are too many peopleinthe cave at one time.Allofthe above actions could have a detrimental effect on the endangered species offish,whichisalso protected under separate state andfederallaws. Step4;ascertain resource allocationusingresourcevalues.Basicallywhat this meansisdetermining the thresholdofimpairmentofa resource, or anotherwaytosayitcouldbeto determine thelimitsofacceptable change. Just how important,howsensitive, orhow99rare are the resourcesinvolved?Sometimes there are otherexistinglaws,regulations, orpoliciesthat setguidelinestohelpmakethose determinationssuchas the Threatened and Endangered SpeciesActor TheAntiquitiesAct.Othertimesitmaybesimplya matterofassigning alevelofhigh,medium,orlow.Inany case, there shouldbea definitemanagementgoalestablishedforthe resourcesbeingmanaged. Whatfollowsisa conscientiousdecision.Isitpossible toallowthe competing resourcesuses?Ifthe answerisno,that requires onesetofmanagement prescrip tions.Ifthe answerisyes,then the nextquestionishowand whatwillthe tradeoffsbe?Asetofmanagement prescriptions can thenbedeveloped such as protecting important ground water recharge areas,providingpro tectionforsensitivekarstfeatures andresources, and managingcaveresourcestoprovideaqualityrecreation experience. Step5;develop asetofpreferred actionsandalternatives. These preferred actions aredevelopedbythemulti-disciplinaryteamsothe solutiontoone specific problem won't create three orfourmore problemsinotherprograms.Eachconflict orissueislookedatbya teamof program specialists. The specialistsusuallyinvolvedare thewildlifebiologist,archeologist, conservationist, andoil,gas,andminingengineers.Eachspecialistlooksattheparticularissueor problem and at avarietyofpossiblesolutions. Then they determinewhatkindofimpacts a proposed solution, oranyviablesolution,mayhaveon theirspecificprogram. Another considerationiswhether the proposed solutionisacceptable to thereviewingspecialist's program. Management actions shouldavoidany irreversible orirretrievablecommitmentofresources. Someof
100the management actions which couldbepro posedinorder to protect thekarstarea are: 1. Designate the karst asanArea of Critical Environmental Concern(ACEC),2. Designate as a right-of-way avoidance area, 3. No Surface Occupancy forallfutureoiland gas leases, 4. Close to mineral material sales, 5. Withdraw the area from the Mininglaws,6. Close the area to solid mineral leasing, 7. Restrict off-road-vehicle use and other surface disturbing activities to minimize erosion and impacts to the cave and hydrologic resources. When a draft planiscomplete,itisput outfora public review and comment period. This provides the public the opportunity to study the management prescription and point out any discrepancies or deficiencies. At the end of the comment periodallthe public comments are reviewed and appropriate cor rections and additions are made to the plan. Afinalplanisthen prepared and another review periodisprovided.Ifthere are no substantive comments the Resource Management Planisapproved.Thenextlevelof planningisthe prepa ration ofanactivity plan. The purpose ofanactivity planisto clearly state the specific management direction, goals, and objectives foranarea. The plan should describeindetail how the management prescriptions devel opedinthe RMP are to be implemented. The basic components of the activity plan should include:1)a description of the resources and setting (this section shoulddescribe the geol-1989Cave Management Proceedingsogy, hydrology, biology, archeology, surface use, and discuss the resource conflicts and need for protection as pertains to the stated goals and objectives), and3)a section on management actions. This section should outline the management prescriptions devel opedinthe RMP and state the management actions necessary to accomplishit.For ex ample,ifthe management prescriptionwas"apply no surface occupancy(NSO)stipula tions to futureoiland gas leases" then the management action could be, reviewallnew leasesorexpiring leases subject to re-issuance and the NSO stipulation.Ifthe management prescriptions were, regulate visitor use to enhance the recreation experience and pro tect the endangered cave fish,themanage ment action could be, limits of acceptable usewillbe set, cave entrywillbe regulatedbyuse ofanentry permit system.Thelast part of the plan should be the Implementation and Monitoring section. This section should outlineanimplementation strat egy.Itshould state whether the planwillbe implementedinphases andifso, how the priorities of implementationwillbe deter mined. For example, phase one might be to initiate those actions which are directed to wards the most threatening of the resource conflicts. Other considerations to determine the phasing of project implementation might be the amount of manpower and budget available. Another aspect of the implementa tion planIsto identify the priority of imple mentation of the management actions. This. can be set upbyfiscal yearorby-available funding. Additionally,thecost in manpower and in dollars can be estimated for the accom-..... plishment of each management action or phase of implementation. This gives the
resource manager definite items to useinthe preparation of the budgetinthe coming years. A monitoring planisthen developed to determinethesuccess of the management actions. This plan should set out the specifics as to isto be monitored, the re sourceswillbe monitored, how often monitor ing activities are to occur, and what kind of manpower and budgetwillbe needed to ac complish the monitoring. For instance,ifitisdetermined that photo monitoringisto be one type of resource monitoring used, the plan should describe whatisto be photo moni tored,Le.fragile formation areas and heavy traffic areas. Frequency of monitoring might be onceortwiceperyearorevery two years.Theamount ot' money necessary forfilm,processing, andfilingbinders for each year should be calculatedinaddition to how much timewillbe necessary for personnel to com plete the year's photo monitoring. This amount of money can then be added into the annual101budget aspartof thebaseprogram needs.Insummary, theBLMisdirected to initiate a multiple use planning processbythe Federal Land Policy and Management Act. The Federal Cave Resources Protection Act requires that caves be consideredinthat planning process. TheBLMuses a Resource Management Plan as its primary planning document to solve a wide range of complex issue related problems. Then problems or resource conflicts are addressedbyan interdis ciplinary team. Basic resource management prescriptions are developed through theRMPprocess. The next level of planningisthe Activity Plan. The Activity Plan outlines specific man agement goals and objects and how they are to be implemented. Thisisaccomplishedbydeveloping asetof management actions, an implementation plan, and a monitorin'g plan.
1021989Cave Management ProceedingsA PRELIMINARY REPORTONHYDROGEOLOGICALSTUDIESAT KARTCHNER CAVERNSSTATE PARK byCharlesG.Graf2624North Evergreen Street, Phoenix,AZ85006AbstractWith the signing of abillbyGovernor Rose Mofford on April27,1988,Kartchner Caverns became a state park, ending a remarkable 14-year period of secrecy following the discovery of the cavebyTucson cavers Gary Tenen and Randy Tufts.Themeterological, geological, hydrological and biological aspects of the cave are currently being studied under contract for Arizona State Parks by Arizona Conservation Projects, Inc. These environmental studieswillprovide Arizona State Parks with the information necessarytodevelop the cave for public visitation and education while preserving the caveinas pristine a condition as possible. Kartchner Cavernsislocated within alowhillof Paleozoic limestone at the base oftheeastflank of the Whetstone Mountains10miles south-southwest of Benson and 21 miles north-northwest of Sierra Vista. Although12,594feet of passage have been mappedinthe cave,theentire cave lies within a rectangular area of1300feetby1600feet. Each of the three main chambers of the caveismore than400feet long, and the widest, the Big Room,ismore than200feet wide.Thevertical extent of the caveis102feet, and the greatest ceiling heights are about50feet.Theprofile of Kartchner Cavernsisnearly horizontal, reflecting its development under shallow phreatic condi tions.Thecave cuts impressively across steeply dipping (up to 30) limestone beds.Thebedding planesappearto have had negligible influence on the solution of the cave. Instead, many of the cave passages, including the three large well-decorated chambers of the cave, are oriented along northeast-trending faults. Ceiling collapse and the development of in-cave drainages have subsequently modi fied the original phreatic passages.Thecaveisreplete with a dazzling
103array of calcite speleothems including stalactites, stalagmites, col umns, draperies, flowstone, coralloid, boxwork, cave pearls, and soda straws. Especially impressive are the large number of shields and the spectacular display of helictites. A variety of sediments are exposed in the cave including massive breakdown, finely-laminated clays, ad deposits of allocthonous granitic detritus containing granite cobbles up to one footindiameter.Inaddition, the cave contains a system of intermittent channels which have flowed twicedUringthe last15years. Observations of the cave passages, sediments, speleothems and other features indicate that Kartchner Caverns possesses a complex solutional and depositional history. A progress reportonthesurface and subsurface geology and hydrology studiesarepresentedinthis paper. Brief summaries of workonother aspects of the investigation, including mapping, cave meteorology,andcave biology are also included. A tentative outline of the speleogenesis of Kartchner Cavernsisoffered.IntroductionFourteen years of secrecy ended on April 27,1988,when Governor Rose Moford signed abilldeclaring Kartchner Caverns Arizona's newest State Park. Mofford's signature capped a remarkable series of events which began withthediscovery of the cavebyTucson cavers Gary Tenen and Randy Tuftsin1974.Toprepare for the public opening of Kartchner Caverns inanenvironmentally sensitive manner, Arizona State Parks has contracted for a two-year long pre-development study of the meteorological, geological, hydrological and biological aspects of the cave. This paper previews these studies, describes the cave and its history of exploration, presents some pre liminary results, and proposes a tentative outline of the speleogenesis of the cave. Thispaperisnot a treatise of the results compiled to date. Those resultswillbe reported laterbythe specialists workingineach discipline. Instead, this paperisintended as an introduc tion to the ongoing studies of the cave, and to the cave itself.SettingKartchner Cavernsislocated beneath alowhillof Paleozoic limestoneatthebaseof theeastflank of the Whetstone Mountains10miles south-southwest of Benson and 21milesnorth-northwest of Sierra Vista (Figure1).The state park embraces550acres oflimestonehillsand adjacent alluvial slopes.AsFigure 2 shows, the park occupies theEl/2of Sec. 25, T18S,R19E,and most of theWl/2 of Sec.30,T18S, R20E.,allwithin Cochise County. The Coronado National Forest bounds Kartchner Caverns State Park to the west. From this boundary, the Whetstone Moun tains steepen rapidly, cresting three miles distant at an elevation of7388feet. The
104highest point within the park itself, at5078feet,isthe summit of a limestonehilllocatedinthe northeastcomerof the property. An alluvial pediment occupies thesouthern part of the site, sloping gradually down to the San Pedro River eight miles away. Picturesque Guindani Canyon, incised deeply into the Whetstones behind the park,isthe source of the only major drainage (intermittent) travers ing the park.Theonly significant prior use of the land has been for cattle grazing.HistoryThediscoveryandexplorationof Kartchner Caverns and its eventual addition to the Arizona State Parks systemisa remarkable story of secrecy spanning fourteen years. The cavewasdiscoveredin1974byTucson cavers Randy Tufts and Gary Tenen. Actually, Tufts found the small opening seven years earlierin1967,but did not pursueitas the crevice appeared awkward and seemed to lead no where. Returning to the area with T enenin1974,they rechecked the hole and this time pushed through. Enticed onwardbyblowing air, they reached another small hole which they had to enlarge with hammer and chisel. After an extremely tight squeeze through, the passage began toopenup, beckoning the cavers further into the cavern. The cave did not disappoint them, forintheBigRoom they marvelledatthe kind of discovery that many a caver only dreams about. Little did Tufts and Tenen imagine, climbing down into the sink hole on that eventful dayin1974,that theirlivesand most of their spare time for the next fourteen years would be tied to that auspicious spot of hillside. EarlydUringthe many explorationsfol-1989Cave Management Proceedingslowing their discovery, Tufts and Tenen rec ognized the fragile nature of their spectacularfindand realized how vulnerableitwould be to those less careful. Sadly, most publically known cavesinArizona have been defaced, stripped of formations, and littered with trash. Because of the cave's location within sight and strolling distance of State Highway90,and because they knew how easyitwould beforsomeone else to stumble upon the entrance sinkhole, the two cavers determined thatfurther action was necessary to protect the cave. Therefore, in1978,they approached the owner of the land,JamesKartchner, of St. David, with an offertobuythe550-acre parcel containing the cave. When the offer was rejected, Tufts andTenendivulged the secret of the cave. Thus began a long andsupportiveexploration,mapping,andcaretaking relationship with the Kartchner family. Eventually, Tufts, Tenen, and the Kartchners realized the need for full-time protection of the cavebya modern andwellequipped resourcemanagementagency. Several agencies were contacted including Arizona State Parks. State Parks was inter ested but lacked the statutory tools to effect acqUisition of the property. Undeterred, the group arranged a trip into the cave for then governor Bruce Babbitt,requiring an oath of secrecy from him as they had fromallothers involvedinthe project. Babbitt provided renewed impetustothe projectbysuggesting that they work withTheNature Conservancy, a conservation organization which buys up land to preserve critical habitats for rare and endangered species.TheNature Conservancy, under Arizona Director Dan Campbell, surveyed the cave but found no rare or endangered speciesonwhich
tojustifytheir purchase and permanent stewardship. However, CampbellcontactedKenTravous, thenewDirectorofArizonaState Parks, and after atripinto thecave,Campbell and an enthusiasticTravousbegandevisinga plan to acquire thecaveforArizonaState Parks.WithThe Nature Conservancy arranging tobuythe caveinthe interim,Tufts,. Tenen, Campbell, Travous and othersnowinvolvedInthe project began the complex negotiations needed to enable State Parkstofundthe purchaseofthecave.Amajordifficultywasthelackofa permanentfundingmechanismforlandpurchasesbyArizonaState Parks;allpark revenuesfromentrancefeeswent into the State generalfund.The group workedoveratwoyearperiodwithafewsupprotivekeylegislators,particularlySenators JohnHaysandGregLunn(bothofwhom hadpersonallyseen.thesplendorsofthecave)and RepresentativesLarryHawke and Joe Lane.Thisallianceresultedinlegislationsettingupa permanentacqUisitionand developmentfundforState Parks thatfinallyreceivedthe supportofthefullHouse and Senate.WithGovernorRoseMoffordinformed and readytosignthebiU,the legislators added amendmentsonthefloortomake Kartchner Caverns thefirstState Parks acquisitionwiththenewfund,thusliftingthe 14-yearveilofsecrecy andsurprisingthe restoftheLegislature,thenewsmedia,and thepublicalike.Becauseofthe careoftheoriginalexplorers, the caveisinremarkablypristinecondition. For example,Tuftsand Tenen markedallroutesinordertokeepvisitorsto one path,withtheresultthat 95% oUhecavefloorremains untrod.ArizonaState Parksnowhas the challenging task, onetheylook105forwardtowithenthusiasm andsensitivity,ofdevelopingKartchner Cavernsforpublicvisitation and educationwhilepreserving thecaveinas pristine a condition aspossible.Pre-Development StudiesThe purposeofthe pre-developmentstudiesnowbeingconductedistoprovideaframeworkofbasicknowledgeaboutthegeologicand environmental conditionsofKartchnerCaverns.Thestudieswilldocument existing conditionsandyieldinformationcriticaltothe sound development and managementofthecaveforpublicviewing.Thestudiesfocusonfourmainaspectsofthecaveenvironment:(1)caveclimateand meteorology,(2)geology,(3)hydrology,and(4)biology.Thegeologicalstudiesincludeinvestigationsofthe surfacegeology,subsurfacegeology,speleothems(cavedecorations),minera1ogy,andspeleogenesis.Ageophysicalsurveyisbeingconducted,primarilytodetermineifotherlargevoidsexistinthevicinityoftheknowncaveand toavoidsitingsurfacefacilitieswhere theymayadverselyaffectthecave.Thehydrologicalstudies,likethegeologicalstudies,Includeboth surface and In-cave aspects.Thissetofstudieswillbeusefulforguidingengineeringand constructionplanning,aswellasfordevelopingvisitorinterpretation strategies.Of'allthestudies,cavemicroclimateandmeterologywillprobablybethe mostcriticalindesigninganenvironmentally soundcavedevelopment and management plan.ArizonaState Parks intends to maintainhumidity,temperature, and airflowinthecaveinordertopreserve theuniquefeaturesofthecave.Other parametersbeinginvestigatedinthis
106studyincludeevaporation rates, airquality,driprates, and surface meteorology. The mostvisiblebiologicalactivityinthecaveare the-bats, whichspend summerinthecaveto bearyoung.Bats occupy avitalnicheinthecaveecosystem, therefore,mucheffortisbeingdevoted to understanding their habits and requirements. Other smallvertebrates, aswellas invertebrates, arealsobeing studied.Lastly,the potentialofthe cave to support algae andmossgrowthisbeing studied. Such growthisa common probleminelectricallylightedcaves.Cave DescriptionNotlongafter the summersunsets, batsbeginspiraling out of the sinkhole entrance to Kartchner Caverns. This depression, located near the baseofan ocotillo-dotted slopeoflimestone, leads into oneofthe mostbeautifuland pristine cavesinArizona. The sinkholeitselfdropsverticallyabout 15 feet and mea sures 25-feetlongby1Q-feetwide.Afewfeet above the bottom of theSinkhole,acrevicepenetrates thewall,leadingdown throughsmallchambers, afewsqueezes, and somelowcrawlsto Grand Central Station, adelightfulgalleryand corridor that foretells thetrulymarvelouspartsofthe cave ahead.(Caveplace names are generally christenedbythe explorers and provide a road mapforlocating features and describing thecave.)From Grand Central Station, a 200-footambleinwalkingpassageleadsto the base of a huge breakdownpileat the south endoftheBigRoom.Beyond that,inthevaultedexpanseofthemainpartofthe chamber, a profusionofstalactites, stalagmites, columns, andflowstone greets thevisitor.(Seethe glossary at1989Cave Management Proceedings the endofthis paperforbrief descriptionsofthe speleothem names usedinthis paper). These formations cover nearly an acreoffloorarea and are oneofthe highlightsofthe cave. Returning to the breakdown pile, a trail branches west to the topofthe'breakdown, meandering between boulders almost under neath the roosts of a summer maternity colonyofabout one thousand Cave bats(Myotisveli/er).The trail continues down the othersideofthe breakdown, pasttwofinestalagmites named Kartchner Towers, to a short, tightdownclimbthat marks the beginningoftheRiverPassage. TheRiverPassageisa series of roomsoriginallyformed below the water table which have beenmodifiedand integratedbysolution and erosion from in-eave streamflows.A somewhat arduous tripleadsdownthis passage through Lover's Leap, the Bathtub Room, the Thunder Room, the Shelf Passage, the Grand Canyon to the Pyramid Room. Several reaches of stream channel(whichhave containedflowingwater only twice since 1974) emerge into this section of passage,onlyto disappear into sumps a short distance further. Particularlynoteworthy along theRiverPassage are the helictites, flowstone, cave pearls and other speleothems adorning the Shelf Passage. Beyond the Pyramid Room, the arduous becomes downrightnasty!Inorder to reach the Rotunda Room-Throne Room and theSubwayTunnel-Pirates Den, the othertwomainchambersofthe cave(inaddition to theBigRoom),the Triangle Passagemustbetraversed. The Triangle Passageisa..lOO-footlong,lowmuddycrawlonbellyand hands and knees. Unfortunately, the worstisstillahead: The Trench, a7Q-footlong exhaUSting struggle through thigh-deepmud.Beyond The Trench,
the route becomes easier and leads toTheDoorway, a verticalsUtcutting through a foot thick wall of quartz.TheQuartz Divide, as this feature is called,isthe insoluble vestige of siliceous infilling along a fault. Boxwork has formedonthe limestone ceiling bordering this quartz dike,oneof the few placesinthe cave where this speleothemisfound.OncethroughTheDoorway, the cave changes in aspecttovery wide, oftenlowbut walkable mud-floored passages.Thepassagesareattractive for their sweeping curves,scaIlop-shaped solution features, and the fossil crinoidsandhorn corals etchedinrelief on the walls. Speleothems, though not abundant, have typically formed at the ends of passages.ThePirates Den and Sue's Room both have good displays, and a fine example of a shieldisfoundatTheAngels Wing.BackoutsideTheDoorway, a trail branches off to the Rotunda Room.TheRotunda Room was named for the limestone beds arching dramatically across the passage. A myriad of beautiful helictites andbarbended soda straws hang from the roof near the trail. Several of these,TheFallen straws, have dropped from the roof and now stand uprightinthe mud floor (see the Speleogenesis sec tion of thispaperfor further discussion). FromTheFallen Straws the trail ascends a huge breakdown pile to the highest point in the cave,anoverlook above the Throne Room, the most significantly decorated room of the cave. Thisroomcontains the giant column, Kubla Khan,andthe towering stalagmite, Nefertiti. Kubla Khanisthe largest known columninanAirzona cave. Surrounding these two giantsisa forest of stalactites and stalagmites.Theroomalso housesanabun dance of soda straw, including a 20-foot long107specimen that ranks among the longer ones knowninthe world. Helictites the thickness of spaghetti also grow from the ceiling andwallsof the Throne Room, cUIVing and twisting delicately through the airinapparent defiance of gravity. The total length of surveyed passageinKartchner Caverns stands at12,594feet (2.39 miles). Surprisingly, the entire cavelieswithin a rectangular area of1600feetby1300feet. Each of the three main chambers of the caveismore than400feet long, and the widest, theBigRoom,Ismore than200feet wide.Thevertical extent of the caveis102feet, and the greatest ceiling heights, about50feet,arefoundintheBigRoom and the Throne Room.Theterminal sump of Red River, located off the Big Roominthe Red River Room,isthe deepest pointinthe cave, at an elevation of4592.7feet. At a few pointsinthe cave, roots are visible where the roof thicknessissmall.Thegreatest thickness of limestone overburden, about260feet, occurs where the Mushroom Passage crosses under the summit ridge of the limestonehillcontaining the cave.Geology SynopsisThe surface geology of the Benson Quad rangle, which includes the Kartchner Caverns area,'wasmappedbyCreasey (1967). The map reproducedasFigure 4 of htis paper came from a studybyWrucke and Armstrong (1984) which utilized the1967map compiledbyCreasey. Other recent studiesinthe area include a map showing mineral resource po tential (Wrucke,etaI., 1983) and a map showing the resuhs of aeromagnetic and gravity surveys (Bankey and KIeinkopf, 1985).
