Proceedings of the 1991 National Cave and Karst Management Symposia

Proceedings of the 1991 National Cave and Karst Management Symposia

Material Information

Proceedings of the 1991 National Cave and Karst Management Symposia
Alternate Title:
National Cave & Karst Management Symposia
Alternate Title:
National Cave and Karst Management Symposia
Publication Date:


Conference Proceeding
serial ( sobekcm )


General Note:
10th National cave management symposium proceedings, Bowling Green, Kentucky October 23-26, 1991Contents: The Importance of Partnerships in Resources Conservation / Jeff Bradybaugh -- The Evolving Relationship Between Mammoth Cave National Park and its Hydrogeological Symbionts / E. Calvin Alexander, Jr. -- Karst Management Through Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances / Percy H. Dougherty -- Developing Urban Nonpoint Source Management Plans in Karst Areas of South-Central Kentucky / Kent R. Taylor -- Environmental Effects of Acid Mine Drainage in Karst Terrain / Christopher G. Groves - Carol M. Wicks -- Water Quality Impacts of Agriculture on Karst Conduit Waters, Greenbrier County, WV / Gary C. Pasquarelli - Douglas C. Boyer -- Hydrologic Fownet Mapping and Karst-Conduit Detection Using the Natural Electric Field / Arthur C. Lange -- Development of a Flow-Through Filter Fluorometer For Use in Quantitative Dye Tracing at Mammoth Cave National Park / Martin Ryan -- The Effects of Recharge Basin Land-Use Practices on Water Quality at Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky / Joe Meiman -- Delineation and Hazard Area Mapping of Areas Contributing to Significant Caves / Tom Aley - Cathy Aley -- Natural and Cultural Landscape Interactions in the Karst of Batuan, Bohol, The Philippines / Philip Reeder -- It's an Open and Shut Case: Plugging Artificial Entrances at Onondaga Cave State Park / Eugene Vale - Ronald Jones -- Analysis of Survey Methodology in a Hawaiian Lava Tube / Darrel T. Tanaka -- Management Considerations for Clay Vermiculations / Roy A. Jameson -- Pre-Development Studies at Kartchner Caverns / R.H. Buecher -- Prelimiary Investigation of the Hydrology and Hydrogeochemistry at Timpanogos Cave National Monument, Utah, and its Implications for Cave Management / Michael Tranel, Alan Mayo, Ph.D., R.G. - Thomas M. Jensen -- A Profile of the Butler Cave Conservation Society, Inc. / Fred L. Wefer -- Peter Piper Mapped a Cave in "Pickle Park" / Pam Saberton -- Management of the Karst Areas Within the Ketchikan Area of the Tongass National Forest, Southeastern Alaska / James F. Baichtal -- Oregon Cave Tour Standards, 1989-1991 / John E. Roth -- Management of Lechuguilla Cave, New Mexico / Ronal C. Kerbo -- Cave Management in Hawaii / William R. Halliday, M.D. -- Blasting for Conservation: The Ethics of Blasting and Digging In Caves / John M. Wilson -- An Inventory System for Large Cave Systems / Jim Nepstad -- Applications of a Geographic Information System to the Management of Great Saltpetre Cave, Rockcastle County, Kentucky / Gary A. O'Dell -- Image Database: A Resource and Information Management Tool for Tomorrow's Technology / W. Gerry Estes -- Using Cave Registers to Further the Understanding of the Human Effect on Caves / John M. Wilson -- Using the NSS Reward to Deter Cave Vandalism / John M. Wilson -- Cave Management by Prescription, An Alternative to Classification Systems / L.H. Mullins -- Legal Brief / Robert B. Stitt -- Cave Wilderness Designation in America: A New Action Proposal / William R. Halliday, M.D. -- Cave Radiation / Tom Aley -- Petroglyphs and Pictographs in Caves and Rock Shelters: A Missouri Perspective / Carol Diaz-Granados -- The Looting of a Cherokee Burial Cave: The Lake Hole ARPA Case / Quentin Bass -- The Problems of Owning an Archaeological Site: An Example from Savage Cave / Ken Carstens -- Prehistoric Graffiti and Self-Expression: Examples from teh Central Kentucky Karst / Philip J. DiBlasi -- Managing Kentucky's Caves: A Cultural Resource Perspective / Jan Marie Hemberger -- Cave Fauna Conservation in Texas / William R. Elliot, Ph.D. -- The Effects of Cave Visitation on Terrestrial Cave Arthropods / Kent R. Carlson -- The Effects of Cave Restoration on Some Aquatic Cave Communities in the Central Kentucky Karst / Julian J. Lewis, Ph.D. -- Status of Endangered Bats in the Eastern United States / Michael J. Harvey -- Design Improvements for Gating Bat Caves / Roy Powers, Jr. -- Cave Gates: Design and Construction Considerations / Jim Hathorn -- Responses of Winter Populations of the Federal Endangered Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis) to Cave Gating in Kentucky / John MacGregor -- Revised System for Management of Civil Liability for Cave Related Injury / Joel Stevnson, Esq. -- Management of Government Owned Caves With and Emphasis on the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act / Jerry Trout -- The Significance of a Cave / Robert R. Stitt.
Open Access - Permission by Publisher
Original Location:
Northup Database Collection
General Note:
See Extended description for more information.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
K26-03280 ( USFLDC DOI )
k26.3280 ( USFLDC Handle )
8388 ( karstportal - original NodeID )
405716584 ( OCLC )

USFLDC Membership

Added automatically
Karst Information Portal

Postcard Information



This item has the following downloads:

Full Text


1991National CaveManagementSymposium ProceedingsBowling Green, Kentucky October23-26,1991HostedBy:American Cave Conservation Association Mammoth Cave National Park --. .. .Q/{Q;. Co-SponsoredBy:BureauofLandManagementCaveResearchFoundationCenterfor CaveandKarst Studies,W.K.UIndiana Karst Conservancy Missouri Speleological SurveyNationalCaves AssociationNationalOutdoorLeadership School NationalParkService National Speleological SocietyTheNatureConservancy RichmondAreaSpeleological SocietyUS.FishandWildlife ServiceUS.ForestService Symposium Program Chairmen: David G.FosterandRonalC.Kerbo Designed and ProducedbyTheAmerican Cave Conservation AssociationHorseCave, KentuckySeniorEditor:DebraL.FosterAssociate Editors: David G. Foster, Mary M. Snow, RichardK.Snow


Cover Photo Cave Explorer Jack Lehrberger in Floyd Collins Crystal Cave/Unknown Cave under Flint Ridge, Kentucky. Photo courtesyofWilliamT.Austin.Wegratefully acknowledge the generous volunteer assistanceofthe following persons: Debbie Abrams; Jeff Bradybaugh, Mammoth Cave National Park; Nancy Cole,U.S.Fish&Wildlife Service;EdCouncill; Jim Nieland; Dan Opel; Traci Opel; Lisa Powers; Marty Ryan, Mammoth Cave National Park and David Sholar.Wewould also like to thank the Bowling Green/Warren County Tourism Commission for providing hospitality packets for symposium guests and Liberty Printing for their generosity in both the printingofthe Symposium Guidebooks and these proceedings. Copyright1993American Cave Conservation Association, Inc.131Main and Cave Streets Post Office Box 409 Horse Cave, Kentucky 42749 (502) 786-1466 Printedby:Liberty Printing 1901 Russellville Road Bowling Green, Kentucky 42101 Please contact individual authors for pennission to use anyofthe material in these Proceedings.


TableofContentsNational CaveManagementSymposium Welcoming SpeechJanetB.Thorne............................................................4 Opening Remarks FromTheChairman David G.Foster............................................................6TheImportanceOfPartnerships In Resources ConservationJeffBradybaugh ............................................................7TheEvolving Relationship Between Mammoth Cave NationalParkAndIts Hydrogeologic SymbiontsE.Calvin Alexander, Jr.11KarstManagementThrough Zoning And Subdivision Ordinances Percy H. Dougherty 57 DevelopingUrbanNonpoint Source Management Plans In Karst AreasOfSouth-Central KentuckyKentR.Taylor 66 Environmental EffectsOfAcidMineDrainageInKarst Terrain Christopher G. Groves; Carol M. Wicks71WaterQuality ImpactsOfAgricultureOnKarst Conduit Waters,GreenbrierCounty,WV Gary C.Pasquarell; Douglas G. Boyer 72 Hydrologic Flownet Mapping And Karst-ConduitDetectionUsingTheNatural Electric FieldArthurL.Lange79DevelopmentOfA Flow-Through Filter FluorometerForUseIn Quantitative Dye TracingAtMammoth Cave NationalParkMartin Ryan 92TheEffectsOfRecharge Basin Land-Use PracticesOnWaterQualityAtMammoth Cave National Park, KentuckyJoeMeiman 105 Delineation And HazardAreaMappingOfAreas ContributingToSignificant Caves Tom Aley; Cathy Aley 116 Natural and Cultural Landscape Interactions InTheKarstOfBatuan, Bohol,ThePhilippines PhilipReeder.............................................................123It'sAnOpenAnd Shut Cave: Plugging Artificial EntrancesAtOnondaga CaveStateParkEugeneVale; Ronald Jones 129 AnalysisOfSurvey Methodology In A Hawaiian LavaTubeDarrelT. Tanaka 132ManagementConsiderationsForClay Vermiculations RoyAJameson 139 Pre-Development StudiesAtKartchner Caverns R.H.Buecher144 Preliminary InvestigationOfTheHydrology And HydrogeochemistryAtTimpanogos Cave National Monument, Utah, And Its ImplicationsForCave Management Michael Tranel; Alan Mayo, Ph.D., R.G.; Thomas M. Jensen 164 A ProfileOfTheButler Cave Conservation Society, Inc. Fred L. Wefer 1791


PeterPiper Mapped A Cave In "Pickle Park" Pam Saberton 190 ManagementOfTheKarst Areas WithinTheKetchikan AreaOfTheTongas National National Forest, Southeastern Alaska James F. Baichtal 198 Oregon CaveTourStandards, 1989-1991 John E.Roth209 ManagementOfLechuguilla Cave, New Mexico RonalC.Kerbo 216 Cave ManagementInHawaii William R. Halliday, M.D. 217 BlastingForConservation:TheEthicsOfBlasting And Digging In Caves John M. Wilson .000221AnInventory SystemForLarge Cave Systems Jim Nepstad 222 ApplicationsOfA Geographic Information System ToTheManagementOfGreat Saltpetre Cave, Rockcastle County, Kentucky GaryAO'Dell 235 Image Database: A Resource And Information Management ToolForTomorrowsTechnologyW.Gerry Estes "241Using Cave Registers To FurtherTheUnderstandingofTheHuman EffectOnCaves JohnM.Wilson 246 UsingTheNSS Reward ToDeterCave Vandalism John M. Wilson0256 Underground Wilderness:TheTime Is Right GeorgeN.Huppert00263 Cave ManagementByPrescription, An Alternative To Classification SystemsLoB.Mullins00267 Legal Brief RobertR.Stitt000275 Cave Wilderness Designation In America: A New Action Proposal William R. Halliday, M.D. .0289 Cave Radiation Tom Aley0292 Petroglyphs And Pictographs In Caves And Rock Shelters: A Missouri Perspective Carol Diaz-Granados000297TheLootingOfA Cherokee Burial Cave:TheLake HoleARPACase Quentin Bass00000000303 The ProblemsOfOwning An Archaeological Site:AnExample From Savage Cave Ken Carstens .000000 : 308 Prehistoric Graffiti And Self Expression: Examples FromTheCentral Kentucky Karst Philip J. DiBlasi .00000313Managing Kentucky's Caves: A Cultural Resource Perspective Jan Marie Hemberger0000003182


Cave Fauna ConservationInTexas WilliamR.Elliot .Ph.D. .323TheEffectsOfCave VisitationOnTerrestrial Cave Arthropods Kent R. Carlson 338TheEffectsOfCave RestorationOnSome Aquatic Cave Communities InTheCentral Kentucky Karst Julian J. Lewis, Ph.D. .346StatusOfEndangered Bats InTheEastern United States Michael J. Harvey351Design ImprovementsForGating Bat Caves Roy Powers, Jf. 356 Cave Gates: Design And Construction Considerations Jim Hathorn 359 ResponsesOfWinter PopulationsOfTheFederal Endangered Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis) To Cave Gating In Kentucky John MacGregor 364 Revised SystemForManagementOfCivil LiabilityForCave Related Injury Joel Stevenson, Esq. .371ManagementOfGovernment Owned Caves With An Emphasis On The Federal Cave Resources Protection Act Jerry Trout 379TheSignificanceOfA CaveRobertR. Stitt 384 ListOfPresenters, Authors And Symposium Participants3943


ThomeNATIONAL CAVE MANAGEMENT SYMPOSIUM WELCOMING SPEECHJanetB.ThomeNational Cave Management SymposiumlNational Speleological Society LiaisonGood morning. I'm pleased to see that so many people were able to come here this morning for the kick-off sessionofthe1991National Cave Management Symposium. The organizers must know that I arrived late last night and may have scheduled me to start off this Symposium to make sure that I got here on time.MynameisJanet Thorne, and I am a memberofthe National Speleological Society, oneofthe co-sponsorsofthe Symposium. I'm curious, how manyofyou have been tooneofthe National Cave Management Symposiums before? Would you raise your hand? [Approximately one-third raised their hand -Editor] Thank you. Well thoseofyou who have been to a Symposium before probably have not yet noticed it, but there has been a changeofsignificant proportiOns made between the last Symposium in 1989 and this one.Page 4people who might be interested in attending, no guidance on what the Symposium should accomplish, and often very little ideaofhow a Symposium should be structured. Despite the lackofover-all coordination, past Symposia in general have been quite successful. This has been due in no small part to the fact that a numberofgovernment agencies and private organizations concerned with caves have recognized the valueofparticipation in a conference like this, focused as itisexclusively on cave management. The first Symposium in 1975 was the resultofparticipation and supportbythe National Speleological Society, the National Park Service, the BureauofLand Management, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Cave Research Foundation. Over the years those organizations have continued their strong support, and they have been joinedbya numberofothergroups. This past spring severalofthe organizations which have been involved with past National Cave Management Symposia met to discuss the current status and future goalsofthe NCMS. The representatives at that meeting decided that itwastime for there to be a greater degreeofstructure to the Symposia so that they could be more responsive to the needsofparticipants in the future. Consequently, the participating organizations have created a Steering Committee for the NCMS, and that Committee held its organizational meeting this summer at the NSS Convention. Each organization has one representative on the Committee, andasI name for you each organization whichisinvolved, I would like to have the person who represents that group stand so that you will know who to ask if you have any questions later about thisnewstructure.


TheFederal government agencies which initially are participatingonthe Committee are the Bureau of Land Management, representedbyDel Price; the Forest Service, Susan Rutherford; the Fish and Wildlife Service, Joe Murphy; and the National Park Service,RonKerbo. From the private sector the organizations which are membersofthe Committee are The Nature Conservancy, Geoff Roach; the American Cave Conservation Association, Dave Foster; the Cave Research Foundation, Jim Borden; the National Caves Association, Gordon Smith; and, of course, the National Speleological Society, which I represent. The Steering Committee members have decided that the person whoisthe representative to the Committee from the NSS also will serve as the Coordinator for the Committee. Thatisthe reason I had to getupearly this morning to make these comments! I don't want to take up much more time,butI do think it important that I touch very briefly on the reasons the participating organizations have taken the step of forming a Steering Committee. We see many advantages.Forexample, the Committee will ensure that thereisconsistent, year-after-year, support for the Symposia from a varietyoforganizations concerned about caves. The Symposia hostsofthe future will have the encouragement and combined resourcesofthe participating organizations behind them as they arrange for facilities, search for speakers, and solicit attendance. The varietyofrepresentationonthe Committeeisexpected to ensure that we continue to meet the original goalofthe symposia, whichwasfor it to be a forumat which people from many different backgrounds, but with a common interestinsome aspect relating to caves, all meet in one place to exchange ideas, to develop working relationships, and to identifyourcommon goals. Cave owners, cave managers, and cavers all will benefitbytalking and gaining a better understandingofeach other's interests and attitudes.ThomePage 5Representativesofthe various organizations on the Committee are expected to help future Symposia hosts in identifying current cave management issues of special interest to their own membersorstaffs andinfinding appropriate speakers to address those issues. Also, frankly, the Committee will be a mechanismbywhich Symposia participants and the concerned organizations can be assured that there exist mechanisms for fiscal accountability and responsibility. We want to try to ensure that the hosts of future Symposia are able to start off with seed money to cover advance financial commitments, and that the hosting organizations do not face a disproportionate financial loss if attendanceisunexpectedly light. These, briefly, are someofthe reasons the NCMS Steering Committeewascreated. I am sure that someofyou have questions, and perhaps we can take a couple, but we have a busy schedule today, andweshould try to move ontothe excellent lineup of speakers and papers which have been arranged forus.Certainly there will be many opportunities over the nextfewdays for me or theotherorganization representatives to answer any questions you may have. I do want. to ask that, as you participate in the activitiesofthe nextfewdays, you let me or oneoftheothermembers of the Steering Committee know of any suggestions you have onwaysin which the Symposia can be improved.Oneofourgoalsisto make these meeting responsive to your needs and thoseofyourCOlleagues,and you can helpusa great deal if you giveusyour ideas. Does anyone have any question which should be addressed now? Thank you for coming, and I now wouldHketo introduce to you Dave Foster, Executive Director of the American Cave Conservation Association, who has been carrying the responsibility for all the planning which has gone into this Symposium.


FosterOPENINGREMARKSFROMTHECHAIRMAN David G. Foster Executive Director American Cave Conservation AssociationItismypleasure to welcome you to Kentucky for the1991National Cave Management Symposium. Cave management in Kentucky involves many challenges. Approximately40%ofthe StateofKentuckyisunderlainbykarst. There are approximately 2500 known cavesinKentucky.TheMammoth Cave systemisover 300 miles long, more than twice the lengthofits nearest competitor. The protectionofthe world class cave resourcesofKentucky presents a varietyofproblems for the cave manager to overcome. PartsofMammoth Cave and muchofits drainage basin, for instance, extend far beyondthenational park boundaries. Developmentofboth urban and rural areas in the Mammoth Cave region threatens the water qualityofMammoth Cave and many other long cave systems in Kentucky. The National Cave Management Symposiumisessentially a networking conference for people who study and who care about caves.Wehope thatbyexamining the land use mistakes made in the Mammoth Cave region, youwillbebetter able to prevent similar problems in other partsofthe United States. We have brought together a diverse groupofscientists, researchers and managers to facilitate the exchangeofideas and concepts in order to promotethedevelopmentofgood cave management policies and the protectionofcave resources. On behalfofall those who helped put this symposium together, I welcome you to the1991National Cave Management Symposium. Thanks for joiningus!THENATIONAL CAVE MANAGEMENT SYMPOSIUM STEERING COMMITTEE American Cave Conservation Association, David G. Foster BureauofLand Management, Del Price Cave Research Foundation, JamesD.Borden National Caves Association, GordonL.Smith, Jr. National Park Service, Ronal Kerbo National Speleological Society, JanetB.Thome, NSS/NCMA Liasion The Nature Conservancy, Geoff RoachU.S.Fish&Wildlife Service, Jim Palmer U.S. Forest Service, Brent BottsThe Steering Committee wishes to acknowledge and thank those who contributed to the planning for this year's symposium, including the field trip leaders, speakers, and others, who assisted with various conference a"angements. Page 6


BradybaughTHEIMPORTANCEOFPARTNERSHIPSINRESOURCES CONSERVATIONJeff Bradybaugh Science and Resources Management Division Mammoth Cave National Park First, I would like to welcome you to south-central Kentucky, and its areasofclassic karst terrane containing numerous caves including Mammoth Cave. Weatthe park are excited to be co-hosting the National Cave Management Symposium with the American Cave Conservation Association, because 1991 marks the 50th Anniversaryofthe establishmentofMammoth Cave National Park, and the 75th Anniversaryofthe creationofthe National Park Service. I would also like to recognize that our sister agency, the United States Forest Serviceiscelebrating itslOOthAnniversary this year. Mammoth Cave National Parkislocated in an internationally important karst area, containing a splendid diversityofgeologic, biological and cultural resources.TheMammoth Cave Systemisthe longest in the world, extending well over 300 miles, and contains most typesoflimestone cave formations.Ofthe 200 speciesofcave fauna found here, 12 are found nowhere else. Manyofthese species have been isolated fromothercave systems for over a million years, resulting in fragile, unique populations. Nowhere else do three speciesofsightless fish co-exist. Federally endangered fauna includefivespeciesoffreshwater mussels, Indiana bat, grey bat, and Kentucky Cave Shrimp. Surface vegetationishighly diverse with 450 different species known from the park. An areaofold-growth forest in the park, knownasthe Big Woods,isoneofthe largest remaining areas in the stateofthe ancient forest typesofeastern North America.Ithas been designated a State Natural Area. The state has also designated the Green River within the parkasa state Wild and Scenic River, and the Mammoth Cave subsurface streams as Outstanding Resource Waters.Thepark contains evidenceoffour pre-Columbian Indian cultures, with more than 150 archeological sites identified. In the early 1800's, partly in response to thePage 7impending Warof1812, cave soils which contain valuable nitrates, were removed from Mammoth Cave. This material was processed into saltpetre just outside the cave, and then shipped to gunpowder factories.Anextensive systemofpumps and wooden pipeswasconstructed for this purpose in Mammoth Cave. Remainsofthese andotherhuman activity can be found in caves andonsurface lands throughout the park. With such a diversityofsignificant resources, the park was designated a World Heritage Site in 1981, and the park and an adjacent area were declared an International Biosphere Reservebythe United Nations in 1990. A principal conceptofthe International Biosphere Reserve programisto protect and manage unique resources while encouraging sustainable and compatible economic development. Thisismost often accomplished through the designationofa Core Zone, receiving the highest levelofenvironmental protection and which usually encompasses the primary resources tobeprotected, and a TransitionZonewhere compatible developmentisallowed, and where secondaryorcontributing resources are located.Forthe Mammoth Cave Area International Biosphere Reserve, the national park forms the CoreZoneand the TransitionZoneconsistsofthose portionsofthe Mammoth Cave groundwater basins lying outside the park.TheTransitionZoneencompasses about 60,000 acres, which is3/4ofMammoth Cave's groundwater basins.TheTransitionZoneisprimarily a karst terrane known as the Sinkhole Plain where surface runoff quickly enters the extensive underground stream systems, flowing toward and through Mammoth Cave and then emptying into the Green River. Obviously, Mammoth Cave National Park and adjacent lands contain someofthe best examplesofournation's natural and cultural heritage. However, these resources are threatened directly and indirectlyby


Bradybaughhuman activity. Priceless native American hand woven sandals datedas2000years old have been stolen from the display area in Mammoth Cave. Elevated levelsofozone and other air pollutants are affecting plant growth. Exotic speciesoffish compete with native species and the endangered Kentucky Cave Shrimp. illegal harvestofendangered freshwater mussels threatens their continued existence, and pollutionofthe Mammoth Cave underground stream system,ofwhichIwill speak more,isalsoofprimary concern. So how do you andIasresources managers, in our various locations, solve these typesofproblems? Certainly better enforcementofresources statutesisimportant. But rather than limit public use and participation in activities related toourresources,Ibelieve more public involvementisneeded. Through environmental education and participation, the public must develop a senseofownership and pride in the unique resources which we manage, in trust, for them.Asresponsible resources managers, working in a world where outside interests have a strong influence on our resources andourmanagement actions, we must develop strong partnerships with industry and the business community, political officials, government agencies, academia and research institutions, special interest groups, neighbors, and the general public in such awaythat they understand that they have a stakeinthe well-beingofthese unique resources.PRIMARY THREATS AND PARTNERSHIPSI would like now to discuss several partnerships in which Mammoth Cave National Park staff are heavily involved dealing with water pollution, a primary threat to park resources. Negative changes in quantity and qualityofwater flowing through the Mammoth Cave system would be expected to adversely affect the unique aquatic life in these underground streams and alter natural cave development processes.Mammoth Cave Area Special WaterQualityProjectIncreased public awarenessofwater quality problemsinsouth-central Kentucky led to the formationofthe Mammoth Cave Karst Area Water Quality OversightPage 8Committee in1988.Thecommittee was formed for the purposeofachieving coordination among citizens, landowners, and government agencies in monitoring and improving water quality in the area. Membership consistsofthe Soil Conservation District and county government representatives from eachofthefivecounties in the project area. A multi-agency Technical Committeewasthen formed to develop a program to address groundwater pollution problems associated with agricultural practices within thefivecounties, which includes and extends beyond the Biosphere Transition Zone. The Technical Committee designed a program to address three principal concerns:1)elevated concentrationsofherbicide residues2)high fecal coliform counts from animal wastes which runoff into sinkholes from feed lots and dairies3)sedimentation dueto soil erosion from cropping practices The Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS) and Soil Conservation Service (SCS) have provided engineering support and cost-share funds for local farmers to construct solid and liquid animal waste retainers. Thirty facilities have been constructed to date, and the programiscontinuing. We should note that more farmers signed up for the cost-shared construction program in the first year than the available funds could support. SCS and ASCS are also working with farmers to examine reductions in pesticide use, useofno-till and alternate tillage practices, and reductionofconventional cropping on highly erodible soils. The Kentucky DivisionofWaterisresponsible for designation of demonstration farms and set-upofon farm water quality analysis programs to collect trend data before and after implementationofnew management practices. Hydrologistsat Mammoth Cave National Park are assisting the Division, and also are running concurrently a water quality monitoring program downstream, within the park, to assess changes resulting from improved farm management practices.