108Therocks of the limestonehilloverlying Kartchner Caverns have been mappedbyCreasey as mainly Escabrosa Limestone of Mississippian age, with a small outcropinthe south of HorquUla Limestone of Pennsylvanian age. According to the map, the entrance to Kartchner Caverns would be through Horquilla Limestone (Figure4).However, the lime stonehillismore disrupted than shownbyCreasey, and a reconnaissance of the lithologic composition, bedding thicknesses, and fossil assemblages indicates that notallof the ex posed limestone may be correctly identified (Scott Gibson, personal communication).Infact, a study of conodonts from the limestone at the entrance to the cave positively identified this outcrop as Escabrosa Limestone, rather than the Horquilla Limestone as the mapbyCreasey shows (Robert Buecher, personal communication) .Thelimestones of thehilloverlying Kartchner Caverns dip westward of south westward at angles generally between 10 and 40. Kartchner Caverns cuts impressively across these steeply dipping beds, which ap pear to have had negligible influence on the solution of the cave. A series of faults of apparent small offset trend N300E across thehill(the sense of movement along these faults has not yet been mapped).Thethree main chambers of the cave are clearly aligned along these northeast trending faults, however thefaultsthemselves probably were not the primary weakness controlling limestone dissolution (see the Speleogenesis section of thispaperfor further discussion). Development of the three chambers toward the northeastwasapparently stoppedbya fault(visibleon the surface) trending approximately N45W. No exten sions to the cave have been found beyond this1989Cave Management Proceedingsstructure.Themost spectacular fault visibleinthe caveistheoneoriented along the Throne Room and Rotunda Room, where brown recrystallized dolomite(?)isjuxtaposed against light gray limestone (Scott Gibson, personal communication) Near the west boundary of the park, the limestonehillsarein fault contact with Pre cambrian Pinal Schist. A few hundred yards furthertothe west,anotherfault places the Pinal Schist in contact with Precambrian alaskite.TheWhetstone Mountainsrisesteeply at this location andaremainly composed'ofalaskite. Further up the mountain, Precam brian quartz monzonite becomes the domi nant rocktypeexposedatthesurface. Mines and prospects forbullquartz, fluorite, uranium and tungstenarelocated in Precambrian rocks within1-1/2miles of Kartchner Caverns (Wrucke,etal., 1983). At the crest of the Whetstone Moun tains, PaleozoicsedimentaryrocksrestuncomformablyonthePrecambrian intrusive and metamorphic rocks.ThePaleozoic rocks dip southwesterlyatangles of20to35,andresemble in outwardappearancethe rela tionshi ps presentatKartchner Caverns, except on a much larger scale. However,therocksatthe crest of the Whetstonesarebroken by only a few minor faults (WruckeandArmstrong, 1987). The Escabrosa Limestone outcropping in thehillsat Kartchner Caverns has been dropped about2000vertical feet relative to the exposures near thetopoftheWhetstones.Thesouthern part of Kartchner Caverns State Parkisoccupied byanalluvial pediment which extends out into theSanPedro Valley about four miles (where itistruncatedbya lower surface). Thisupperpediment surfacewasnamed the Whetstone Surface and mapped
byBryan (1926).TheSpeleogenesis section of thispaperprovides further information about thisandlower surfaces.Inthe park area,theWhetstone Surface consists of an undetermined thickness of gravel wash (no menclature first usedbyGray,1965and 1967) overlying a surface of Pinal Schist.Thethickness ofthegranite wash probably varies, butisnotbelieved to be great (as suggestedbythe predominance of schist cuttings found beside water wells penetrating the granite wash inthewestern part of the park). West oftheHighwayWell(see Figure 2 for locations of wells mentionedinthis paper,andTable 1 for cadastral identifications)jUstwest of State Highway90,a major north trending basin and range bounding faultispostulatedtoexist beneath the cover of granite wash.TheHighwayWellbottomed without hitting bedrockat790feetin"fairlywellcementedalluvial materials consisting of fragments of decompoSed granite, limestone, and quartz," according to the driller (Don Weber, personalcommunication). Waterlevelsin the Middle Canyon and Kartchner Wells are also consistent with such a major fault.A'projection ofthewater table between these two wells would intersect the land surface near Highway90,which suggests that the surface of Pinal Schist supporting the water table must terminate west of that location. As noted previously, the block of Paleo zoic sedimentary rocks cropping outinthe Kartchnerhillslies about2000feet lowerinelevation than thesamerocksinthe upper Whetstones.Thestructural features responSiblefor this relationship are unclear.Themapandcross-sections of Creasey (1967) indicatethatthis Paleozoic blockisbounded by deep-seated, high-angle normal faults109(probably associated with basin and range faulting).ifthis scenarioistrue, a majorE-Wtrending fault must bound the south side of the limestonehillsinorder for thePaleOZOicrocks to extend deeper than the adjacent Pinal Schist underlying the gravel wash. Alternatively, Davis (1979) proposed a thin-skinned gravity glide mechanism for this "anomalously highly faulted and folded isolated block of Paleozoicstrata"(p. 551).Inthe gravity glide scenario, the Paleozoic rocks would have come to rest on a platform of Pinal Schist underlying the sedimentary block at relatively shallow depth. Additionally, the western bounding fault of the limestones would belowangle rather than high angle as shownbyCreasey. These two alternative hypotheses account for the queried contact shown between the limestonesandthe Pinal Schistinthe hydrogeological cross-section (Figure 6). Knowledge of the true structural relationshipinthis areaisimportant for understanding the speleogenesis of the cave.Ona more prac tical basis, such knowledgeisimportant for understanding the occurrence and movement of groundwaterinthe park for possible future utilization as a park water supply.Hydrology SynopsisTheunusually large number ofwells(Table1)located in the vicinity of Kartchner Cavernsisfortuitous, considering the general lack of development along theeastside of theWhetstoneMountains. Although many questions remain about the hydrogeology, particularly with respecttothe Paleozoic block itself, the information derived from these wells permitsthepresentationof a relatively unspeculative synopsis of the hydrology.
110Availablewelldatafor these wellsislistedinTable 1; thewelllocations are shown on Figure 2. The North and South Wells(dug)and theMiddleCanyon and Kartchner Wells(drilled)penetrate the gravel wash covering the Pinal Schist.Itisnot known whether the NorthWell(34 feet deep) penetrates the entire thickness of gravel wash, but the other wells certainly do, based on cuttings or dug materialstillremaining at thewellsites. No drillers logs have yet been locatedforany of these wells, so the actual thickness of the granite washisnow known. However. the thicknessisbelieved to be small based on the preponderance of schist cuttings at thedrillsites and the gradually sloping schist surface exposedatthe upper edge of the granite washjUstwest of the state park boundary.TheMiddleCanyon and KartchnerWellswere drilled to205feet and220feet, respectively. The SouthWellwas dug to a 58-foot depth. encountering schist within this distance. Water table elevations (calculated fromJune1989measurements. but similar for other dates) indicate that the water table may not be continuous over the area coveredbythese wells. The water table elevation at the NorthWell,4696feet,isapproximately50feet higher than the water table at the Middle Canyon and KartchnerWells;the water table at the SouthWellisabout12feet higher than the water tableinthe latter two wells. Based on these measurements, groundwater appears to occupy(atleastinpart) old chanels eroded into the surface of the Pinal Schist; the indi vidual bodies or shoestring occurrences of groundwater may lack significant continuity over the area.Itisalso possible that the waterlevelintheMiddleCanyon and Kartchner1989Cave Management ProceedingsWells mayliebelow the base of the granite wash. possiblyina fracturedorweathered zoneinthe schist.Thespecific conductance of water samples collected from the wells also indicates a possible independence:393,318.and859uS/cm at 25 C fortheNorth, Middle Canyon, and South Wells. respectively. Groundwater flow in the granite washisgenerally easterly towardtheSanPedroValley.Asdiscussedinthe previous section, a major north-trending basinandrange faultispostulatedtoexist beneaththegranite wash at a location west of the Highway Well. East of this fault. within the San Pedro basin, a great thickness of alluvial sediments has been de posited.Thebulk of thesearePlioceneandPleistocene fine-gralnedfluvialand lacustrine sediments named the St. David FormationbyGray (1965, 1967).TheSt. David sediments were deposited in a mildly subsidingtrough""asindicated by a monoclinalfoldtraversing the formation west ofthepresent San Pedro River (Gray. 1965). This sequence of fine-grained depositsisoverlain by younger deposits of gravel wash. and Holocene alluvial deposits. The thickness oftheSt. David Formationisnot known, but wells over1000feetindepth near St. David bottominsediments similar to those observedintheoverlying St. David Formation (Gray, 1965).Thesediments penetrated 'by the HighwayWellnear the eastern edge of Kartchner Caverns State Park probably represent a coarser. more cemented facies of the St. David Formation. These latter sediments were probably deposited at the margins of the basin contemporaneously with the fine-grained sediments.Therelationships between the basin sediments, pediment surfaces, the limestone hills. and Kartchner Caverns are shown on the hydrogeological
cross-section(Figure6).Water levelshave been measuredinthe HighwayWell(741 feet belowlandsurface) andtheBlackWell,located2-1/2milesbasinward (518 feetbelowlandsurface).These waterlevelmeasurements define alowgradient piezometric surface that probably represents the mountainward extension of the artesian aquifer underlying the San Pedro Rivernear St.David.Within the gravel wash resting on the surface of Pinal Schistinthe southern portionofKartchner Caverns State Park, groundwater moves easterly to the edge of the buriedfaultscarp, then descends to the lower aquifer markedbythe waterlevelinthe HighwayWell.This lower waterlevelliesabout765feet below the lowest measured point within Kartchner Caverns.Anentirely different situationexistsat NorthWell.NorthWellwasduglessthan 100 feet fromthelimestonehillcontaining Kartchner Caverns, yet the waterlevelwithinthewellis70feet higherinelevation than the bottom of the passage leading into Sue's Room. The horizontaldistance between NorthWelland Sue's Roomisonly700feet. The groundwater surface measured at the NorthWellishypothesized to extend to the nearby limestone, where the groundwater drains readily down through the limestone to alevelbelow the present accessiblelevelofthe cave. The waterlevelinthe NorthWellhasfluctuated over a greater range than thelevelinthe SouthWell(Figure5).During the one yearcycleover which measurements have been taken, the waterlevelinthe NorthWellhas varied4.5feet.Inthe SouthWell,adugwelllocatedina setting very similar to the NorthWell(butnot near limestone), the fluctuation wasonly2.1 feet.111Oneofthe most interesting questions remains unanswered: Whereisthe water tableinthe Paleozoicblock?The answer appearstodepend onwhichstructural scenarioforthe emplacementofthe Paleozoicblockiscorrect.Iftheblockwas droppedby deep seated basin and rangefaults,the waterlevelwithintheblockisprobably an extensionofthe water table within the San Pedrobasintothe east(orroughly740feetbelowlandsurface as measuredinthe HighwayWell).This scenario, however,wouldnotruleout the possibility of a perched waterlevelwithinthe Paleozoic block, considering the complex structure and presenceofdipping bedswithintheblock.Ifthe second scenarioiscorrect and theblockisa thin-skinnedgravityglideoverlying Pinal Schist, a much higher water table, sup portedbythe surface of Pinal Schist; wouldhave formed.Ifthe Paleozoicblockhadglideddownand come to rest on alowareaofthe Pinal Schist, groundwater rechargemovinginto theblock)likelyto be enhanced due to the permeable nature of the limestone)maybesignificantly channelizedinthis depression beforespillingover the bounding basin and rangefault.Under this scenario, awell tap ping this hypotheticallowareajustwestofthefaultmightyieldgood quantitiesofwaterfromreasonable depth. Should awellbeconsidered at this location, a determinationwouldhavetobemade on whether withdrawalscouldadversely affect conditionsinthe cave(whichdepend on the maintenanceofhighhumidity).Guindani Canyonisthe surface drainagewithgreatest potential to affect the hydrologic regimewithinthe limestoneblock.Guidani Canyon heads at the crestofthe Whetstones and descends through a rugged, oak-lined
112 g.orge. However,atthe point whereitcrosses the eastern boundary into the park, Guindani Canyonismore aptly described as an arroyo. Most of the canyoniscut into impermeable scribed as an arroyo. Most of the canyoniscut into impermeable alaskite and quartz monzo nite, so prodigious floods can be expected.InAugust and September of1988,dUringa30day period over which a total of6.23inches of rainfellinto the Park's rain gage, the arroyo through the park flowed almost continuously. Despite the impingement of Guindani Canyon directly against the limestoneatseveralloca tions, no flowsorponding of water were noted afterward in any part of the cave. On the other hand, water has pondedina few low parts of the cave twice since1974(most notably in The Trench and Subway Tunnel). Water began entering the cave and pondinginDecember1978andinMarch1985.Rather than correlating with intense summer thunderstorm activity, the ponding appears to result from prolongedflowsdue to snowmelt runoff. Although low areas of the cave apparently do not pond oftenona human time scale (especially reflecting that the last fourteen years have been among the wettest of record), the great thickness(sixfeet or more) of laminated mudsinthese areas attests to the frequency of pondinginthe recent geologic past. Although mudisabundantincertain parts of Kartchner Caverns (and a bane to keeping notes and instruments clean), no permanent water exists except for a few small drip pools. Intermittent stream channels are presentinsome rooms and passages, however. Typically, these channels emerge into a pas sage or room through breakdown or a small hole;flowa short distance; than disappear1989Cave Management Proceedingsinto a sandorgravelfilledsump, a small hole in the limestone floor,orinto breakdown.The in-eave stream flowsandthe ponding of waterinlow areas are part of a sequence of events thatisnot entirely clear. Water first enters the cave in upstream passages heading near Guindani Canyon (such as GraniteDells).The stream flow disappears into a holeorsump, than apparently begins rising upward into some ofthenearby low areas (parts of the Water RoomandSubway Tunnel, for in stance).Theponding apparently represents the rise of a water table of limited extent, because some very low passages, suchasthe Cul-De-Sac Passage, do notfill.Asthe water level continues to rise, some previously dry streams become activated.Thestream in the Thunder Room (named fortheroar a five-foot cascade makes asthestream emerges into the room)isoneexample. Channels in theBigRoom then begin carrying water. These streams coalesce, then flow down the Red River Passage before finally disappearing into a sump in Red River Room, the lowest point in the cave.Therather complicated flow system de scribed aboveiscontrolled by a combination of structural, stratigraphic, and solutional fea tures, many of which are hidden from view below the present level ofthecave. Once the program of precise leveling in the caveiscompleted, parts of the flow systemwillbecome better understood. However, without actually being presentdUringa stream flow episode and carefully observingtheprogression of events, measuring discharges, conducting dye traces, and performing other relevant studies, any conclusions aboutthecave hy.grology willbe partly conjecture. Considering the rarity offlowin Kartchner Caverns, such observation
may not occur for some time.SpeleogenesisKartchner Caverns began forming sev eral hundred thousand years agoand has developed since theninresponse to a complex interplay of geological and hydrological factors.Theoutlinepresentedbelowofthespeleogenetic history must be consideredtentative-tobe tested and modifiedby ob servationsandresults fromthedetailed hydrogeological studies nowinprogress.1.Initiationandenlargementofthecaveunder shallow phreatic (water table) conditions.Shallow phreatic genesis(asopposed to either a vadoseordeepphreatic mechanism)isevidentinthe predominance of rounded passages and rooms and the extremelyflatprofile of the cave, which cuts dramatically across steeply dipping strata. The three main passages(BigRoom, Rotunda Room-Throne Room,andSubway Tunnel-Pirates Den) are aligned along faults that trend parallel or sub-parallel to the strike of the beds. Closer examination, however, reveals thatthefaults probably only indirectly influ enced the formation of these main cave pas sages.Thefault planes often coincide with passage walls rather than the axes of the passages, suggesting that the faults did not act as the primary weaknesses through which groundwater flow and resultant limestone dissolution occurred. Instead, groundwaterappearsto have flowed more readily along fracturesorjoints located within the crest of narrow anticlinal flexures whichlieadjacent to113the fault surfaces. These shallow flexuresappearto be drag features produceddUringfaulting. A water table high enough to initiate solution of Kartchner Caverns could not have been sustained until the San Pedro basin hadfilledwith sediments to a level at least as high as the cave. Alternatively, a localized water table perchedinthe Paleozoic block could explain the initial solutional episode, but this possibilityisconsidered lesslikely.For a localized perched water table to remain stable, recharge must remain relatively constant. However, the Paleozoic blockislocated so close to thebaseof the Whetstones thatitmust have been subject to great precipitation ex tremes (from a single storm, annually,orover longer periods of geologic time).Itisdifficult to imagine that recharge into the block from runoff and infiltration would be moderated enough to avoid prodUcing significant fluctua tionsinthe water table. Although s0me cavesappearto have originated by this mechanism, the phreatic features displayedinKartchner Cavernsappearmore consistent with a much longer period of stabilityInthe water table. The existence of a regional water tableinthe San Pedro basin (whichextended mountainward into the limestoneblock)isproposed to explain the Initial solution of Kartchner Caverns.Inorder for a regional water table to have formed, alluvium must have been depositedintheSanPedro basin to a levelatleastashighasthe limestone block. Such a condition apparently did not exist eariler than the end of deposition of the St. David Formation. Paleomagnetic dat ing of the uppermost remaining St. David sediments indicates that they were probably
114deposited soon after the Matuyama-Brunhes paleomatnetic chron boundary (Johnson,etaI.,1975) dated about730,000years ago (Harland, et-a!., 1982). However, these up permost sediments are separatedbyan ero sional uncomformity from the granite wash, signifying that deposition continued for some time later and at a higher level than the dated sediments.Ifthe5t. David sediments were deposited high enough, a regional water table extending to Kartchner Caverns could have developed. Although the water table would have formed later than730,000years ago, this paleomagnetic dateestablishesa maximum age for the onset of cave formation. Alternatively, a water table high enough to initiate cave formation may not have ex isted until later, when the granite wash was depositedontop of the 5t. David Formation. The granite wash, which blankets much of the alluvial slope on both sides of the San Pedro Valley, nearly surrounds the limestonehillcontaining Kartchner Caverns. At the very upstream end of the GraniteDellspassage, the caveisseparated from surface deposits of granite washbya horizontal distance of less than100feet. At this location, the surface of the granite washliesabot50feetinelevation above the level of the cave.Infact, the entire profile of the caveliesbelow the adjacent surface of the granite wash (Figure 6). While no evidence has been discovered to indicate that 5t. David sediments were ever deposited high enoughfora water table to form at cave level, the requisite height certainly was achieved after deposition of the granite wash. The age of the granite washisnotwellknown. Melton (1965) suggests an Illinoian age based on stratigraphic relationships.Ifthe deposits are Illinoian, an age of between1989CaveManagementProceedingsabout120,000and170,000years oldIsindicated (Van Eysinga, 1983).2.Loweringofwatertable.After a long period of relative water table stability,dUringwhich most ofthephreatic solution of the cave was completed, the water table began dropping. A declineinthe water table could be due to a reductioninrecharge (drier climate)ora dropinthebaselevel (downcuttinginthe San Pedro basin),ora combination of the two. Except for a shorter period of phreatic activity described later, vadose processes henceforth became the predominant factors in the further evolution of the cave.3.Breakdownandpassageenlargement.Passage enlargementincaves typically occurs as water levelsfallbelowpassage ceilings. Buoyant supportislost,andover time ceilings collapse until a stable ceiling configurationisreached (White,1988;Bogli, 1980).Aswaterlevelsslowly lower, breakdown may remainonthe floor, dependingonthe rate of solutionandthelength of time groundwater actively circulated through the breakdown. Huge piles of breakdownintheBigRoom, Rotunda Room,andThrone Room are evidence of this enlargement process.Inother areas, such as the Grand Canyon, most ofthebreakdown blocks have been removed.4.Speleothem format!on. The first speleothemsinthe cave would
have started forming as the water tablefell.Someof the large stalactites, stalagmites, and columns locatedinparts of theBigRoom and Throne Room probably began forming at this time.5.Furtherloweringofthewatertabletobelowthepresentlevelofthecave.Evidence for this includes some relic vadose modificationfeatures, such as an abandoned stream channelinthe southwest end of the Cul-De-Sac Passage that appears to have once connectedto the Thunder Room.6.Watertablerise followedbyaperiodofstability.This time intervalisstrikingly evidencedbythe Mushroom, a seven-foot high stalag miteinthe Back Section of the cave which has been undercutbyre-solution at thelevelof an ancient water table. Surveys show that the undercut shelf, about half way down the sta lagmite, lies at the same level as low horizontal ceilingsinthe Triangle Passage and the pas sage connecting the Water Room to Granite Dells.Theseceilingsareimmaculate, phreatically-formed planes that cut across dip ping limestone beds. This period of water table rise and renewed limestone solutionappearsto have integrated the major rooms of the cave into a single, connected system.Therise in water table may have been duetowetter conditionsinsoutheastAri zonaorto a rising base level, perhaps causedbydownstream damming of the ancient San Pedro River.Inany event, the water table stabilized at a level slightly lower than halfway between the present high andlowpoints of115the cave. The age of this water table rise i5problematical. The rise might have followed the preceding drop relatively qUickly(although considerable intervening time must have passed for the Mushroom toform)oritmight have come much later. Except for theinitialsolutional episode, thisisthe only phreatic waterlevelrecognizedinthe cave to date.Asfurther observations are made and spiritleveling data becomes available, additional sub tler paleo water levels may be revealed. Figure 6, the hydrogeological cross sec tion, providesoneclue to the minimum age for this stage of phreatic activity. The cave profile (and, hence the slope of the water table that producedit)ismuch flatter than the existing topographic surface, soitmust be older than that surface. Two geomorphic surfaces relevant to this discussion have been identified, the Tombstone Surface and the Whetstone Surface. The Tombstone and Whetstone Sur faces(aswellas a lower AravaipaSurface)are pediment surfaces mappedbyKirk Bryan between1922-24(Bryan,1926;Plate10inGilluly,1956). Both the Tombstone and Whetstone Surfaces truncate the granite wash and the St. David Formation, but areinturn truncatedbythe inner valley of the San Pedro River. These surfaces once extended across the valley and therefore reflect periods of significantly higher base levels, but as Figure 6 shows, not high enough to correspond to the gradient evidentinthe cave. The Tombstone Surfaceisthe highest surface. This surface surrounds muchofthe Whetstone Mountains, butisnot present on the northern and northeastern alluvial slopes (including the area where Kartchner Cavernsislocated). This surface probably once existed
116inthe area,butwasdestroyed during bevelling of the later Whetstone Surface(Gilluly,1956).TheWhetstone Surface slopes down from the mountaininthe vicinity of Kartchner Caverns and represents a period of climatic stability (Gray, 1965). During this time, a deep, mature red soil formed on the Whet stone Surface (Melton, 1965). A red soil also formed on the Tombstone Surface 1967). The differenceinage between the Tombstone and Whetstone Surfacesisnot clear, but the formation of the red soil on both surfaces apparently occurreddUringthe same interval of geologic time. Melton (1965) proposes that this occurredlargelyduringSangamon time. This would placetheage of the red soilinthe interval between120,000and70,000years ago(VanEysinga, 1983). Sangamon timeinsoutheast Arizonawascharacterizedbya "warm and considerably more humid climate than now" (Melton,1965,p. 14). Thus, although the last episode of phreatic developmentinKartchner Caverns must have preceded the cutting of the Tomb stone and Whetstone Surfaces, the age of the red soil estabilshes a definite younger bound.7.ThephreaticsurfaceoftheregionalaquiferdropsforthelasttimeinthevicinityofKartchnerCaverns.8.Vadosemodification.The dropinwater table brought on a new cycle of vadose modification, which continues to this day. Streamflowswithin the cave have become better integrated.Thestream coursesinGraniteDellsand other areas of the cave appear to coalesce andflowout of the cave1989CaveManagementProceedings(downward through a gravel sump) at the end of Red River Passage, the lowestpointin the cave. However,itisnot clear thatallcave flo\VS combine intooneflowatRed River Passage, as significant lengths of the stream channels pass under breakdown, where they are inaccessible.Inaddition, small drains(afewinches to a footindiameter) have formed near stream levelinseveral areas. Some of the water entering these drains may discharge back into known parts of the caveatlower elevations, but significant deeper losses also probably occur. Despite some integration of flow paths as a result of vadose modification, the pro cess of drainage integrationisstillatanim mature stage.Asmentioned, disconnected reaches of stream channel occurthroughout the cave. Also, when flowsinthe cave do occur, water backs upandpondsinthe Subway Passage and other areas, whereittakes many months to drain. Although the drop of the regional water table ended phreatic development0f Kartchner Caverns, later geoclimatic eventsintheSanPedro Valley have influenced vadose processes.Speleothemformation, cave sediment deposition and erosion, and in-cave streamflowsand ponding areallrelated to these external geologic, hydrologic andclimatic circumstances. Two of the significant external events are outlined below. These events provide perspective for reflecting on the later history of the cave; they are also probably recordedinthe caveinclastic and carbonate Attheendofthelast interglacial (Sangamon), the Whetstone Surface extended "" across the entire San Pedro Valley.Inearly or pre-Wisconsin time (ca.70,000years ago),
theSanPedro River cut down through this surface (Haynes, 1967). This entrenchment amounted to about200or m0refeet (WruckeandArmstrong, 1984).Thebase level was lowered and the water tableinthe regional aquifer further declined. The current water level in Black Well,518feet below land surface, probably reflects the additive effects of this early Wisconsin baselevellowering, the more recent reductioninaquifer recharge duetothedrier climate prevailinginthe last several thousand years, and pumping of the artesian aquiferinthe St. David areainthe last hundred years. Haynes (1967) has proposed that, after entrenchment of the San Pedro River, a large late Pleistocene lake occupied the San Pedro Valley.Thelake may have reached an el evation of2800to2900feet in the SanPedroValley belowKartchnerCaverns. Haynes associates this lake withanintermediatesurfacelyingbetweenBryan'sWhetstone and Aravaipa Surfaces. How ever, he suggests that this intermediate surface actually correlates with the Whetstone Surface further upstreaminthe San Pedro Valley.Hebelieves that the Whetstone Sur facemappedbyBryan in the vicinity of St. Davidisactuallyanolder surface.Inthis paper Bryan's older nomenclatureisused, but the intermediate surface describedbyHaynes'is identifiedonFigure 6. Marls associated with the intermediate surface and ascribed to the late Pleistocene lake have been dated from30,000to12,000years before present (Haynes, 1967). Around12,000years ago the lake had disappeared, according to Haynes.1179.Renewalofspeleothemdeposition.Asthe water table dropped, speleothem formation began anewinpreviously flooded sections.Inparts of the cave unaffectedbythe water table rise, deposition of calcium car bonate no doubt continued unabated, perhaps explaining the great size and abundance of formationsinsuch areas as the Throne Room.10.Depositionofasequenceofcavesediments.After vadose processes had enlarged the cave passages to essentially their present size, a sequence of cave sedimentswasdeposited. Although some of the deposits look alike,itisnot clear whether deposits foundindifferent parts of the cave are strictlycontemporane ous. The sequence listed below(inascending order) was depositedinthe Bathtub Roominthe River Passage: a. Small breakdown chips and cobble sized breakdown fragments embeddedinthe detrital matrix.Thematrixisprobably composed of insoluble residue left from the dissolved limestone. This lithological unitisabout six inches thick at the observed location.b.Laminated clays (the total thickness of about three feet includes at least four sub units distinguishablebycolor). These clays record a long interval of periodic (yearly?)lowvelocityflowsinthe cave. These clays are clearly older than the laminated silts and clays described earlier which arestillbeing depos itedinthe Subway Tunnel. c. Granitic detritus. A six-inch layer of granitic sand and gravel has been deposited above the laminated clays. This material looks
118very similar to the granite wash outside the cave and represents reworked material. The presence of granite washinthe cave indicates the opening-of a significant hydraulic connec tion to the surface. The effect of this hydraulic connectionisdramatically visibleinthe up stream end of the cave at Granite Dells, where granitic material composed of sand, gravel, and cobbles up to a foot acrossisfound in deposits as much as eight feet thick.d.Rowstone. Over the granitic detritus, a flowstone deposit 1/4-inch to one-inch thick was deposited. This suggests the existence of a more quiescent, wet periodinthe late history of the cave. Such a climate existed between about9,000and10,000years ago when cienegas and marshes proliferated along the San Pedro River, and followed a period when Clovis hunters camped and butchered Late Pleistocene mammoths and other mammals at many locations within the San Pedro Valley (Haynes, 1981). e. Speleothems. Speleothems were also actively forming during this time,as evidencedbythe picturesque display of decorations de posited on top of the flowstoneinthe Shelf Passage. This period may have corresponded to the last episode of vigorous growth of speleothemsinthe cave. Although speleothem formationisstillactive today, conditions are certainly drier than they have beeninthe past, and the total volume of speleothem growth must be significantly decreased. 11. Renewed streamflowinvadose passages. Renewed streamfloweroded through the deposits described above.Inthe Shelf the sediments below the flowstone were washed out, leaving the flowstone shelf and associated formations bridging the top half of the passage.Insome areas, such asinthe1989Cave Management ProceedingsGrand Canyon passage, coralloid and other speleothems have already formedonthe eroded surfaces of the sediments. 12. Fallen soda straws.Inthe Rotunda Room, soda straws have fallenlikearrows into the mud. Except for ponding which has occurred in the Subway Passage twicedUringthe last15years, thisisthe last geologic event recognizableinthe history ofthecave.Itissuggested that the straws were detached from the roofdUringthe Great Sonoranearth quake of1887.This quake unloosed a rock slide in the Whetstones which ignited a forest fire, and damaged and destroyed buildingsinnearby Benson and St. David (DuBois and Smith, 1980).Inaddition to events discussed in the preceding tentative chronology, several events of uncertain chronology have been identified. Thesearebriefly described below: 1.Theopening ofanentrance to the Throne and Rotunda Rooms,anduse of these roomsbybats.TheThrone Room and Rotunda Room are now inaccessibletobats, but fossil deposits of guano occuratseveral locations. Later, at some unknown time, this entrance closed, ending use by bats. 2. A ponding event in the Rotunda Room and the Cul-De-Sac. This exceptional eventinthe geologic past left a line of remnant bat guano flotsam adhering to breakdown bouldersinthese two rooms.Thelevelis far higher than any recent ponding.Theponding obviously occurred afteruse of theThroneRoombybats, and must representanuncommonpe riod of sustained precipitation outside the cave. 3. Collapse of the entrance sinkholeandopening of the present entrance_intothecave. Several related events must be placed into this part of the chronology. Some time
afterthesinkhole formed,itpartiallyfilledwith sediments. These sediments were later washed out, leavingthemarks that are visible today.Itisnot known whether the cave was accessible both beforeandafter this deposition, or only after.Itisalsonow known how long bats have used this entrance to access theirpresent roosts intheBig Room. 4. Drying out of formationsintheBigRoom. Very large stalagmites, stalactities, and columns have formed intheBig Room many ofthemarenow dry, their growth ended.Itisnot known whether thisisa relatively recentorvery old event. 5. Helictites. A exceptional array of helictites festoontheRotunda and Throne Rooms. The delicacy of many ofthemwould suggest they are relatively young, but thisisconjecture. 6. Deposition of a bond tentatively identifiedasa bison bone, in the Bison Burial Ground off the Echo Passage.Thespeleogenetic history presented aboveis tentative. Many questions about the chronology remain thatwillbe answered by the studies in progress. Detailed investigation of the key speleogenetic events, combined with dating of critical material,willsubstantially improve the chronology. Radio carbon dating of fossil guano and other suit able material, paleomagnetic dating of cave sediments, and uranium/thorium series dating and oxygen isotope studies of speleothemswillbe particularly useful.Inthe end, not onlywillthespeleogenesis of Kartchner Caverns by better defined relative to the late Quater nary history of theSanPedro Valley, but our knowledge of the late Quaternary historywill119benefit aswell. Studies inProgressPrecise survey. Although an excellent map of the cave has been produced, thekeyto understanding many aspects of the geol ogy, hydrology, and speleogenesis of the cave hinges on obtaining precise leveling and tra verse data. Cave surveys with compass,clinometer, andtapeare typically accurate toonepart inonehundred, even for careful work. Carrying a more accurate theodolite and spiritlevelsurvey through any caveisa formidable task owing to often tight and muddy conditions and short sights. Kartchner Cav ernswillbe no exception. This phase of the projectisscheduled to begin once the bat colony has moved out for the summer. Geophysics.Theprimary purpose of the geophysicsistodetermineifadditional large cave chambers have been carved within the limestone block. Another objectiveisto aidinthe placement of surface facilities to minimize impact on the cave. Three methodswillbe applied over known parts of the cave:(1)microgravity,(2)electrical resistivity, and(3)natural potential. Based on the results, the two most prom ising methodswillbe applied. These methodswillbe applied over the entire park on both limestone and alluvial surfaces.Byincluding the pediment area in the study, the structural relationship between the pediment and the Paleozoic block should be better elucidated. The traverse lines and levels for the geophysics