BradybaughA numberofimportant advisors including the UniversityofKentucky CollegeofAgriculture, U.S. Geological Survey, Kentucky Geological Survey, Environmental Protection Agency, Western Kentucky University, and Tennessee Valley Authority are contributing their expertise to the Project as membersofthe Technical Committee. But most importantly, the cooperation and interestbythepUbliC,elected officials, and particularly farmers, has been, and will continue to be essential to any successes the project achieves.Caveland Sanitation AuthoritySeveral years prior to the creationofthe Area Water Quality Oversight Committee, several local municipalities were struggling with water quality issues related to municipal sewage disposal. Poorly designedorunder-sized sewage treatment plants in the cities of Horse Cave and Cave City were releasing effluent into sinkholes, thereby having a direct affectonsubsurface water quality in the Hidden River Cave hydrologic system.Innearby Park City, no sewage treatment system exists, and effluent from septic systems, and in most cases raw sewage,isbeing injected directly into the Mammoth Cave hydrologic system. With the cities unable to meet federal and state clean water regulations, the Environmental Protection Agency granted funds to prepare a wastewater facilities plan for the citiesofHorse Cave, Park City, Cave City and Munfordville, as wellasMammoth Cave National Park. The plan recommended constructionofa regional sewer system for the area. Becauseofpublic concerns regarding the qualityofthe local drinking water supply, impact to cave resources themselves and the economic value they represent to the region, the Caveland Sanitation Authoritywasformed to implement the plan. The Authority consistsofthree representatives each from Park City, Cave City and Horse Cave, as well as theSuperintendentofMammoth Cave National Parkasan ex-officio, non voting board member. Since 1987 various construction projects have been completed to implement different portionsofthePage9project, including upgrading the wastewater systems in Cave City and Horse Cave and tying domestic and industrial sources into the system. Major funding has been providedbytheEnvironmental Protection Agency, CommonwealthofKentucky, and the National Park Service through direct grants. Farmers Home Administration and theEPAhave also provided construction loans, which are being repaid through user fees. Just recently, an agreement was reached on implementing the final phases including a sewage collection system for Park City and conveyance lines for remote usersincluding the national park.Thisisa splendid exampleofa partnership involving a number of diverse interests, individuals, and governments. The road has been very rocky, with a lotofdisagreement, resignatiOns, legal actions, and grid lock. But, through the trials and tribulations the Authority board members under the public eye, were able to keep in mind the importanceofthe project, which at present appears to be headed toward completion.ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION, TOURISM AND ECONOMICSIn both these cases, acknowledgementofa problem vital to the community's well being resultedinforming a partnership to address these issues. This cooperation,ofcourse, followed the public realization that their groundwater supply for agricultural and industrial use, domestic supply and support of the tourism industry,inshort their collective livelihood: was threatened in addition to the ecological damages expected. This then was an opportunity to create a public stake in the well-beingofthe biosphere resources. The next stepisto elevate this concern from a personalorfinancial interest to thatofa public or resources welfare issue. Hereiswhereourresponsibilities as environmental educators comes in. Firstly,wecannot simply escort visitors throughourprecious caves; they cannot just receive a verbal dietofcake and ice cream.Ifthey do,weare missing a prime opportunity to discuss environmental issues facedinourareas. We must be willing to discuss the controversial issues constructively


Bradybaughaspartofourpublic programs. All to often inmyexperience, area managers are reluctant to work these issues into public programsorto assure that staff making the public contacts thoroughly understand the issues; and therefore, are comfortable in discussing them. Environmental education is not only essential for the public, but for our staffaswell. The National Park Service, several weeks ago, convened a national symposium to examine its organization, ,role in resources stewardship, and direction it must takeasthe Service heads toward the next century. The conferees consistedof 1(2 National Park Service employees and 1(2 citizens from all sortsoforganizatiOns interested in national parks. We received some accolades but also plentyofconstructive criticism. Two primary recommendations came outof'the conference: the National Park Service must become leaders in resources stewardship and environmental education. Not working alone however, becauseweall know that funds and manpower are limited, but through partnerships with other agencies, interest groups and the public. Remember I mentioned earlier that the International Biosphere Reserve concept includes resource compatible economic development. Mammoth Cave National Park participates in the Barren River Area Development District, a state-chartered organization which coordinates economic, land use, and environmental issues inourregionofKentucky. Active participation in this organizationbypark managersiscrucial to building a consensus with business leaders and civic officials for the protectionofbiosphere resources through compatible economic development. While not every decisionmaybe favorable to our pointofview,wehave the opportunity to discuss issues, provide research data,and raise the awarenessoflocal officials to resources management concerns associated with various economic development projects. We cannot ignore the economic valueoftourism and its potential for resource-compatible economic growth.Asit relates to the resourceswemanage, economic considerations must be included when buildingourpartnerships, a point which Stephen Biggers will be, discussing withusmore in afewminutes. While we, as park managers, are primarily concerned with the well beingofthe resource,ourneighbors are often heavily dependent on the tourism income the resource generates. For example, I recently saw some data from the Kentucky DepartmentofTravel Development which showed that visitors to Mammoth Cave National Park generated $98 million in total expenditures to the benefitofthe statewide and local economies in1990.These expenditures had an additional tax impactof$6.8 million and resulted in employment of 2,800 persons. The modern day resources manager needs to be armed with this data,aswellasnatural and cultural resources data, to build partnerships with the local business community in order to achieve resource:) protection and compatible economic development. I believe this conceptofpartnerships and public involvement holds true foraUofushere.Itmaybe disconcerting to manyofusto imagine the public with greater influence in managementofournational, state and regionally significant resources. But the public has demonstrated their commitment to resources protection issues ranging from endangered species, to oil spills, to air and water pOllution, to antiquities, allofwhich, as you know, can be associated with cave systems. I believe that greater public participation in managementofour parks, forests, monuments,orwhat-have-you, through partnerships, will enhance public responsibility for them, and ultimately better provide the means for better protectionofournatural and cultural heritage.Page10


AlexanderTHEEVOLVING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MAMMOTH CAVE NATIONAL PARK AND ITS HYDROGEOLOGIC SYMBIONTSE.Calvin Alexander,Jr.DepartmentofGeology and Geophysics UniversityofMinnesota Minneapolis,MN55455June1992AndNoah he often said to his wIfe when he sat down to dine, "I don't care where the water goesifit doesn't get into the wine." from Wine and WaterbyG.KChestertonPage11


AlexanderTABLEOFCONTENTSPage1 Introduction 14 Geographic Locationand Geologic Setting 142MammothCave NationalParkand Its Regional Neighbors A Study in Conflict Analysis15Level ISeedsofRegional Conflict 16 Local Animosity -TheCreationofMammothCave NationalPark16 DynamicResource19Growing KnowledgeBase....................................19Concessionaire Interests 20 Level II NationalParkRegional and National Policy 20GeneralOrganizational Characteristics 20 Local Entities21EnvironmentalGroups21Science intheNational Parks21LevelIII-Political Policy Making23Conflict Synthesis233 RecognitionofRegional Symbiosis 24ResearchModes24'Individual Scientists 24VolunteerOrganizations25NationalParkService25Others26Summary26ResearchActivities26 1950sto1973 26Objectives26Projects27SignificanceofResearch29 1973to1989 29 Objectives29Projects30SignificanceoftheResearch 32 ApplicationsoftheResearch 33Page 12


AlexanderContributions to the Body of Scientific Knowledge33New Hydrogeological Concepts Resulting from National Park Service-Sponsored Research33OtherBenefits34Future Research Objectives341989 to 199135Objectives35Current Projects36Significance of Current Research374TheImpact of Research on National Park Service Management375TheImpactofNational Park Service Management on Research40TheCreationofthe Research Geologist Position40TheTenureofthe National Park Service Research Geologist40OtherScientific Researchinthe Mammoth Cave Region436TheFuture WhatisGood for the Regional Symbiosis?44Research44Agendas46The Local Symbiont Level46TheNational Park Service LocalLevel46TheNational Park Service Southeast Regional Level47Science in theParkand the Region477 Summary and Conclusions48Acknowledgements50Cited and Pertinent References50Page13


Alexander1INlRODUCTIONTheNational Park Service (NPS)ismandated to protect and preservethephysical, biological, and historical resources placedinits care. Each unit in the NationalParkSystem contains portionsoforentire single and multiple ecosystems.TheNPS is required, therefore,toassume a complex, interdisciplinary approaCh to its management philosophy. Additionally, each unitispartofa local and regional geographic area, often with cities andothergovernmental units nearby, and each unitisenmeshedincomplex, physical, biological, and pOlitical symbiotic relationships with its neighbors.TheNPS management philosophyisbeginning to consider social and pOlitical interactions and partnerships with residents and governmental agencies that co-inhabit the units' geographic regions. Mammoth Cave NationalPark(MCNP) in Kentuckyisa prime exampleofhow complex this process can become.AtMCNP,theNPS manages both the complex surface ecosystems and the Mammoth Cave System (MCS), the longest cave in the world, and the major componentofthePark. This systemofcave passages and underground rivers supports its own rich and diverse flora and fauna. These biota are intimately interconnected in complex ecological relationships and are coupled to conditionsonthe land surface.Themanagementofsuch resourcesisdependentonknowledgeofthe biological and physical aspectsofboth the surface and subsurface environments and considerationoftheeconomic and social needsofregion's inhabitants. This paper examines the interplayofscientific research, social interactions, and natural resource management in the Mammoth Cave Region. Duringthesummerof1991, about two dozen individuals connected with MCNP were interviewed and manyofthis paper's observations and conclusions are based on those interviews.Thepublished -resultsofthe scientific research are reviewedasarewritten plans for future research projects. Social issues that impact the hydrogeologic researchinMCNP and the neighboring communitiesareexplored.Theorigin, development, and impactofNPS's evolving management decisions and policiesatMCNPonhydrogeologic andotherresearch intheregion are reviewed. Finally, recommendations are made concerning how to improvetheinteractionsofscience and management.GEOGRAPHICLOCATION ANDGEOLOGICSETTINGMCNP lies within the Central Kentucky Karst, a regionof970 square miles (2,510km2 )with over 450 miles (720km)ofmapped cave passage. Many long-time workers in the area believethatthere willbeatleast 1,000 miles (1,600km)ofcave passage that are humanly passable when all such passages are discovered and mapped. Over 325 miles (520km)ofmapped cave passage are contained within the MCS itself. The Parkcontains 52,713 acres (21,332 ha), approximately 74%ofthe 70,618 acres (28,578 ha) originally authorized.TheGreenRiver flows westward through the Park, and the townsofMunfordville,HorseCave, Cave City, Park City, and Brownsville are nearby.TheMCS occurs within the upper St. Louis Limestone, allofthe Ste. Genevieve Limestone, andtheGirkin Formation. Located below the St. Louis Limestone, the Salem-Warsaw Formations and older rocks act as a regional aquiclude.Therocks intheregion dip gently toward the west, northwest and north. In general, surface water flows across the lower St. Louis Limestone into swallets in the middle St. Louis Limestone.Thewater then flows through the aquifer, and down the potentiometric gradient to the Green River, whichistheregional base level. Twenty-eight groundwater drainage basins and seven sub-basins southofthe river have been definedbyDr. JamesF.Quinlan and his research associatesbyutilizing the data from more than 400 dye traces,. 1,500 water-levelmeasurements,and mappiqg ofapproximately 450 miles (725 km)ofcave passagesbyvarious groups activeinthe park and in the region. These results are shown on the mapbyQuinlan and Ray (1989).Page14


Alexander2MAMMOTH CAVE NATIONAL PARKAND ITS REGIONAL NEIGHBORS A STUDY IN CONFLICT ANALYSISRecognizingthatresource management requires a comprehensive understandingofthe nature and extentoftheresource, including the susceptibilityofits various components to adverse impacts, the NPS, scientists, and cavers intensified research in the biological and physical settingsofMCNP inthemid 1960s. This work demonstrated that the cave extended far beyond theParkboundaries.Theunderground riversonwhich the subterranean ecosystems (and eventually the surficial ecosystems) depend so heavily also extend beyond Park boundaries and drain the adja cent Sinkhole Plain and the communities built on it. These new insights encouraged the NPS to adopt the conceptofregional watershed protection, rather than Park-bound schemes, and to begin working in cooperation with local governments and with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to gain protection for the underground riversofthe entire region.TheNPSismoving from the roleofquiet neighbor to the roleofan active partner in the developmentofthe region surrounding MCNP. This change necessitates more specific and larger-scale research to define and understand the natureofgroundwater flow in the region.ThemetamorphosisofMCNP's role in the region hasnotbeen an easy change to accept for anyofthe groups involved, however, becauseoflong-term conflicts in the Mammoth Cave Region. These conflicts are rooted in history and in politics at a varietyoflevels, and to understand the evolving relationship between MCNP and its regional neighbors, the various componentsofthis conflict must be appreciated. Figure 1isa visualizationofthese complex levelsofconflict and the relationshipsofthe various components within each level.Thefollowing analysiswiUutilizethephraseologyofthis illustration.Other Political PolicyOther Federal Governmental AgenciesFig.1:Diagrammatic representationofnested levelsofconflict forMeNP.(Roger Brucker, personal communication 1991) Page15


AlexanderLEVEL ISEEDSOFREGIONAL CONFLICTThecomponentsofthis level comprise the fundamental basis for conflict between MCNP and the citizensofthe Mammoth Cave Region. This conflictisrooted in the historyofboth the region and Mammoth Cave,butalso includes the dynamicnatureofthe region's cave and groundwater resources and the contributions that various scientific studies have made to increasingtheunderstandingofthat dynamic nature. Another critical component involvestheinterests and influenceofthe MCNP concessionaire, a powerful residentofthe area, in the region's politics and in the managementoftheresourcesofMCNP. Eachofthese componentsiscomplex, and a detailed examinationisbeyond the scopeofthis paper. Brief summariesofthe salient points, however, will be presentedinthefollowing discussion.Local Animosity -TheCreationofMCNPIn1790,John and Patty Houchin settled on the south bankofthe Green River just downstream from what would become known as Mammoth Cave and its Historic Entrance. Legend states that this entrancewasdiscovered sometime during1798or1799byJohn Houchin while hunting. In1798,Valentine Simmons purchased 200 acres, including two caves that would become known as Dixon and Mammoth Caves. In1799,Simmons soldtheproperty and both caves toJohnFlatt, and the larger cave (Mainmoth Cave) became known as Flatt's Cave. Mammoth Cave was referred toas"Big Cave" in Jonathan Clark's diary in1802.OnJanuary21, 1810,thename "Mammoth Cave" was first used in printbya newspaper in Richmond, Virginia. The first mapofMammoth Cave was madeshonlybefore1811.Thecave and others in the region became vital sourcesofsaltpetre during the Warof1812;this domestic source helped the U.S. to win the war. Without it, the country probably would have lost quickly. Despite this role,itwas Nahum Ward's published descriptions in1816that made Mammoth Cave famous. EdmundF.Lee made the first instrument surveyandmapofMammoth Cave. During the period from1838to1839,the Slave-guide, Stephen Bishop, made many important discoveries in Mammoth Cave. Ownershipoftheland containingtheentrances tothetwo caves changed several times before the property was purchasedbyDr.JohnCroghan in1839.In1842,Stephen Bishop, withtheassistanceofGeorge Croghan, prepared a new mapofMammoth Cave, which was publishedin1845.Stephen Bishop continued to make discoveries in Mammoth Cave for Dr. Croghan, and, in gratitude;Dr. Croghan eventually gave Stephen his freedom.WhenDr. Croghan died in1849,the property was placed in trust for heirs and was known thereafter as the Mammoth Cave Estate. When Stephen died in1857,explorationofMammoth Cave was continuedbyslave-guidesMatand Nick Bransford.Theprocessofmaking Mammoth Cave and vicinity into a national park was initiated in1905bymembersoftheKentucky Congressional delegation to the U.S. SecretaryofInterior. Billstocreate MCNP were subsequently introduced in Congress, but no action initially resulted. In1906,Lock andDam#6was builtontheGreen RiveratBrownsville, downstream from Mammoth Cave. This dam raised the water levelsatMammoth Cave approximately six feet and flooded significant partsofthe cave. However, the dam also allowed excursion-class steamboats to bring visitors to the cave via the Green River. In1908,Max Kaemper secretly mapped much of what was knownofMammoth Cave for its managers, and discovered another significantponionofMammoth Cave with guide Edward BishOp. In1916,George Morrison opened the Cox Entrance to Mammoth Cave on land outsideofthe cave property.Hethen opened the New Entrance under similar circumstances in1921.In1924,Roy Jaggers, Earl Lee, and L.L. Lee discovered the Frozen Niagara sectionofMammoth Cave, and opened the Frozen Niagara Entrance to access it. In October1924,the MammothCave National Park Association, a private subscription organization, was organized in Bowling Green, Kentucky, to purchaseoraccept donationofthe necessary land and to clearthetitles for what was hoped would be the future MCNP.Page16


AlexanderOnJanuary30, 1925, Floyd Collins becametrappedin Sand Cave, a small cave locatedonthefar southeast endofMammothCave RidgethatFloyd hoped couldbemadeinto a successful commercial venture.TheimportanceofSand Cave was its location, which would have allowed directcompetitionwithMammothCave. Floyd's plight andtheattemptsofhis would-be rescuers became front-page, headline newsthroughoutthecountry. Somewhere between ten and fiftythousandpeoplecloggedthesiteofthetragedy.OnFebruary 15, 1925, rescuers finally reached Floyd's bodyanddoctors decidedthatFloyd had been deadatleast 24 hours (Murray and Brucker, 1979, p. 211).Thepublicitysurroundingtheattempttorescue Floyd andthefailureoftheseeffortsfedtheenthusiasm forthenationalparkconcept.OnApril 18, 1926,theU.S. SecretaryoftheInteriorreceivedthereportoftheSouthernAppalachian NationalParkCommission. Thisreportrecommended nationalparkstatus fortheMammothCave region forthefol1owing reasons.Thelimestone cavernsthatcontain "beautiful and wonderful formations,"the"great underground labyrinth"ofpassageways "of remarkable geologicalandrecreational interest perhaps unparal1eled elsewhere," andthe"thousandsofcurious sinkholesofvarying sizes through which muchofthedrainageiscarried to underground streams,therebeingfewsurface brooksorcreeks... ." Therugged topography and "areasofapparently original forests which, though comparatively small in extent,areofprimevalue from an ecological and scientificstandpoint,and should be preserved for all time in its virginstatefor study and enjoyment...."The"beautiful and navigableGreenRiver and its branch,theNolin River," whichOowthroughtheforestsofthearea. "Allofthis offers exceptionalopportunityfor developing a great national recreationalparkofoutstandingservice in the veryheartofourNation's densestpopulationand at atimewhentheneedisincreasingly urgent and most inadequately provided for."OnMay 25, 1926, pursuant to this recommendation andtheendorsementofthecitizensofKentucky,theU.S. Congress authorizedtheestablishmentofMCNP, which wastocontain 70,618 acres (28,578 ha).Theact, signedbyPresident Calvin Coolidge, stipulatedthatonly donated lands conveyed in fee simple couldbeacceptedbytheSecretaryofInterior for the creationofMCNP. Later,theU.S. CongressappropriatedFederalfundstospeed land acquisition.Theact also requiredthata minimumof45,310 acresofland including andsurroundingMammothCave wouldbedonatedtotheFederal government beforethearea couldbeacceptedasa national park.Bythecloseofthe19205, no less than15different commercial caves were competing for tourist business intheMammothCave Region. In 1929,theMammothCave NationalPark Association purchased two-thirds interest intheMammothCave Estate. In 1930,theCathedral DomesEntrancewasopenedand the remaining one-third interest outstanding in theMammothCaveEstatewas condemned and purchased.UpontherecommendationoftheMammothCave NationalParkAssociation,theCommonwealthofKentucky createdtheKentucky National Park Commission in 1928.TheCommission was authorized to use legalcondemnationofland through the Commonwealth's rightofeminentdomain to speed land acquisition for MCNP. Thissamelegislature alsoappropriatedfundstobeused for land acquisition at DepreSSion-era priceof$30/acre,ratherthanthethen normal $60/acre. Kentucky also ceded to the Federal government exclusive jurisdiction over park lands. Initially,theCommission lost many condemnation suits inthelocal courts, especially inEdmonsonCounty. It seemed doubtful thatenoughland would ever be obtained to create a National Park.TheAssociation andtheCommission each operated the respective cave properties acquired.OnJanuary 5, 1931,GeorgeMorrison soldtheNewEntranceto the Kentucky NationalParkCommission.TheCarmichael and Violet City Entrances toMammothCave wereopenedthesameyear.TheCivilian Conservation Corps(Ccqcame intotheregion in May, 1933, whenCCCCompany 510 began to buildtheFlint Ridge Reforestation Camp. At this time,MammothCave wasoperatedbyajointcommitteewiththeprofits earmarked for further land acquisition.[Itisimportant tonotethat, through May 1934, allofthis actionwastakenbytheCommonwealthofKentucky and powerful Kentucky residents, not the Federal government.]Page17


Alexander"On May 28, 1934, NationalParkService officials met withtheMammoth Cave NationalParkAssociation and the Kentucky NationalParkCommission.TheNPS agreed to assumetheobligationofpurchasingthenecessary land. Thus, local landowners who had 'beaten' park proponents in the local courts now had to fight the Federal government...andlost...Only whentheresponsibility for obtaining land was assumedbythe NationalParkService in Federal court wasitable to successfully utilize the powerofeminent domain. Thereafter, land acquisition proceeded quickly" (Sides, 1992). The Salts Cave and Colossal Give properties were purchased for MCNP in 1935. In 1936, H.D. Walker surveyed Mammoth Cave fortheUnited States Geological Survey.ByMay 22, 1936, 27,402 acres (11,089 ha)ofland had been acquired by various means and was acceptedbythe U.S. SecretaryofInterior. In 1940,theNew Discovery Entrance was opened. Finally,onJuly1,1941, 45,310 acres (18,340 ha), composedofover 600 deeds, had been assembled, and Mammoth Cave was accorded full national park status. In the end,morethan2,000 people were displaced. The forced abandonmentofhomes and schools, and the displacement from churches and ancestral cem eteries were difficult pills to swallow. Titles to the land containing the churches and cemeteries were conveyed in fee simple totheUnited States, but the titles are subject to continuing ingress and egress with the rightofburial in the cemeteries for the membersofthe churches and their families. Interments, however,arenot to exceed the individual burial capacitiesofeach cemetery as specifiedattimeofacquisition.OnJune5,1942,theU.S. SecretaryofInterior was given authority to accept exclusive jurisdiction over park lands (Act 56 Stat. 317).TheU.S. SecretaryofInterior was now empowered to make rules and regulations forthepropermanagement and careofthe new national park and for the protectionofthe property contained therein, including all flora and fauna. Sometime during 1943, Hidden River Cave, a commercial cave ownedbyDr. Thomas beneath the townofHorseCave, became the first caveinthe region tobeclosed astheresultofgroundwater pollution.TheU.S. SecretaryofInterioraccepted exclusive jurisdiction overparklandsonMay1,1944, as ceded by KentuckyonMarch 22, 1930.OnJune18, 1945, a deed reservation for certain roads to remainopenfortheusual useofthe public was recorded inEdmonsonCounty (Deed Book 45,DeedNo. 262,p.604-607.)OnSeptember 18, 1946, after WorldWarII had ended, MCNP was formally dedicated. Manyofthe cave's guidesandmostofthecave's tourist practices and routes were retainedbytheNPS. ManydfthesurnamesthatareontheMCNP payroll today have beentherefor over a century. However, manyoftheAfrican-American guides, whooutnumberedtheAnglo American guidespriorto NPS takeover, were "furloughed". This endedtheproud traditionofcave exploration and guidingatMammothCave by African Americans that had begun with Stephen Bishop. This policy also created a lasting senseofdistrust and hatred towardtheParkService in muchofthelocal African-American community.TheNPS continued to charge a substantial entrance fee to Mammoth Cave itself while keeping closed all the other, formerly commercial, now government-owned caves within NPS boundaries (e.g., Colossal and Salts). However,theNPS did not yet ownGreatOnyx CaveorFloyd Collins' Crystal Cave, andtheownersofthese caves fought "cave wars" with eachotherand with Mammoth Cave to gain as large a share as possibleofthe 500,000 touristswho annually visited Mammoth Cave. These cave owners fought pertinaceously against government take-over. These in-holdings were not only competition for Mammoth Cave, they were viewed as a threat to bureaucratic survivalbyPark management for several reasons. They consumed maintenance appropriations via road use, and they used general resources supplied by the Federal government for MCNP. In addition, subsidies were budgeted and administrators were paid according tothenumberofvisitors at MCNP each year (Murray and Brucker, 1979,p.240).Themore successfulthein-holders wereindiverting visitors from MammothPage18


AlexanderCave, the lowertheparkwas rated. With fewer visitorsatMCNP, less was spentatthe concessionaire's facilities and stands.Forfearofconnectionofothercaves to Mammoth Cave and for fearofaccidents likethatwhich killed Floyd Collins,theNPSprohibitedall exploration off established tourist trails. Thus ended the proud traditionofguide-explorers, and more hard feelings toward the NPS were created.FromFebruary 14 to 20, 1954, the National Speleological Society sponsoredthe"0"(Collins' Crystal Cave) Expedition, which was hostedbythe Thomas family, the ownersofFloyd Collins' Crystal Cave. Coincidentally, on February 16, 1954, during this expedition,theU.S. House Interior Committee approved a billtoacquireGreatOnyx and Floyd Collins' Crystal Caves. Additional explorations were sponsored and supportedbythe Thomas family during 1955 to 1956 in Floyd Collins' Crystal Cave.Theresultsofthis work were published copiously in the National Speleological Society News and in various local and regional caver newsletters, and this generated much national publicity for the cave property. Someofthe individuals involved in the exploration and mappingofFloyd Collins' Crystal Cave formed the Cave Research Foundation (CRF) which was incorporated in the CommonwealthofKentucky in 1957.CRFwas formed to support scientific research and exploration in caves, in general, and in what would eventually grow from Floyd Collins' Crystal Cave to the Flint Ridge Cave System, in particular.JoeLawrence and Roger Brucker,C3expedition members and foundersofCRF, published a book about the expedition in 1959,TheCaves Beyond.Thesaleofthis book generated more publicity for Floyd Collins' Crystal Cave.OnOctober 20, 1959,CRFsigned a MemorandumofAgreement with NPS to allowCRFto explore, study, and map all caves within MCNP. This caused further animosity on the partofthe MCNP guides, who were bannedbythe NPS from exploring during their off hours.CRFencouraged MCNP guides to join its work trips into the caves,butthat did little to ease the angerofthe older guides, who remembered through their own experienceorthatPage19ofoneoftheir family members, being denied access to Mammoth Cave.By1961, through continued effortsbyCRFand others and with supportofthe Thomas Family, Floyd Collins' Crystal Cave had expanded to become the Flint Ridge Cave System. In that same year, Great ,Onyx and Floyd Collins' Crystal Caves were sold to the NPS, giving MCNPtheapproximately 52,000 acres currently contained in the park. [NOTE:Thepreceding historical materialisfrom Sides (1991), Meloy (1979), Murray and Brucker (1979, p. 211, 238-240, and 317), MCNP (1983), and interviewsofvarious individualsbythe authors.]Dynamic ResourceIfonewere to occasionally visit MCNPorthe MCS,onemight feel that the resource never changes. However, ifonewere to visit the resource regularly and were to become well acquainted with it,onewould realize that the resource changes constantly. In other words, the cave andtheparkareeach a dynamic, not a static, resource.Foryears, it was popular for both the tourists and park managers to consider the caveasan unchanging, 150-mile long labyrinthofmystery, reOecting an attitude that dated back to the early 18oos. However, these dynamic resources are simultaneously being created and destroyed bythe same processes.Growing Knowledge BaseThe final historical componentisthat the dynamic natureofthe resource was revealedbyboth scientific and systematic cave mapping investigations. The scientific studies and mapping created a growing knowledge base that documented the dynamic resourcesofthe park and cave system.Asthat knowledge base grew in size and sophistication, the following became evident:1)the dynamic resource ..yas changing at a much greater rate than initially thought; 2) the resource was much larger than originally thought; and 3) the resource was an integral partofa system that extended well beyond the park boundaries.