120are currently being surveyed.Surface Geology and Subsurface GeologyTheobjectives of the surface and subsur face geological investigations are twofold:(1)To provide a detailed understanding of the geological setting and speleogenesis of the cave and(2)to provide geological engineering information critical to the evaluation of poten tial visitor access points. The studies include identification and mappingofthe lithologic and stratigraphic units, strike and dip of beds, faults, folds, and joints. The relationship of these features to passage formation, cave sediments, breakdown, speleothems, and air and waterflowsisbeing noted. Careful study of the details of faulting and folding, both on the surface and underground, should shed considerableUghton the modeofemplacement of the Paleozoic block. Surface and subsurface geological reconnaissances have been com pleted; subsurface workwillrecommence af ter the bats have migrated from their summer maternity roosts. Cave sediments.Theclastic sediments deposited within a cave provide a uniquerecordtounderstandingthecave'sspeleogenetic history. Autochthonous deposits present within Kartchner Caverns include the insoluble residue leftbythe dissolution of the limestone bedrock; breakdown; and organic deposits of guano (relatively minor compared to some caves).Theallocthonous depositsinKartchner Caverns, describedinthe preced ing Speleogenesis section, promise to be es'peciallYuseful for interpreting the cave'.s his tory. The distribution, mineralogical compo sition, characteristics, thickness, stratigraphy1989Cave Management Proceedingsand probable source of the cave sediments are being studied.Inaddition, the age of suitable depositswill be determined through paleo magnetic dating.Speleothemsand Mineralogy.Secondary mineral deposits within Kartchner Caverns giveitmuch of its beauty. The speleothems decorating the cavearecom posed primarily of calcite, although some aragonite(apolymorphic form of calcium carbonate)ispresent. Speleothem formation occurs when calcite-saturated water infiltrates into the cave and comesincontact with the cave atmosphere.Thehigh dissolved carbon dioxide concentrationinthepercolating waterisnotinequilibrium with much lower concen trationsinthe cave atmosphere, resultingindegassing from the water. This shifts the equilibriuminthe water, causing calcite to precipitate (and explains why speleothems can be deposited in cave atmospheres of100%relative humidity). Other cave minerals of more limited distribution and prominence may also occurinKartchner Caverns. For example, whitish crusts of unknown mineralogy coatthesur face of some breakdown blocksinthe Rotunda and Throne Rooms;somesecondary silicate minerals could also be present.Onthe other hand, gypsum speleothemsordeposits, commoninsome caves, havenotyet been foundinKartchner Caverns. Once undergroundfieldwork begins againinSeptember, the speleothem typeswillbe inventoried. Mineralogical composition of selected speleothemswillbeiden!ifiedbyxray diffraction and petrographic methods. Trace element analysiswillbe used to deter-
mine the cause of speleothem coloration, and uranium series dating of speleogenetically important speleothemswillbe performed. These studies,likethe others,willassistindeveloping interpretive and educational ma terials for park visitors.Hydrology and Hydrochemistry.Much ofthehydrology workinprogress has been describedinpreceding sections. Among workitems not mentioned are thethe calculation of the lOO-year runoffineach watershed inthepark and the determination of the lOO-year floodplain. Inside the cave, "bugs" (detectors made of cotton and acti vated charcoal) have been placedinthe bot tom ofsomestream chanels, waitinginreadi ness for in-cave flows should any occur during the study period.Thebugs would allow fluorescent dyes and optical brighteners to be used to trace surface-subsurface streamflowrelationshipsandundergroundflowpaths. Although standing waterinthe caveisscarce, water sampleswillbe collected fromsomeof the small pools. Some samples of drip waterwillalso be collected.Ifanepisode of flow does occurinthe cave during the study period, additional samplingwillbe done.Finally, water chemistry sampleswillbe col lected from the wells and from streamflowsinGuindani Canyon. Concentrations of major cations and anions, trace metals, and radio chemical constituentswillbe determined. Alkalinity andpHwillbe measured with par ticular care in order to obtain precise values ofthesaturation indices.Inclarifying the hydrochemistry, insightwillbe provided into the surface-subsurface hydrologic relationships and flow patterns within Kartchner Caverns121State Park. On a more practical basis, the datawillindicate whether groundwater meets drinking water standards, which would allowitto be developed as a park water supplyifwithdrawal does not adversely affect conditionsinthe cave.Cave Meterology.Thecave meterology studywillbe of key importanceinguiding the planning and devel opment of Kartchner Caverns. Large parts of the cave arestilllive.Intheliveareas, calciteisstilldepositing and speleothems are form ing. Changesinairflow, temperature. or humidity causedbyimproper development could quicklydryout the cave, halt speleothem growth, and diminish the cave's beauty. Among the meterological variables be ing studied are temperature (both air ahdsoil),humidity, evaporation rates, drip rates, airflow,and barometric changes.AsFigure 3 shows, a total of22rnicrometerological sta tions have been installedinthe cave (plus seven additional air temperature-only stations). At each station, electronic temperature sen sors record maximum and minimumair and soil temperatures. Stationsinthe Back Sec tion of the cave are read at least once monthly, while ten of the Front Section stations are cabled to a data logger for hourly readings. The coldest temperature recordedinthe caveis65.6Fat Pirate's Den; the warmest tem peratureis69.4ofatthe OverlookintheBigRoom. Temperatures are virtually constant atallstations within the cave.Theonly excep tionisthe air temperature station at the Babbitt Hole, a construction near the en trance which funnels air, where a 5F annual fluctuationintemperature has been recorded.
122Eight-inch diameter evaporation pans (protectedbycanopies to ward off overhead drips)havebeeninstalledateach micromete.r.ological station to determine evaporation rates. Exactly750milliliters of water are added to each pan using a volumetricflask.Once a month, the volumeisremeasured to determine loss, then topped off again at750milliliters. As expected, evaporation rates are extremely low, varying from 0.1 to 1.3 milliliters per day, equivalent to a depth of evaporation of 1.1 to13.8millimeters per year.Bycomparison, evaporation from apakept indoors at the project officeinTucsonis100times as much.InJune1989,matric suctions were measuredinseveral locationsinthe cave using a dew point microvoltmeter (Rasmussen, 1989). Matric suctions can be directly con verted to relative humidities, which allows relative humidities greater than 95% to be accurately determined(incontrast to wet and dry bulb psychometric measurements which become decreasingly useful above this range).InGrand Central Station, free atmosphere matric suctions varied between20and30bars (equivalent to a relative humidity of between97.7and96.0percent). Deeperinthe cave, at Lover'sleapand the Pyramid Room, free atmosphere suctions varied between10and15bars (99.2 and98.7percent relative hu midities, respectively). Readings with the probe embedded within sediments in the Pyramid Room indicated matric suctions be tween 4 and 8 bars (equivalent to soil pore relative humidities varying between99.70and99.35percent). Based on these data, a moisture gradient exists between cave soil water and the cave atmosphere.Inaddition, an atmospheric moisture gradient exists from1989Cave Management ProceedingsIthe rear of the cave to the front. Net move ment of.moisture out ofthecave through the entranceistherefore inferred (Rasmussen, 1989). These measurements compare favor ably with the evaporationpandata, which indicate greater evaporation rates near the entrance. A surface meterological station has been installed which includes a recording thermo graph for monitoring temperatures, a recording microbarograph for monitoring air pressure changes, a recording hygrothermograph for monitoring relative humidity,anda recording weighing-bucket rain gage.Oneof the ob jectives of the cave meterology studyisto determine whether air flowinandout of the cave entranceisdue to barometric, chimney, or gravity effects.Todetermine this, barometric changeswillbe recorded simultaneously inside the cave, and a highly sensitive hot-wire an emometer to measure air movementwillbe installed at a passage constriction near the entrance. When these results are combined with other hydrometeorological information collected dUring the study, a cave water budget can be determined. Thiswillbe helpfulinassessing the vulnerability of the cavemicroenvironment to determine construction and development options which may be consid ered for visitor access.Air Quality.The air quality studieswillinvolve mea surements of carbon dioxide, methane, and hydrogen sulfide gases; alpha radiation (radon and thoron daughters); and viable airborne moss and algal spores. Methaneandhydro gen sulfide concentrations are usually negli gible in caves with little decomposing organic
matter(likethe situation at Kartchner). Car bon dioxide concentrations are commonly elevatedincave atmospheres because of exsolution of carbon dioxide fromCO2-satu rated water infiltrating into the cave. How ever, concentrations are typically far below levels of concerniflittle decomposing organic matterispresent (again,likethe situationatKartchner Caverns). Monitoring of natural alpha radiationwillbe conducted to characterize typical concen trationsandtohelpinunderstanding airflowpatterns in the cave.Inaddition, background levels of viable mossandalgaeinthe caveatmospherewillbe determined. Exotic plant growth in electrically lighted cavesisoften a major problem that can damage cave features and detract fromthenatural beauty of the cave. Understanding airborne transport of plant materialwillassistinthe design of cave protection measures andwillprovide back ground data to assess the effectiveness of those measures.BatsKartchner Cavernsisthe summer migra tory and maternityhomefor about one thou sand Cave bats(Myotis uelifer).Thebats begin arriving from their winter rangeinMexicoinMay, have young aboutthethird week ofJune(which begin flyingthefirst week of August),andleave by mid-September.Intheir nightly forays for insects, the bats navigate deftly through the tortuous series of small roomsandpassages connecting the Big Room totheentrance sinkhole, threading throughaneight-inch diameter constriction along the way. (Humans bypass this obstacle through a nearby artifically enlarged passage, replacing123a plywood cover behind them to maintain the natural meteorological conditions of the cave).Thebat flights begin about20minutes after sundown andlast25to35minutes.In1988,about650batsflewnightly from the cave, growing to1300bats after the babies beganflying.In1989,pre-maternity numbers started higher, about1000individuals, and the total population after the young beganflying peaked atabout1800(Deborah Buecher, personal communication). Because of the configuration of the entrance Sinkhole, the bats can be counted with unusual accuracy.Theinvestigators sitqUietly,backs against thewallinthe bottom of the Sinkhole, and count the batsastheyflyout of the sinkhole high lighted against the twilight sky.Aseach bat exits the Sinkhole, the investigators pressthe space barontheir portable computers, auto matically recording the exit time.Thedata can later be dumped out to yield graphs of the bat flight. Inside the cave, the locations of former and current bat roosts have been mapped. Bat bones have also been notedinseveral areas. A sampling ofthe oones willbe examined to identify species,andifsuitable old materialisfound, absolute datingwillbe attempted. Remains from theThroneRoom are of par ticular interest, because thisareaisnow unusedbybats due to its remoteness from the en trance. No other species of bats are presently known to use the cave, except for occasional individuals ofTownsend'sbig-eared bat(Plecotus townsendii),which roostinthe en trance. Outside of the cave, investigators have periodically set up mist nets to survey the bats indigenous to the area.Themist nets are usually erected at the water tank near the
124southwestcomerof the property where the bats swoop down and skim the water to drink. Captured bats are identifiedbyspecies and usually further examined to determine sex, age, and maternity status. Weight and size measurements are then commonly taken be fore the bats are released. To date, seven species have been captured,allof which are typical of this range and habitat (Deborah Buecher, personal communication): Cave batMyotis ueliferCalifornia myotisMyotis' californicusFringed myotisMyotis thysanodesBigbrown batEptesicus fuscusPallid batAntrozzous pallidusSanborn's long-nosed batLeptonycteris sanborniiMexican long-tongued batChoeronycteris mexicanaInvertebrates and Small Vertebrates. Inver tebrates make up the majority ofallknown cave organisms, but tend to be overlookeddUringcave inventories. The dark, generally nutrient poor habitat of caves gives rise to interesing invertebrate dominated ecosystems and unique cave-limited species.InKartchner Caverns, the bat guano, although limitedinextent and quantity,isa major nutrient sourceinthe underground food web. Mites forageinthe guano for mold and are themselves eatenbyother predatory species of mites. Isopods, spiders, ants, and pseudoscorpions have been observedinKartchner Caverns. A cave adapted silverfish also has been found;thiSsilverfish has been tentatively identified as a species previously known no closer than from cavesinTexas and Central America. Cave crickets, exhibiting some characteristics of1989Cave Management Proceedingscave adaptation, have been found throughout the Front Section of Kartchner Caverns and as far back as Grand Canyon and the Granite Dells.Thesmall vertebrates, such as mice and lizards, have been seen onlyInthe entrance sinkhole and nearby connecting passages. Two types of rattlesnake, the Wester Dia mondback and the Blacktailed, are also fre quently observed on ledgesorincrevices within the entrance sinkhole.SummaryIna few years, the wonders discoveredbytwo cavers in1974and kept secret for so longwillbeopenforallto view.Thebaseline information gaineddUringthe current geology, hydrology, metero logy and biology studieswillallow Arizona State Parks to develop Kartchner Caverns as a premier park for visitation and education. Arizona State Park's commitment to develop the cave only after performing thorough studies of the cave en vironmentwillassure thattheqUietbeauty and nearly mint condition of Kartchner Cavernswillawe visitors for years to come.Acknowledgements and DisclaimerThe author gratefully acknowledges the assistance of Robert H. Buecher, Project Manager for Arizona Conservation Projects, Inc., the not-for-profit organization conduct ing the pre-development studies at Kartchner Caverns for Arizona State Parks. Many of the ideas presented in thispaperevolved during cave trip discussions withMr.Buecher. I also thank Deborah Buecher for her help, most notably for discussions on the bat and inver tebrate studies and for her preparation of base maps usedinseveral of the figures. Randy
Tuftsisthankedforhisassistancewiththe history section of this paper andMikeDarristhankedforhishelpindrafting the hydrographs and hydrogeological cross-section.Whileacknowledging the assistanceofthose named above, the author remainssolelyresponsibleforany factual errors or imperfect interpretations presentedinthis paper. The voluntary work on which this paperwasbasedwasconducted during the author's spare time andisnot connectedwithhis offic;ial duties at the Arizona DepartmentofEnvironmental Quality.GlossaryFor brevity, speleothem types were not definedinthe main textofhispaper. The short definitions presentedbelowcapsulize a large body of literature dealingwiththe-unusual forms and growth mechanisms of speleothems. The authoritative workbyCarolHilland Paolo Forti(1986),CaveMineralsofthe World, discusses these topicsinconsider able detail. The definitions presentedbeloware largely borrowedfromthis book. Boxwork-intersectlon mineral blades,usuallycalcite, projectingfromthewallsorceilingofa cave.Column-aspeleothem formedbythe joining of a stalactite and a stalagmite.Coralloid-anyof a number of nodular, globular, or coral-like speleothems.Drapery-afolded orfurledspeleothemwhichhangs downfrominclinedwallsor ceilingswitha curtain-like appearance.125Dripstone-ariy sortofspeleothemformedbydripping water(e.g.stalactites and stalagmites).Flowstone-a smooth, sheet-like speleothem formedbyfilmsofflOwingwater.Helictlte-atWisted, usually worm-like speleothemwhichgrowsviaasmallcapillary channel. Pearl,Cave-aspherodial, polished carbon ate concretionwhichformsinshaII0w cave pools. Shield,Cave-adisc-shaped speleothem composedoftwoparallelhemisphericalplates separatedbyamedialcrack. Uke the helictite,itisbelieved to have formedunder capillary pressure. SodaStraw-atubular stalactitewhich re sembles a drinking straw.Speleothem-asecondarymineraJdeposit formedincaves. Stalactite-a vertically-hanging speleothem formedbydripping water and generallyhavinga tube or remnant of a tube atitscenter. Stalagmite-a vertically-oriented convexfloordeposit formedbywater dripping downfromabove. Bankey,V.and i. D. Kleinkopf, 1985.
126Geophysical Maps of the Whetstone Roadless Area, Cochise and Pima Counties,Arizona. U.S. Geo!. SurveyMisc.Field Studies Map M-1614-C. Bogli, A.,1980.Karst Hydrology and Physi calSpeleology. Springer-Verlag, Berlin,284p. Bryan,K.,1926.San Pedro Valley, Arizona and the Geographic Cycle(abs.).Geo!. Soc. Amer. Bull.,v.37, pp. 169-170. Creasy, S. C.,1967.Geologic Map of the Benson Quadrangle, Cochise and Pima Counties, Arizona. U.S. Geo!. SurveyMisc.Geo!. Invest. Map 1-470. Davis,G.H., 1979. Laramide Folding and FaultinginSoutheastern Arizona. Amer. Jour. of Science,v.279,pp. 543-569. DuBois, S.M.andA.M.Smith, 1980. The1887EarthquakeinSan Bernar dino Valley, Sonora: Historic Accounts and Intensity PatternsinArizona.Arizona Bur. of Geo!. and Mineral Technol ogy Special Paper No.3,112p.Gilluly,J.,1956. General Geology of Central Cochise County, Arizona.U.S. Geo!. Survey Prof. Paper 281,169p. Gray. R5.,1965.Late Cenozoic Sedimentsinthe San PedroValleynear St. David, Arizona. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Arizona,198p. Gray,RS., 1967. Petrography of the UpperCenozoic Non-Marine Sedimentsinthe San Pedro Valley, Arizona. Jour. of Sed. Petrology,v.37,no. 3, pp. 774-789. Harland,W.B., Cox,A.V., Llewellyn, P. G., Pickton,C.A.G., Smith,A.G., and WaltersR,1982.A Geologic Time Scale. CambridgeUniv.Press, Cam bridge, Great Britain, 131p.1989Cave Management ProceedingsHaynes, C. V.,1967.Preliminary Report on the Late Quaternary Geology of the San Pedro Valley, ArRizona.Arizona Geo!. Soc. GuidebookIII,Tucson,pp.79-86.Haynes, C. V.,1981.Geochronology and paleoenvironments of the Murray Spring Clovis Site, Arizona. National Geographic ResearchReports,v.13, pp.243-251.Hill,C.A.and P. Forti,1986.Cave Minerals of the World. National Speleological Society. Huntsville, Alabama,238p. Johnson,N.M., Opdyke,N.D., and Lindsay,E.H.,1975.Magnetic Polarity Stratig raphy of Pliocene-Pleistocene Terres trial Deposits and Vertebrate Faunas, San Pedro Valley, Arizona. Geo!. Soc. Amer. Bull.,v.86,pp. 5-12. Melton, M. A.,1965.TheGeomorphic and Paleoclimatic Significance ofAlluvialDepositsinSouthern Arizona. Jour. Geo!.,v.73, no. 1, pp. 1-38. Rasmussen,T.,1989.Summary Trip Re port, Kartchner Caverns, June30,1989. Unpublished report, Arizona Conserva tion Projects, Inc.files10p. Van Eysinga,F.W.B.,1983.Geological Time Table. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1 plate. White,W.B.,1988.Geomorphology and Hydrology of Karst Terrains. Oxford University Press, New York,464p.Wrucke, C. T. andA.K.Armstrong, 1984. Geologic Map of the Whetstone Roadless Area and Vicinity, Cochise and Pima Counties, Arizona.U.S. Geo!. SurveyMisc.Field Studies MapMF-1614-B. -...
Wrucke, C. T. andA.K.Armstrong,1987.Paleozoic Stratigraphic SectioninDry Canyon, Whetstone Mountains, Cochise County, Arizona. Geol. Soc. of America Centennial FieldGuideCordilleran Section, pp. 29-34. Wrucke, C. T.,McCoUy,R.A., Werschky,R.S.,Scott,D. C.,Bankey,V.L.,Kleinkopf,M.D., Staatz,M.H., and Arrnstrong,A.K.,1983.Mineral Resource Potential Map of the Whetstone Roadless Area, Cochise and Pima Counties, Arizona.U.S. Geol. SurveyMisc.Field Studies Map MF-1614-C.BiographicalSketch CharleS G. Graf received a SSE degreeinEngineering Science from Arizona StateUniversityin1972.Hehas caved since1969and has been a member of the National Speleo logical Society since1980.He has attended coursesonkarst hydrogeology givenbyWest ern Kentucky University and the National WaterWellAssociation.Onmany weekends,Mr.Graf can be found "firing up" his carbide lamp at the entrance to Kartchner Caverns, volunteering time in support of the Kartchner studies. During the week, heisemployedbythe Arizona Department of Environmental Qualityas a Hydrologist, where he currently manages the Superfund Hydrology Unit. Prior tocomingtoADEQ,heworkedasa Hydrogeologist for Tetra Tech International, where he supervised and conducted water resource studiesinthe Sultanate of Oman.127 Scali: 1 IDchEqual.Approzimatlly 22 Wil .. FIGURE 1LoeAnON MAP
Well B____ACross-Section (Figure 6) Li CONTOUIlINTEIlY"....20 Figure2.SiteMap,KartchnerCavernsState Yark
11_,,....lclll_ I 100 feel, Outline MapofKartchnerCaverns r,.... Itt IIDI.11.14" loc .... Figure 3. IACICS[CT I011 Crowskst.ocll I \ ---IIlcrolDeteorolollcal IIODUOrlDI 8tatlo.
PreliminaryGeologyofKartchnerCavernsStatePark IOT91 Groye' OepoliuElcabrolO L.i"'..tone @J 80110 QuOrtzl'.HorQuiliO LimtilOn,(Io.er)10"'1"orfill FOf'",olion[E]Alal,illC!iJ BloCIPrinceLI",..lon, [i;]Abri;oLI",ellon,lliJ PinalSChill SCAL.E -o q'-.(, \\I \a Armllrong,1984-. -Fi,ure4. SurfaceGeolo,y
20SOUTHWELL0 't: (D-18-19)25dcc 21 AAAA A A AAAA"'0AAC...A 0 A -22 AA A A A6ol..2eu... 23 ........Aeu eu---24 f!= a..w o 25JJAS0No-JF M AMJJ1988 1989 20 i 21JNORTHWELL(D-18-19)25dbb "'0c 0-22 0 Cii 23 ,rJ!Woler level recorder in.tolled 6-18-88a..w o 25JJAS0NoJF M AMJ J1988 1989 FIGURE5.SELECTEDWELLHYDROGHAPHS
WEST --.-........-.. EAST /-",.oryo-=C-. ,\\.-.-.-.----...--.---.SECTIONA-B-CTHROUGHPDI ... ENT ......... ---_...--_.-------_ HYDROGEOLOGICALCROSS-SECTION.... ..-S7' --6.SECTION A-B-D THROUGH CAVE, ,/ / ,/,/ 9XVertIcalExaggeration ".,;d//p'/./..--
1281989Cave Management Proceedings State-(hvned ShowCaves:ShouldTheyBeSell-Supporting?byRussell GurneeABSTRACTAbout700caves throughout the world have been modified and made accessible to visitors as show caves.Someare privately owned; some are maintained as religious shrines; but most are state owned and operated. State-owned caves are administeredbypublic officials and dependent upon government appropriation for their protection.Allare valuable natural attractionsandoften points-of destinationforcitizens and tourists. Their value (private, religious, or public)isdependent upon continued protection and sustained maintenance. Their success can influence the economy of an entire region. Management of public show caves requires the same skills and expertise as a private business enterprise. However, public caves do not have to make a profit to survive, but most outstanding show caves are self-supporting and generate more revenue than they require for maintenance and upkeep. The exhibition of caves requires major modifications to the natural conditions and constant attentiontothe environmentifthe public experienceisto be safe, educational, and pleasurable. Publicly owned show caves, developed using tax dollars and later charging admission for visitors, areincompetition with private enterprises. The administration should provide for depreca tion, maintenance, and replacement of capital investments fromtherevenue generated-before the generated incomeisreturned to the state for budget assignment. Examples of management plans of state-owned show caves of several countries are given. Recommendations are made for cooperation with citizen/speleologicaVscientific organizations to monitor the impact on the cavebyvisitors.Therecognitionbythe government of the unique needs of the cave environmentandthe long-range consequences of neglect of maintenanceisthe first stepforsustained conservation of this resource. Investment of income generatedbycave admissions should be allocated to the preservation of the cave. State-owned caves can, and should, be self-supporting.
Approximately700caves throughout the world have been modified and made ac cessible to visitors as show caves. Some are privately owned, some are maintained asreligious shrines; but most are state owned and operated. State-owned caves are adminis teredbypublic officials and are dependent upon government appropriation for their pro tection.Allthese selected caves are valuable natural attractions and often points-of-desti nation for citizens and tourists. The value of caves, whether under private, religious, or public ownership,isdependent upon contin ued protection and sustained maintenance.Thesuccess of their attracting visitors can influence the economy of an entire region. Most public national parks and preserves are evenly supportedbythe largess of gov ernment appropriations even though a small numbercanprovide for their own upkeep.Thepolicy of evenhandednessisunderstand able and because the value of a natural resourceisgenerally measuredinhuman viewpoint terms, itislogical and simple to justify. Un fortunately,inthe United States, public Show Caves (theonesegment of the park service which usually returns more money thanitcosts)aretreated equallyinthe budget and often they suffer through inadequate funding. "Why should caves be treated any differently than other natural featuresinthe park service?" Itistrue thatallof the propertyset aside as public domainisequally deserving and important. However caves have characteris tics that setthemapart. Caves reqUire controlled access, usuallybya gate, because they can be dangerous and are often fragile and subject to damage. Safety of visitors usually requiresgUidesfor protec-129tion, andforthis service an admissionisusually charged. Unlike most natural attrac tions (such as waterfalls, mountains, and beautifulscenery), caves have a mystery about them that piques the curiosity of visitors. A well-known publicly owned cavewillautomaticallyattract visitors and require services beyond the usual requirements of an average park. However, no matter how attractive, caves are not unique. There are many show caves around the world which have set the standard for comparison, and a publicly owned cave must "compete" with others. Many caves,inthe United States for example, are privately owned businesses and operate as profit-making enterprises.Theowners must pay taxes, provide maintenance costs, allow for depre ciation, andstillreturn a profit. Itisunfair to these private endeavors for govemment-owned caves to exhibit caves without charge. For this reason the state usually charges a fee and setsitcosts to be comparable to the private sector. Ordinarily the admission fee (usually arbitrarily set) does not return directly to the manage ment of the cave. It goes into the general fund for the whole park, and a budget setbythe administrationdeterminesthenecessary maintenance and operation costs. This may not provide sufficient income to protect and exhibit the cave.Inthose areas where a government owned caveisincompetition with private enterprise, government should playbythe same rules required of the private owner; andifthereisa profit after meetingallof the general maintenance expenses these funds should be applied to long range investments directly related to the protection of the cave. Any income above that provision could then revert to the general fund. Foregoing the
130"profit" from a public show cave means that the individual taxpayer who does not use the serviceorattractionisforced to contribute to the upkeep of the cave. MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSNational OwnershipInthe United States, the policy for the National Forest Service differs from the Na tional Park Serviceinthat the Forest Service has a husbanding roleinmaintaining and monitoring a renewable resource; primarily trees. However, they also control mineral rights and mining leasesonpublic land. This raises "value" questions sometimesinconflict with the National Park Service. The National Park Service maintains areasforthe enjoyment of the public and the protection of thewildlifeand environment. Both positions are defend able as good and worthy human causes, but they conflict whenitcomes to allotment of budgets. Serious consideration should be given to the revision of budgets for state owned show caves to provide for the adequate protection, security, and preservation of those caves that are now under the supervision of the government.Inthe U.S.A. there are a number of world-class show caves that are points-of destination for visitors fromallover the world. Mammoth Cave, Kentucky; Carlsbad Caverns, New Mexico; BlanchardSprings, Arkansas; Wind Cave and Jewel Cave, South Dakota are managed by the United States government and provide an outstanding experience for the public. Great capital investments have been madeinthese propertiesbytaxpayers to present them as the principal attraction to1989Cave Management ProceedIngseach park. However,inevery case, after the initial development expense, the major outlays of their yearly budgets have gone to surface development. Maintenance within the cave and improvement of the experience of visitors has not kept up with the available technologies or the demands of the public. Volunteer projects are launchedto"clean-up" some of these cavesbydedicated volunteers because the budgets do not allow for the Investment of public funds even though the admission moneyisadequate to cover this expenditUre.ItIslikehaving theater-buffs clean the theater while the management en larges the ticket office.MANAGEMENTRESPONSmlUTYInthe public sector a Show Cave man ager might beanadministrator from the Federal, State, or local municipality whoisappointed to provide supervision and protec tion. His principal duties are related to the administrative and operational aspects of the site.Inthe National Park Serviceitisa policy to rotate Superintendents throughoutthePark system, regardless of the main theme of the park,inorder to permit broad personal organizationalskillstodevelop.A Superintendent's functionisin the short-range management of the facility.Thelong-range goals are setbyadministrators (usually not on site) who prepare programs for the entire Park System. Private, not-for-profit groups such as religiousorcultural organizations do net have the organizational structure to choose admin istrators to operate their public caves. They operateinthe manner of private cave owners and appoint a manager who has control of the
access to their caves and are responsible for their upkeep. Few of these managers have any expertiseincave operation as tourist attractions. Most of them are experiencedinbusiness management and concentrate their effortsonsurface development and improve ment. Decisions regarding changes within the cavearegenerally made on site and the committee of the not-for-profit owner has little inputinthe actual work doneinthe cave. Both of these methods of public show cave management exist and with mostwellknown caves their efforts have been very successful. "Then why change a system thatisworking?" Sometimes the system has been too successful,andhas brought a show cave to a point beyond its carrying capacity. Today,inmost of the developed countries, the historic world-class caves that areingood conditionaresuffering from over-visitation.InEngland, the caves of the Cheddar Gorge have overflow crowdsinsummer andinthe French caves of prehistory theylimitpublic access because of the fragile nature of the cave paintings.Toomany people can cause a change in cave temperature simplybytheir presence.InSpain, Portugal, Yugosla via, and Italy the attendance to show caves has exceeded the facilities and capacity of the caves dUring the vacation season.Inthe United States many of the Na tional Park Caves limit the number of people by admittingthemona first-come, first-serve basis. When a predetermined quotaisreached the administrators close the cave. Puerto Rico and Barbados,inthe Caribbean, have show caves where appointments are made forvisitation.Allthese caves, wherever located, are131attractive, exotic, and interesting and present visitors with a unique natural experience. This makes them afor travel ers. The caves are responsible for the atten dance at many parks and while many changes are made to the surface facilities, littleisdone to enhance and safeguard the one feature that has attracted thepublic-thecave.DEFINING THE PROBlEMPolicy seems to be the principal stumbling block in finding a solution to the over-crowdinginpublic show caves. Without a clear-cut policy regarding the conservation of the cave and the responsibility of public management, thereislittle hope of improving the situation. Until a balance is achieved, permitting the optimum sustained public use of the cave, based upon improved facilities to accept them, the goalwillnot be reached without deterio ration of the cave environment.Atthis time the decision of when this balanceisachievedisbeing made at various levels of authority andbypeople of different degrees of expertise.Bydefinition, a show caveisset aside for the benefit of man, unless the presence of some other organismorlifewithin the caveishazardous to him.Theconservation of the cave then becomes a matter of self-interest to man and the policytoprotect the caveisto enhance the experience for visitorsbymain taining the natural conditions that are the basis for the visit. Conservation then becomes not altruistic but realistic and can be measuredindollars.SEEKING A SOLUTIONReducing this complicated subject to
132dollars permits decisions by committees and local managers regarding important necessary conservation programsbythesimple expedi ent. "Wedon'thave the money."Someconservation needscannotbe measured in money.Thepreservation of Lascaux Cave in France, endangeredbyover visitation, defied scientific solution even after10years of study. Only by building a duplicate cave nearby, tofulfillthedemands of the public,wasthe pressureonthe original cave relaxed.Thesustained continued enjoyment of natural caves throughouttheworldiswell within professional expertise available today. Wecantrain gUides, administrators, engi neers,andartists to maintain the conditions that created these caves inthefirst place.Thecaves can be self-supportingbythe visitors and attendeesifprovisions are made to includeinlong-range plans the resources forthepreservation ofthesites.CONCLUSIONSTheredevelopment of a show caveisrequired only onceortwiceina generation and should not be a practice carriedonbythe day-to-day managers of the operation. Moni toring of conditions withinthecave should be the responsibility of management, but the decision to make changes must come from specialists whocananalyze the data, project the consequences of change,andprepare a program for maintenance to sustain the results. This analysisisa limited specialty that does not provideanopportunity for many careers. However, the knowledgeandskills are avail able today. With a worldwide economy pro viding sophisticated and critical visitorsand1989Cave Management Proceedingstourists in the most obscure places, a governmentthat exhibits a public show cave should take advantage of current technology in presenting their caves. A search shouldbemadefor experi encedandcapable experts inthedesignandpresentation of these specialized areas. Spe leological organizationscanaid inthesearch for persons with backgroundandexperienceasprospective consultants. Athoroughknowledge oftheenvironment, esthetic sen sitivity,andanawareness oftheeffectonthe cave life, structure,andhuman safetyareallingredients requiredtopreparea planormodification withinthecave.Themost im portant ingredient required by the designeristheability to work withthenatural conditions withtheleast impactonthecave. (Don't callina house paintertoredotheceiling oftheSistine Chapel.) Authoritieswhocontrol accesstopublic show caves should provide forthecontingency money, with income from admissions,topay for the monitoring of conditions withinthecave, examiningtheneedfor extensive surface development,andmaintainingthenatural integrity ofthesite.Allthesecosts shouldbepart ofthebudgetandonly after thisexpenseismet shouldthesurplus reverttothegeneral fund. Russell Gurnee231Irving Avenue Closter, NJ07624
133Cave Conservation:SpecialProblemsofBatsbyGaryF.McCracken DepartmentofZoology and Graduate ProgramsinEcology and Ethology UniversityofTennessee, Knoxville Knoxville, Tennessee37916AbstractIgnorance as to the real status of populations of almostallbat species is a major problem for their conservation. This ignoranceisreflected in the IUCN "red list' of threatened species, whichisboth minimalist and biased.Therecent proposition that we should construct "green lists" of species known to be secure, rather than red lists,isextended to bats. Available informaton regarding the status of thefivespecies of North American bats listed as endangeredisreviewed, and these species are used to illustrate major problems encounteredbybat populations.Allof these species rely on cave roosts. Their habit of roostinginlarge aggregationsdUringhibernationand!orreproduc tion make these and other cave dwelling bats particularly wlnerable to disturbances which can reduce populations. Types of disturbances and theirlikelyeffects are discussed. The long-life spans and low reproductive rates of bats mandate that theywillrecover slowly following populaton reductions. Habitat alteration and destruction outside of roosts and posioning from pesticides also have impacted negatively on bat populations; however roost site disturbance and habitat destruction have probably had much greater negative effects than has pesticide poisoning. Because disturbance within their cave roostsisa major probleminbat conservation, constructing lists of "green caves" (those which can be visited) and "red caves" (those which must be avoided)isencouraged. Criteria for constructing these lists of caves are discussed. RedBooks,GreenUsts,and a LackofInfonnationEach year, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature OUCN) updates the Red Data Book which lists plant and animal species known to be endangered,vulnerableorrare.The1988Red Data Book places33bat speciesinthese categories.Asthere are approximately900species of batsin