AlexanderThis growing knowledge base has created and continues to create several conflicts. First, it revealedthatboththe MCS and the park were regularly impactedbya varietyofhuman activities occurring intheregion,butoutsideofthe park. This discovery destroyed the myth that MCNP and the MCS couldbemanagedbythe NPSasisolated, autonomous units. Second, the individual scientists and caverstooka personal pleasure and pride in participatinginthe growthofthe knowledge base. These feelings grew into a strong senseofloyalty to the resources that superseded the loyaltyofthese individuals to the NPS. Finally,itrevealed the additional conflict between the scientific view that what realityisand the management viewthattries to determine what reality should be.ConcessionaireInterestsNational Park Concessions, Inc. (also called NPCorthe concessionaire), the concessionaire at MCNP and fourotherNational Parks, developed directlyoutofthe Kentucky National p'ark Commission.Theindividuals that were active in the Commission, suchasJudge Coleman, helped to form the NPC. In this sense, the concessionaire actually predates the park. MCNP, rather than theotherparks in which NPC operates, has always been its business base, and NPC's corporate headquarters are located incaveCity.Theconcessionaire, like all concessionaires operating in national park units,isessentially a protected monopoly (Public Law 89-249, Section 5, currently governs the preferred renewalofcontracts whichtheconcessionaires enjoy). NPC has become entrenched in the Mammothcaveregion with successive generationsofemployees. It maintains deliberate ties into the regional community and to the Congressman in the region, Congressman William Natcher.Atone time, and probably still today, the policyofthe concessionaire was to employ residentsofeachofthe counties containing and/or surrounding MCNP. These local people could, in effect, create a network to protest strongly any actions takenbythe park management that are seen to conflict with the interestsofNPC. Successive MCNP Superintendents have said that their toughest battles are with the concessionaire. The interests and activitiesofthe concessionaire are often perceived to be in direct oppositionofthe effortstomanage and protect the resource. However, becauseofthe protected monopoly within the NPS, the NPC has enormous powers, allowing it to take actions that the Superintendent hasnopower to control.LEVELII-NATIONALPARKSERVICEREGIONALANDNATIONALPOLICYThis level contains all entities and characteristics that impact upon policy making in the NPS at the regional and national levels. Included for considerationarethe general characteristics and structureofthe NPS organization, local entities in the MammothcaveRegion, the interestsoflocal and national environmental groups in the managementofthe natural resourcesofthe MammothcaveRegion, and the management structure for scientific research activities in the NPS.GeneralOrganizationalCharacteristics'There are several organizational characteristicsofthe NPS that are critical to how the resourcesofthe National Park System are managed. According to Smith (1968) and Everhart (1983), the basic organizational structure introduced when the NPS was established in 1916isfundamentally unchangedtOday.In the NPS, responsibility for administrationisvested with rangers who advance up the lineofcommand, whereas staff functions are filled by the naturalists, engineers, scientists andotherspecialists who make recommendations concerning management. The rangers usually hold degrees in a varietyofsubjects and skills in a varietyofactivities.Incontrast, staff officers include scientists and interpreters who have professional training and experience in specific disciplines. Smith (1968) pointedoutfour reasons for the initial adoptionofsuch a line and staff systelJl ofadministrative management and control. First, the original park units were under the controlofthe military in the years prior to the establishmentofthe NPS. Someofthe park personnel, then in the military,Page20


AlexandertransferredtotheNPS. Second, wilentheNPS was organized,theleadersofthe new organization found that veteransofthe Spanish-American and First World Wars were among those who were the most qualified to administer what were then remote areas. Third, protectionbya quasi-military ranger force was a major responsibility intheearliest daysofthe Service becausetheParks were remote and difficult to reach. Fourth, the NPS was established in an era when the regulatory functionofthe Federal government was in new vogue. To assure loyalty primarily to the Service andnottotheindividual park unit, the NPS adoptedthemilitary's philosophyoftransferring key personnel on a time scaleofapproximately every three to four years. Such transfers have been and continue to be the key to promotion. Finally, according to Everhart(1983):"Undeniably, the threatofcrime has caused a substantial shiftofemphasis towardthedirectionoflaw enforcement. Rangers now receive400hoursofintensive law enforcementtrainingatthe Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, plus periodic refresher courses ....Ata conferenceofpark Superintendents, the moderatorofa sessiononlaw enforcement noted that 'hardly anything has been more talked about' within theParkService, concluding that'ourpeople are undertrained in resource management and overtrained in law enforcement. A tremendous imbalance has been created.'"Local EntitiesThese include local governments, judicial bodies, business and industry, citizen groups, and ChambersofCommerce, allofwhom try to give input to the NPS unit near them. Most. park units contain partsofresources and ecosystems that are regional in extent and, therefore, are not protectedbythe land ownedbythe park. Despite this, thereisno local advisory representation tothepark unit to facilitate the local input that would permit cooperation between the NPSPage21and local agencies in managing and preserving the shared resources. Hence, decisions madebythese organizations will impactonpark resources without any NPS input into those decisions, and vice versa.Ifthereisstrong local animosity, these decisions will be made eitherbyignoring the parkorin spiteofthe park.EnvironmentalGroupsBecauseofthe interestoflocal and national environmental groups, thereisalways some degree of oversight when the sensitivityofthe resource has been identified. These groups can bring pressure to bear on the NPS and on local park unit management. However, such efforts often aggravate both the NPS managers and the local citizens.TheNPS resents the environmentalgroups' successful attempts to establish policy because itisseen to be an infringement on the managers' prerogatives.Thelocal citizens often view the environmental groups as "outsiders" trying to influence local issues.Science in the NationalParkSystemScience in the NPSisperformedbystaff officers with no command authority. Park scientists report eithertothe park SuperintendentortotheRegional Chief Scientist. Regional Chief Scientists reporttoRegional Directors and to the NPS Senior Scientist in the Washington, D.C., office. This Senior Scientist reports to the Associate Director for Science and Technology, who,inreturn, reports totheNPS Director. Table 1 shows this current management struc::ture. Science in the NPS in general andatMCNP in particularisnow supervisedbythe park Superintendent, who has historically been a line officer, not a scientist.Animportant resultofthis organizational structureisthat, if a conflict arises between management and science, the management command structure takesprecedence. Exceptions. to this are extremely rare.


AlexanderNATIONAL HEADQUARTERS IN WASHINGTON, D.C.:OFFICEOFPARK PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATEDIRECfORSENIOR SCIENTIST Air Quality Division Energy Conservation and Technology Transfer Division Natural Science Division Natural Landscape Division Water Resources Division Special Science Projects Division NPSDIRECfORDEPUTYDIRECfOR SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE IN ATLANTA, GEORGIA:REGIONALDIRECfORDEPUTY REGIONALDIRECfORASSOCIATE REGIONALDIRECfOR,OPERATIONS DEPUTY ASSOCIATE REGIONALDIRECfOR,SCIENCE AND NATURAL RESOURCES Natural Resource Management and Policy Division Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Division Coastal and Marine Ecosystem Research DivisionMAMMOTH CAVE NATIONAL PARK, MAMMOTH CAVE, KENTUCKY:SUPERINTENDENT CHIEF, DIVISIONOFSCIENCE AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CULTURAL RESOURCES SPECIALIST Museum Technician (seasonal) NATURAL RESOURCES SPECIALIST Air Quality Technician Radon Technician (seasonal) Biology Technician HYDROGEOLOG1STHydrologic Technician Table1.1992 organizational structureforthe management of scientific researchinthe National Park Serviceinthe Southeast Regional Office andinMammothCaveNational Park (Mihalic,1991;Deskins, 1991).Page 22


AlexanderLEVEL III POLITICAL POLICY MAKINGTheu.s.Congress can impactonNPS policy and resource management through legislation local and/or State citizens, local and/or State business, local State government, national environmental groups, national industrial interests, etc. and more pertinently, the local U.S. Congressmen seemtobe the most expedient route to gettheNPS to do something desiredbythe local groups identified in Level II and/orbythe Park Superintendent. This completely circumvents the regional and national NPS command structures.CONFLICfSYNTHESISWhen a new Superintendent, usually someone with a ranger (line officer) background, arrivesatMCNP, heorshe quickly realizes that there are elementsofconflict which interfere in hisorherability to managetheresourcesofMCNP.Thefirst introduction to thisisoften whentheconcessionaire proposes to pursue some activity thatisinherentlyorpotentially damaging to the resource.TheSuperintendent will,ofcourse, resist such a proposal.Heorshe then discovers the entrenchmentofNPC's protected monopoly within the NPSandthattheproposed activity falls outsideofthe Superintendent's jurisdiction to changeorcontrol.TheSuperintendent tlien discovers that scientific research is being performed at MCNPbyacademic scientists, independent organizations like CRF, and NPS scientists.Theresultsofthis research have demonstratedthatthereisa great dealofresource lying outsidetheboundariesofMCNP which must be consideredtoprotect the resources inside MCNP.TheNPS, however, has the tendency to consider only that which lies within their boundaries, even though those boundaries were drawn for practical and political, not environmental, reasons.Theentire resource in the Central Kentucky Karstisan intimate linkageofmany resource elements, and events outsideofMCNP boundaries can quickly impact the resources inside MCNP boundaries. Therefore, the Superintendent quickly realizes that heorshe must consider all the Mammoth Cave Regionnotjust the resources in MCNP.Page23Thelast issue that the Superintendentislikely to encounterislocal animosity, usually as the resultofsome activity in which the NPS at MCNP must interact and cooperate with Ipcal citizens, Chambers of Commerce, churches, industry, and city governments.TheMaster Planning process, now referred toasthe General Management Planning (GMP) process, will be used hereasa illustration.Atthecommencementofthe GMP process, the Superintendent and theparkstaff used the existing knowledge baseoftheresources plus some generalized viewsofwhat the NPSatMCNP should be doing to serve the public,bothin protecting the resource and interpreting it, to starttheplanning process.Thisreviewofthe available science (the knowledge base) illuminated someofthe dangers and potential risks to the resource, and appeared to indicate the necessity, in some situations,ofless, not more, development. This immediately placed theGMPprocess in direct conflict with the concessionaire's interests. Since public input was partoftheGMP process, the concessionaire, feeling threatened, organized all the surrounding counties through a networkofemployees. Resolutions were made in allofthefiscal courts in these counties.Theactionsofthe concessionaire also gained the involvementoflocal ChambersofCommerce, local civic groups, local church groups, and an impressive arrayofpeople that the concessionaire could turnoutoncommand. Again, the concessionaire, understanding well the four-fold conflict setting (local animosity, concessionaire interests, dynamic resource, and growing knowledge base) simplyfedthe conflict with inflammatory comments such as, "these outsiders are coming in and they want to changeYOURpark, and they want to close it down, and they want to lock it up and make it into wilderness." Allofthese were fighting words to the local communities surrounding MCNP, and so the ensuing battles intensified.TheNPS retreated to the planning room and attempted to revise the GMP, promising less controversial items, hoping that 1he revisedGMPwould be acceptedbythe local popUlace.Thelikelihoodofthis occurring, however, depends upon the concessionaire and his perceptions that his interests are being protected.


AlexanderIn the last three decades, a new constituency has grownasthe scientific knowledge base has expanded. This constituency includes CRF,theWilderness Society,theSierra Club,theNational .Parks and Conservation Association, andotherenvironmental groups who actasadvocatesofpreservationofthe resourcesofMCNP and the MCS. These groups have, through participation in past battlesatMCNP, become very awareofthe elementsofconflict in the region, and have become as effectiveasthe concessionaire in these battles.TheSuperintendent may have less experience than either the concessionaireortheenvironmental community in dealing with what can be a hostile, loud, vociferous, local populace who tends to oppose the actionsofthe NPS at MCNP. Meanwhile, knowledgeofthe cave and groundwater resources expands, and the understandingofthe threats becomes more detailed and comprehensive. Finally, the last potential conflictisnational pOlitical policy.TheCongressofthe United States makes numerous decisions which affect MCNP. Budgetary decisions regarding the NPS are particularly critical. Congressman Natcher representsthearea that includes the Central Kentucky Karst, and heisoneofthefive most senior U.S. Congressmen.Heisvery powerful, andischairmanoftheAppropriations Committee. Local citizens and the concessionaire successfully lobby Congressman Natcher to their benefit, often to the detrimentofthe NPS and the resourcesofMCNP.TheSuperintendent may take three to four yearstocomprehend allofthese elements, while being distractedbyalloftheothertasks requiredofhimorheron a daily basis. These short term necessities leave little time for larger, long-term issues which maybevital to preservationofthe resource. Just when the Superintendentisgetting a graspofthe elementsofconflict that must be addressed to manage the resource, heistransferred toanotherpark unit to start over again.3RECOGNITIONOFREGIONAL SYMBIOSISRecognitionofthe symbiotic relationships between MCNP and its regional neighbors has been the resultofyearsofcave exploration and mapping, long-term resource monitoring and inventory, and patient scientific research. Many dedicated individuals have contributed to this effort.RESEARCH MODESHydrogeologic research has been performed in four modesatMCNP. These are:1)individual scientists, 2) volunteer organizations such as CRFand others,3)a NPS Research Geologist assigned to 4) andotherindividuals and agencies.IndividualScientistsIndividual, non-NPS scientists (primarily academic and often membersofCRF)have made long-term, career commitments to study the resourcesofMCNP and the MCS.Ifan academic scientistisinvolved, the effort has often included obtaining funding (non-NPS) and funnelling graduate students into appropriate research projects in the park and region to continue the professor's long-term research program. Examplesofthis include but are not limited tothefollowing. a)Thehydrogeological, geomorphological, and mineralogical work intheCentral Kentucky KarstbyDrs. William and Elizabeth White and their students and associates (1960 to present) that culminated in two theses and in the White and White (1989) book summarizing karst geomorphology and hydrologyofthe park area. b)Thegeological, stratigraphic, speleogenetic, and hydrogeological research in the MCSbyDr.ArthurPalmer and Ms. Margaret Palmer (1960 to present) that culminated in Palmer (1981; 1989a,b).c)Thehydrogeologic research in the MCSbyDr. Ralph O. Ewers and his students (Ewers and Ford, 1978; Recker and others, 1988; Recker, 1989; Meiman and others, 1988; Meiman, 1989; Estes, 1989)Page24


Alexanderd)Thesurface and in-cave archaeological researchbyDr. PattyJoWatson and her students and associates (approximately 1963 to present), which resulted in two books (Watson, 1969; 1974) and a long seriesofarticles (e.g., Watson 1989; 1991). Professor Watson's research played a major role in garnering the recognition for Mammoth Cave archaeology that culminated in her election to the National AcademyofSciences. e) The research (approximately 1955 to present)byDr. Thomas Barr (Barr, 1967; Barr and Kuehne, 1971), Dr. ThoJl1as Poulson and his students (e.g., Poulson, 1967; 1990; Poulson and White, 1969; Poulson and Kane, 1981), and Dr. Julian Lewis (e.g., Lewis, 1981; 1990).VolunteerOrganizationsFordecades, a major partofthe scientific research, the bulkofthe resource inventory, and mostofthe cave exploration and mapping in MCNP and the MCS has been donebyvolunteers. This volunteer poolisnational and international in origin and contains individuals from many different professions. Their efforts are largely self-motivated, self-directed, and self financed.Thequality and professionalismofthis volunteer work is, on average, excellent and the bestofitiswithout equal. The lead organization in the volunteer effort has been the CRF, butotherorganizations have made sizable contributions. Other volunteer organizations involved in MCNP and the region include the Central Kentucky Karst Coalition, the Fis.her Ridge Project, the North Shore Project, various National Speleological Society Grottos, etc., as well as numerous individual volunteers. Muchofthe work donebyDrs. White, Dr. andMs.Palmer, Dr. Watson, Dr. Poulson, Dr. Lewis and a numberofotherscientists were doneunder the aegis of CRF. Dr. White wasCRFChief Scientist from 1962 to 1973 and Dr. Poulson has served in the same role from 1979 to present.NationalParkServiceJamesF.QuinlanwashiredbyMCNP on July 26, 1973,asthe resultofa requestbythe MCNP Superintendent, Joseph Kulesza. According to his position description, he was to coordinate all research activities in MCNP andwasto emphasize what were identifiedascritical research needs. The identified critical research needs included complex, long-term studiesofregional karst geomorphology, speleology, park and regional hydrology, geochemistry, petrology, mineralogy, sedimentology, cave climatology, and paleontology.Hewasto identify. and correlate research needs in each discipline based on acquired knowledge and appraisalofphysical data and literature. Dr. Quinlan was to perform geological studies and to establish monitoring systemsofphysical resources, including water drainage patterns, particularly those vulnerable to outside influence.Hewas to receive general administrative supervision from the MCNP Superintendent, but was to have wide latitude for professional, independent judgment and action.Hewas to maintain close ties with the Regional Chief Scientist. Dr. Quinlan's tenure at MCNP was scientifically productive. The contributions ofhisscientific work are reviewed below. Dr. Quinlan's tenurewasalso controversial.Asa resultofdisputes withNPSmanagement, Quinlan (1975) filed a formal grievance against MCNP Superintendent Kulesza. The successful resolution of that 1975 grievance permitted a decade of fundamental scientific work at MCNP until the underlying conflict between science and management resurfaced. After a bitter clashofwills withNPSmanagement, Dr. Quinlan resigned in. With Dr. Quinlan's departure, the NPS lost muchofthe knowledge that he had gained during his16yearsasthe Research GeologistatMCNP and his 30 years of experience in the Central Kentucky Karst. This situation will be discussed in more detailinthe section, "The tenureofthe National Park Research Geologist", laterinthis paper. -Page 25


AlexanderA new research structure was established in the fallof1988.Theposition Dr. Quinlan vacated in 1989 has not been filled.TheResearch Geologistposition was held and fundedbytheSoutheast Regional Office, and duty-stationedatMCNP. The park requested that the position be filled again Dr. Quinlan's resignation.TheRegionalChief Scientist chose to reassign the position elsewhere 'in the region. In October 1990, MCNP requestedtheregional office to establish a Hydrologist positionatMammothCave. In November 1990, the Regional Office approved this position in lieuofa research scientist and the positionwasfilled,ata full performance levelofGS-ll,in January 1991. This new staff is conducting hydrogeology research programsasdirectedbythe Superintendent.OthersState and Federal governmental agencies and private industry have performed research in MCNPorin the Central Kentucky Karst. Examplesofthis include the first dye trace intheregion, performedbyAnderson (1925)ofLouisville Gas and Electric, geologic mapping efforts bytheKentucky Geological Survey, and hydrogeological studiesby tJte U.S. Geological Survey. Severalofthe latter efforts werepartoflarger State and Federal programs and involved MCNP only because itwaslocated inthestudy area. These studies, however, provided useful background information on MCNP and the MCS. MCNP is currently involved inordeveloping inter agency projects with several State and Federal agencies. These projects involve environmental issues that directly impact MCNP and are issue oriented. This modeofresearch appears to be growing,bothatMCNP and throughouttheNPS, and represents a distinctly new styleofresearch in the National Parks.SummaryTheprofessionals involved the exploration and scientific studyofMCNP and the MCS represent a significant reservoirofknowledge and varied expertise whichisavailable to the NPS on a volunteer basis. With this overview, we would now like to review someofthe highlightsofthe geologic and hydrogeologic research that has been undertaken at MCNP. [This reviewisnotmeant to be all-inclusive and, for brevity, willnotmention manyofthe researchers who have contributed to the current scientific understandingofthe resourcesofthe Central Kentucky Karst.]RESEARCH ACTIVITIES Theexploration, mapping and scientific studyofMCNP, the MCS, and the Central Kentucky Karst have been at the leading edgeofU.S. speleology and karst hydrogeology for almost two centuries. Cave exploration, mapping and scientific observations in the area began in the 1800s. Scientific research began in the 1920s and continues tothepresent.Themodern research effort and its results canbeunderstoodbyfirst describing how a research plan was developed, and then howitwas implemented, modified, and expanded. Itismost convenient to dividetheresearch from the 1950sto1991 into three parts: (1) that done from the 1950s to 1973,priorto a NPS Research Geologist being placed in MCNP, (2) from 1973 to 1989, whentheNPS Research Geologist wasatMCNP,and(3) from 1989 to 1991 (when this paper was written) after the Research Geologist resigned from the NPS.Theresearch's valueisdefinedbythe impacts it has had on the managementofMCNP, the policies and actionsofthe residents and governmentsoftheMammoth Cave Region, and finallyonkarst science in general.1950s to1973ObjectivesThe first documented speleological research plan for the Mammoth Cave Region was outlinedbyCRF(1960) included the following items: (1) Exploration and Cartography, which were considered "basic to an integrated speleological provide data for mapping, geological study, archaeological work, andotherinvestigations .... (2) Geology and Hydrology: Littleisknown about the hydrologyofthe Mammoth Cave Region. Studies undertaken in 1925[byAnderson] showed the need for systematic tracingofwater from the ridges and from the Sinkhole Plain. A complete studyofwater movement, both in accessible streams andinfloodedPage26


Alexandercave passages, requires new techniques and extensive support. Springs alongtheGreenRiver should be located and describedindetail. A specific hydrologic research plan was then formulated by variousCRFscientific personnel, including theCRFChief Scientist, Dr. White. Amoredetailed descriptionoftheenvisioned hydrology program was presented inCRF(1968), as follows:1.DrainageNetBehavior: would include examination and careful mappingofthecave passages as representativesofpaleoconduits.2.Hydrology: would encompass allofthe quantitative measurements usually associated with water research, such as: gaging stationsonall identified springs to measure discharge, hydrographs, rain gauges, refinements to measure infiltration, determinationofthe existence and characteristicsofa storagecomponentofthekarst aquifer, and dye tracing to connect various partsofthe drainage network not accessible to direct examination. 3. Hydrogeologic Controls: would consistofcareful mappingofthestratigraphic, lithologic, and structural characteristicsofthe aquifer and comparing these with known cave patterns and known groundwater flow paths.4.Geochemical MechanismsofSolution: could be accomplished via two methodsofexamination. First, ... hydrochemical facies mapping consistsofdoing fairly complete analysesofdissolved ions (Ca, Mg, Na,CI,HC03 )in wells, underground streams, and springs.Fromthe distributionofthese constituents in space...onecan learn much about the residence timeofthewater,ofthegeneral flow paths in the diffuseOowpartsoftheaquifer, andtheprior historyofthe water before it reached the sampling point. Second,thechemical hydro graph technique measuresthesame variablesbutdetermines them as a functionoftime.Bylookingatthevariationofthe chemical parameters with season and with discharge, information can be gainedaboutwhetherthe waterisOowing throughopenchannelsorbydiffuseOow."5.Theory: ...New mathematical models for groundwater motioninlimestone must be invented...."6.Pollution Transport Mechanisms: A full programofhydrologic research...must be concerned with the various pollutants which canbetransportedbyunderground flows....Arenatural clean-up processes operating? Cave streams have a well known aquatic life. Does the cave life succeed in scavenging the pollutants? Howisthe pollution dispersal pattern related tothenature and geometryofthedrainage net? Thisisan area wherethereisan interface between the biological programs operating in cave systems and the hydrological research....Oneismeaningless withouttheotherand itisbecoming an absolute necessity that somesortofquantitative measurements be started.Theresearchonthe drainage net itself cannot be ultimatelytested until the quantitative flow data are available.Projects[NOTE: During this time, various Stil.te and Federal governmental agencies and private industries were involved in research projects intheMammoth Cave Region. Space doesnotpermit addressing these projects here,butthatresearch formed a foundation upon whichthefollowing was built.] Various aspectsofthis hydrogeologic research were performedbyDr. White, his graduate student, John Hess, and graduate students recruited fromotherinstitutionsbyCRF. This occurred primarily from 1957 to 1974 and can be traced throughthefollowing publications:CRF(1961), Reams (1963; 1965), Deike (1967), Deike andWhite(1969), White (1969),Harmonand others (1972), and Wells (1973).Otherresearch occurring during this period at MCNP can be traced through the variousCRFAnnual Reports for 1957 to 1973ortheregular scientific literature.ThereviewsbyPoulson and White (1969), Quinlan (1970),Whiteand others (1970)areuseful synthesesofthe information available in the later 1960s. InCRF(1961), the following research activities were discussed: (1) Physical Geology, (2) Karst Geomorphology, (3) George Deike's Ph.D. research on cavern development and paleohydrologyofthe MCS, and his publications on these topics with Dr. White, (4) Mineralogy, and (5) Hydrology (though itwasnoted that dye tracing andthechemical analysesofwater samples in Flint Ridge had to be suspended duePage27


Alexanderto lackoffunding and available manpower). "The workistime-consuming since tracing dye-laden water often necessitates continuous observations for periods extending over several weeks before dyed water appearsataccessible points." Reams(1963; 1965)examined, withCRFsupport,theoriginofvertical shafts.Heconfirmedthatthese features, which rapidly conduct water vertically downward intheaquifer, were vadose in origin (Pohl,1955).Healso tentatively assigned ages tothevertical shafts intheCentral Kentucky Karst basedontimeofformation determined from simple laboratory models (Reams,1963; 1965).Deike(1967)concluded that "the roleofthetrunks was to carry water fromtheSinkhole Plain to the Green River....Thespring locations seem to have shifted very little sincethecaprock was breached. Trunk gradientsarevery low. This implies a very flat water table...."Healso discussedthespeleogenesisofthe MCS relative tothecontrolofvarious structural elements. Deike and White(1969)determined that two typesofconduit non-linearity were present intheMCS: "an angulate form generatedbywater flow down a hydraulic gradient diagonal to a rectangular joint set, and a curvilinear form with sweeping S-bends apparently related to meandersofsurface forms." They then performed a statistical analysisofsuch forms in the MCS. White(1969)proposed a classificationofthree typesofcarbonate aquifers in regionsoflow to moderateflow.Each flow type (and sub-type) had particular hydrologic controls, mainlythedepthofsoluble rocks beneaththeland surface, and each flow type .(and sub-type) had associated cave types, input settings, and degreesofsediment load. Independent but interacting reviewsbyPoulson and White(1969),White and others(1970),and Quinlan(1970)reviewed thestateofkarst hydrogeology asofthe late1960$.These reviews discussed what was known, what remained to be learned, and synthesized muchofthe earlier work. These reviews and the communityofscientists they helped build were particularly important in guiding the subsequent research effortsofCRFandtheNPS Research Geologist.Harmonand others(1972)characterizedthewatersofthe Central Kentucky Karst basedonchemical parameters.Watersamples were grouped according tothecalcite saturation index andtheequilibrium pressureofCO2 ,Wells(1973),a student recruited byCRFfromtheUniversityofCincinnati, studied the geomorphological developmentoftheSinkhole Plain. Wells(1974)utilized equationsofbest fit curves to examinetherelationships between: (1) current surface stream profiles prior to their captureatswallets, and (2) underground conduits betweentheswallets andthesprings.Heextended this information into a preliminary modeloftheorigin and developmentofgroundwater drainage patterns. Dr. Franz-Dieter Miotke's pioneering work intheCentral Kentucky Karst culminated in Miotke and Palmer(1972),Miotke and Papenberg(1972),and Miotke(1975).Miotke and Palmer(1972)noted chemical data indicate that "...most infiltration into the caves reachesthephreatic zone while still unsaturated...."Miotke and Papenberg(1972)reportedtheresultsofthe first significant dye-tracing results, as follows. "The Sinkhole Plain inthevicinityofPilot Knob drainsbothto theGreenRiver andtheBarren River.Itisa potential sourceofgroundwater pollution inMCNPandotherintervening areas....Thepre-karst drainage pattern still influences the subterranean drainage .... Although the relationship between the pre-karst drainage pattern...and subterranean drainageisobvious,thelackofsprings occurring alongtheBarren River southeastofBowlingGreen--particularly to the southoftheswalletsofthesinking streams, from wherethehydraulicgradientissteepest--shows thattheinfluenceonthe groundwater hydrologyofnotonly the strike and dipofthebeds,butalsothelithology, cannotbedenied.... A subterranean drainage divide lies between Little Sinking Creek and Sinking Creek....Ifthesubsurface flowPage28


Alexanderdirectionofwater fromtheseveral sinking streams eastofGardnerCreekissimilar tothatfromtheCreek..., itismost probably to River Styx Spring, Echo River Spring, andothersprings eastofTurnholeBend Spring. Consequently,partofthewater supplyofMCNPmaybepolluted by waterthatenterstheaquifer as much as6kmsouthoftheMCNPboundary .....SignificanceofResearchDeikeand White. examInedtheoriginsofthecaves withinMCNPand performedsomeofthe firstmorphometricstudiesofcavesintheUnitedStates.WhitecontributedthebeginningsofanAmerican synthesis concerningthetypes and characteristicsofkarst aquifers,anaquifer type little understoodatthattime.BothWells andMiotkeand Papenberg performedsomeofthefirst successful, modern dye traces intheregion and also providedthefirst links betweenthedevelopmentoftheMCS andthatoftheSinkhole Plain.Theresultsofthis research providedthefoundations fortheresearchthatwouldbedoneafter 1973.TheworkoftheResearch Geologist (Quinlan, 1992, personal communication)atMCNPwas most strongly influencedby:(1)Miotke's dye traces,(2)Hess's knowledgeofsprings, and (3)thereview papersbyWhiteandothers(1970) and Quinlan (1970). 1973 to 1989 Objectives Individual scientists andCRFcontinued topursuevarious research projects between 1973 and 1989.CRFcontinued work insupportofits 1968 research plan. VariousStateand Federal agencies also performed researchthatincludedtheMammothCave Region andMCNPbasedontheirown agency agendas.TheNorthShoreTaskForce, agroupofvolunteer cavers from Louisville, Kentucky, obtained permission from MCNP to carryoutsystematic exploration and mappingofthe cavesonthenorthsideoftheGreenRiver in the park. In 1973MCNPhired a Research Geologist, JamesF.Quinlan, a scientist already familiar withtheresearch being performed intheMammothCave Region. This familiarity resulted fromhisown independent researchintheregion and in karst areas elsewhere and from his involvement withCRF.Quinlan(1977, 1991) retrospectively summarized his own research plan as follows: Principal research needs identified were:(1)delineationofgroundwater basins intheparknorthandsouthoftheGreenRiver utilizing dye tracing and chemical hydrograph studies, and (2) determinationofthevariable timesoftravel from points outside theparkto cave streams and springs inside the park.Theresearch results "willbeapplicable toprotectionofcave fauna, including [endangered and threatened species], visitor health and safety, andwaterqualityTheresultsareurgently needed inorderto knowtheresponse time forthefollowing:(1)reaction to accidental spillsofhazardous materials alongthenearby Interstate highway,otherroads, andthemajorrail line between Louisville and Nashville, and (2) planning NPS responsesnotonly to such accidental spills,butalso to existing and proposed oil and gas production, drilling, and waste-disposal practices."Theworkplan consistedoffour major sub-projects (Quinlan, 1991). PhaseI:dye tracing would be performed inorderto: (a) delineate groundwater basinsnorthandsouthoftheGreenRiver, and(b)re finetheresultsofsuch dye-tracing. PhaseII:regular chemical analysisofwater quality at selected springs and cave streams would beundertakeninorderto: (a) determinethenatural variationsthatoccur, (b)interpretwhat chemical processes and mixing processes occur intheaquifer between where water and pollutantsentertheground and where theyaredischargedatsprings (which would allow predictionofdilution tobeexpected for spilled materials), and (c) calibrate instrumentation used for monitoring water quality--and thus gain greater reliability for interpretationofwater quality data. Phase III: the skillsofArthurLange, whoisa pioneer inthenatural potential methodoflocating conduits from the surface (Lange, 1988; Lange and Quinlan, 1988), wouldbeutilized. Such remote location methods would assist in not only locating conduitsthatwere inaccessible toPage 29


Alexanderhuman inspectionandmapping,butalso the sitingofinstrumentationinthesecave rivers. Phase IV:computer-aidedmathematicalanalysisandinterpretationofdatawouldbeperformed--first using groundtruthto model real data, and then, whenthemodel accurately modelled these conditions, to using hypothetical situations to model adequate aquifer behaviorandspill response.:In1988, Dr. Quinlanhadbegun negotiations to initiate a collaboration with Dr. Shirley Dreiss, a nationally recognized scientist in this aspectofhydrogeologicdataanalysis.ProjectsManyoftheresearch projects that occurred between 1974 and 1989aresummarized in the Superintendent's Annual ResearchReports,and in theCRFAnnual Reports, includingsomeoftheprojectsthatwerenotpartofCRFssponsoredresearch Program.Theworkofthe Drs.Whiteandtheirstudents and coworkersissummarized inWhite(1988) and White andWhite(1989).TheNorthShoreTask Force's effort expanded into scientific research concerning: 1) the distributionofcaves and karst featuresnorthoftheGreenRiver (George, 1973; 1975; 1979), 2)othergeomorphic and paleo-topographic features (George, 1982), 3)thegeologic factors controlling cavern development (George and Schmidt, 1977), and 4) water quality issues (George, 1977). George (1985, 1989)areoverviews summarizing this bodyofwork. Hess (1974), in his Ph.D. dissertation, presentedtheworkthatbothhealone and he and Dr.Whitehad performed intheCentral Kentucky KarstonthefollowingtopiCS:(1) analysisofkarst aquifers from spring hardness hydro graphs, and (2) seasonal variations inthecarbonategeochemistryofthewatersofthe Central Kentucky Karst.Heexamined spring hydrographs to investigatetheflow systemoftheCentral KentuckyKarstandtheseasonal changes in the chemistryofthevarious waters in the area.Floodpulses weremonitoredfor temperature and specific conductance,andvariations were attributed to aquifer storage and back floodingbythe Green River. Hess notedthatwhentheprecipitation input pulse was very sharp and well-defined in time, a considerableamountofresolutionoffinestructurefrom the different local inputs was observed.Thefine structure foundonthehydrographs couldthenbecorrelated with the variousPage30inputs arriving after different time delays. Finally,heconcluded that:(1)thedistinction between the local andtheregional springs, drawn originallyongeologic grounds,isalso manifested inthewater chemistry, (2)thethick soilsoftheSinkhole Plainarethe most significant sourceofCO2inthegroundwater system, and(3)all waterstrendtoward a common levelofundersaturation.Bothvadoseandbase level (shallow phreatic) waters appeared tobeundersaturated mostofthe time. Hess and others (1974) identified81springs along theGreenRiver usingtemperatureand specific conductance measurements. Discharge was estimated for each spring so identified.Thelocationofthese springs became critical forthesuccessofDr. Quinlan's subsequent dye tracing. Dr. Quinlan recognized immediatelyuponhis arrivalatMCNP that a studyofthepollution in Hidden River Cave in Horse Cave, Kentucky, could providenotonly insight intothegroundwater hydrogeologyoftheregion, but would also provide data to justifythecomprehensive researchthatheenvisioned fortheregion. This work wassupportedinpartbytheWaterResources ResearchInstituteattheUniversityofKentucky and by local and regional banks and businesses, and it resulted in the publicationsofQuinlan and Rowe (1977; 1978) and Quinlan and Ray (1981; 1989).Theseresults showedthatheavy-metaL-laden water fromthecave, insteadofgoing to the expectedoneortwo springs, actually appeared at46different springsat15locations along a five-mile (8-km) reachoftheGreenRiver,thefirst documentationofa distributary system in a karst region.By1978, aftermorethan 250 dye traces, Quinlan and Rowe had also partially delineated15groundwater basins intheCentral Kentucky Karst,11ofthem characterized by distributary flow. In 1979, Dr.Quinlandeterminedthateffluent from Park City flowed into portionsofMCS in MCNP through a major drainagetrunkfortheregion,aBdthatflowconditions determined whichroutewas utilized.Underconditionsoflow flow,thewater flowed northwest and then westjustto Cedar Sink and Turnhole Spring viaProctorCave and Logsden River. During moderate flow and flood-flow conditions, however, watertooka high-level overflowroute


Alexanderdownstream from Proctor Cave and also flowed to both Echo River (within the tourist sectionofthe MCS in MCNP) and Sand Cave on Turnhole Bend in MCNP (Quinlan, 1979; Quinlan and others, 1983). This was the second documentation that groundwater flow routes varied with base-flow and flood-flow conditions, and that effluent could cross groundwater drainage divides during flood conditions. Quinlan (1980a; 1982a,b) described: (1) the occurrence and movementofgroundwater in the karst aquiferofthe Central Kentucky Karst, (2) the flowofheavy-metal-laden and creamery-waste effluent through the aquifer, (3) the various tracers utilized, (4) the constructionofa potentiometric-surface map based on water levels in 1,500 wells during'base-Ievel conditions, and (5) the delineationof27groundwater basins within the karst aquifer. in the 740-square-mile (1,900-km2 )area southofthe Green River. These basins were delineatedbyutilizing the resultsofmore than 400 dye traces, 1,500 water-level measurements, and mappingofapproximately 300 miles (480km)ofcave passagesbyCRF, the Central Kentucky Karst Coalition, Dr. Quinlan's research group, the Fisher Ridge Project, and several others.Healso described the beginning of instrumentation efforts infivedifferent cave streams, several springs, and along the Green River to monitor stage, temperature, conductivity, flow velocity, precipitation, and chemical hydrology.Heconcluded that such information would: (1) be valuable for the examinationofaquifer properties, (2) facilitate the predictionofflow rates, and (3) expedite the computer simulationofaquifer behavior under a varietyofconditions. The publicationofQuinlan and Ray (1981; 1989)wasthe initial culminationofwhat Quinlan conceivedasPhase Iofhis research plan. This map delineated the groundwater characteristics in the Central Kentucky Karst. Constructed using techniques described in detail in Quinlan (1981; 1982b), the map showed the poten tiometric surface, i,!ferred groundwa ter flow pa ths (basedontracerflowroutes drawn perpendicular to potentiometric contours), springs, cave passages, and the boundariesof28groundwater basins and seven sub-basins. This map could be used to identify catchment areas that might affect the water qualityofanyofthe springsPage31and cave streams shown. It could alsobeused to predict not only the dispersal routeofany hazardous material that mightbedischarged into the groundorspilled accidentally, but also what water supplies might be adversely affectedbysuch dischargesorspills.Forexample, the map shows that MCNP and the MCS within MCNP could be affectedbyanything that pollutes groundwater in the following basins: the Turnhole Spring, the Echo River, and the Pike Spring groundwater basins, and any associated sub-basins. The map demonstrates that troughs in the potentiometric surface correspond to zonesofmaximum groundwaterflow,and the coincidenceofmajor underground rivers with such troughs in four instances serves to strengthen that conclusion. Finally, this map set a new standard for the mapping and managementofgroundwater drainage basins in karst regions. To our knowledge, it has not yet been equalledbyany other workers in the world. Quinlan and Ewers (1981a,b) and Ewers and Quinlan (1981) synthesized the current stateofknowledgeofthe groundwater hydrologyofthe Central Kentucky Karstbyaddressing the developmentofthe MCS through time. They also described the development and characteristicsofthe largest groundwater drainage basins in the region (Graham Springs, Bear Wallow, and Turnhole Spring). They documented the headward captureofdrainage from one basin to anotherinseveralofthe groundwater drainage basins. Palmer (1975; 1981), contributed valuable information concerning the lithologic and structural controls on the paleoconduits. This information guided Quinlan and Ewers (in their various publicationsof1981) to describe a possible scenario for the developmentofthe currently active groundwater conduit networks. Quinlan and others (1983) added further insight into understanding the groundwater drainage basins and springs in the Central Kentucky Karstbydescribing Waterworks Spring in the Graham Spring groundwater drainage basin, the only known perennial, diffuse-flow spring in the region. Their recommendation for the emphasisoffuture work was "...on interpreting the resultsofinstrumentation to monitor the stage, discharge, and water chemistryofcave streams that drain to the park. This data will be coupled with data from a rain-gauge network and soil-moisture records and variousothercomputer-assisted procedures. Itis


Alexanderexpected to yield a unique understandingofhow groundwater moves within this aquifer andofspecific characteristicsofits individual conduit elements." Palmer (1985) provided a synthesisofthegeologic settingoftheMammothCave Region.Healso presented information concerning-hydrologic controlsofcave patterns, describingthegeneral characteristicsofthe caves basedontheir occurrence: (1) in high-level recharge areas, (2) along major phreatic drainage lines, and (3) at the downstream endsofcatchment areas.Hedescribed the relationshipofthekarst features and caves to the geomorphic developmentoftheMammoth Cave Region, including datesofformationofthevarious vertical levelsofthecave passages. Basedonhis analysisofthelinkage between karst and surficial features, Palmer determined thattheoldest passages in the MCS began forming during the late Tertiary and early Quaternary periods,Hefurther proposed that the Sinkhole Plain also formed duringtheTertiary period. Quinlan and Ewers (1985), was a synthesisofobservations made in the Central Kentucky Karst and elsewhere. It was a major effort to expandthemonitoringofgroundwater in karst terranes into a more standardized, utilitarian procedure. In this paper, they discussed the nature and characteristicsofflow in karst aquifers, and observed that "...springs,ratherthan wells--arethe most logical, efficient, reliable, and economical places to monitor for pollutants in limestone terranes [fromtheabstract]."Theoft-quoted analogy made in thispaperhasdonemuch to convey the perplexingnatureofdesigning a monitoring program in a karst aquifer to someone not familiarorexperienced with such things: "The probabilityofa randomly-drilled monitoring well interceptingthetrunk conduit which drains a groundwater basinissimilar to the probabilityofa dart randomly thrownata wall mapofthe United States hittingtheMississippi River!" This paper's unambiguous and lucid explanationofthe problemsofgroundwater monitoringinkarst terranes made a major changeatthenational level in groundwater monitoring in karst areas. Quinlan and Ewers (1989) was the next major synthesisofthe groundwater data and included not only resultsofthe continuing dye tracing, but also resultsofthe initial information gathered fromtheinstrumentation network. Furthermore, they detailedtheeffectsoftheMay 1984 floodontheTurnholeSpring groundwater basin's flow patterns, which basicallyinvolvedtheshuntingofwater from a once-active spring (TurnboIeSpring) toanadjacent setofsprings that used to drain a separate groundwater basin (Sand house Cave Spring, Stilling Well Spring, Notch Spring, and Knob Spring). This event also affectedtheTurnholeSpring in that, sincetheMay 1984 event, it periodically closes with sediment and re-opens, affectingthestageofbase-level streams in the MCS and elsewherebyas much as 12-35 inches (30-90 em) during a 48-hour period. Hess and White (1989) describedthewater budget and physical hydrologyoftheCentral Kentucky Karst, notingthatbase-level backllooding provides a major sourceofrecharge tothekarst aquifer. Backtlooding was observed to extend to a distance between 0.3 to1.1miles (0.5 and 1.7 km) intotheMCS fromtheGreenRiver. They elaboratedontheobservations made by Hess (1974) concerning storm hydrograph response intheCentral Kentucky Karst aquifer, and noted thatthehydrographs reveal a considerableamountofdetail,induding"...a surprisingamountoffine structure." Aquifer relaxation and storage were examined, and it was determined that aquifer recovery times were approximately two to three weeks fortheTurnholeSpring groundwater basin.Theamountofwater held in temporary storage in this basin was calculated to have been between 663 and 1,080 million frJ (18.8 and 30.6 millionm)respectively for twoseparatestorm events.SignificanceofResearchThesignificanceoftheresearch has been multifaceted, as the research itself has been.Theresearch has proven its value in the protection and managementofMCNP,theMCS, and the Central Kentucky Karst, and has won national and international recognition.Theprinciplesofgroundwater movement in a karst terrane that were discovered during this time are beingllpplied to the protectionofthe manyotherkarst aquifers throughout the U.S. and the world. This applicabilityisalso true for the techniques and technology de veloped to perform the research, and theseareservingasguides forotherresearchersinmany karst areas.Page 32


AlexanderDrs. Quinlan and Ewers were awarded the Geological SocietyofAmerica's 1986 E.B. Burwell,Jr.,Memorial Award for their paper, "Groundwaterflowin limestone terranes: Strategy, rationale and procedure for reliable, efficient monitoringofgroundwater quality in karst areas" (Quinlan and Ewers, 1985). This awardisgiven annually for a published paperofdistinction which advances knowledge concerning the principles and practicesofengineering geology (Beck, 1987).Asapproximately20%ormoreofthe United Statesisunderlainbykarst terrane, the papernotonly impacted research efforts at MCNP and in the NPS, but also nationally (Quinlan, 1989) and internationally.ApplicationsoftheResearchThe applicationsofthe recent research have beenasfollows (quoted directly from Quinlan and Ewers, 1989).1.Designofa $14 million regional sewage-treatment system for MCNP and the townsofHorse Cave, Cave City, and Park City. [Work on this projectishalfway completed, with Park City and MCNP still tobeconnected. ]2.Response to spillsofhazardous materials among Interstate 65 (an averageof1.5per year, described in Quinlan, 1986b).3.[Development of] a strategy for reliable monitoringofpollutants in karst terrains (Quinlan and Ewers, 1985).4.Interpretationofthe geomorphic historyofthe Mammoth Cave area.5.Environmental protection for MCNP.6.Regional planning for solid-waste disposal and concomitant protectionofgroundwater supplies and the blind Kentucky Cave Shrimp, Palaemonias ganteri (Hay), whichisonthe Federal Endangered Species List.ContributionstotheBodyofScientificKnowledgeIn addition to the above, there are four conceptsofgroundwater movement that have been recognized previously inotherkarst terrains, but are now described in the Mammoth Cave Region in more extensive and detailed nature than anywhere else. These are as follows (quoted from Quinlan and Ewers, 1989):1.Distributaryflow.2.Shuntingofwaterbyhigh-level overflow routes [often into adjacent groundwater drainage basins).3.Shared headwaters [of groundwater drainage basins].4.Locationofall major stream caves in troughs on the potentiometric surface and, likewise, associationofall major troughs with axesoftrunk drainage in the subsurface.NewHydrogeologicalConceptsResultingFromNationalParkService-SponsoredResearchThe first concept involves a new technique, rather than a new concept, and has made a significant impact on the practiceofdye tracing in karst terranes. "The Hidden River groundwater sub-basinofthe Bear Wallow groundwater drainage basin was the siteofthe first attempt, in 1977, to use the presenceofoptical brighteners and heavy metals in spring waterasa prospecting tool in the search for effluent from a sewage-treatment plant (Quinlan and Ewers, 1989)."Theremaining concepts represent significant first-discovery situations in the fieldofkarst hydrogeology (quoted directly from Quinlan and Ewers, 1989). They are:1.Deliberate injection in North Americaofoptical brightenerasa tracer.2.ApplicationofCI Direct Yellow96asa tracer (Quinlan, 1977).3.Published maps showing the relations between surface drainage, numerous dye traces, the potentiometric surface, springs, mapped caves, and groundwater basins in a karst terrain (Quinlan and Ray, 1981; 1989).Page33


Alexander4.Useoflow-frequency electromagnetic induction equipment to locate sites for successful drillingofwells tomonitorcave streamsatdepths ranging from 130 to470ft(40mto143m).5.Continuous monitoring for stage, conductivity, velocity, temperature, rainfall,andsoil moistureata genetically related seriesofsites. (Pioneeringworkoncontinuous monitoringofconductivity andtemperatureofa spring and a cave stream, plus stageoftheGreenRiver .... ). [NOTE: This system, designed by Dr.RalphEwers and Dr. Quinlan, is known astheKarst Waters Instrumentation Systemor"KWIS".]6.Thediscoveryofaquifer storage in bedrock in karst aquifers. This discovery was made by interpretationofwater level data from wells drilled into andnearMillHole[oneofthefirst applicationsofdigital data acquisition at MCNP].7.Thestrategyofmonitoringfor pollutants in karst terrainsatsprings and cave streams (begun by Quinlan and Ewers, 1985, 1986a) and continued bythecreationofthe U.S. EnvironmentalProtectionAgency standard guidelines for monitoring in a karst terrain (Quinlan, 1989).OtherBenefitsTheNPS's Southeast Regional Chief Scientist Dr. Dominic Dottavio, and Assistant Regional DirectorRobertDeskinsbothcommentedontheimportanceofa subtle benefitofDr. Quinlan's stay at MCNP (Dottavio, 1991; Deskins, 1991).TheresolutionofDr. Quinlan's 1975 grievance hadanimpactonhow science wasdonethroughouttheentireNPS.OneofDr.Quinlan'sgrievances wasthattheMCNPSuperintendentatthattime would not allow Dr. Quinlan to conduct any research outsideofMCNP boundaries (in accord with NPS management policies in forceatthe time). This policy was enforced even though his position description specifiedthatDr. Quinlan was to extend his research beyond park boundaries, andhecoulddemonstratethatwater and pollutants intheMCS withinMCNPcame from outside MCNP.Theresolutionofthatparticular grievance gave Dr.Quinlanpermission to perform his dye tracing whereverhefelt it was necessary, inotherwords, whereverthewater led him.Thedecision, basedonanopInIOn rendered bytheRegional Solicitor,thatDr.Quinlandid indeed havetheright to perform scientific researchoutsideaparkunitwhen justified became a precedent forotherNPS scientists when theyencounteredmanagers who were similarly opposed to work outsideofparkboundaries.FutureResearchObjectivesDr. Quinlan had planned tocontinuehis research objectives,butinanexpanded form. According toQuinlanandEwers(1989)andpersonalcommunications with Dr.Quinlanin 1989,thehighest-priority researchatthattime was Phase IIofhis research plan:themaintenance andinterpretationofdata fromtheKWISnetwork.Itwas Dr. Quinlan's goal to have 18ormoreKWISinstrumentationpaCkages installed withinonetotwo years in a varietyoflocations to cover different land-use practices, different areal geology, different surficial recharge anddischargecharacteristics,differentaquifercharacteristics such as diffuse-and conduit-flow regimes, andothercategories. A rain-gage network was scheduledtobeinstalled.Theinformationgenerated by these networks would provide specific informationonthe movementofpulsesofwater(and therefore pollutants) throughtheaquifer in response to various environmental conditions (type andamountofprecipitation, stageofboththeGreenRiver and groundwater, hydrogeochemical facies setting. physical and chemicalnatureofthepollutant, etc.).Theseresults would provide invaluable insight intonotonly how this particular aquifer behaves,butalso would providetheinformation necessary to develop specific response protocols and modelling for toxicorotherpollutant spills in the region. Karst aquifers cannot be modelled using standard, porous-mediacomputermethods,andefforts to simulate karst groundwater systemsarestill intheirinfancy.Withoutverified models, groundwater flow velocities and pollutant movements in karst terranesareimpossible to predict.Theinformation providedbyKWIS would give further insightintotheoperative physical processes and would provide necessary data for model calibration and verification. It was Dr. Quinlan's goal to gather a substantial, statislically significant bodyofKWIS data, and then to arrange for others skilled in mathematical interpretationofwaterPage34


Alexanderquality data, such as Dr. Shirley Dreiss, and several modelers to create an accurate computer model for the Central Kentucky Karst. This collaboration could have providednot only the first such simulation and modelofits kind intheworld, but also a management tool without equal for the NPS and the governmentsofthe Central Kentucky Karst in protecting their shared groundwater and cave resources.Ofthe 18 KWIS instrumentation units that had been planned, four had already been installedbyDrs. Quinlan and Ewers, and the parts for muchofthe rest remained in storage, awaiting assembly andinstallation. As willbedetailed inthesection, "The InteractionofNPS Karst Hydrogeologic Research and Management", Dr. Quinlan left the employmentofthe NPS in 1989.AtDr. Quinlan's departure, implementationofhis research plan ceased. Without the KWIS network fully installed and operating, computer modelling to meettheNPS goalofcreating spill response protocols, therefore,isno longer feasible on any reasonable time scaleorwith any reasonable accuracy.1989to1991Theprevious 16 yearsofkarst hydrogeologic research was conceived and implementedbya Research-grade scientist with an extensive education and broad experience who was able to conceive and visualize long-term research needs within MCNP and the surrounding region. In the fallof1988, the Superintendent established a new research structure whichhedirects.Thenew structure was initially titled the OfficeofScience and Resource Management.TheOffice was formally approvedbythe Southeast Regional Office in January 1989 andwaselevated to full Division status in January 1991.TheDivision's activities are planned and executedbyindividuals with B.S.orM.S. degrees and substantially less experience in karst hydrogeology than Dr. Quinlan possessed.Thefour KWIS units installedbyDrs. Quinlan and Ewersarein the field,buttwo are non-functional from storm damage and there are no plans to repair them (Meiman and Ryan, 1991).Thedata set generatedbythe operating units (a stackofcomputer disks approximately two feet tall)isan invaluable data set that, if analyzed, could improve the understandingofhow pulsesofwater and pollutants move through thePage35aquifer system under various conditions. The data disks are stored, unanalyzed, in a file drawer. Data loggers and platinum resistance thermometers have been installed inoneofthe small caves in the park. This cave contains a large colonyofbats andisrecognized to serveasanimportant bat habitat. Partsofa KWIS unitisbeing used to monitor atmospheric conditions. PortionsoftwootherKWIS units are in the MCS on a tourist route, monitoring environmental conditions there, primarily the atmospheric impacts of a food service operation in that partofthe cave.Onecustomized KWIS unit was used for a temporary projectatCumberland Gap National Historical Park in 1990.Thecomponentsofthe restoftheKWIS units are in storageatMCNP. Knowledgeofinstrument installation, design, and programmingofdata loggers and related probes will andisbeing exported tootherpark areas (Meiman and Ryan, 1991).Otherscientists are continuing their research programsatMCNP and in theMammoth Cave Region. Much of this workisnotyet published, but a numberofsummaries can be found in the Annual Reports forCRFfor the years 1989 to 1990.ObjectivesMCNPWaterQuality Monitoring Program: This new program was initiated in 1990, with the intentionofmonitoring water quality in MCNP (Project#MACA-N-020 funded, and MACA-N-021unfunded) (MCNP, 1990; Meiman, 1990a,b). Itisthese programs that are currently the primary thrustofkarst hydrogeological researchatMCNP. MACA-N-020 was designed to determinetheexisting water qualityofthe Green River drainage basin (surface and subsurface) and to monitor trends in base flow and event-related water quality. Included in thisisthe identification of: (1) existing baseflow("chronic") and event-related ("acute") water quality problemsintheGreen River drainage basin, and the potential pollution sources and problems. Partofthe goalsofthe studyisto determine the levelofcompliance with government water quality standards, and to collect data that will assist in the determinationofexisting water quality impacts on the biological, aesthetic, and recreational resourcesofMCNP.