134the world (nearly one-fourth ofallmammal species), this "red list"of threatened species includes less than four percent of the world's bats. This disproportionately small number should lead anyone with even remote aware ness of the worldwide extinction crisis to question whetehr thislistreflects reality with regard to bat species that are threatened.Inreality, the redlistdoes not come close to giving an accurate picture of the problem. First, consider that the redlisthas a substantial geographical bias toward North American species.Thestandard referenceonNorth American bats (barbour and Davis, 1969)lists39species of batsinNorth America, north of Mexico. These39species comprise aboutfivepercent of the worldwide bat spe cies diversity. However, of the33threatened bat species on the IUCNlist,fiveare native to North America. So, a fauna comprisingfivepercent of total bat species diversity accountsfor15percent of the species considered as threatened. I argue that this bias does not reflect reality with regard to species manage ment. Rather, this bias reflects our ignorance regarding the status of most bat populations. We simply know the status of batsinNorth America better than for other parts of the world. I also argue that our degree of igno ranceiseven more frightening when you recognize that we are not even certain how accurate the IUCN redlistisfor bat speciesinNorth America. This isso because for most bat speciesinNorth America, much less for those elsewhere (particularlyinthe tropics), we simplydo not have the information to determine whether overall population sizes are stable, decreasing,orifthey are decreasing, at what rates?Soour ignorance on the status of batsisextreme. Given this ignorance, the IUCN1989Cave Management Proceedingsredlistgives a highly inaccurate and minimal assessment of our current extinction crisis. Recognizing this, prominent conservaton biologists recently have suggested that the construction of red lists has been a major tactical errorbythose who wish to preserve the world's biota Omboden, 1987;Diamond, 1988). Red lists are thought to be a tactical error because the existence of such alistmay lead to the assumption thatifa speciesjsnot on the list. that speciesisnotinjeopardy. This, of course,isnot how the list should be inter preted. Many species that are notonthelistshould be, butarenot, simply because we don't know enough about them.Tocorrect this tactical error,ithas been suggested that rather than constructing red lists, we should construct "green lists". Green lists would in clude species that we know are secure.Tobe on the green list, a species should meet the criterion of "known nottobe declininginnumbers now, and unlikely to declineinthe next decade" (Diamond, 1988). With a greenlist,itisargued, the burden of proofisshifted to those who wishtomaintain thatalliswellwith a species. Those proposing green lists have been concerned with birds, not with bats. Certainly, much moreisknown aboutthestatus of birds than of bats. However,itisestimated that fewer than one-third of the world's bird spe cies would qualify for inclusionona greenlist.This being the case with birds, I also suspect that fewer than one-third oftheworld's bats likewise would qualify for such alist.Some ThingsThatWeDoKnowWIth our ignorance as a perspective, I wish to consider some of what we do know
about the status of bats, particularly cave bats. This requires going back to the redlist.Of the39bat speciesinNorth America, north of Mexico,18rely substantially on caves for roosting sites.Someof the remaining 21 species alsoareoccasionally foundincaves, but caves evidentlyarenot absolutely essential to them.Ofthe18species for which caves are essential,13species utilize caves year-round, both for reproduction and as winter roosts.Theremainingfivespecies rely on caves as hibernating sites, but roost elsewheredUringreproduction. Four of thefiveNorth Americanspeciesonthe redlistreqUire caves year round (Table1),andonespecies (the Indiana bat) requires caves for hibernation, but roosts elsewheredUringthe summer. SoallNorth American bats listed as threatened are cave dwelling; there appears to be a correlation with cave-dwelling and species jeopardy. How ever, to hearken briefly back to our ignorance, itiseasier (not easy, just easier) to assess the status of cave dwelling bats than the status of bats that are more dispersedintheir roosting habits, and thus more difficult to find and monitor.Thebias toward cave-dwelling bats beingonthe threatenedlistmayinpart be a result of relative ease of censusing.UfeHistory Traits PredisposingBatstoExtinctionUnlike most small mammals, bats have extremely longlifespans. Even the smallest bat typically has alifeexpectancy on the order of10years, and individuals are known tolivemuch longer than this.Wildlittle brown bats, for example, are known to survive as long as30years (Keen and Hitchcock, 1980).INaddition to longlifeexpectancies, bats have135verylowrates of reproduction. Many female bats do not reproduce until their second year and, after reaching maturity, females usually produce only a single pup each year. Conse quently, bats have far lower potential ratesofpopulation growth than are typical of most small mammals. Although bats are often per ceived of as similar to rats or mice, the repro ductive rates of bats are,incontrast, more similar to those of antelopes or primates.Ifa bat populationisdecreasedinsize,itcan recover only slowly. Bats have other characteristics which contribute to their vulnerability. Among the most significantistheir habit of roosting to getherinlarge aggregations.Thefact that large numbers of individuals often are concen trated into only afewspecific roost sites resultsinhigh potential for disturbance. Because of their aggressive roosting habits, species that are very common actually can be vulnerable because they areinonly a limited number of roosts. Mexican free-tailed bats ITadarida brasiliensis mexicana) are an excellent ex ample. Single cave roosts of these bats can contain tens of millions of individuals, and the loss of evenonesuch roost would mean the loss of a significant portion of the entire species population.DisturbanceofRoostsby HumansAggregations of batsarevulnerable to a variety of disturbances. Atr least three North American endangered spe cies (Indiana, gray and Sanborn's long-nosed bats) are known to have abandoned traditional roost sites because of commercial cave devel opment (Humphrey,1978;Tuttle,1979;
136Wilson, 1985a). An important hibernaculumforendangered big-eared bats has been threat enedbyquarrying (Hall and Harvey, 1976), and I personally have observed numerous examples ofvandalism such as burning old tires, or shooting guns inside bat cave roosts. Although intentional disturbance of roostsiswell documented, unintentional disturbance often posesaneven greater threat.Inthe temperature zone, aggregations of bats which cavers typically encounter are either h!bernat ing groups that occurinlatefall,winter or early spring, or maternity colonies that occurinlate springorsummer.Thereisno queston that disturbances as seemingly trivial as merely entering a roost area, or shining a lightonhibernating bats orona maternity group of females and their pups, can resultindecreased survival, perhaps outright death, and possible abandonment of the roost site. Although thereissomecontroversy about the significance of this apparently "innocent" disturbance, my own experience and reading of the literature lead me to the opinion thatitcan be extremely significant. However, thereisno question that the impact of such disturbances are somewhat species-specific, and that the timing of the disturbanceisvery important.Theresults of "innocent" disturbance of a maternity colony can include the following:(1)Itcan cause individuals to abandon roost sites, particularly earlyinthe reproductive season when females are pregnant. This may resultinfemales moving to other, perhaps less ideal, roosts where their success at reproduc ingisreduced.(2)Disturbance raises the general level of activity within roosts. This may resultingreater expenditure of energy and less efficient transfer of energy to nursing1989Cave Management Proceedingsyoung. This,inturn, may cause slower growth of young and increasetheforaging demandsonfemales, thus 'increasing the time females are outside of the roostandvulnerable to predation.(3)Disturbancecancause outright death of young that lose their roost-hold andfallto the cave floor.(4)Maternity aggrega tions often result in thermoregulatory ben efits. Clustering bats gain thermal benefits from being surrounded by other warm bodies. However, individuals also may receive ther mal benefit becausetheaccumulated body heat of all individuals present serves to raise temperatures withintheroost area. There fore,ifthe size of a colony decreases, the accumulated thermal advantages totheindi vidualsinthat colony may likewise decrease, anditmay become energetically less advanta geous,orperhaps even energetically impos sible for females to raise pups in that roost. Thus, there may be a "threshold" where after a population reaches a certain lower size, roost temperaturescannotbe raised suffi ciently for rearing youngandthat roost mustbeabandonedasa maternity site. Problems caused by disturbing hibernat ing bats also relatetotheir energy reqUire ments.DUringwinter,temperatezone bats go long periods without eating,andallow their body temperatures to drop, often to near freezing.Theenergy reservesthatbats accu mulate priortohibernationareoften close to whatisneeded to survivethewinter. Distur bancedUringhibernation may cause bats to arouse prematurely, elevating their body tem peratures and utilizing stored energy reserves which should not be spared.Thebats may go back into torpor after thje disturbance, but then they may not have sufficient energy to
survive the rest of winter. This may notbeapparentto the person causing the distur bance. Roost site disturbance also can seriously impact bats which do not form large aggrega tions. Thisisundoubtely so for many tropical bats which roostinmature, hollow trees, whicharebeing cutasmore tropical forest goes into cultivation.Tomy knowledge, wedon'tknow the trajectories of populations of any of these tree-roosting bats. As an example closer to home, it seems ,probable that the decline of the Indiana bat may be attributedinparttothe loss of roost sites other than caves. Indiana bats hibernateincaves and thereisno question that disturbance of hibernacula has contributed to their decline. However,inthe midwestern United States, several large hiber nacula of Indiana bats are protected from disturbance, yet these cave populations con tinue to decline (Clawson, 1987). We can only speculateonthe reasons for this continued decline, and this again points to our igno rance. However, while Indiana bats hibernateincaves, in summer they roost and give birthinthree hollows and under the loose bark of trees.Theloss of tree roosts may verywellbe a serious factorinthe continuing decline of the Indiana batinthe Midwest. That the decline of the Indiana bat may be dueinpart to factors outside of their hibernaculainno way implies that disturbancesathibernacula are unimpor tant. Rather, it emphasizes the importance of protecting hibernacula so as not to add addi tional stresses to these populations.Habitat Degradation OutsideofRoosts137Manalsohas impacted negatively on bat populationsbycausing habitat alteration and degradation outside of their roost sites. For example, two species of North American bats on the redlistare endangered,inlarge part, because man's activities have decreased their food resources. Both species of long-nosed bats inhabit desert regions of the southwest ern U.S. and Mexico, and both feed on the nectar and pollen of desert flowers(WilsonI1985a,b;Anonymous, 1988).Wildagaveisa major food source of both species.Wildagaves have been severely reduced because they interfere with cattle grazing and because they are harvestedbymoonshiners for making tequila. Although long-nosed bat populations also have been affectedbyinterference with their cave roosts (Wilson,1985a,Anony mous, 1988), the reductioninagavesisclearly importantintheir decline. Long-nosed bats also are major pollinators of both organ pipe and giant suaguaro cacti.Thewell-known decline of these cacti alsoisevidently directly attributable to the decline of long-nosed bats (Wilson,1985a,b;Anonymous, 1988).The RoleofPesticidesPesticides used to control insect populations have negatively impacted populations of many bats(Clark, 1981). Two effects seemlikely:(1)direct poisoning of bats,and(2)recutioninthe resourcebaseof bats which eat insects.Atpresent, we know little regarding the effects causedbypesticides reducing the insect prey of bats. However, direct poisoningbyDDT (now banned for useinteh U.S.) and other organochlorine pesticides have been widely implicatedinthe decline of many bats(reviewedinClark, 1981). While pesticide poi-
138soning clearly has caused the decline of local populations of many bats, there has been a tendency to over-emphasize the importance of pesticide' poisoning asoneof the major factorsinthe decline of bats (Clark,1981;McCracken, 1986).Infact, I question whether the general decline of any bat species can be attrbiuted solelyoreven largely to the toxic effects of pesticides. Thisisnot to exonerate pesticides, but rather to point more strongly at what are the major causes of bat population declines:Le.roost site interference and the reduction of resources. I suspect that overem phasis of the importance of pesticide poison ing serves to draw attention away from these other causes. How do I justify these statements? First, the belief that bats are unusually sensitive to pesticides dates from an early paper which' purported to document their extreme suscep tibility to DDT poisoning (Luckens and Davis, 1964).Itisnow established that the susceptibilityof bats to DDTisingeneral no greater than that of other similar sized animals (Clark, 1981). Second, there have been many ob served, dramatic declines of bat populations that have been attributed to DDT poisoning, without strong data to support these attribu tions.Themost spectacular of these occurredinEagle Creek Cave, Arizona, where the population of Mexican free-tailed bats de clined from an estimated30million toanestimated30thousand individuals. While other toxins, such as methyl parathion (Clark, 1986), may have contributed to this decline, and human disturbance also seems alikelyculprit, thereisno evidence that DDT poisoning was a major cause of the loss of this population1989Cave Management Proceedings, (Clark,1981;McCracken, 1986). Again, thisisnot to say that DDT or other toxins have not directlykilledbats.Itiswelldocumented, for example, that young Mexican free-tailed bats from Carlsbad Caverns have had potentially lethal pesticide concentratons. However, thisisevidently a local problem that has not been reportedinother colonies of this species (GelusoetaI., 1981). Finally, a natural "ex periment" on DDT poisoning has been done for us.Inthe early1960s,Cave Springs CaveinAlabama housed a major maternity colony of gray bats. This cave was heavily disturbedbyhumans andbythe early1970s,allits gray bats were gone. However, Cave Springs Cave was then protectedbyfencing and its gray bat population began recovering to the point thatitnow housesanestimated50,000individu als. Cave Springs Caveisneaa former DDT processing plant which also was a major toxic waste dumping site. At present, the bats and bat guano within this cave are substantially polluted with a variety of toxic chemicals including DOE (derived fromDDT)andPCBs. Although this bat colony experiences occa sional dieoffs resulting from these toxins, the colony has nonetheless contiued to recoverinthe face of these pollutants; this recovery dating from when the cave was protected (Tuttle, 1986).Red Caves/Green CavesFrom what we know about human-caused impactsonbat populations, thereislittle question that roost-site disturbance, vandal ism, and habitat destruction have had severe effects. Thisisparticularly so for cave-dwelling bats.Myopinion that these impacts arelikelyto have had greater negative effects than
pesticide poisoningissharedbyother re searchers (Clark,1981;Tuttle, 1985). People who visit caves, both professionally and for sport, must be acutely aware of the potential damage they can do to resident bats. To minimize such damage, we should recognize that there are caves ("Red Caves") which should not be visitedbyhumans at any time,oronly visited dUring certain times of the year,andother caves ("Green Caves") which are not important to batsorother threatened species and can beopento visitation. Bats select cavesashibernacula or as maternity sites because theyfulfillvery specific require ments. Fulfilling these requirements dependsoncave structure, air circulation patterns, temperature profiles, and the cave's location relativetoforaging sites (Tuttle and Stevenson,1978;Tuttle, 1979). Because the require ments of bats are highly specific, those caves which dofulfillthemwillbe relatively rare and may be absolutely essential to the bats. There may simply be no acceptable, alternative roost sites available. These caves must be placed on our red list. Conversely, most caveswillnot satisfy these requirements andwillnot be importantasbat roosts. These can be placedona green list.Itseemslikelythat the vast majority of caves would goonthe greenlist.For example, less thanfivepercent of caves surveyedinthe southeastern U.S. were found to be physically suitable as gray bat maternity or hibernating roost sites (Tuttle, 1979). A major problem, of course,willbe deciding whether a cave belongs on the green versus the redlist.Oneobvious criterionisthat major hibernacula and maternity roosts of threatened andordeclining bats be139red-listed, at leastdUrinthe seasons when bats are present. Conversely, caves which are not occupiedbybats and for which thereisno evidence of prior occupancy shouldbegreen listed. But, obviously, judgementswillhave to be made, often with only limited information. For example,itcan be argued that historically important roosting sites that are now aban doned should be red-listed, at least tempo rarily,inthehopethat theywillbe reoccupied.Italso can be argued that caves with only small colonies should be red-listed, possibly for gene pool conservation,orthat caves important to transients during seasonal movements should be red-listeddUringthe relevant seasons. On the other hand, there may be no harmingreen-listing some cave roosts of abundant, widely dispersed species (e.g. those of eastern pipistrelles), particularlyifthose caves have inherent interest to cavers. Although listing caves for no or restricted access because of their usebyroosting batsislikelyto be controversial, these listings are necessary to preserve bat populations.Individuals who explore caves for sport or scientificstudy have a high probability of encoun tering roosting bats.TheNSS, as the largest single organization of cavers, has the oppor tunity to provide education regarding poten tial impacts on bat populations to large num bers of people who arelikelyto encounter bats.Inaddition, cavers often have knowledge of bat roosting sites, andthiSknowledgeisessential to informed and responsible listing of caves on red or green lists. Opportunities are abundant for cavers to cooperate with state, national and private conservation agenciesinidentifying and preserving sensitive cave habi-