AlexanderIn addition to the water quality monitoring program described in the preceding, delineationofthe primary groundwater basinsonthenorth sideoftheriverisa high priority. Additional instrumentationisto be developed and added tothemonitoring network, and a generalized aquifer vulnerability mapisto be created. Sampling methods willbeevaluated and modifiedasneeded. Also,theprojectisto develop methods for determining whetherornot specific high bacterial "events" are attributable tohumansewage inputs, and to determinesample parameter(s) and analytical methodes) to reliably establish when a public health threat exists. Supplemental to this program willbethe monitoringofherbicides utilizing the same sampling sites and methodologies. These are all valid goals, that echo Dr. Quinlan's research plans, particularly those utilizing the KWIS network.However, the methodology, sampling intervals, and analytical standards will neither meet these goals nor current "industry" standards setbythe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and leading researchers in karst hydrogeology around the country.Forexample, sampling frequenciesofonce a month will not providetheinformation necessary to make detailed and accurate observations concerning this exceptionally dynamic aquifer. These sampling intervals areproneto miss significant events on a regular basis. Hence, the generalized studies proposed will not produce the specific products both proposed and required for resource management and protection (i.e., aquifer vulnerability maps). Without expanding the KWIS network, the event-specific goal cannot be met. MACA-N-021's goals are to further develop methodology that would be effective in pollutant remediation where access to the polluted conduitsispossible. Effective methods to locate additional primary conduits will also be developed and utilized. To further the research plan, adequate access to all known primary conduitsisproposed to be developed and/or secured. Finally, emergency spill-response capability will be developed in MCNP. Quinlan and others (1990) clearly stated doubts that the goalofpoIlution remediation in a karst aquiferasdescribed above could ever be possible.Thegoaloflocating additional primary conduitsisa direct statementofoneofDr. Quinlan's research goals, utilizing the skillsofArthurLange.Thereis an ongoing concern, however, that drilling new entrances into a conduit might enhance the vertical flow into it via the new entranceormonitoring weIls.Current ProjectsThedelineationofgroundwater basinsonthe north sideoftheGreenRiverisa project that Dr. Quinlan estimated was approximately 70% complete in early 1989 (Quinlan and Ewers, 1989, p. 66). This information was obtained to construct a regional-scale map, to compliment the Quinlan and Ray (1981; 1989) maps. A draft manuscriptofthat map exists and has been sent to MCNP (Quinlan, private communication, 1992). However, littleofthat tracing was done inside MCNP northoftheGreenRiver. Between March 1990 and January 1992, MCNP staff have conducted over 65 traces designed to delineatethegroundwater basins northofthe Green River, inside MCNP (Ryan, 1991, 1992; Meiman and Ryan, 1991). This major effortiscontinuing. Another emphasisofthe current research programistechnology development. Ryan's (1991a, 1991b) developmentofa submersible, filter fluorometer instrumentation to allow continuous, quantitative monitoringofdye pulsesisa noteworthy effort. This will aid in the dye tracing activities northofthe river andotherdye tracing activities southofthe river.Thedye tracing efforts that resulted in Quinlan and Ray's (1981; 1989) maps was qualitative, with limited time resolution. Ryan's (1991a, 1991b) initial results demonstrate that quantitative tracing with KWIS-based, continuous data acquisition represents a significant new stepinunderstanding the conduit systemsofMCNP.Thefinal research program in karst hydrogeology,asidentifiedbythe Park Hydrologist (Meiman and Ryan, 1991),isto document the flow reversals between the River Styx and Echo River basedonGreen River .Stage. Thisisconsidered to be a partofthe emphasisonemergency spill response. This phenomenon has been documented in reasonable detail in Quinlan and Ewers (1981a), but it will be useful to knowatwhat stageofthe Green River that overflow occurs into Echo River.Page36


AlexanderA related research emphasison"bio-monitoring"isdescribed in MACA-N-020 and 021. Bio-monitoringisdefined tobethe identification and studyoffauna both withinthebase-level riversofthe MCS and the Green River thataresensitive to various pollutants and which, therefore, maybeindicatorsofthe presenceofthat pollutantbypopulation changesorcomplete disappearancesofthe species.Itisa highly useful and validated However, bio-monitoring researchatMCNP was initiated 30 years ago and continues currently in the scientiRc studiesbyboth Dr. Thomas Poulson and his graduate students and Dr. Julian Lewis, and has been copiously reportedonin print. A summary maybefound in Poulson (1990) and Lewis (1990). Thisisa funded project, but the absenceofany reference to this relevant background material raises a concern about the current park staffs lackofknowledgeofpre-existing and/or ongoing research in pertinent research fields.SignificanceofCurrent ResearchItistoo early to evaluate the ultimate impactofthe current research, because itisongoing and only time will show how valuable it will prove to be. Muchofthe current researchisfocusedonwhat are perceived tobeimmediate management concerns, but useful results are beginning to appear .at appropriate professional meetings (Meiman, 1990a,b; 1992; Ryan, 1991, 1992). However, the change in emphasis from long-term research conceived by a highly qualified setofscientists to short-term research conceived in large partbythe park Superintendent and two scientists with far less experience raises concerns about the long-term significanceofthe current research.4THEIMPACfOFRESEARCHONNATIONALPARKSERVICEMANAGEMENTScientific research and long-term resource monitoring have profoundly affected the management and managersofMCNP. Research has totally changed the boundary conditionsofthe management task facing the Superintendent. In the 1960s, it was possible for the Superintendent to believe that the restofthe region had no affectonthe Park. Therefore, the Superintendent was able to manage in isolation what many assumed to be a nondescript show cave in Central Kentucky. In the 1990s, however, the MCNP Superintendent faces the daunting taskofadministering a National Park that has the following attributes and management challenges. (1) Itisa world-class resource thatispartofthe longest and best-documented cave system in the world. (2) It contains unique, rare, and threatened biota. (3) Itisbeing profoundly impactedbyNPS activities, concessionaire operations, visitors, and human activities in the region outsideofthe Park. In addition, researchers have shown that manyofthe technical and regulatory tools usedbysociety to manage resources are not effective in karst regions. Finally, the resultsofscientific research often seem toPage37change the rules with new discoveries faster than the managers can assimilate and react.Asa resultofthese new boundary conditions, the Superintendent has only a limited ability to "preserve and protect" the resource heorsheischarged to manage. The reactionsofthe individual Superintendents to the research performed at MCNP, the MCS, andinthe Mammoth Cave Region have depended upon their individual skills, philosophy, and management style. Although noneofthe MCNP thus far have had a scientific background, two MCNP Superintendents, Amos Hawkins and Robert Deskins, both recognized the valueofthe research being done both prior to and during their tenures. These men maximized the resultsofthis researchbyinitiating and then solidifying a regional partnership in the Central Kentucky Karst. The research, and specifically the dye tracing, performedbyDr. Quinlan demonstrated clearly the need for a regional sewage treatment project to protect the groundwater resources and, hence, the caves,ofboth the region and MCNP. This resultedinthe creation and developmentofthe Caveland SanitationAuthority (CSA), a regional sewage treatment authority designed to serve Horse Cave, Cave City, Park City, and MCNP.Thesystem for Horse Cave and Cave City was completed in 1989.


AlexanderNeither MCNP nor Park City, the primary sourceofpollution for the MCS within MCNP, have been hooked into the system yet. Detailsofthis cost-sharing partnership may be found in Mikulak (1988). The successesofthese two individual Superintendents demonstrate that productive partnerships between management and scientific research are possible within the NPS.Inboth cases, the Superintendents did not try to manage the research. Rather, they allowed the scientists involved to manage the detailsofthe scientific research, and the Superintendents only managed the administrative details. They used the scientific results as a basis for innovative management of the resourcebyseekingoutthe best available scientific information from their own and outside sources. They welcomed that information and assimilated it into their management decisions. Finally, they forged effective partnershipsbyenlisting the participationofscientists and other skilled professionals in their management teams. The successesofMr. Hawkins and Mr. Deskins can be measured in the increased prestige and valueofMCNP at the local, regional, national, and international levels. The attempt to relocate the MCNP headquarters buildings and visitor center onto Joppa Ridgeisa specific illustrationofthe use of scientific research results in complex management decisions. Since the dedicationofthe visitor center and headquarters complex in 1966, visitors have been concentrated at these facilities, which are located near the Historic Entrance to the MCS and directly above the cave itself. According to the General Management Plan (MCNP, 1983,, "from 1965 to 1975, the Historic Entrance areawasheavily congested with cars and people throughout the summer season and on peak traveldaysinspring and fall. In an attempt to relieve congestion occurring at that time, the 1976 Master Plan evaluated several alternative solutions. Based on existing conditions and available information, a preferred alternative was selected that proposed developing a staging area at the peripheryofthe park near Union City [on Joppa Ridge]. In concept, this staging area would concentrate parking and basic visitor services in a less fragile areaofthe parkawayfrom the entrances to the primary cave system[Le.,the MCS]." However, the discoveryofLogsdon/Hawkins River underneath Joppa Ridge in 1979, demonstrated that a major cave system lay beneath the proposed staging area. Both Roger Brucker and Bob Deskins (personal communications, 1991) stated that in 1979, Dr. Quinlan had proposed keeping the visitors center and headquarters complex near the Historic Entrance in the downstream portionofthegroundwater basin. Relocating the staging area to Joppa Ridge would have moved it into the upstream portionofthe groundwater basin. Pollution associated with the staging area would then affect a larger sectionofthe cave system.Ifpollution occurred, it would be better to have it occur closer to the Green River, thereby minimizing the travel distance through the cave and impact on the cave system. In lightofthe difficulties identifiedbyresearch, the conceptofa staging areaonJoppa Ridgewasremoved from the 1983 General Management Plan. The new cave discoveries and a drop in visitation were citedasthe reasons for the change.The1983 General Management Planwasdevelopedbyan NPS pla,nning team from the park, region, and Denver Service Center (DSC). The planning team captain wasW.Drew Chick, Jr.,ofDSC. Mr. Deskins was a team member and,asSuperintendent, the Recommending Official. In contrast to the successes,otherSuperintendents were disinterestedorhostile to research performedbyvarious groups at MCNP. In the absenceofproductive partnerships, researchwasoften done in spiteofpark management. When the park management did utilize research results, they were not utilized asfully as the various researchers involved would have preferred. Dr. Quinlan, for example, often had to perform his research in the face of NPS management support that ranged from minimal to hostile. This situation existed with the current Superintendent, who occupied this position prior to and during the time when Dr. Quinlan resigned.Onthe other hand, this Superintendentissupportive of the current activitiesofthe DivisionofScience and Resource Management (which he created). The Division Chief and the Division employees are generally satisfied with management support, though they are continually faced with less funding than they would like and feel they need.Page38


AlexanderA MCNP management stratagem employedbyseveral Superintendents has been to try to ignore the research results.Forexample,CRFwould often approach a MCNP Superintendent with information in the formofcave maps producedbytheir cartographic program andtheSuperintendent would expressly tell theCRFmembers thathedidnotwant to know--healready knew more thanhecared to about the cave.OneSuperintendent early inthehistoryofCRFsinvolvementatMCNP toldCRFthat he would justaswell prefertohave "the damn entrances blown shut" (Roger Brucker, 1991).Anotherexample involves the pretense that the cave doesnotextend beyond the park boundaries, which allowed park management to avoid confronting the controversial land acquisition issue for several decades. However, this pretenseisno longer viable. In the current Resource Management Plan (MCNP, 1990), Project #MACA-N-052 (proposed but unfunded) involves developmentofspecific strategies to protect external cave resources (Le., those that lie outsideofMCNP boundariesbutare integrated partsofthe MCS). This project represents an attempt to begin addressing the land acquisition issue. NPS managementisacknowledging that many milesofthe MCS and several entrances are in unacquired lands that lie withintheoriginally authorized boundary.Thepresent Land Protection Plan does not address this issue.TheSoutheast Regional Office, citing the policyoftheSecretaryofthe Interior to only address "perceived inholdings", deleted the park's proposal to include this issue in the Land Protection Plan. Althoughtheenabling legislation for MCNP indicatesthatthelegislative intent was to protect "all the caves," several cave systems that are now connected with the MCS lie outside the authorized boundary. MACA-N-052's recommended actionisstatedasfollows. "The Land Protection Plan should be updated to propose acquisitionofappropriate interests to insure the protectionofallofthe lands withintheauthorized boundaryofMCNP and those interests should be acquired.This action would complete the intent explicitly expressedbyCongress in establishing the park, and would provide for protectionofperhaps more than 100 milesofcurrently unprotectedPage39[sections of)theMCS, several cave entrances, and a relict plant community.... Additionally, alternatives for appropriate protectionofthe portionsofthe MCS that lie outsideofthe authorized bounaaries shouldbedeveloped." Management has recognized that it cannotprotect that which it was mandated to protect, and has decided to pursue additional land acquisition to fulfill its mandate. (MACA-N-052's proposed budgetis$4 million over four years.) Such attempts will increase the local conflicts for MCNP and the NPS, because the human infrastructure surrounding MCNP has significantly expanded in the years since Mammoth Cave became partofthe National Park System.Theultimate resolutionofthese plans willbemore financially and politically expensive than it would have been in earlier decades.Theignore-the-research management approaCh can succeed for the Superintendent if heorsheisrotated to a new position before any detrimental effects revealedbythe research have an impact on the resource. This approach fails forthePark, however, because it leads to reversalsofmanagement decisions, squanders valuable time and resources, and allows others, usually non-NPS personnel, to. manipulate the park to their advantage.TheNPS often expends its limited resources repeatingtheresearchofother(previousand/orcontemporaneous) workers. Several proposed and/or active NPS research projectsatMCNP will repeat the research that has been donebyindividual scientists, volunteer organizations, Dr. Quinlan, and researchers withotheragencies and industry. MCNP management appearstolack interest inorknowledgeofmany non NPS research projects conducted in the Park. Muchofthis outside scientific expertiseisreadily available to the NPS management for littleorno cost. During an interview in July 1991, Roger Brucker stated an excellent summaryofthe interactionsofscientific research and management thatisworth repeating here.Hefelt the resources at MCNP and in the MCS were an excellent metaphor for the difficultyofscience and management interactions because "allofitisunderground and remains hidden from view most of the time," whichisthe "central


Alexanderofthese particular resources. Inotherwords, science/management interactions are more susceptible to conflict becauseoutofsight,outofmind if you can't see the impact, it, in fact, doesn't exist.5 TIlE IMPACTOFNATIONAL PARK SERVICE MANAGEMENT ON RESEARCHSome impactsofNPS managementonlong-term scientific research and monitoring have been positive, however, the impacts have often been negative. Arguably, the most positive impact was the original decision to hire a Research Geologist at MCNP. While the Research Geologist produced the outstanding scientific results outlined above, he also was the centeroftwo long-term disputes with NPS management. This conflict between Superintendents and the Research Geologist appears tobea fundamental consequenceofthe current NPS management structure and recurs at a varietyofscales and intensities. Someofthe particularsofthis conflict at MCNP are reviewed below to illustrate the pitfalls associated with the current management structure that does not naturally produce the continuity requiredbylong-term research, and to help identify solutions that will encourage successful long-term monitoring and scientific studies in the NPS. TIlE CREATIONOF TIlE RESEARCH GEOLOGIST POSITIONAccording to NPS Assistant Southeast Regional Director Robert Deskins (personal communication, 1991), the MCNP Research Geologist position resulted from discussions between the MCNP Superintendent, the Chief Naturalist, and himself, then MCNP's Assistant Superintendent. These meetings began in 1972 becauseofpark management's recognitionofthe need for scientific research to facilitate and improve resource management within the park. The decision reached in these meetings was to create a Research Geologist position.Theposition itself and the funding for it, however, have always come from the Southeast Regional Office. According to the position description (Quinlan, 1975), the Research Geologistwasto be supervised in the following manner. ...receives general administrative supervision from the Superintendent, GS-14, but has wide latitude for professional independent judgment and action. Plans, executes, and evaluates research independently, [emphasis added] sUbjecttomanagementreviewby Superintendent and Regional Director. Exercises initiative and assumes responsibilities with limited technical supervision from Regional Scientist. Maintains close functional ties with the Regional Chief Scientist, Southeast Regional Office." Three candidates applied for the position, two NPS employees and one geologist from outsideofthe NPS, James F. Quinlan. Before making his final selection, the MCNP Superintendent solicited the review and inputofthe scientific staffofCRF.CRFoffered the opinion that James Quinlan was the best qualified candidateofthe three for the position (Sides, personal communication, 1991).Hewas offered the position in late 1972. However, due to personnel ceilings .and a hiring freeze, he was not officially hired until July 26, 1973. [James Quinlan had completed all but the thesis requirements for his Ph.D. and had finished a three year post-doctoral research appointment before he began to work at MCNP. However, his thesis was not finally completed and his Ph.D. granted until 1978.] TIlE TENURE OF TIlE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE RESEARCH GEOLOGISTDr. Quinlan's initial grade was aGS-ll(subject to furlough).Hereported directly to two individuals: (1) the MCNP Assistant Superintendent (GS-13), who was his administrative supervisor, and (2) the Regional Chief Scientist, who acted as his technical and scientific supervisor. Dr. Quinlan (1991) quickly realized the regional natureofthe groundwater and cave resources, but MCNPSuperintendentJosephKulesza(G-S-14) (Superintendent from 1970 to 1976) constrained him toPage40


Alexanderperform research only within the boundariesofMCNP. This wasthesame constraint thatCRFworked underatthis time in their investigations and mapping in the MCS and was consistent with NPS management policies in forceatthat time.Therewereotheradministrative needs for science that management was unresponsive to according to Dr. Quinlan. These conflicts escalated into a formal grievance (Quinlan, 1975) against MCNP Superintendent Kulesza. In addition to the Superintendent'S refusal to allow research outsideofpark boundaries,othermajor grievances involved what Quinlan (1975) felt were instancesofcensorship and suppressionofscientific reports by the Superintendent, cases where Quinlan was forbidden to and prevented from contacting the Regional Chief Scientist, difficulties in accommodating the flexible schedule requiredbythe research, etc.TheRegional Chief Scientist, Dr. Ray Herrmann, supported Quinlan's (1975) grievance and Quinlan believed -thathewon 99%ofit. In the resolution, he was assigned totheUplands Research Laboratory at Great Smoky Mountains National Park, with his work locationatMCNP. His direct supervisor became the Regional Chief Scientist, who also was to review research objectives with Dr. Quinlan. Only general administrative supervision was providedbythe MCNP Superintendent. Dr. Quinlan was thus able to independently develop and conduct the research program within the limitationsofthe resources made available (Quinlan, 1986a).Thereisdisagreement on the formatofthe grievance resolution, however. Mr. Deskins (personal communication, 1991) believes that the resolutionwasinformal andnotwritten. Conversely, Dr. Quinlan (1991) believes that there was a formal, written resolution,buteffortsbyDr. Quinlan, Mr. Deskins, andtheauthors to obtain a copyofthis document have been unsuccessful. This lackofclarity concerning the natureoftheresolution has plagued the relationship between Dr. Quinlan and the NPS since 1975. Dr. Quinlan filed his grievance against Superintendent Kulesza. According to Mr. Deskins (personal communications, 1991), once Superintendent Kulesza left MCNP in 1976 and a new Superintendent, Amos Hawkins, took over, direct supervisory controlofDr. Quinlan returned to the MCNP Superintendent andPage41remained there until Dr. Quinlan received a second grade promotion in 1986 (his first grade promotionwasin 1979). This change in supervision, Mr. Deskins believes, was primarily a resultofpersonnel ceilings imposed within the Regional office during the administrationofPresident Jimmy Carter (1976-1980). President Carter was committed to decentralizing government, and so regional office staffs were cut and parkunit staffs were increased. When Superintendent Hawkins was transferredin1979,RobertDeskins became MCNP Superintendent.PresidentReagan(1980-1988)droppedthe decentralization policyofPresident Carter. At that point, Dr. Quinlan could have been transferred back to the supervisionofthe Southeast Regional Office and the Chief Scientist, hadhefiled for such action. However, during the tenuresofMCNPSuperintendents Hawkins (1976-1979), Deskins (1979-1985), and Pridemore (1985-1988),thevalueofDr. Quinlan's researchwasrecognized and the peculiarities of his schedule and work were understood and/or tolerated. This minimized the conflicts between Dr. Quillian and these park Superintendents, andhedid not feel the need to invokethe1975 grievance resolution.Hecontinued to operate with the belief that the1975resolution was in effect. Duringthetenuresofthese three Superintendents, Dr. Quinlan continually received extremely high ratings for his annual performance reviews (Level I--Farexceeded all performance standards on a sustained basis). In 1986, Dr. Quinlan was evaluated for promotionbyan independent panelofscientists (standard procedure for a Research-Grade appOintment).Thepanel recommended promotion, and Dr. Quinlanwasupgraded to a GS 13/5. According to the position description for the Research Geologist (GS-1350-12), Dr. Quinlan's supervisor was once again the NPS Southeast Region's Chief Scientist, though the MCNP Superintendent provided general administrative supervision.Thesubsequent historyofDr. Quinlan's supervisionisunclear butiscritical in the subsequent events. According to Mr. Deskins (1991), sometime during 1986 after his promotion, Dr. Quinlan's supervisor once again became the MCNP Superintendent. Mr. Deskins recalls that this occurredasthe resultof


Alexanderpersonnel ceilings imposed in the Regional Office. In contrast, Dr. Gary Hendrix (personal communication, 1992) remembers that when he was transferred totheSoutheast Regional Office in 1989oneofhis first assignments was tobeDr. Quinlan's supervisor.Asthe resultofthis ambiguity in Dr. Quinlan's supervision, when the current MCNP Superintendent took over in 1988,thestage was set for a conf1ict that would ultimately result in Dr. Quinlan's resignation. Both individuals have strong personalities and both agree that personality conflicts played a major rolein.manyoftheir difficulties. "Quite frankly I tried to fire him. We had tremendous personal problems." (Mihalic, 1991). Dr. Quinlan believed thathewas still directly supervisedbythe NPS Southeast Region's Chief Scientist,notthe MCNP Superintendent.TheSuperintendent, however, believed that he was Dr. Quinlan's direct supervisor.TheRegional Chief Scientist didnotsupportDr. Quinlan's position and the Superintendent's beliefs prevailed. Several individuals interviewedbythe authors in during the summerof1991agreed withthespeculation that another contributing factor to the escalating dispute might have been Dr. Quinlan's grade (GS-14/5 in 1989) relative to the Superintendent's grade. The current Superintendent decided that Dr. Quinlan should be restricted to working regular hours in the office, and believed that Dr. Quinlan was not performing the typeofwater quality research that had been funded.TheSuperintendent perceived the KWIS-based research to be more dye tracing research, what the Superintendent calls conduit research (i.e., where water flows in the region)..Hequestioned Dr. Quinlan's managementofhis staff, and a numberofotheradministrative issues that had been raised during Quinlan's 1975 grievance re-emerged. ...He'dbeen operating for fifteen to twenty years doing what...he thought was right. I came in and I said: 'We can no longer gointhis direction. We have to go over here and do these typesofthings.'...Hewas reluctant to do this" (Mihalic, 1991). A contributing factor to the dispute appears to be the current Superintendent's lackofknowledgeofnot only the scientific researchthathad beendonein the Park,butalsothescientific researchthatDr. Quinlan was performing and would have continued to perform. Despite repeated invitations, the Superintendent never agreed to spend a day in the field with Dr. Quinlan to review the groundwater hydrogeologyofthe region-an opportunity that each preceding Superintendent had taken advantage of.TheSuperintendent never saw first-hand what actually constituted Dr. Quinlan's research.TheSuperintendent incorrectly characterized Dr. Quinlan's research as conduit research,notwater quality research, which, in the Superintendent's view, contributednothing to understanding how pollutants move throughthesystem (Mihalic, 1991).TheSuperintendent believed that Dr. Quinlan possibly was misdirecting his water quality grants to some inappropriate categoryofresearch. This clashofscience and management perceptions led to the endofDr. Quinlan's researchatMCNP. Dr. Quinlan's tenure at MCNP was traumatic for both MCNP management and Dr. Quinlan.Fromthe beginning, MCNP had no experience managing a scientific research project. No provision had been made to provide the Research Geologist's position with a research budget that was bothadequate and could expand as needed. No equipmentorsupplies existed until Dr. Quinlan obtained outside grants, from local banks, the CommonwealthofKentucky, and the UniverSityofKentucky.TheNPS funds that were eventually made available came from Regional and National NPS sources and programs. Dr. Quinlan's schedule, demeanor, personal philosophy, and strengthofconviction, clashed with the employee qualities acceptable to the NPS.Asthe clashofwills between Dr. Quinlan and the Superintendent intensified, the Superintendent filed a civil service adverse action against Dr. Quinlan. Dr. Quinlan filed a grievance.TheRegional Chief Scientist proposed a compromise that would have transferred Dr. Quinlantoa Cooperative Park Study Unit (CPSU) at the UniversityofTennessee in Knoxville. Dr. Quinlan called this the Geologist-in exile option. Another NPS scientist offered a blunter characterization: "Had Quinlan accepted a transfer to the CPSU in Knoxville, he would never have Page42


Alexanderhas allowed to set foot in MCNP again." In the absenceofsupportfrom. the Regional Chief Scientist, Dr. Quinlan decided that his only option was to resign from the NPS andhedid so in 1989.OTHERSCIENTIFIC RESEARCH INTHEMAMMOrnCA VBREGIONThecurrent Superintendent's philosophy concerningthemost appropriate managementofscientific research hasnotbeenrestrictedtoDr. Quinlan.Anearly indicationofthe relationship to comewaswhen this new Superintendent refused to go into the MCS withCRFupon his arrivalatMCNP.CRFhas made such an offer to each new Superintendent, andthecurrent Superintendentisthe onlyoneto have declined. Several past MCNP Superintendents, Assistant Superintendents,orAdministrative Assistants have participated in regular work trips withCRFinto the MCS. This refusal to viewCRFson-going research was consistent with the current Superintendent's refusal to go into the field with Dr. Quinlan.Anexampleoftheinteraction between volunteers and this management philosophyisillustratedbythe current Superintendent's comments about Dr. Patty Jo Watson,aninternationally renowned archaeologist (Mihalic, 1991). "Patty Jo Watsonisan archaeologist, so she's doing the archaeology that she's interested in,butshe's not necessarily doing the archaeology that the NationalParkServiceisinterested in .... When asked if MCNP had ever provided a listofarchaeologicalresearchneeds to Professor Watson,theSuperintendent responded, "Tomyknowledge, we have not."Thecurrent Superintendent made similar comments abouttheworkofDr. Poulson (1990). A different sortofexampleofNPS management's impactonlong-term scientific research and monitoringatMCNP was recently describedbyHagan and Sutton (1991) and Dr. Julian Lewis (personal communication, 1991)ofthe UniversityofLouisville and a long-time researcher in the MCS. Recently, the MCNP Resource Manager undertook efforts to clean up and restore partsofthe MCS.TheResource Manager contacted Dr. Lewis about a site he was studying in a remote sectionoftheMCS within MCNP. Dr. Lewis had chosen this areaasa research site in the early19805for a long-term study to document and observe the dynamicsofits ecosystem, which was based on thePage43wood remainsofold tourist trails. Dr. Lewiswassecure in the knowledge that it was in a remote location in a cave in a national park where therewasno chanceofthe habitat being disturbed.TheResource Manager, knowingofDr. Lewis's research, requested Dr. Lewis's opinion regarding whether the site was a candidate for restoration. Dr. Lewis advised the Resource Manager that the area shouldnotberestored since: (1)thearea was only seenbyexplorers withCRFand afewtourists on NPS wild-cave trips, (2) the area offered a valuable opportunity for research not often available in the MCS, and (3) Dr. Lewis had already invested several yearsoftime and money, and he planned to continue this research.TheResource Manager asked Dr. Lewis toputhis response in a written memprandum to the park and to post a signatthe entrance to the area stating it was a scientific research area and should not be enteredorotherwise disturbed. Dr. Lewis immediately complied with both requests. Several months later, aCRFcrew workinginthe vicinity discovered that the area had been restored, and they notified Dr. Lewis.Theremovalofthe wood and the severe trammellingofthe area destroyed that local biological community and, therefore, Dr. Lewis's research. In addition to the individual examples described above, the fundamental natureofthe NPS constrains the rangeofscientific research done and scientists who are willing to workatMCNP.TheNPSisa large, governmental bureaucracy administeredbya military line-and-staff organization which has promulgated numerous rules and regulations regarding the resourcesofMCNP. Some individuals choose not to deal with this system and MCNP looses the potential contributionsofsuch individuals.Otherindividuals and organizations successfully adapt their programs and activities to the NPS system.Forexample, to obtain its MemorandumofAgreement


Alexander with theNPS,theCRFadopted a highly-structured, military-like organization and discipline.CRFsgrowth, long-term stability, successful exploration and mapping programs, and itssupportofscientific studies demonstratetheutilityoftheir approach.ThesuccessofCRF, however, led to a misperceptionbysome that cave exploration, mapping and to a lesser extent scientific research intheMCNP portionoftheMCS could only be performed undertheauspicesofCRF.Thatperception was andisincorrect, particularly for scientific research.Theoptionofperforming scientific research at MCNP withoutCRFshelp has always existed and several individuals and organizations havedoneso. A combinationofapproachesisalso possible.Oneoftheauthors (EKE), Angelo George, and others, have performed research in MCNPbothwithCRFsassistance and strictly throughtheNPS regulatory system.Oneofus (ECA) notes, however,thatthemisperception exists and has contributed to personal decisions by some scientists to conduct their karst hydrogeologic research elsewhere.6THEFUTUREWHATISGOODFORTHEREGIONAL SYMBIOSIS? RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCHThe importanceofscientific research at MCNP should be clearly understood to define andsupportrecommendations for future work.Therearetwo definable,butultimately overlapping, categoriesofresearch which augment National Park functions: long term (usually basic) research, and short-term (usually applied) research. Basic research helps to definethenatureoftheNationalParkresource andthesystems which doormay impacttheresource. Applied research helps determine thestateoftheresource with respect to recognized impacts,orinresponse to plans for development, both internal and external to the park. Basic research studies may require yearsordecades to complete given the complexityofnatural systems,thephysical dimensions involved inthe parks, and the necessityofexamining time variationsofnatural phenomena and processes. Indeed, successive discoveries as basic research proceeds invariably necessitate additional studies.Thebasic research activity itself, andtheexpertise engenderedbythe pursuitofbasic research, are invaluable in designing and carryingoutapplied research to understand and solve applied problems.Tothe extent that we develop an improved understandingofthegeneral processes acting, and produce a clearer pictureofthe National Park resource, we are able to findbettersolution to practical problems. Applied research programs mustbetimely and responsive totheimmediate needsoftheparkandthepark managers. While it wouldbeshortsighted to let applied research needs disruptthecontinuityoflong term research, itisessential tothewell-beingofthepark that resources (including staff time)beallocated to practical problems when they arise.Thereisanotherconsideration in promoting scientific research in National Parks. They represent, to a large extent, relatively pristine areas andareinvaluable resources for basic studiesoftheregional, national, and global environment. Even in those parks most strongly affectedbyhuman activities,thecurrentstateofrestricted development and cultural changeisan invaluable resource for environmental investigation.Thevery actofpreservation produces a significant scientific resource. This aspectofnational parks is recognized world-wide. With this background in mind, and considering the historyofscientific activity at MCNP outlined above, we would like to make recommendations for future research at MCNP. Theserecommendations fall into two areas: a general policy approach to support scientific research in the park, and specific recom mendations for research areas which we think will provide knowledgeofbenefit tothepark andsupportthe objective to preserve and protect the resource. History shows that long-term research programs can exist at MCNP,butalso reveals that these activities can be seriously impactedbymisunderstanding, lackofPage44


Alexandercommunication, and even a lackofknowledge. Allofthese problems can be overcome,buttheir probable origins shouldberecognizediftheyaretobeminimized.Themanagement structureoftheNPSiscertainly a factor which exacerbates these problems.TherotationofParkSuperintendents has a sound management basis, which we donotcriticize. However, the growing importanceofscientific research,bothfor purposesofpark management and intheuseofNational Park environments forbroaderscientific discovery, places a newSuperintendentin a difficult position with respect to a professional NPS staff scientist with many yearsofexperienceata given park. A new Superintendent, who has responsibility and authority, will typically have less factual knowledgeaboutthepark resource than mostofthepermanentstaff. This situationislikely tobeevenmoreprofound with respect to technical scientific information held by a senior-level scientist. This canbe(orlead to) a highly uncomfortable situation forboththenew Superintendent and forthepark scientists.Itisclearly intheinterestoftheNPS to develop an appreciationofthis problem among its senior personnel inbothmanagement and staff lines, and to develop andpromoteprocedures to overcometheimplicit difficulties.Oneapproach we specifically and strongly precludeisrotationofscientific personnel. Scientific understandingofnatural systemsistime-consuming. Ongoing research in National Parks wouldbeadversely affectedbychangingthepersonnel directly responsible for carryingouttheresearch. Even if mostoralloftheresearchisbyexternal (volunteer) researchers, withtheparkscientist inanoversight role, rotating park scientists will lowertheefficiencyoftheresearchoperationif a new scientist has to get up to speed after each transfer.Itisprobably essential to the successofresearch in a park to have the NPS scientist actively involved. Perhaps amoreimportant reason for not rotating park scientistsistheir value as partofthe park resource which inevitably results from many yearsofactive research in a park.TherolesofSuperintendentand park scientist are, ideally, complementary.TheSuperintendent has amoredisinterested managerial pOSition andthepark scientist develops the essential depthofknowledge basedonlong experience with the park.Thechallengeisto find a mechanism to bring these two views together in a harmonious partnerShip that benefits the park. This suggestion obviously applies to all National Parks, not just MCNP. Based on a considerationofthelong recognized special hydrogeological regime atMCNPwe can make specific recommendations regarding future research in the park.Thetremendousamountofresearch accomplished inthelastfewdecades had helped provide the basis not only for practical responses to problems in and around the park,butforthedesignoffuture research programs. In particular,thehydrogeologic work has definedtheboundariesofthegroundwater drainage basins andthedynamicnatureofthe groundwater system. Basedonthat knowledge, and with the goalofproviding information useful in managementofthe park,therearethreemajor research programs we can suggest:1.Inorderto understandmorefully the natural variation in water chemistry and discharge (and the relationships between chemistry and discharge) itisessential to gather comprehensive data at major points in the hydrologic system. Itisessential to gather that data with a time-resolutionofsamplingthatisshort compared to the variations in these systems.Thewater quality and quantity changes significantlyontime scalesofminutes to hours in MCNP. Automatic data gathering systems such as the KWIS instrumentation which was being installed in 1988 and 1989 provide preciselythekindofinformation necessary for a complete understandingofchemistryofthe hydrologic system at MCNP. It makes sense to restart and complete the KWIS program, and begin analysisofthis important data set.2.Asanalysisofthe data collected above proceeds it will become possible to produce modelsofthe groundwater now systems at MCNP.Itisimportanttobegin this modelling effort for two reasons. First, itisan exceptional opportunity to develop and refine the first well-constrained hydrologic model for a karst system anywhere. Such a model will represent the kindofbasic scientific effort at MCNP which will contribute to a general understandingofa significant scientific problem. Second, a functional geohydrologic modelofMCNP will provide potentially the most important tool in any plan for emergency response to pollution events,Page 45


Alexandersuchasa surface spill.Itmay also provide the basis for responding to unusual meteorological events whichmayresult in flood surges capableofendangering visitors in the cave and/or to park infrastructure.Such.a model wouldbeinvaluable to evaluatetheimpactsoffuture surface and subsurface developments anywhere in the drainage basins.3.A biologic/biomonitoring research and monitoring program maybevital to the long-term healthofthe MCS. Using the data collected over the past twenty yearsorso, it should be possible to develop a biomonitoring program which can detect subtle changes inthesubsurface environment.Anongoing biomonitoring program also prese.nts the opportunitytoinvestigatenaturalchangesinthemicroenvironmentsofthecave through examinationofbiologic changes. Intheprocessitshould also be possible to define especially secure partsofthe underground biosphere which may serveasrefuges for species preservation, from which restockingofdamaged environment could take place following possible future destructive events. These three programs shouldbecoordinated withoneanother.Bylisting these particular research programs,wedo not wish to imply that they are the only ones important enough for NPS attention, rather that they are the logical extensionsofprevious research efforts, and will likely provide the most immediately useful data for managing the resource at MCNP.AGENDAS The Local Symbiont LevelDuringourinterviews with various citizensofthe Mammoth Cave region, a numberofthemesoragendas repeatedly emerged (Austin and Austin, 1991; Gunn, 1991; Kelley, 1991). This local agenda can be summarizedasa setofquestions:1.Will a fully implemented CSA truly preserve the MCS and the groundwater resourcesbyreducing pollution? Since CSA can't service every sinkhole thatisreceiving waste on the Sinkhole Plain,isthe regional sewage plan going to work? Was allofthis worth it?2.NPS scientists tend to talk over everybody's heads. Would the NPS please translate existing scientific research resultsatMCNP into lay terms for the local citizens? What has NPS research discovered that may be helpful tothelocal area noworinthefuture?Thereneeds tobecontinual and on-gOing communication concerning this.3.Will the NPS continue to provide technical support to CSA and the region? Suchsupporthasbeena great help.4.May the local region make research requestsoftheNPS to assist in joint issues?5.Would the NPS consider creating a local adVisory board to MCNP to allow local input intothemanage mentofpark resources since that management might impacttheothersymbionts?TheNational Park Service LocalLevelInourinterviews, the MCNP Superintendent and the membersofthe staffofthe OfficeofScience and Resource Management voiced a numberofgoals and ideas (Mihalic, 1991; Bradybaugh, 1991; Meiman and Ryan, 1991) which can be summarized as:1.CSA, the regional sewage treatment project, should be completed with all haste to protect MCS andthegroundwater resourcesofthe symbionts.2.MCNP should utilize its Resource Management Plan in creating an academic wish-list to solicit the participationofacademic scientists in research.3.MCNP needs to hire and adequatelysupporta biologist, geologist, andotherprofessional scientists, including a cultural resource specialist for archaeological and historical research (Native Americans, Warof1812, Floyd Collins, Cave Wars, etc.). These should be Research-grade positions like the one Dr. Quinlan occupied. All scientists should be supervisedbythe NPS Chief Regional Scientist.4.There shouldbea realignmentofNPS staff. MCNP currently has more visitor-protection/co01rol Page46


Alexanderrangers than ithas resource-protection rangersbya factorofleast two. This ratio should be reversedorat least brought into balance.5.MCNP should develop and obtain funding for a world-class karst research institute, which will include programs for visiting national and international scientists. In addition, theeXlstmgwater quality program MACA-N-020isfunded for three years, butitcannot possiblybecompleted in this time, and shouldbeexpanded and fundedona long-term basis. This program requires implementationbyoneormore Research-grade scientists with much greater experience than the current MCNP science staff.TheNational Park Service Southeast Region LevelMr. Deskins (1991) expressed the following goals for the Region:1.Develop and strengthen theeXlstmgand new CPSU's to a levelofinvolvement found in the CPSU'softhe NPS Western Region. Add another 20-25 CPSU's to perform muchofthe proposed and on-going research.2.Create a functional, complete information management system (both paperand computer-based) and a standard operating procedure for data storage and retrieval protocols. These will facilitate useofdata.SCIENCEINTHE PARK AND THE REGIONMuchofthe scientific research in the MCS, at MCNP, and in the region has been donebyvolunteers. That pattern probably will continue for the foreseeable future given the intrinsic attractivenessofthe resource and NPS's limited funds. Volunteer scientists should be recruited, encouraged and supported in their work in MCNP. However, the current Volunteer In Parks (VIP) program was not established to encourageormanage scientific research, and the VIP Coordinators are not qualified to supervise and interact with volunteer scientists. A new structure needs to be created. Specifically at MCNP, cooperation with academic scientists and volunteer groups and their supported scientists should be increased and encouraged.TheNPS needs and desires to continue doing research within its aegis, both to fulfill its own priority needs and to coordinate, manage and use the volunteer scientific research. However, in order to do successful long term science and resource monitoring in National Parks, major structural changes need to be made. Phraseologyisneeded in the NPS legislation to authorize and require scientific research, long-term monitoring, and resource inventorying. This will enable the NPS to establish research programs and obtain Congressional funding specifically forthatresearch.TheNPS will then need to establish both a budget and an organizational structure that are dedicated strictly to research. Currently approximately2%ofthe NPS budget goes to scientific research (Dottavio,1991;Bishop, 1991; Bradybaugh, 1991). That amount needs to be substantially increased because the results of researcharecritical to resource management. The budget and structure needs to be separate from both political climates and personal whim. A NPS DirectorofScientific Research should be created at the Washington, D.C., level, and heorshe should be given line authority. Chief Scientists' already exist at the regional level, but are completely removed from the management line. Chief Scientist positions will be useful in any park unit that requires more thanonescientific discipline toberepresented on its staff. MCNP, in requiring a biologist, geologist, and cultural resources scientist at the research grade, needs a Chief Scientist to oversee and administer the entire science program. Increasing the grades and pay structures for scientists will help attract top-quality researchers. The new research organizational structure should be integrated withotherexisting organizational structures so that research and management are encouraged to work together.Theresearch structure should have long-term continuity. Good scientific research cannotbeaccomplished if scienceismanaged eitherbynon-qualified managersorbymanagers who rotate through the park every three to four years. Such transient management techniques tend to rewardPage47


Alexanderpeople who go along with the system and donotchallenge it. The "get it done today" management philosophy as it has been applied to research needs tobeeliminated. This has impacted negatively on park-paid researchbyforcing researchers to do investigations.TheNPS should learn to take advice. from scientists andotherprofessional volunteers who collect, and therefore understand, the data for NPS, so that the non-scientist NPS managers can makeproperuseofsuch data.TheNPS should developbotha partnership attitude and a contractual working relationship with these professionals. Most importantly,theNPS should recognize the research currently being donebyvolunteers. A case in point: Dr. Poulson and Dr. Lewis have been doing bio-monitoring (biota inventory and temporal monitoring) for yearsatMCNP. Itisnot cost-effective to reinvent biomonitoring, when it already exists in great detailatMCNP. The NPS needs to stop making management decisions without first investigating the possible impactsofthose decisions on the cave resources. Volunteer and staff scientists should be consulted first.TheNPS should approach these scientists for more information and forthecreative applicationofthat knowledge to the problem. This requires open, honest, frequent communication between science and management. Finally,othernational parks have excellent programs for the communicationofthe latest research results to the visiting public. Such programs usually work to the parks' advantage. Such programs are missing at MCNP.Forexample, the interpretative signs inthecave andonthe surface are outdated and, in many cases, incorrect.Thebottom line for scientific research at MCNPisthat the current managers at MCNP seem tobeso divorced from the park'S resources that: (1) they don't know what to ask the volunteer scientists for, and (2) they don't know how to use the data that the volunteer scientists provide. Protecting and studying a resource requires a strong affinity for and commitment to the resource and an appreciation for how special it is. Dr. Quinlan had such a commitment,butheisgone. Numerous volunteer scientists, long-term cave explorers and mappers, andotherinterested individuals have these qualities, but they are ignored.7SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONSKarst hydrogeologic research has a long and distinguished historyatMCNP. Research and resource monitoring in the last 30 years have been particularly productive, and have demonstrated that MCNP, the MCS, and their regional neighbors are linked togetherina symbiotic relationship. MCNP and the Central Kentucky Karst contain the longest cave system and the best documented, conduit-flow, karst groundwater systeminthe world. Information and scientific concepts developed during the studyofthe MCS and the Central Kentucky Karst form the basis for karst monitoring and regulation throughout the restofthe United States. Such documentation has resulted in MCNP being designated a World Heritage Site in 1981 and in the Mammoth Cave Region being designated an International Biosphere Reserve in 1990. Also, the underground riversoftheMammoth Cave Region have been designatedbythe CommonwealthofKentuckyasOutstanding Resource Waters.Thescientific research and resource monitoringatMCNP have been accomplishedbyfour different groups. First, a numberofindividual university scientists have dedicated major portionsoftheir research careers to the studyofthe Central Kentucky Karst. These efforts have been successful both professionally and scientifically. Second, a numberofvolunteer organizations have assumed primary responsibility for the exploration and mappingofthe MCS.Thedecades-long effortsofthese dedicated individuals resulted in the discovery and integrationofmany individual caves into the longest system in the world. These same volunteer groups have also supported scientific research and resource moilitoring efforts at many levels. Third, a NPS Research Geologist worked at MCNP from 1973 through 1989.TheResearch Geologist's efforts were highly successful and have been the basisofa numberoffundamental changesinthe environmental managementofMCNPPage48


Alexanderand the Central Kentucky Karst. His efforts have brought national and international recognition to theParkandtheMammoth Cave Region. Fourth, a numberofprivate, State and Federal agencies have performed a numberofimportant studies covering the area.TheMCNP management support of, and responseto,this research has varied. A few Superintendents have supportedthescientific research and have successfully incorporatedthegrowing knowledge base into management decisions that have often impacted theparkand the region. Park managers decided to hire the Research Geologist and thereby initiated a very successful and productive periodofresearch.OneSuperintendent successfully initiated a regional partnership, CSA, between MCNP and its neighbors to deal with a major threat to the groundwater quality in region,thecave, and the Park.Moreoften, however, Superintendents have grudgingly utilized research findingsorignored them entirely. Muchoftheresearch and resource monitoring wasdonein spiteofMCNP management, without NPS supportorfunding.TheResearch Geologist was actively opposedbytwoParkSuperintendents.Hehad to file a formal grievance to be able to carry out the research he was hired to perform, and, despite the successofthe grievance resolution, continued to work in an often hostile, unsupportive, management environment.TheResearch Geologist's direct supervision was shifted from the MCNP Superintendent tothatofthe Regional Chief Scientist and back again several times for various management reasons. In 1989, his direct supervision was again the MCNP Superintendent and a bitter clashofwills with the Superintendent resulted in the resignationofthe Research Geologist.Thefull impacton ofthis resignationisonly now becoming evident.Thedirect effects include the cancellationorabandonmentofhighly productive, visible, and immediately useful NPS research programs. During his tenureatMCNP the Research Geologist produced about 120 karst-related publications. MCNP also lost the 35 yearsofaccumulated knowledge and experienceofthe Research Geologist.Theindirect effects are potentially even more damaging.TheSuperintendent now firmly controls the nature and directionofscientific researchatMCNP.Theimplicationsofthis action are chillingly clear to any NPS employee performing scientific work at MCNP.Itwill take a very committed individual to tell a Superintendent that scientific results conflict with management policy. Can and will long-term scientific research and monitoring be performedatMCNP? We believe that it can.Therecord clearly demonstrates that the MCS and Central Kentucky Karstisofsuch importance and attraction that university scientists and volunteer organizations will continue their dedication and commitmenttofurthering scientific study and systematic exploration in the Mammoth Cave Region. These motivated and creative individuals will strive to succeed withorwithout MCNP management support and encouragement.Theresearchers will productively use whatever resourcesaremade availablebysupportive park managers,orthey will creatively seekouteffectivewaysto continue their research when faced with unsupportive and/or hostile park managers. Will NPS scientistsbeable to participate meaningfully in the long-term scientific research and monitoring at MCNP? We do not believe that thisispossible under the present NPS management system.Thedeliberate destructionofthe productive and successful karst hydrogeology research programatMCNP accompaniedbythe forced resignationofthe Research Geologistisstark evidenceofthe problem. While non-NPS volunteer researchers have some ability to protect their work from the uninformed actionsofa hostile management scenario, the NPS scientists do not. These events are not just the isolated productofan unusual personality conmct.Thepattern spans several Superintendents and analogous events have occurredinotherNational Park units.Theproblemisa fundamental structuralflawin the NPS management organization. While some Superintendents can besupportivemanagers,otherSuperintendents'management techniques can destroy the continuity requiredbyscientific practices.Page49


AlexanderTherefore, we believe that a major reorganizationofthe NPS is necessary before NPS personnel can successfully perform effective, long-term scientific research and resource monitoring.TheNPS should have a Science Division thatismanaged and directedbyscientists, rather thanbyadministrative personnel with no scientific trainingorexperience.TheScience Division should extend throughout the NPS structure, from the Washington, D.C., headquarters with a NPS Chief Scientist, totheregional offices with Regional Chief Scientists who report to the NPS Chief Scientist, and intotheindividualparkunits with Chief Park Scientists, eachofwhom would administer in toto the scientific programs within their individual parks.TheScience Division shouldnotbeeliminated from the command structure, but rather it should be an integral, co-equal partofthat structure. Mechanisms should be established: (1) to encourage and reward cooperative decisions for good resource management between park managers and the scientists, and (2) to protect NPS scientists from NPS managers and vice versa. NPS scientists should not be required to change their baseofoperation every three to four years for promotionoradvancement purposes. We recognize that implementationofsuch sweeping changes in the NPS structure willbecomplicated, costly, and will undoubtedly necessitate a concise, specific, Congressional mandate. Such a mandate will require changing the NPS enabling legislation and will also require a concurrent increase in base funding.Ifand until such legislation and funding are available, we believe that the NPS should actively pursue partnerships with: (1) university scientists via CPSU's andotherappropriate mechanisms, and (2) volunteer organizations suchasCRF.Theuniversity scientists wili provide access to state-of-the-art equipment and techniques and will keep NPS science programs in the mainstreamsoftheir respective disciplines. The volunteer organizations will provide a proven, long-term commitment to science and resource inventory and access to highly qualified and motivated individualswilling to contribute their expertise and labor.TheNPS should not only seek cooperative agreements with such organizations, but should actively and financially support their activities. Finally, the NPS should seek and encourage university, volunteer, and local advisory groups to contribute to the evaluationofpark management decisions.TheNPS must alsobeawareofits regional symbionts and MCNP's obligation to them. This awareness can be acknowledgedbythe creationofa local advisory board to MCNP management, continued participation inthecompletionofCSA, and the sharingofresearch results with local and regional citizens andotherentities. In closing, we quote from the report resulting from an investigation performedbytheCommission on Research and Resource Management Policy in the NationalParkSystem (1989). "Researchisbasic to the missionofthe NPS: Yet, the Park Service, unlikeotherFederal agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service, lacks an explicit missionfor research. Without a sufficient knowledge base, itisimpossible to make wise management decisionsorto design effective education programs. Research must be broad based becausetheNationalParkSystemishuge and diverse and because its units have both cultural and natural resources which are affectedbymany factors. Research must also be ongoing, incorporating new techniques and interpretations asappropriate....TheNPS cannot manage what it does not understand."ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThesectionsofthis paperonthe history and scientific researchofthe Mammoth Cave Regionarebased on research donebyElizabethK.Estes.Hercontributions are gratefUlly acknowledged.Thefinal versionofthis paper was preparedbythe author who assumes full responsibility for its contents and any inadvertent misstatements. This research was partially supportedbythe NationalParkService under PurchaseOrderNo. PXB120-1-0178.Theauthor would like to acknowledge the following individuals who contributed their time, memories,files,energy, and thoughtstothis project: Ms. Judy Austin, Mr. William Austin, Dr. Sarah Bishop, Mr.JeffBradybaugh, Mr.RogerBrucker, Mr.RobertDeskins, Dr. Dominic Dottavio, Mr. Kip Duchon, Dr. Ralph Ewers, Mr. David Foster, Mr. James Goodbar, Mr. Nicholas Gunn, Dr. Gary Hendrix, Mr. Randall Kelley, Mr.RogerMcClure, Mr. Joseph Meiman, Mr. David Mihalic, Mr. James Nieland, Dr.ArthurPalmer, Dr.JamesQuinlan, Mr. Martin Ryan, Dr. Stanley Sides, Mr. Gordon Smith, and Mr. Richard Zopf.Thefollowing individuals have also provided reviewofportionsofthe manuscript and have offeredPage50