140tat. Several NSS grottos have taken the initia tive themselves to construct, or areinthe processofconstructing, red and greenlistsof caves. These people shouldbesupportedintheir efforts. Efforts to construct theselistsshouldbeexpanded.ReferencesAnonymous, 1988. Long-nosed bats pro posedforendangered status. Bats6(2):3. Barbour,RW.,and W.H. Davis, 1969.BatsojAmerica:University of Kentucky Press. Clark,D.R,Jr.,1981.Bats and environmentalcontaminants: a review. U.S. Fish andWildlifeService Spec. Sci. Rept. No. 235.Clark,D.R.,Jr.,1986.Toxicityof methylparathion to bats: mortality and coordination loss. Envir. Toxico!. Chern. 5: 191-195. Clawson,RL.,1987. Indiana bats, downforthe count. Endangered Species Tech.Bull.XII(9):9-11. Diamond, J.M., 1988. Red books or greenlists?Nature 332: 304-305. Geluso. K.N., J.S. Altenbach, and D.E.Wilson,1981.Organochlorine residuesinyoung Mexican free-tailed bats from several roosts. Amer.MidI.Nat. 105: 249-257. Hall, J.S., and M.J. Harvey, 1976. Petition to place the Virginia big-ared batPlecotustownsendii uirginianus,and the Ozarkbig-1989Cave Management Proceedingseared batPlecotus townsendii ingens,on the U.S. Fish andWildlifeService"ListofEndangered Species. Humphrey,S.R,1978.Status, winter habitat and management of the endangeredIndianabat,Myotissodalis.AOridaSci. 41: 65 76. Imboden, C.,1987.Green lists instead of red books? World Birdwatch 9(2): 2. Keen,R,andH.B. Hitchcock,1980.Survival and longevity of the little brown bat(Myotis lucijugus)insoutheastern Ontario. J. Mammal. 61: 1-7. Luckens, M.M., andW.H. Davis,1964.Bats: sensitivity to DDT. Science 146:948.McCracken, G.F.,1986.Why are we losing our Mexican free-tailed bats? Bats 3:1-4. Tuttle, M.D.,1979.Status, causes of decline, and management of endangered gray bats. J.Wildl.Manag. 43:1-17.7.Tuttle, M.D.,1986.Endangered gray bat benefits from protection. Bats 4(4): 1-4. Tuttle, M.D., and D.E. Stevenson, 1978. Variationinthe cave environment anditsbiological implication. Proc. Nat'! Cave Man agement Symp.(R.Zuber, J.Chester,S. Gilbert, andD.Rhoades, eds.), pp. 108 121. Wilson,D.E.,1985a.StatusReport:Leptonycterissanboni,Hoffmeister,
141Sanborn's long-nosed bat. Rept. to U.S. Fish andWildlifeService,35pp. Wilson,D.E.,1985b.StatusReport:Leptonycteris niualis,Saussure. Mexican long-nosed bat. Rept. to U.S. Fish andWildlifeservice,33pp.Table 1:Officially endangered NorthAmeri
1421989Cave Management ProceedingsMysteryCaveTrails:Past,PresentandFuturebyWarren Netherton Forestville State ParkRR2,Box128Preston, Minnesota55965AbstractMystery Caveisa show caveinsoutheastern Minnesota.Itwas privately operated until1988,whenitwas purchasedbythe state of Minnesota and includedinForestville State Park.Thecurrent development workisbased on the premise to re-establishthepasages to what existed when the cave was discovered.Themuch needed trail renovation currently under wayisprogessing as a result of planning which gives equal consideration to future interpretive possibilities, resource management concerns, and the historical record. Oral history interviews provide an important background which trail modifications are based on. Early photographs have provided documentation of cave alterations. Test pits excavatedinthe floor identified areas where speleothems are buried from devel opment work40or more years ago.TheMinnesota Conservation Corps(MCC)isfound advantageous to use forthevariety of preparation and excavation projects under way.TheMCC identifies areas where contractors can remove materialinless sensitive zones. Excavation techniques incorporate shovels, picks, wheelbarrows, rope, garden hand trowels, hand pressure sprayers, and plastic putty knives. Refractive seismic survey techniques are used tomappoten tial safety problems near the tour route. Other caves and materials are being examinedbypark personnel for possible applicaton intheMystery Cave development.Editor's note:Paper presented at the1989National Cave Management Symposium, New Braunfels, Texas, 3-7 October1989.' Mystery Caveislocatedinsoutheast Minnesota near the town of Spring Valley.The12.7 mile maze of joint controlled passages are developedontwo levels under about a half square mile.Thecaveisa stream pirae-y route on a meander loop of the SouthBranch Root
River. Two separate sections of tOur routes are accessed at opposite ends of the cave system (the historical entrance and the Minne sota CaQ'erns entrance).Thehistoric tour routeiscurrently under going development work.Inthe past, thisiswhere most ofthevisitors toured the cave.Itisexpected this trendwillcontinue with the addition of a new lighting system and trail modificatons.Thepurpose of the present effortsisto restore the cave to as close to the natural conditions which existed when discov eredandmaintain easy accessibility forvisitors.Itisanopportunity to redevelop a repre sentative portion of the cave anditsfeatures for the public to view. At the same time, some of the resource problems can be addressed.HistoryofDevelopmentDiscovered in1937,Mystery Cave was immediately developed as a show cave. The development involved enlargement of pas sagesbyexcavation of sediment andflowstone, bridgeandstair construction, and string ing of bare light bulbs. Crawlways were dug out so visitors could walk through upright. This initial trail work was done largely with pick, shovel, and a mule which hauled exca vated material loaded onto a two-wheeled cart. Tours were offered from1937until1942,when torrential rains flooded the cave.Theflood damage coupled with difficult eco nomic times dissuaded the lessees to termi nate tour operatons and blast the entrance closed.In1947,new entrepreneurs leased the cave.Theopenedthe entrance and began143removing theflooddeposits with shovel, wheel barrow and water hose. Additional excavation of material fromonelocationinthe cave andfillingof passages in another locaton elimi nated at leastoneof the previous brides.Bycutting the high spots andfillingthelowareas, the tour paths were transformed to relatively level, broad walking surfaces which often span the width of the passages.Peagravel spread on the paths provided a mud-free trail surface.In1958,a new entrance was dug at theIeastern end of the cave and more tour routes established. Tours were offered under these condi tions upto1988when Mystery Cave was acquiredbythe state of Minnesota and made an addition to Forestville State Park. One hundred sixty thousand dollarswasappropri ated for new wiring and other improvements. Park officials are mandated to continue cave tour operations dUring the summer season.Itwas determined the historical entrance to the caveisunsafe for the general public; the antiquated lighting system includes deteriorat ing insulationonundersized wiring within easy reach of the trails. This routeisnow undergo ing development. Tour operatons have con tinued at the Minnesota Caverns entranceforthe past two summers despite somewhat clumsy logistics. Uability concernsatthis en trance have heightened pressure to open the historical entrance as soon as possible.Thetrail development work ont hehistorical entrance goes beyond simplyn a new lighting system.Theworkisbased on the premise to re-establish the cave passages to as near a condition as possible to what existed at
144the time of discoveryin1937.Wellilluminated walking surfaces are to be provided which are easily accessible to the public,including wheelchairsfora portion of the route.Theprevious cut andfilldevelopment served its purposewell.Present management finds several problems with the previousimprovements, however, and steps are being taken to rectify these with the present devel opment efforts.Interpretive ProblemsFrom the interpretive perspective, visitors re ceive a distorted view of the cave on the historical entrance tour route. Numerous speleothems,inparticular flowstone along the walls, are covered withfillmaterial. Some of the better examples of draperies, flowstone and stalagmites are buried. Thisisina show cave which does not have many speleothems. These are some of the features unique to the underground which vistiors pay to see. Flowstone cascadesappearto stop abrupty at trail surfaces to the uninitiated.Itisobvious toonefamiliar with caves whatisoccurring; however, the general public would never recognize the condition and leaves the cave with a false impression. Besides covered speleothems giving the visitoranerroneous view of Mystery Cave, the cut andfillmethods have altered the passage shapes considerablyinat least four areas. For example,inone room (the Devil's Kitchen) the 20-foot-high room appeas rather interesting. What one does not recognize upon entering this chamberisthat the original floor surface1989Cave Management Proceedingsliesbeneath20feet offillunderfoot.Byremoval of thisfill,the character of this roomwillchange from interesting to spectacular when putincontext with the rest of the tour route.Resource DegradationFrom the resource standpoint, the existing trail situation has serious problems.Theresult of thousands of visitors through the caveisthat thepeagravel trail surface has been kicked, tossedorinsomemannertransported atop flowstone, sediments andwallcrevices.Innumerous places, pebbles are cemented to the travertine.Thechoiceistoallow the gravel to remaininplaceorremoveit.Either way, the surfaceismarred.Theremarkably rapid rates of deposition along some portions of the tour route has compounded this problem.Thefillmaterial discussed above has obviously choked off speleothems and altered water drainage, while in the trenched out portions of the cave, flowstoneisnow being deposited upon sediments which were previ ouslybUried.Itiscementing loose gravel which tends to dislodgeandroll offonthe trail. When the passages were cut larger, tons of layered poolstone deposits were removed and used asfillelsewhere.Thetrail trenching through these areas provided standing roomfiveand a half to six feet high. Thisisan improvement from taking the general public through a crawlway, but wasn't enough to keep soda straws intactontheceiling. The soda straws are long gone and streaks from visitors' heads mar the natural texture of the mud coated ceiling. -
Several primary sources of information were tapped to help determine the extent of cave alterations mentioend above. They are: 1. Oral history interviews 2. Photographs 3. Test pits.Oral History InterviewsFortunately, several key individuals arestillliving who were intimately involved with the original development work at Mystery Cave.Bytaperecording interviews with these people, insight was gained about the early develop ment. Interviews reveal the cave changes made from the unique perspective of the interviewee. They not only provide information on what was done, but also help explain the reasons behind the actions; information that a set of dry factsdon'tuncover.PhotographsEarly photographs of the entrance and cave features document the trail facilities, passage alteration, speleothem conditions, and above ground land use. Although early photo cover ageinthe caveislimited to the showier features,itserves as tangible evidence present development workisbased on. Old brochures, postcards and personal black and white pho tographs serveassource material.TestPitsSimply by examining the walls and floors, itispossible for a person familiar with caves to recognize alterations. With the assistance of145local volunteer cavers, a series of preliminary test pits were duginselected areas. These holes uncovered speleothems beneath the floor which have been covered for40or50years.Byconsidering the historical, interpre tive and resource impacts of previous Mystery Cave development,itisestimated that ap proximately600cubic yards offillmaterial requires removal from the tour routes to re establish the natural floors of1937.Addition ally, some portions of the route necessitate excavation beyond the natural floors to pro vide protection of the resourcebyincorporat ing seven-foot ceiling heights and making grades suitable to accommodate the general public.The WorkersExcavation work began inMayof this year (1989) and has continued for the past four months.Itisproceeding with the useoftwo different types of crews, a Minnesota Conser vation Corps(MCC)crew and a contractor. The MCCisa youth program modeled after the Young Adult Conservation Corps(YACC). The MCC performs the excavation along thewallsand speleothems.Thecontractorisused to remove the bulk of the material between the MCC excavated portions, the so-called grunt work. The MCC was selected to work on the cave project for several reasons.Theresults of their work have beenqUitesatisfactory.(1)Close quality control over their work (park personnel supervise the crew. The non-re-
146newable resources of the cave do not allow for mistakes.Themeasure of production for the MCC crewisquality, not quantity.)(2)Inexpensive. (pay per hourisslightly above minimum wage.Thecost of the MCC per forming comparable workis24percent below contractor costs.)(3)Public relations[[heintangible public rela tions benefits ofanimpressionable, young (ages18to 26) crew working on a physically challenging and unique projectwilllast for years and has beenwelldemonstratedbyformer Civilian Conservation Corps workers at Wind Cave National Park and Jewel Cave National Monument.Ina sense, the MCC Mystery Cave project,ifmanaged correctly,willyield perhaps50years of free advertising.)(4)Flexibility (the workers can be used on a diversity of tasks which are sometimes difficult to writeorpay for on a contract basis. During the course of aday,a crew member may perform heavy labor, shovelling mud and gravel, lifting rocks, and hauling wheelbar rows, then switch to carefully exposingflowstone a fraction ofaninchata time with a water sprayer and putty knife.) Disadvantages of such a crew include:(1)Supervision time.(2)Difficultyinsecuring workersdUringthe school year.(3)InMystery Cave, workers' radon exposure must be monitored and limited.Thesuccess of the MCC crew at Mystery Caveisa function of two key elements, training and1989Cave Management Proceedingsa good crew supervisor. ConSiderable time has beenspenttraining the crew members and supervisor on how to do the work. Fortu nately, for this project, a natural leader was selected who appreciates the significance of the task at hand andisa hard worker.TheMCC crews accomplished a number of preparation projects which had to precede most of the excavation work.Theentrance to the caveisat thebaseof a cliff face. Tons of talusona poorly engineered IS-foot entrance tunnelwasremoved by hand and new shoring installed to protect workers from potential rockfalls.Theinner and outer doorways and steps of the entrance building prevented use of wheelbarrows so the concrete steps were jackhammered out and replaced with arampwhile the doors were eliminated completely. A vapor barrier replacement restricted airflow.Approximately100feet inside the cave, a temporary door and wallwasinstalled to provide security. To protect speleothemsandwalls of the cave during development work, heavy guard struc tures of plywood were erected around the features.Thestructuresaredesigned to with stand the impact of afullyloaded wheelbar row.Allof this work required its own on-the-spot customizing. Plans and designs changes as problems were encountered. For example, the massive security door had to be relocated three times due to irregular cave wall shapes and buried crevices. Special Excavation T
Flowstoneisthe main indicator used to arrive at the natural floors.Bycarefully removing the gravel, silt, and rock from the floor, the former air filled portion of the passageisexposed, having been buried40or50yeas. Following the flowstone downwardisnot a foolproof method of arriving at the discovery year's floors, but overall the most reliable one. Upon reaching undisturbed sediments, the stratification of the materialisanindica tion of surfaces unalteredbyman. Much of the floor surface, however, consists of poorly sorted gravel with indistinct layering.Ittakes a fairly large exposure to see whatisoccurring. These layers indicate that the natural floors have already been surpassed. Occasionally, masses of layered silt and clay are exposed, but closer inspection has proveditto be large clods cut from other sections of the cave and usedasfill.Inpractice, this method has helped minimally. Another indicatorisforeign debris whichisdepositedinthefill.Finding these itemsisa clear marker not of where naturally deposited material is, but whereitisnot. When digging through a couple feet of material with no clear indicators to demonstrateifitis fill or natural sediments,itisa relief to encounter a coin, shovel handle, boardorbrokenpopbottle among the muck. For the heavier removal offillmaterial, shovels and picks are used. To move large rocks, a ropeistied aroundit.The rope serves as hand holds so workers canliftor drag the rock to a wheelbarrow for transport out of the cave. Removing fine silt offers some difficulty.Themud adheres so tightly to the shovel147blades that the shovel must be stuck sharply against the wheelbarrow or scraped off the shovel with another tool. Buckets are often used toliftand carry mud from thedigsitetowheelbarrows. Work crews quickly learned not to leave tools, buckets or wheelbarrowsfilledor muddy at the end of the day, as the material begins to set uplikeglue overnight. Fine workisaccomplishedbymeansofgarden hand trowels, plastic putty knives, and a hand pump sprayer.Thepastic putty knives workwell.Theidea behind theseisthat the plasticissofter than calcite.Ifa scratch ap pears from exhuming the speleothems, hopefullyitwillbe on the putty knife and not the travertine. Of course, care must be taken, as the material being scrapedorpulled away can easily act asanabrasive against the flowstone. Sometimes a hand pump sprayerisusedinconjunction with teh putty knife work for satisfactory results. Garden hand trowels are used for courser work away from theflowstone. Putty knife work follows. The fine workof material removal to expose speleothemsissome of the most rewarding job experiences for the workers.Itissomewhat analogous toanarcheological dig.Itisexciting to follow a thin crust of flowstone downward along the wall, only to haveitcontinue to expose a drapery which has been buried for years.Thecharacter of the tour routeischang ing,notonlyfromtheunearthingof speleothems, but also from the sheer changeinsize of the corridors.Themost dramatic change thus faristhe addition ofanentrance room. Previously, this section of cave was a
148passage approximately six feet wide and six feet high.Onewall of this passage consisted of rocks stacked to the ceiling, with trailfilldebris behind. After the contractor wheelbarrowed this material out ofthecave, a room about30feet long, 6 feet highand12feet wide was exposed. Digging out thisroomhas saved consid erableexpensetotheprojectbyeliminating the need for a man-made entrance building.Theroomwillfunction asaninitial stagingareafor tour groups.Thematerial excavated from the caveisstockpiled a couple hundred feet from the entrance. Most of this was removedbythe contractor who haule dit out of the cavebywheelbarrow to a contractor who hauleditout of the cavebywheelbarrow to a tractor with a bucket and then transporteditto the pile.Thecontractor was to be paidonthe basis of loosefillinthe stockpile, but shrinkage and settling reduced volumes significantly.Inorder to account for this, a20percent shrinkage ad justment was made.Other ConcernsThelargestroominthe caveispart ofthehistoric tour route.Therearetwo structural concerns in thisroomwhichareintimately related. Breakdown blocksandsediments are sloughinig offanembankment ontothestair way which enters this room. Dripping wateriswashing away the small materialinthis sedi ment whichholdsittogether. A large mass of materialisundercut. Whenitfalls,this masswillland directly onthetour route.1989Cave Management ProceedingsPortions oftheceilingandwalls of theroomareinthe DubuqueandMaquoketa formations, a portion of which are remarkably consistent alterations of limestoneandshale beds.Theconstantly dripping waterisgradu ally erodingtheshaleandencouraging sepa ration ofthebeds.Concernexists for the integrity oftheceiling.Toinvestigatethesituation further, a refractive seismic survey was performed onthesurface abovetheroom.Themappedresults indicatethesoil covered limestone forms a depression abovetheroomandisacting as a basin whichisthesource ofthedripping water.Thefinal analysisandsolution to this situationispending.Anotherapplication oftherefractive seismic techniquesisscheduled to bedonealongthetour route. A characteristic of many Mystery Cave passagesistheir keyhole shapes. Often,thecreviceatthebottomisfilledwith sediment of breakdown, either naturallyorbyprevious cave developers. Two times, these crevices havebeenaCcidentallyandunexpect edly breached during trail work.Oneof the crevices extended six feet deep. A refractive seismic surveycanidentifythesepassage situ ationsandarescheduled inthefuture.The FuturePlans call for a new lighting systemandcon crete trails. Bridgeswillspanareaswhere floor gradients are excessive.Othershowcavesarebeing examined bytheDivision of Parks personneltoidentify materialsandconstruc tion techniques which maybeappropriate for Mystery Cave.