Alexanderextremely helpful suggestions: Mrs. BarbaraB.Albright, Mr. Roger Brucker, Mr. Robert Deskins, Dr. Dominic Dottavio, Mr. David Foster, Dr. Tom Poulson, and Dr. George Shaw. This manuscript has particularly benefitted from an extensive, detailed reviewofEstes and Alexander (1991)bythe MCNP staff. We would alsoliketo thank Mr. Gerry Estes of Image Database Softwareforcomputer supportinthis project.CITED AND PERTINENT REFERENCESAnderson,RB.,1925, An investigationofa proposed dam siteinthe vicinityofMammoth Cave, Kentucky: Louisville Gas and Electric Company, unpublished, 26p.Austin, W.T., and Austin, J., 1991, Interview with ElizabethK.Estes and E. Calvin Alexander, Jr., July, 1991, tape onfilewith the author. Barr, T.C., Jr., 1967, Ecological studiesinthe Mammoth Cave System of Kentucky I. The Biota: International Journal of Speleology,v.3,p.147-203,28 plates.__, and Kuehne,R.A,1971, Ecological studiesinthe Mammoth Cave SystemofKentucky II. The Ecosystem: Annales de Speleologie,v.26,n.1,p.47-96. Beck, B.F., 1987, PresentationoftheEB.Burwell, Jr., Memorial Award to JamesF.Quinlan and Ralph O. Ewers: Geological SocietyofAmerica Bulletin,v.99,n.1,p.135-157. Bishop, S.G., 1991, Interview with ElizabethK.Estes and E Calvin Alexander, Jr., July, 1991, tape onfilewith the author. Bradybaugh, J., 1991, Interview with ElizabethK.Estes and E Calvin Alexander, Jr., July 1991, tape onfilewith the author. Brown,RF.,1954, Public and industrial water supplies of the Mississippian Plateau region, Kentucky: U.S. Geological Survey Circular341,38p.__, 1966, Hydrologyofthe cavernous limestones of the Mammoth Cave area, Kentucky, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1837,64p.-'and Lambert, T.W., 1962, Availability of ground waterinAllen, Barren, Edmonson, Green, Hart, Logan, Metcalfe, Monroe, Simpson, and Warren Counties, Kentucky, U.S. Geological Survey Atlas HA-32.__, 1963, Reconnaissanceofground-water resourcesinthe Mississippian Plateau Region, Kentucky, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1603, 58 p.,16plates, 7 tables. Brucker,RW.,1991, Interview with ElizabethK.Estes, July, 1991, tape and transcript onfilewith the author. Brucker, R.W., and Watson,RA,1980, The longest cave: Alfred A Knopf, New York, 316p.Cave Research Foundation, 1960, Speleological research opportunities at Mammoth Cave National Park, ill Watson, R.A(ed), 1981,TheCave Research Foundation, Origins and the First Twelve Years, 1957-1968: Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, Cave Research Foundation,p.320-322.-'1961,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.323-340.__, 1962,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.341-352.__, 1963,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.353-370.__, 1964,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.371-375.__, 1965,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.377-390.__, 1966,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.391-416.__, 1967,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.417-464.-'1968,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.465-494.-'1969,CRFAnnual Report, ill Watson,R.A(ed),1981, The Cave Research Foundation 1969-1973: St. Louis, Missouri, Cave Books,p.1-38.__, 1970,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.39-76.-'1971,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.77-118.__, 1972,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.119-184.-'1973,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.184-265.-'1974,CRFAnnual Report, ill Watson, R.A(cd), 1981", The Cave Research Foundation 1974-1978: St. Louis, Missouri,CaveBooks,p.1-64.-'1975,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.65-144.__, 1976,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.145-210.__, 1977,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.211-276.__, 1978,CRFAnnual Report, ibid.,p.277-341.Page51


AlexanderCommission on Research and Resource Management Policyinthe National Park System, 1989, National parks: From vignettes to a globalview:Washington, D.C., National Parks and Conservation Association,13p.Cushman, R.V., 1968, Recent developmentsinhydrogeologic investigationsinthe karst area of central Kentucky: International AssociationofHydrogeologists Memoirs,v.8,p.236-248.__, Krieger,RA,and McCabe,J.A,1965, Present and future water supplyforMammoth Cave National Park, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1475-Q,p.601-647. Davies, W.E., and Chao, E.C.T., 1959, Report on sedimentsinMammoth Cave, Kentucky, U.S. Geological Survey Administrative Report, 117 p. Deike, G.H., III, 1967, The developmentofcavernsofthe Mammoth Cave region [ph.D. dissertation]: The Pennsylvania State University, 398p.-'and White, W.B., 1969, Sinuosityinlimestone solution conduits: American JournalofScience,v.267, February 1969, p.230-241. Deskins,R,1991, Interview with Elizabeth K Estes and E. Calvin Alexander,Jr.,July, 1991, tape onfilewith the author. Dottavio, D., 1991, Interview with Elizabeth K Estes and E. Calvin Alexander, Jr., July, 1991, notes onfilewith the author. Duchon,K,1991, Interview with Elizabeth K Estes and E. Calvin Alexander, Jr., July, 1991, tape onfilewith the author. Estes,E.K,1989, The origin and deve10pmentofBrucker Breakdown and the adjacent area [M.S. thesis]: Eastern Kentucky University, 267p.-'and Alexander,E.c.,Jr., 1991, Karst hydrogeologic researchinMammoth Cave National Park, submitted for publication i!! Scienceinthe National Parks: Washington, D.C., American Association for the AdvancementofScience, manuscript dated November, 1991, 49p.Everhart, W.C., 1983, The National Park Service: Boulder, Colorado, Westview Press, Inc.,197p.Ewers,RO.,and Ford, D.C., 1978, The originofdistributary and tributaryflowwithin karst aquifers (abs): Geological SocietyofAmerica Abstracts with Programs,v.10,p.398-399. Ewers, R.O., and Quinlan, J.F., 1981, Hydrogeologyofthe Mammoth Cave Region, Kentucky, i!! Roberts, T.G. (ed), Field Trip Guidebook, Annual Meetingofthe Geological SocietyofAmerica, Cincinnati, Ohio, November 5-8, 1981, Leesburg, Virginia: Falls Church, Virginia, American Geological Institute,v.3,p.457-506.__, and Ford, D.C., 1978, The originofdistributary and tributaryflowwithin karst aquifers (abs): Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs,v.10,p.398-399. George,AI.,1973, Southern Warren County karstland excursion, Kentucky, i!! George,AI.(ed.),GuidebOOkto the Kentucky Speleofest: Louisville, Kentucky, Speleopress,p.1-21.__, 1975, Preliminary investigation of pseudo and interstratal karstification along the northern boundaryofthe Central Kentucky Karst, i!! George,AI.(ed.), Speleofest Guidebook, Larve County, Kentucky: Louisville, Kentucky, Speleopress,p.48-69.__, 1976, Karst and cave distributioninnorth-central Kentucky: National Speleological Society Bulletin"v.38,n.4,p.93-98.-'1977, Evaluation of sulfatewater qualityinthe North-central Kentucky Karst, i!! Dilamarter, R.R., and Csallany,S.c.(eds.), Hydrologic ProblemsinKarst Regions: Bowling Green, Kentucky, Western Kentucky University,p.340-356.-,1982,Peneplains, upland streams terraces, and cave levelsinportions of the North-central Kentucky Karst, i!! George,AI.,and McCarty, L.M. (eds.), Guidebook to the 1982 Kentucky Speleofest, Meade County Fairgrounds, Kentucky: Louisville, Kentucky, Speleopress,p.48-68.-'1989, Caves and drainage north of the Green River, i!! White, W.B., and White, E.L., 1989, Karst Hydrology, Concepts from the Mammoth Cave Area: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold,p.189-221.-'and Schmidt, J .B., 1977, Cave development northofthe Green River at Mammoth Caveisstrongly influencedbyrecharge from afilledPennsylvanian paleo-valley: International AssociationofHydrogeologists Memoir12,p.415-430. Gunn, N., 1991, Interview with Elizabeth K Estes and E. Calvin Alexander,Jr.,July, 1991, tape onfilewith the author. Hagan,S.,and Sutton, M., 1991, Cave restoration can cause damage: National Speleological Society News,v.49,n.6,p.170-171. Harmon,RS.,Hess, J.W., and White, W.B., 1972, Chemical characterization of vadose watersinthe South Central Kentucky Karst, Presented at the National Speleological Society AnnualConvention, White Salmon, Washington, August 1972. Hendrickson, G.E., 1961, SourcesofwaterinStyxand Echo Rivers, Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, U.S. Geological Survey ProfeSSional Paper 424-0,p.41-44.I-less,J.W., 1974, Hydrochemical investigationsofthe Central Kentucky Karst aquifer system[Ph.D_dissertation]: Pennsylvania State University, 219p.-'Wells, S.G., and Brucker,T.A,1974, A surveyofsprings along the Green and Barren Rivers, Central Kentucky Karst: National Speleological Society Bulletin,v.36,n.3,p.1-7.Hess, J.W., and White, W.B., 1989, Water budget and physical hydrology, i!! White, W.B., and White, E.L. (eds), 1989, Karst hydrology, Concepts from the Mammoth Cave Area: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold,p.105-126.Page52


AlexanderKel1y,R., 1991, Interview with Elizabeth K.Estes andE.Calvin Alexander, Jr., July, 1991, tape onfilewith the author. Krieger,R.A,and Hendrickson, G.E., 1960, Effects of Greensburg Oilfield brines on the streams, wells, and springs of the upper Green River Basin, Kentucky: Kentucky Geological Survey ReportofInvestigations N.2,36p.Lange,AL.,1988, Detection and mapping of karst conduits from the surfacebyacoustic and natural potential methods, ResearchReportprepared for the National Park Service and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Wheat Ridge, Colorado,TheGeophysics Group, 40p.__, and Quinlan, J.F., 1988, Mapping caves from the surfaceofkarst terranesbythe natural potential method, in. Proceedings of the Second Environmental ProblemsinKarst Terranes and Their Solutions Conference,Nashvil1e,Tennessee, Dublin, Ohio, National WaterWel1Association,p.369-390. Lawrence, J., Jr., andBrucker, R.W., 1975,Thecaves beyond, the story of the FloydCol1ins'Crystal Cave Expedition: Teaneck,NewJersey, Zephyrus Press, 290p.Leithauser,AT.,and various authors, 1982-1986, Phases I-VIofecological analysis of the Kentucky Cave shrimpPalaemonias ganteri Hay. Mammoth Cave National Park: Norfolk, Virginia, Old Dominion University Research Foundation, National Park Service Contract#CX-5000-1-1037. Lewis,JJ.,1981, Observations on aquatic communitiesinthe Historic SectionofMammoth Cave, in. Lindsley,K.B.(ed), Cave Research Foundation 1981 Annual Report: Albuquerque, New Mexico, Adobe Press,p.17-19.-'1990, Water quality, habitat degradation and community compositionincave streams of the Mammoth Cave Karst,inMammoth Cave National Park, 1990, Proceedingso[MammothCave National Park's First Annual Science Conference: Karst Hydrology, Mammoth Cave National Park, December 17-18,1990:Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, Mammoth Cave National Park,p.1-38.Lindsley, K.B., (ed), 1981,CRFAnnual Report: Albuquerque, New Mexico, Adobe Press, 47p.__(ed), 1984,CRFAnnual Report: ibid.__(ed), 1985,CRFAnnual Report: ibid.,48p.__(ed), 1987, 1986 CRf Annual Report: St. Louis, Missouri, Cave Books,51p.__(ed), 1988, 1987CRFAnnual Report: ibid., 74p.__(ed), 1989, 1988CRFAnnual Report: ibid.,91p.__(ed), 1990, 1989CRFAnnual Report: ibid.,48p.Mammoth Cave National Park, 1983, General Management Plan for Mammoth Cave National Park: Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, Mammoth Cave National Park,71p.__, 1990, Resource Management Plan: Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, Mammoth Cave National Park, pages unnumbered, 2 appendices,15attachments. Meiman, J., 1989, Investigationofflood pulse movement through a maturely karstified aquifer at Mammoth Cave National Park [M.S. thesis]: Eastern Kentucky University.-'1990a, Mammoth Cave National Park Water Quality Monitoring Program, March1990:Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky, 40p.__, 1990b, Mammoth Cave National Park Water Quality Monitoring Program preliminary results of1990:Year One, in. Mammoth Cave National Park, 1990, Proceedings of Mammoth Cave National Park's First Annual Science Conference: Karst Hydrology, Mammoth Cave National Park, December 17-18,1990:Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, Mammoth Cave National Park,p. 1-38. ___, 1992,Theeffects .of recharge basin land-use practices on water quality at Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky: Proceedings, Third Conference on Hydrogeology, Ecology Monitoring and Management of Ground WaterinKarst Terranes, December 4-6, 1991, Nashville, Tennessee, National Ground Water Association, Dublin, Ohio,p.697-713. Meiman, J., Ewers, R.O., and Quinlan, J.F., 1988, Investigation of flood pulse movement through a maturely karstified aquifer at Mammoth Cave Nation Park: A new approach: Environmental ProblemsinKarst Terranes and Their Solutions (2nd Conference, Nashville, Tenn.), Proceedings, Association of Ground Water Scientists and Engineers, Dublin, Ohio,p.227-263. Meiman, J., and Ryan, M., 1991, Interview with ElizabethK.Estes andE.Calvin Alexander, Jr., July, 1991, tape onfilewith the author. Meloy, H., 1979, Outline of Mammoth Cave history: JournalofSpelean History,v.13,no1.,p.28-33. Mihalic, D., 1991, Interview with ElizabethK.Estes andE.Calvin Alexander,Jr.,July 1991, tape and transcript onfilewith author. Mikulak,RJ.,1988, Wastewater managementinCave Country: An unlikely success story, in. Environmental ProblemsinKarst Terrains and their Solutions Conference, Second Proceedings: Dublin, Ohio, National WaterWellAssociation,p.315-331. Miotke, F.-D., 1975,Derkarstimzentralen Kentucky bei Mammoth Cave [Habititation Dissertation]: Jahrbuch der Geographischen Gesel1schaftzuHannover, Jahrbuch 1973, Hannover, Germany, 355p.Miotke, F.-D., and Palmer,AN.,1972, Genetic relationship between caves and landformsinthe Mammoth Cave National Park area: Wiirzburg, Bohler Verlag,69p.Page 53


AlexanderMiotke, F.-D., and Papenberg, H., 1972, Geomorphology and hydrology of the Sinkhole Plain and Glasgow Upland, Central Kentucky Karst: Preliminary report: Caves and Karst,v.14,p.25-32. Murray,R.K,and Brucker, R.W., 1979, Trapped!: New York, G.P. Putnam's Sons, Inc., 32.') p.Palmer,AN.,1975, StratigraphyofMammoth Cave National Park: Cave Research Foundation 1975 Annual Report,p.34-36.__, 1977, Influenceofgeologic structure on groundwaterflowand cave developmentinMammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky, U.S.A: .International AssociationofHydrogeologists, 12th Memoirs,p.405-414.-'1981, A geological guide to Mammoth Cave National Park: Teaneck, New Jersey, Zephyrus Press, 210p.-'1985, The Mammoth Cave Region and Pennyroyal Plateaus,!!! Dougherty, P.H. (ed.), Caves and KarstofKentucky, Kentucky Geological Survey Special Publication12,Series IX,p.97-118.-'1989a, Stratigraphic and structural controlofcave development and groundwaterflowinthe Mammoth Cave Region, !!! White, W.B., and White, E.L. (eds), 1989, Karst hydrology, Concepts from the Mammoth Cave Area: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 346p.-'1989b, Geomorphic historyofthe Mammoth Cave System, !!! White, W.B., and White, E.L. (eds), 1989, Karst hydrology, Concepts from the Mammoth Cave Area: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 346p.Palmer, M.V. (ed), 1980,CRFAnnual Report: Albuquerque, New Mexico, Adobe Press,47p.__(ed), 1982,CRFAnnual Report: Albuquerque, New Mexico, Adobe Press, 34p.__(ed), 1983,CRFAnnual Report: Albuquerque, New Mexico, Adobe Press, 34p.Plebuch, R.O., Faust,RJ.,and Townsend,MJ.,1985, Potentiometric surface and water qualityinthe principal aquifer, Mississippian Plateaus region, Kentucky, U.S. Geologic Survey Water Resources Investigation Report 84-4102,45p.Pohl, E.R., 1955, Vertical shaftsinlimestone caves: Occasional PaperN.2,National Speleological Society, Huntsville, Alabama,25p.Poulson, T.L., 1967, Comparisonofcave stream communities, !!! Cave Research Foundation 1967 Annual Report,p.33-34.__, 1990, Developing a protocol for assessing groundwater quality using biotic indicesinthe Mammoth Cave region, !!! Mammoth Cave National Park, 1990, ProceedingsofMammoth Cave National Park's First Annual Science Conference: Karst Hydrology, Mammoth Cave National Park, December17-18,1990:Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, Mammoth Cave National Park,p.51-78. Poulson, R.L., and Kane, T.C., 1981, How food type determines community organizationincaves, !!! Beck, B.B. (ed.) Proceedings Eighth International CongressofSpeleology, Bowling Green, Kentucky, July 18-24, 1981,p.56-59. Poulson, R.L., and Wells,BJ.,(ed), 1979,CRFAnnual Report: Albuquerque, New Mexico, Adobe Press, 69p.Poulson, R.L., and White, W.B., 1969, The cave environment, Science,v.165,p.971-981. Quinlan, J.F., 1970, Central Kentucky Karst: Reunion Internationale Karstologie en Langcdoc-Provence, 1968, Actes: Mediterranee, Etudes et Travaus,v.7,p.235-253.__, 1975, Formal grievancefiledbyJamesF.Quinlan, Park Geologist, Mammoth Cave National Park, against Joseph Kulesza, Superintendent, Mammoth Cave National Park, Submitted to Regional Director, SERO, February17,1975,24p., 24 exhibits.-'1977, Hydrologyofthe Turnhole Spring Drainage Basin andvicinity,Kentucky, an area that includes partofMammoth Cave National Park: Uplands Field Research Laboratory (National Park Service), Management Report N.11,22p.__, 1979, Karst hydrologic studiesinthe Mammoth Cave National park area,'Kentucky: Techniques,reSUlts,and environmental applications (abs): Second Conference on Scientific Researchinthe National Parks, San Francisco, California, Abstracts volume, p.160.__, 1980a, Karst hydrologic studiesinthe Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky: Techniques,reSUlts,and environmental applications: Proceedingsofthe 2nd Conference on Scientific Researchinthe National Parks, San Francisco, California,v.5,p.506-510. -' 1981, Hydrologic research techniques and instrumentation usedinthe Mammoth Cave region, Kentucky,!!! ROberts, T.G. (ed), Field Trip Guidebook, Annual Meeting of the Geological Society of America, Cincinnati, Ohio, November 5-8, 1981, Leesburg, Virginia: Falls Church, Virginia, American Geological Institute,v.3,p.502-504.__, 1982a, Sinks, Stinks, and Springs: a summaryofthe Mammoth Cave region with emphasis on techniques, results, and applications of National Park Service-sponsored research,!!! Wilson, R.C., and Lewis, J. (eds), 1982, National Cave Management Symposia Proceedings for the 1978 (Carlsbad, New Mexico, October 16-20, 1978) and1980(Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky, October 14-17, 1980) Symposia: OregonCity,Oregon,PygmyDwarf Press, 234p.__, 1982b, Groundwater basin delineation with dye-tracing, potentiometric surface mapping, and cave mapping, Mammoth Cave Region, Kentucky, U.S.A: Beitrage zur Geologie der Schwicz-Hydrologie,v.28,p.177-189.__, 1986a, Research grade evaluation: Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, Mammoth Cave, Kentucky,100p.,15attachments. Page54


Alexander-'1986b, Recommended procedure for evaluating the effectsofspillsofhazardous materials00ground water qualityiokarst terranes: Environmental ProblemsinKarst Terranes and Their Solutions Conference, (Bowling Green, Kentucky), Proceedings, NationalWaterWell Association, Dublin, Ohio, p. 183-196.-'1989, Groundwater monitoringinkarst terranes: recommended protocols and implicit assumptions(EPA600/x-89/050): Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 79p.[DRAFT; final version tobereleasedin1992]-'1991, Interview with ElizabethK.Estes and Dr. E. Calvin Alexander, Jr., July 1991, tape and notes onfilewith author. Quinlan, J.F., and Ewers, R.O., 1981a, Hydrogeologyofthe Mammoth Cave region, Kentucky, ill Roberts, T.G. (ed), Field Trip Guidebook, Annual Meetingofthe Geological SocietyofAmerica, Cincinnati, Ohio, November 5-8,1981, Leesburg, Virginia: Falls Church, Virginia, American Geological Institute,v.3,p.457-506.__, 1981b, Preliminary speculations on the evolutionofgroundwater basinsinthe Mammoth Cave region, Kentucky, ill Roberts, T.G. (ed), Field Trip Guidebook, Annual Meetingofthe Geological SocietyofAmerica, Cincinnati, Ohio, November 5-8, 1981, Leesburg, Virginia: Falls ChurCh, Virginia, American Geological Institute,v.3,p.496-501.__,1985, Groundwaterflowinlimestone terranes: Strategy rationale-and procedure for reliable, efficient monitoringofgroundwater quality in karst areas, Proceedingsofthe Fifth National Symposium and Exposition on Aquifer Restoration and GroundWaterMonitoring, Columbus, Ohio,p.197-234.-'1986, Reliable monitoringinkarst terrains:Itcan be done, but notbyEPA-approved methods: Ground Water Monitoring review,v.6,n.1,p.4-6. (Reply to discussion,v.6,n.4,p.42.)__, 1989, Subsurface drainageinthe Mammoth Cave area, ill White, W.B., and White, E.L. (eds), 1989, Karst hydrology, Concepts from the Mammoth Cave Area: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, p.65-104.__, Ray,J.A,Powell, R.L., and Krothe, N.C., 1983, Groundwater hydrology and geomorphologyofthe Mammoth Cave region, Kentucky, andofthe Mitchell Plain, Indiana, ill Shaver, R.H., and Sunderman,J.A(eds), 1983, Field tripsinMidwestern Geology,v.2, Geological SocietyofAmerica and Indiana Geological Survey,p.1-85. Quinlan, J.F., and Ray,J.A,1981, Groundwater basinsinthe Mammoth Cave Region, Kentucky, showing springs, major caves,flowroutes, and potentiometric surface: Friendsofthe Karst Occasional Publication,n.1,1 sheet, scale 1:138,000. Quinlan, J.F., and Ray,J.A,1989, Groundwater basinsinthe Mammoth Cave Region, Kentucky, showing springs, major caves,flowroutes, and potentiometric surface: Friendsofthe Karst Occasional Publication,o.2, 1 sheet, scale1:138,000.__, and Fehrman, J.G., 1990, Groundwater remediation may be achievable, ill Mammoth Cave National Park, 1990, ProceedingsofMammothCave National Park's First Annual Science Conference: Karst Hydrology, Mammoth Cave National Park,December17-18, 1990:MammothCave, Kentucky, Mammoth Cave National Park,p.113-114. Quinlan, J.F., and Rowe, D.R., 1977, HydrolOgy and water qualityinthe Central Kentucky Karst: PhaseI:UniversityofKentucky,WaterResources Research Institute, Research ReportN.101,93p.[Reprinted with correctionsas:Uplands Field Research Laboratory (National Park Service) Management ReportN.12.]__, 1978, Hydrology and water qualityinthe Central Kentucky Karst: Phase II Part A Preliminary summaryofthe hydrogeologyofthe Mill Hole Sub-basinofthe Turnhole Spring Groundwater Basin: UniversityofKentucky,WaterResources Research Institute, Research Report N. 101, 42p.Reams, M.W., 1963, Some experimental evidence for a vadose originoffoibe (domepits)[MSThesis]: UniversityofKansas,115p.__, 1965, Laboratory andfieldevidence for a vadose originoffoibe (domepits): International JournalofSpeleology,v.1,p.373-390. Recker,S.A,1990, Seepage velocitiesina conduit-adjacent porosity systemofa karst aquifer and their influence on the movementofcontaminants, Mammoth Cave Region, Kentucky [M.S. thesis]: Eastern Kentucky UniverSity. Recker,S.A,Ewers, R.O.,and Quinlan, J.F., 1988, Seepage velocitiesina condUit-adjacent porosity systemofa karst aquifer and their influence on the movementofcontaminants: Environmental ProblemsinKarst Terranes and Their Solutions (2nd Conference, Nashville, Tenn.), Proceedings, AssociationofGround Water Scientists and Engineers, Dublin, Ohio,p.265-287. Ryan, M., 1991, Developmentofa flow-through filter fluorometer for useinquantitative dye tracing at Mammoth Cave National Park (abs):1991National Cave Management Symposium, October 23-26,1991, Bowling Green, Kentucky, Guidebook: Horse Cave, Kentucky, American Cave Conservation Association,p.7.__, 1992, Developmentofa flow-through filter fluorometer for useinquantitative dye tracing at Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky: Proceedings, Third Conference on Hydrogeology, Ecology Monitoring and ManagementofGround WasterinKarst Terranes,December4-6, 1991, Nashville, Tenn., National Ground Water Association, Dublin, Ohio,p.243-261. Sides,S.,1991, Chronologyofthe historyofMammoth Cave, Course Notes for "ExplorationofMammoth Cave", Karst Field StudiesatMammothCave: Bowling Green, Kentucky, Center for Cave and Karst Studies, Western Kentucky University,p.9-50.__, 1992, LetterofJanuary12,1992, to E. Calvin Alexander,Jr.,copy available from the author. Smith, P.M., 1967, Some problems and opportunities at Mammoth Cave National Park: National Parks Magazine, February,p.14-19.Page 55