Thedevelopment work at Mystery Caveiscontinuing. Due to the particular nature of previous trail development, the present exca vationisactuaIly a restoration based on re source concerns, historical information and interpretive potential. The overaIl goalisto returnthecave to as natural a condition as possible and easily accommodate visitors.Itisanticipated these portions of trailwillhandle the bulk of the tour businessinthe future. Hopefully, the work done currentlywillpro vide a sound foundation for the developments to come.Itisa step toward eliminating re source problems and providing visitors an accurate view of the speleothems and pas sages of the historical portions of Mystery Cave.149
1501989Cave Management ProceedingsSomeHighTechAnswerstoCaveManagementProblemsbyJimPisarowicz ForestvilleStateParkRR2,Box128Preston, Minn.55965ABSTRACTIn1988,Mystery Cave became a part of Forestville State Park.Isthe first developed caveina state parkinMinnesota.Oneof the first tasks of the park's management team was to generate amapof Mystery Cave for resource management and interpretive uses.Tothis end, caver's surveys were usedinconjunction with cave radios to pinpoint positionsinthe cave on the surface. Aerial photography and high precision surface surveys indicated the locatons of these poiintsandcomputers were used to tieallthe loose ends together. Using computer cartography linked wiht cave resource inventory databases provides a means of supplying cave managers with better informa tion for decision making.Editor's Note:Paper presented at the1989National Cave Management Symposium, New Braunfels, Texas, 3-7 October1989.Caves are an interesting and important aspect of the natural environment, yet unlike many major geological features remain hid den from view.Theoriginal entrance to the Mystery Cave Systeminsoutheastern Minne sota was discoveredin1937despite begin ningitsspeleogenesis millions of years ago. Like many aspects of the natural world, caves, once discovered attract explorers who scruti nize and map those areas that are not known. For many years, cavers have reached into the unknownIworming their way down narrow cracks and fissures, discovering large trunk passages, underground lakes and rivers, and ultimately surveying their discoveriesinMystery Cave. Mystery Cave became a part of Forestville State Parkin1988.Itisthefirst show caveina state parkinMinnesota. Managing and understanding this important natural resourceispart of the duty ofthepark managers at the park. Yet to accomplish this goal, the extent and the resources of this underground world have to be recorded.
linePlotsOneof the first tasks of the park's man agement team was to generate a map of Mystery Cave for resource management and interpretative uses. Fortunately for the park managers, cavers have spent literally thou sands of hours undergoundinMystery Cave surveying the over20kmof passages we now know comprise the Mystery Cave System. Using compasses(torecord direction),clinometer(torecord slopeordip)and measur ingtape(to record distance) these explorers have charted hundreds of passages, rooms and features under the rolling coutnryside of southeastern Minnesota. Using the data collected from thes emany trips into Mystery Cave, these cavers have generated a line plot of the survey traverse through the cave. Such a "map" provides general orientation and distance underground and a crude notion of connectivity between passages and regions of the cave. Missing from this "map"isthe sense of relative space: the size of passages, their shapes, whatlieson their floors, where the waterflows,etc. (Ganter,1989).A BetterlinePlotAlthough a line plotisnot a mapinthe true sense of the word,itisa very useful toolindetermining where Mystery Caveislocated.Onthe one hand, visitors typically ask quesitons such as: "When we were crossing the under ground lake, where would we have beenifwe wereonthesurface?" and "How deep are we hereinthe cave?", and on the other hand, park managers wonder whether the cave ex-151Itends beyond the boundariesofthe park or whether roads, buildings, etc., go over por tionsofthe cave. These are related questions which may be answeredbyhaving a "better" line plot one upon which users canfeelconfident that the plot represents where the cave actuallyisunderground. Because of the difficultiesinsurveying cave passages (reading instrumentsinpas sages barely large enough for people to get through, having everything coatedwithmud, etc.) cave surveyswilltypically have larger errors associated with them than surveys runbyland surveyors. To compensate for these errors, statisti cal procedures called loop closureisused to distribute survey errorsifa survey can form a loopinthe cave. A loopisformed when a survey begins and ends at the same location. Even with these procedures, occasionally one cave passagewillgo offina trend without looping back into itself and only one survey runs down that passage.Ifany errors occurred along that survey, the actual positioninthe cave and position shown on a line plot or map of the cave can be very different. To correctforthese errors (usually related to the incorrect reading or recording of survey instrument readings or distance measurements) a special kind of underground survey called a cave radio survey was done at Mystery Cave to pinpoint locationsinthe cave onto the surfacetocorrect for cave survey errors.Ina cave radio survey, a special device called a cave radioiscarried to different locatonsinthe cave. This "radio"isactually a low-frequency magnetic induction device and special antennae. Once the antennaeisleveledinthe cave and the transmitter turned on,
152a signal canbereceived on the surfacebyaIspecial receiver and antennae combination. THis sort of equipment can accurately locate positions directly above pointsinthe cave to within several centimeters on the surface.Inaddition to finding the geographic locaton of the cave point on the surface,byusing the magnetic properties of the electromagnetic waves of the transmitter, depthsinthe cave canbedetermined to a high degree of accu racy. These techniques were used at Mystery Cave to locate22points in the cave up to the surface. High precision land surveying tech niques using laser electronic distancemeasur ing(EDM)devices then located a number of these surface points. Coupling these coordi nates with depth reading from the cave radio work, provided accurate assessments of the locatons of the passagesinthe cave relative to surface features above the cave. Because of the expense of employing a survey crew, the additional cave radio points were tied into the survey network using aerial photographs. This technique not only saved substantial moneyinterms of salaryforthese professional employees but also tied into other resource needs being addressedinthe park. This component of the projectisdiscussed below. Another problem that plagues long term cave projectsisthat over long periods of time, the drift of magnetic north must be taken into consideration.Inthe Mystery Cave area, the driftisapproximately 8 minutes per year. Using cave surveys going back twenty years or longer, these differencesinmagnetic instru ment readings can significantly effect the line plot of the cave.1989Cave Management ProceedingsUsing the cave survey reduction pro gram SMAPS, constraints were placed upon the survey data based uponthetwo entrance locatons and the22cave radio points.Byentering databysurvey year, shiftsinmag netic pole drift were compensated forinthe data. Once these constraints wer placed upon the data, loop closure algorithms were used to statistically adjust for survey errors. Basically, the passage locatons were allowed to"vibrate" around fixed points in the cave as new survey loops are addedbynew explorations. By using such highly constrained data, the mount of vibration taht could occur was mini mized. The resulting coordinates for the cave survey points were thus located as accurately as were possible given the original data and the number of cave radio pointsset.Aerial PhotographyTo really maketheconnection between the surface and the underground worlds, aerial photographs were taken of the land above Mystery Cave. Beforetheaerial flyover, large "X"'s constructed out of rolls of white plastic were put outateach ofthecave radio loca tions. These "X"'s, eachonemeter wide and eight meters across, could easily be seeninphotographs of theareatakenbyairplane.Theaerial photographs, combined with land, cave and radio surveys allows both park managers and visitors a first glimpse of the exact relationship between Mystery Cave, the surrounding topography and identifiable sur face features. Cave passages and features can be directly compared and contrasted to sur face features. Not only can questions about where certain featuresinthe cave area located be answered, but these sorts of graphic aids
allows geologistsandinterestedlaypersons to begin to answer questions about why certain features developed where they didinMystery Cave.PuttingItAll TogetherFromtheaerial photos, high precision topographicmapsabove the cave were pro duced. By using electronic stereoscopic plot ting equipment, land contours were deter minedandthese data were put into digital form so that they could be processedbycomputer-aided drafting programs(CAD).Contourintervals of1.3m were obtained using these techniques. Digital contouring at this precision over a large area was both fasterandless expensive than using survey crews todothesamework. Line plots and eventuallytheactual passage contours of the cave itself werethenmerged with the digital surface topography maps. UsingtheCAD program, AutoCAD, to draw both caveandsurface features simulta neouslyandinteracting those programs with collections of informationincomputer data base files via dBASEIII+provides park man agers, scientistsandtheinterseted parkvisitorsanunprecedented view of Mystery Caveandits relationship to its surroundings.Thecaveandsurface can be literally turned upside down to get a better view of the cave and the surface topography. Virtuallyallthe data that has been collected about Mystery Cave can be directly accessedandcomparedinreal time with a computer.Geographic InfonnationSystemA system such astheonedescribed above for153Mystery Caveisreferred to as a Geographic Information System(GIS).Animportant as pect ofthiSGISisthat each of the components of the systemisa commercially available product.Thesurvey reducationisviaSMAPS, the database dBASEIII+and the drawing engine AutoCAD. Each of these programs have relatively user-friendly interfaces which make data entry and manipulation by the system relatively easy and straightforward.Inaddition to this impor tant feature, these programs (especially dBASEIII+and AutoCAD) are widely distributed com mercial software that many people know how to use. Thisisa critical consideration to park maagement who may have turnover of park staffandwho do not want to be constantly training new staff inthepeculiar aspects of a totally custom designed cave GIS.Byusing AutoCAD for the drawing en gine, drawingfilesmay be easily transferred into GIS formats. Although standard GIS pro grams such as ARCINFO, EPPL7, GRASS, etc. cannot handle three-dimensional geo graphic objects such as caves; two-dimen sional cave representations can be transferred toallthestandard GIS packages through the AutoCADfileformat(DXF).Thus, cave draw ings and associated resource inventories(indBASEIII+files)willinterface with GIS sys tems that other agencies associated with land management are probably using. Thisisa critical aspect ofthesystem used at Mystery Cave becauseitallowsthepark tofitinto the larger resources inventories generatedbyother Minnesota state agenciesoreven federal land management databases and vice versa. Thus the Mystery Cave GIS can accommodate the unique three-dimensional problems of han dling a cave resourceandat the same time be
154compatible with the statewide GIS's usedbyother agencies. For the park management team, this system provdies a pwoerfulland management tool allowing them to make decisions about eh welfare of the park based on the most accurate and up-to-date information available. Park structures and roads can be seenindirect relaton to the cave passages below the earth (see Figure labeled "Mystery Cave Area"). Planning of development can take into consid eration the delicacies of the cave eitherdirectly undertheplanned development site or those parts of the cave nearby the planned development and land uses above or nea the cave (see Figure labeled "Picnic Grounds Area Mystery Cave"). The relationship of the cave to adjoining propertie can be accurately plot ted and kept up-to-date as land around the park and over the cave may change ownershi p (see Figure labeled "PropertyBoundaries"state park landisshaded.) For the park visitors, this system pro vides a means to "see" what cannot ordinarily be seen.Theland surface withitsrollinghills,1989Cave Management Proceedingsstreams, and valleys can be made transparent so that the cave can be viewed right through the ground. The important connection be tween the surface, the cave and ultimately the water that shapes each of these features and ourlivescan be recongnized and perhaps better understood and appreciated. Park visitors now leave Forestville State ParklMys tery Cave with more than just having had a cool hour underground away from the heat of the summer sun. They leave the park looking at the countryside, visualizing more than just what they see, and hopefully take that attitude with them everywhere they may go.ReferencesGanter, John."Willwe map as we survey?", NSS News47(6),p.143-144,June1989.
.... w -c0 c 3 0 Aw Q 0 ....Q,... ..
... d OJ <[.. OJ >dU >-." OJ ... f-> lJl.,>-.
.'.,',,'l..,'' I.. .:.. ; .:. ,: .. .'.:" ::.:. .'.'::'.\..":..'.........'. .:'............ ;' .'....... "......'..' ........ .': ....= :".'...:. :.:, .:.'.... :.::-:> : ".'' .. :. ::::: : :..........". ',.. .......,..........,.".":......'........ .:: .:' ::::: ...'::.::'::':::: -:::-:.. . ; .... ,<....:::-:::: ..="" :="" f="" .:.="" .="" t="" ....="" j="" ........="" ......="" ...="" .......="" .:="" _.="" ..:.........="" :......="" .:....="" .....="" .:..="" u="" ::.="" ..............="">..fl' ........> ...>...:,>.,.".,.""'. jF:::':::::: '::-, :, -::-.: .".;'.''.'.;.','.;...;...;...; '.'::' -::-::::-::-:::>:f!!.'-:: .: -::-..:..,. .,. .,.. :..... .,'......:. ': ." :':.:.:':":':\ .:..................'"."::.. .. :".....:....".....'."... :..... '..:..'..........,.,...'..'.,'..: ....;,.,::::-:::::::: -:-:.Fie\d .,... ..." .,..'.,...':'.,.. ..',..... ... '.:-' .....................':.:.
National cave management symposium proceedings, 1989 New
Braunfels, Texas, U.S.A.Contents: Forward: National Cave
Management Symposium / Jay Jorden --
Introduction to Caves, Management Problems / George Veni
Texas Cave Management / John M. Walsh --
TPWD Cave Management Activities / Mike Herring --
Systems for Management of Civil Liability / Joel
Texas Caver-Cave Owner Relations / Kurt Menking --
Panel Discussion: Government and Land Owners / Jay Jorden
Restoration of Show Caves / Russell Gurnee --
Important Mexican Free-tailed Bat Colonies / Rex Wahl --
Ezell's Cave / Jim Robertson --
Sinkhole Management / Ernst Kastning Karen Kastning --
Public Relations and Cave Conservation / Jay R. Jorden --
Endangered Species, Austin Area Caves / William R.
West Cave: Management, Problems and Solutions / John Ahms
Overused, Abused Cave Resources / David G. Foster --
Managing Bat Caves / Matthew Stafford --
BLM: Solving Cave Management Problems / James R. Goodbar
Hydrogeological report, Kartchner Cavers / Charles G.
State-Owned Show Caves / Russell Gurnee --
Cave Conservation: Bat Problems / Gary F. McCracken --
Mystery Cave Trails / Warren Netherton --
High-tech Answers to Management Problems / Jim