Alexander-'1968, New approaches to NationalParkService administration and management: National Parks Magazine, v. 42, n. 245,p.14-18.Watson,PJ.(ed.), 1969,ThePrehistoryofSaltscave,Kentucky: ReportsofInvestigations N. 16, IllinoisStateMuseum, Springfield,86p.__(ed), 1974, ArcheologyoftheMammothcaveArea: New York, Academic Press, 255 p.-'1989, Early plant cultivation intheEasternWoodlandofNorth America:InD.Harris and G. Hillman, eds. ForagingandFarming:TheEvolutionofPlant Exploitation, London, Unwin Hyman, p. 555-570.-'1991,Theoriginsoffood-production in Western Asia and Eastern North America: A considerationofinterdisciplinary researchinanthropologyandarchaeology:InL. Shane and E. Cushing, eds. Quaternary Landscapes, Minneapolis, UniversityofMinnesota Press,p.1-37. Wells, S.G., 1973, GeomorphologyoftheSinkhole Plain in the Pennyroyal Plateauofthe Central Kentucky Karst [MS Thesis]: UniversityofCincinnati, 122 p. White, W.B., 1969, Conceptual models for carbonate aquifers: Ground Water,v.7, n. 3, p. 15-21.-'1988, Geomorphology and hydrologyofkarst terrains: New York, Oxford University Press, 464p.-'Watson,R.A,Pohl, E.R.,andBrucker, R., 1970,TheCentral Kentucky Karst: Geographical Review.,v.60,n.1,p. 88-115. White, W.B., and White, E.L. (eds), 1989, Karst hydrology, Concepts from theMammothcaveArea: New York,VanNostrand Reinhold, 346 p. Zopf, R., 1991, Interview with ElizabethK.Estes, July, 1991, tapeonfile with the author.Page56


DoughertyKARSTMANAGEMENTTHROUGHZONINGANDSUBDIVISIONORDINANCESPercy H. DoughertyDepartmentofGeography, Kutztown University Kutztown,PA19530ABSTRACT Sinkhole formation results in excessof$1,000,000 damage annuallyinthe Lehigh ValleyofPennsylvania, a portionofthe Great Valleyofthe Appalachians.Inthe United States, this lossissecond only to that occurringinFlorida.TheLehigh Valley contains five limestone formations, forming a great structural valley, ranging in age from Cambrian to Ordovician.Thefertile limestone soils and the lowland transportation route have resultedina high densityofpopulation, with nearly a million people livinginthemetropolitan areasofAllentown, Bethlehem, Easton, and Reading. In addition,thearea continues to grow becauseofits proximity to NewYorkand Philadelphia. Therefore, the areaisfaced with a growing threatofa potential lossofhuman life and damage to propertybysinkhole formation.Itisproposed thatthebest way to safeguard lives and reduce the amountofproperty damageistonotallow development on sinkhole prone areasinthefirst place.Itistoo late for the already built-up areasofthe cities, butthegrowing suburban areas can and mustbesafeguarded today. This can be best accomplishedbythe useofstate mandated planning documents includingthecomprehensive plan, zoning ordinance, and subdivision ordinance. All new housing, commercial, and industrial developments must be reviewed under these documents; therefore they should contain language thatistough enough to keep development from occurring on sensitive sites suchaskarst features. This may appear to be a simple task from a karst geomorphology perspective, butitiscomplicated foronemust also deal with politicians, lawyers, and special interests groups suchasenvironmentalists and builders. Thispaperpresents a model ordinance and discusses problems encounteredinpassing such legislation.Themodel ordinanceisthe Lower Macungie Township Subdivision Ordinance which wasinpreparation for over two years when finally adopted.Newspaper headlines andothernews media in the Lehigh Valley contain numerous references to "sinkholes" and karst collapse. Over $1,000,000 damageisdoneyearly intheLehigh Valley, the portionoftheGreatValleyoftheAppalachians that cuts diagonally fromnortheastto southwest across Pennsylvania. IntheUnitedStates, thisamountofdamageissecond only tothemuch larger karstproneareaofcentral Florida.Somecollapseepisodes within the pastfiveyears have resulted in loses in excessof$500,000 each:theMacungie sinkhole (Dougherty and Perlow, 1987),theVera Cruz road collapse (Bonaparte, 1987), and the Allentown church disaster (Clark and Reaman, 1988). Becauseofthe high (\ensity ofpopulation, thereisalsoPage57a danger to human life.Threelives were lost in a 1925 collapse intheCityofAllentown (Wittman,1988), andanotherdeath and seven injuries resulted from the collapseoftwo townhouses and an accompanying gas explosiononAugust 29, 1990 (Casler, 1990). Itisnot unusualtosee headlines in local newspapers like "Residents flee street-gobbling Macungie sinkhole" (Buzgon, 1986), "Another day in the Valley, another sinkhole" (Whelan, 1986),"30foot sinkhole opensinshopping center" (Morning Call, August4,1986), "Emergency work atUpperSaucon sinkhole complete" (Morning Call, November4,1986), "PennDOTsays it's not to blame in latestUpperSaucon sinkhole" (Darrah,


Dougherty MI:WYORK 1987),"AnotherU.Saucon roadisaffectedbysinkhole" (Morning CalI, March7,1987),"Sinkhole threatens to undermineNorthamptonhome" (Berton,1987),"Muhlenberg dormitory getthatsinking feeling" (Youngwood,1988),"City church colIapses into sinkhole" (Clark andReaman,1988),"City firm hired tofiHsinkholesatAllentown Airport" (Cowen,1988),"Lower Nazareth woman files lawsuit over sinkholes" (Morning CalI, July27, 1989),and many more.Thenews reports only indicatethelargest and most disastrous sinkhole occurrences inthearea since most coHapsesarenotreportedin the news media. Perusalofroad master records in suburban and rural townships show the problem tobemuch greater than indicatedbythe news media. Local residentsarealso eager to share accountsoftheirfavorite neighborhood sinkhole coHapse including storiesaboutmissing dogs, disappearing back yards, and even a humorous accountofa footbalI coachata high school footbalI game, who while pacing the sidelines, was engulfed waist deep in a sinkhole.Theabove referenced and personal accounts showthattherearenumerous colIapses in this region whichbearinvestigation becauseoftheir economic and life threatening impact. Inorderto minimizethelossoflife and the destructionofproperty, local government officials mustMAP1.Location of the GreatValleyof the Appalachians. The shaded areainNorthhamptonandLehighcountiesshowsthe limestone outcrops of theLehighValley,extendingintoLebanon Countyasthe LebanonValley.The other major limestoneregionisthe Lancaster Plain.Source:PennsylvaniaTopographic&GeologicSurvey,1981know what causes such episodes. Clues totheformationofcolIapses canbefound inananalysisoftheir spatial and temporal distribution. Itisimportantfrom a planning perspective to know what areasarethe most proneto colIapse sothatzoning and subdivision ordinances can be written in such a way as to minimizethedanger from subsidence.Thetemporal aspectisalso important so that emergency service organizations can plan forthepossibilityofa periodofgreater colIapse activity. Therefore, itisthepurposeofthe current research to investigatethecausesofkarst colIapse,thespatial distributionofoccurrences, and the temporal aspects intheLehigh ValIey. Since the Lehigh VaHeyisa representativesampleoftheGreatVaHeyofthe Appalachians, information from this study can be applied totheLebanonValIey, East, Penn VaHey, Shenandoah ValIey andothersimilar areas in the Great ValIeyoftheAppalachians. ThisisespeciaHy trueofthe Reading, Harrisburg, and Hershey urban areas which have a similar stratigraphic profile.TheStudyAreaTheLehigh ValIeyisgeneraHy considered to bethatportionoftheGreatValIeyoftheAppalachiansthatextends fromtheDelaware Riverontheeast totheSchuylkill Riveronthewest (Map 1). ThisPage 58


DoughertyMAP2.Urban Land-useinthe LehighVaUey:Lehigh and Northampton Counties,PASource: Joint Planning Commission, 1991.encompasses LehighandNorthamptoncounties which containtheAllentown!Bethlehem!Easton metropolitan area with nearly three-quartersofa million population (JPC, 1991).Ifnearby Reading is included,theurban area exceedsonemillion people, mostofwhom liveonthelimestone areasoftheLehigh Valley. Contrary tothenegative publicitythearea received fromthesong "Allentown" by Billy Joel,thearea isnotdepressed and witheringonthevine.Itisa dynamic urban area that hasbeenstimulatedbythe recent completionofInterstate 78.Thearea already containstheNortheast ExtensionofthePennsylvaniaTurnpikeandothermajor highways such as routes 22, 100, and 309. With easy access to NewYorkCityandPhiladelphia,theareas has experienced substantial growth as a warehousing center. Cheap office space has also resultedinaninfluxoftertiary activitiesthathave replacedthejobs lost intheshrinking heavy industrial base. This expansion has resultedina 8.1% increaseofpopulation overthepast ten years (JPC, 1991).Thatincrease plusthemovement fromthecore cities tothesuburbsisresulting in increased urban sprawl. Map 2 showstheurbanland use whichisconcentratedonthelimestone lowlands, a use which maynotbe compatible withthekarst landscape (JPC, 1982).Page59TheLehigh Valleyisa distinct physiographic region located betweenSouthMountainoftheBlue Ridge Province composedofPre-Cambrian and Cambro Ordovician granitic gneisses, quartzitesandsandstones; and Blue Mountain,thefirst ridgeoftheAppalachians, whichiscomposedofSilurian sandstones and conglomerate whichispartially metamorphosed to quartzite. Between the two resistant ridgesonefinds a 25kIDwide valley with over 400 m relief.Thevalley flooriscomposedofMartinsburg Formation shales which form a higher structural benchofundulating topographyonthenorthwestern sideofthevalley, and limestonesonthesoutheastern sideofthe valley which form a flat agricultural plain stretching tothebaseofSouthMountain(Miller, 1934). Map 3 shows the geologic formationsoftheLehigh Valley westofAllentown, extending from Kutztown inthesouth to Slatingtoninthenorth(Lash, et. aI., 1984). Lower Macungie Townshipiswellsituated'to participate intherapid growthoftheregion becauseofits locationattheintersectionofToute 222 and the new Interstate 78. Itistransected by routes 309, 100, and the Northeast Extensionofthe Pennsylvania Turnpike.Aslong as the Township remained rural,


DoughertyMAP3:Geologic formationsofthe Lehigh Valley westofAllentown, PA Shaded areas to the northwestarethe shalehillscomposedofthe Hamburg sequence (Ohsg) and the Martinsburg Formation (Om).Thelimestone lowlandofthe Lehigh Valleyisinwhite andiscomposedofthe Jacksonburg Formation (Ojk), Ontelaunee Formation(00),Epler Formation (Oe), Rickenbach Formation (Ori), Stonehenge Formation (Os), Allentown Formation (Cal), and the Leithsville Formation (Clv). The shaded areas to the southeast are the Hardyston Formation (Cha) and the undifferentiated gneissesofSouth Mountain. Source: Berg and Dodge, 1981; Dougherty,1991there werefewproblems with subsidence; but with urbanizationtheproblems were exacerbatedbystrippingofthe land (Myers and Perlow, 1986), drawdownofthe water table (Wood, et.aL,1972), and fillingofkarst features (Kochanov, 1988). Between 1950 and 1984,theTownship grew from 2,997 people to 14,081 (Lower Macungie, 1988).Therecent census shows over 16,000 people in 1990 and over 2000 housing units approved for sub-division.Bythe year 2000, the population will exceed 25,000. Lower Macungie's locationinPennsylvania causes further problems in karst management. Planning,Page60zoning, and subdivision aredonebythelocal municipality--notthecountyorstate. Pennsylvania has over 1,600 minor civil divisions doing their own thing under the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, Act 247 (CommonwealthofPennsylvania, 1989).Theresultisfragmentation and numerous legal challenges to the local codes.Thepositive sideofthe sitlliltion isitiseasier to change local codes inthefavorofkarst hazard mitigation than itisto changestateorcounty codes where karst landscapes may form only a small percentageofthe total area.Itmustberealized that the material in this paper reflectsthevagariesofAct 247 and cannot be used directly inotherstates.The


DoughertyFonnation IA") Thicl:ness1m\ Formation Descriotion and WeatheriM Qlaracteri5ticsJaclcsonburgFoc17(}.460Darl<.gray shaley limestone grading downwardinl.Ocrystalline. high-<:alciumlime. maticn(M.Ord.) SlOne. Lowto moderaLe porosity and penneabililY; thinsoil mantle;[C". solution (eallJreS.OnLelauneeFoc 0-200.. Mediumgray. rmely crystalline dolomiLe;cheny 31base;missing31 many!oarmation (I..Ord.) tions. Solution-enhancedporosiry and bedrock pinnacles characteri5tic.Mod"""" 1.0 thick soilmantle. Epler Fonnation270 InLetbeddedvery rUle grained.mediurngra) limestoneandgray doltl"niae.SoIutioo (LOrd.) enhanced pcrosity; rew bedrock pinnacles; very thick soil mantle. RichenbachFoc2:UlGr2Y.rtne to coarse doloSlOnes. thin bedded atlOp1.0 thickbeddedtowardbase. maticn (I..Ord.) Solution-enhancedporosiry and bedrock pinnacles characteristic; moderatelythick soil mantle-A1lenl.OwnDolo-575A1LemaIing bed o[ lightand dartgray weathering dolomiLe; Slrom3lOliLes andmite(U. Camb.) oollleS common; some orthoquartzite beds. SOlutioo....hancedporosiry andbed rockpiMacleschar3cLeristic;soil mantle gener.l1Jythin. Leithsville For Interbedded fineto coarsegrained dolostones and tanphyllite; rew thinmatioo(UppennOSl 350L.M.Camb.) beds. porosity; bedrock and pinnacles C()mlJlon;C()mlJlorllyCX)vcred with thickCX)Duviumnear uolands.Table1:Characteristics of Lehigh Valley Carbonate Rocks. Source: Myers and Perlow,1986: Tolal TolalAverage SinkholeAvt:nlJSinkhole DensilV lsinks/

Doughertymile, followedbythe Allentown Formation with 8.6, and the Epler Formation with 6.9.Anattempt to break down the sinkholes into categories basedontheir cause shows the Rickenbach andEplerformations have the highest densityofnaturally occurring sinkholes, while the Allentown Formation has a high utility related component. Several recent sinkhole episodes, not reportedbythe media, have occurredonthe Allentown Formation after it was stripped during housing development construction. This means that human action aggravates sinkhole formation in an area that otherwise doesnothave a significant numberofnaturally occurring sinkholes. Therefore planners should pay more attention totheprevious three formations becauseofthe greater likelihoodofsinkholes formation. Investigationofnewspaper clippingsofsinkhole formation and field visits to sinkhole sites add further information to the previous study thatisnot apparent from the table (Dougherty,199.1).Although the Allentown Formation has a larger numberofsinkholes than mostotherformations, the individual sinkholes are small becauseofthe thin overburden and the small sizeofthe joint controlled groundwater entries. Sinkhole"eyes"are close to the surface and are easily repaired.TheLeithsville Formationontheotherhand has the lowest densityofsinkholes,2.1per square mile, but itisthe siteofsomeofthe most disastrous collapses in the area.TheMacungie sinkhole formed on June 24, 1986 resulting in a hole 40 meters across and nearly 20 meters deep which cost in excessof$700,000 to repair (Dougherty&Perlow, 1988).Thereason for the humongous sizeisrelated to the deep colluvial coverofthe formation allowing for the developmentofsuffosion sinkholes. Thisisalso the location where the allogenic waters from the Hardyston sandstone and undifferentiated gneissesofSouth Mountain come in contact with the first limestoneofthe Lehigh Valley. Larger more persistent sinkholes form at this location, although the overall densityofsinkholesislower in the Leithsville than in anyotherformation in the Lehigh Valley.MethodologyandAnalysis Using the old adage that an "ounceofpreventionisworth a poundofcure," existing ordinances in the Lehigh Valley were investigated to find what provisions were used to minimize the dangerofkarst collapse.Itwas the intent to take the bestofexisting ordinances and create a new zoning ordinance for Lower Macungie Township incorporating the bestofthe rest. In addition, a karst overlay district similar to the flood plain overlay districts common in most zoning ordinances was planned. Several existing bases were used including a detailed fracture trace analysis and sinkhole location study done for the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC, 1985), a study done for the Pennsylvania Power and Light Company by VFC, Inc. (Perlow, on-going), and interviews with Township officials.Tothis base were added sites known through personal knowledge and through having a Joint Planning Commission intern identify sinkholes from aerial photographs. This resulted in a data baseofexisting karst features that can be updated periodically in order to provide a historic basisofpast activity in the problem area. Only twootherordinances were found in the Lehigh Valley that contained karst language. Both were subdivision ordinances.TheonefromUpperSaucon was very restrictive and was thought tobeanti development and unenforceable in court (Donald Miles, Lower Macungie Township Solicitor, personal communication, 1989). In addition, it made extensive useoffracture traces and lineaments, generally accepted karst featuresbuta legally indefensible concept in court.Ifany three karst experts were asked to draw their interpretationoffracture traces from the same air photo, three entirely different spatial patterns would result. Someofthe traces couldbecultural features suchasutility line scars, cropping patterns,orexcavations. It was decided to delete the useoffracture traces in the current ordinance becauseofthe legal problems that could arise. Another subdivision ordinanceisonedevelopedbythe Joint Planning CommissionofLehigh and Northampton counties (JPC, 1988). Itisnot detailed enough to restrict development near karst features and it does not allow for developers to make an appealby perfmming geotechnical investigations to show thereisno danger in developing a particular pieceofproperty. No individual may be restricted from developing his/her property unless a just causeisshown. This -is the resultofthe famous Seventh Day Adventist Case inPage62


DoughertyCalifornia where "taking"orillegal restrictiononthe developmentofone's land has been ruled illegal bytheSupreme court.Thereisa debate over where a karst hazard code should go,thezoning ordinanceorthesubdivision ordinance.Ifplaced in the zoning ordinance itisinthecompanyofsuch issues as floodplains, historic places, wetlands, hydric soils, and steep slopes. In addition, developers have to file an application to go before a Zoning Hearing Board to have any changes made by a special exceptionorthey must have the ordinance changed in their favor--bothofwhicharelong and tedious procedures.Thesubdivision ordinance,ontheotherhand,isadministeredbythelocal planning commission which may make waiversuponapplication.Thegoverning body can also make exceptions if pressured by developers. Unfortunately, inthecaseofLower Macungie,theordinance becamepartofthesubdivision process. It has been tested several timesbuthas not been waivedorchanged.TheheartoftheordinanceistheKarst Overlay DistrictandtheKarst Hazard Overlay Map. Developers seeking a building permit, conditional use,ora special exception must submit a mapata scaleofatleast 1"= 100' showingthekarst features listed intheOrdinance.TheZoning Officer has the responsibilityofinforming applicantsthatthey have karst featuresontheir property; and, if necessary, may perform a site visit and delineate such features,orprocure the necessary expertise to delineate such features.Theapplicantisalso required to have an engineer visit the site and assess the presenceofkarst features.Iffurther testingisnecessary,theresult shouldbesubmitted totheTownship Engineer who will report to the Zoning Officer and Planning Commissionontheadequacyofthereport. In special cases the Township Engineer may request further testingbythe applicant's engineer. A setofperformance standardsisalso adopted in the ordinance. These includetheprovisionofhaving no stormwater detention facility within 30 mofa karst feature. Thisisnecessary for many developers try to site detention basins in dolines with disastrous consequences.Theeyeofthe sink can open due to the excess water and added pressure. In addition, no stormwater swaleorsewer pipe may be constructed within 30 mofa karst feature unless special precautions are taken includingtheinstallationoflinersorimpermeable bed. No throughflowisallowed along utility trenches and impervious dikesarerequired at10m intervals. No buildingsoraccessory structures are allowed within15mofa karst feature unless detailed geotechnical work shows there will be no negative impact. No blasting, well enhancement activities, gasolineorotherchemical storageisallowed within 30 mofthekarst features.Toguard against the strippingofland cover andtheassociated openingofdolines, a soil conservation plan mustbesubmitted to the County Soil Conservation Service showing safeguards. When thereisa disagreement over the delineationofa karst feature,theapplicant shall beartheburdenofshowing that such conditions do not existontheproperty in question. This may require expensive field surveys and geotechnical work, the expense tobebornebytheapplicant. An appeal procedureisset upinanothersectionofthe ordinance for usebytheapplicant. Development within 30 mofkarst features suchassinkholes, sinking streams, ghost lakes, cave entrances, closed depressions, lineaments, faults, and any other recognizable karst featureisexpressly forbidden unless expert geotechnical work shows that it canbedone safely. In addition,thesame restriction applies to limonite excavations,theremnantofthemining legacy responsible for Bethlehem Steel and over fifty blast furnaces in the Lehigh Valley inthelate 1800's. Manyofthe iron pits are undoubtedly old sinkholes where the ironorewas concentrated and still continue to channel water tothehidden karst plumbing network. Seasonal high water tables and clumpsoftrees are also tobeshown onthedeveloper's map for both have been found to be good indicatorsofkarst featuresinthe study area. A subdivision applicant must come before the Township Planning Commission for several reviews: sketch plan, preliminary plan, and final plan. At each step, thereisample opportunity to discuss the karst hazards on the property. In fact,atthe preliminary plan stage, the Township Engineerisexpressly directedtoflag any such zonesonthe applicant's property and/or tell the applicant that thereisa potential for karst featuresonthelandinquestion.ThePlanningPage 63


DoughertyCommission can deny the application for subdivisionorconditional use if the applicant fails to go before the Zoning Hearing Board for a zoning variance.SummaryandConclusionsAlthough itisstated that zoning and subdivision ordinances are a good _way to avoid problems associated with karst subsidence, there are many short comings with this approach. Most karst researchers will undoubtedly feel the wording i,s not strong enough. Any debatable languageorlegal uncertainty, like the identificationoffracture traces, has to be left outofthe Ordinance. Only language that can be defendedbythe Township Solicitor in court and only features readily identifiablebynon-experts can be kept in an ordinance. A great problemisthe fact that karst scienceisstill in its infancy and detection methods are primitiveatbest. Until we get better methodsofdelineating karst features and identifying incipient sinkholes,wecan not make the languageorrequirements intheordinances any tougher. Thereisalso a problem with the public and government officials not realizing the threatofkarst subsidence to lifeorproperty. Education must also accompany the push for implementationofcodesorelse the effortisbound tofail.Developers can present a convincing argument against the implementationofcodes because C?f the extra expense they have topay.Probably the biggest problem with karst hazards codes, be it subdivisionorzoning,isthe lackofenforcement. Many municipalities have nowayto follow up on developers to ensure that the provisions agreed upon are followed. Many of these problems only come to light if thereisa collapseorif a resident protests.ReferencesCited"3D-footsinkhole opens in shopping center,"THEMORNINGCALL, Allentown, P A, August4,1986. "Another U. Saucon roadisaffectedbysinkhole,"THE MORNING CALL, Allentown, PA, March7,1987.Berg, ThomasM.and ChristineM.Dodge. ATLASOFPRELIMINARYGEOLOGICQUADRANGLEMAPSOFPENNSYLVANIA Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Topographic and Geologic Survey, 1981. Berton, Valerie. "Sinkhole threatens to undermineNorthamptonBoroughhome,"THEMORNINGCALL,Allentown,PA, September12,1987. Bieber, Scott. "Homes evacuatedashole opensinMacungie street,"THEMORNING CALL, Allentown, PA, June 24, 1986.Page64Bonaparte,RandRRBerg. "The useofgeosynthetics to support roadways over sinkhole prone areas," in Barry F. Beck and WilliamL.Wilson (eds.). KARSTHYDROGEOLOGY:ENGINEERINGANDENVIRONMENTALAPPLICATIONS.Rotterdam, Netherlands: AA Balkema, 1987. Buzgon, Michelle. "Residents flee street-gobbling Macungie hole,"THEMORNINGCALL, June 24, 1986. Cassler, Kristin. "Gas explosion kills woman, levels Allentown row homes,"THEMORNINGCALL, Allentown, P A, August 30, 1991. Clark, John and Denise Reaman. "City church collapses into sinkhole,"THEMORNINGCALL, Allentown, PA, February18,1988. Cowen, Dick. "City firm awarded contract toflllsinkholes at ABE (airport),"THEMORNINGCALL, Allentown, PA, July 27, 1988.


DoughertyDarrah, Tim. "PennDOT says itsnotto blame for latest sinkhole inUpperSaucon,"THEMORNINGCALL, Allentown, P A, September 25,1986. Dougherty, Percy H. and Michael Perlow. "TheMacungieSinkhole,LehighValley,Pennsylvania:CauseandRepair,"ENVIRONMENTALGEOLOGYANDWATERSCIENCE. Volume 12, Numbcr2,pp.89-98. Dougherty, Percy H. "Land use regulations in the Lehigh Valley: Zoning and subdivision ordinances in an environmentally sensitive karst region," in BarryF.Beck (ed.).ENGINEERINGANDENVIRONMENTALIMPACTSOFSINKHOLES AND KARST. Rotterdam, Netherlands:AABalkema, 1989. Dougherty, Percy H. "Spatial-temporal characteristicsofkarst subsidence in the Lehigh VallcyofPennsylvania," in Ernst H. and KarenM.Kastning (eds.). APPALACHIAN KARST. Huntsville, AL: National Speleological Socicty, 1991.DRBC(Delaware River Basin Commission). KARSTFEATURESMAPOFTHELEHIGHVALLEY. Trenton, NJ: DRBC, 1985. Joint Planning Commission.MODELKARST SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE. Allentown, P A: JPC, 1988. Joint Planning Commission.POPULATIONSUMMARYFORLEHIGHANDNORTHAMPTONCOUNTIES. Allentown, PA: JPC, 1991. Kochanov, William. SINKHOLES AND KARSTRELATEDFEATURESOFLEHIGHCOUNTY,PENNSYLVANIAOpen File Report. Harrisburg, P A: Pennsylvania Topographic and Geologic Survey, 1987.Page65Lash, Gary G.,PeterT. Lyttle, and JackB.Epstein.GEOLOGYOFANACCRETEDTERRAIN:THEEASTERNHAMBURGKLIPPE ANDSURROUNDINGROCKS,EASTERNPENNSYLVANIAHarrisburg, PA:49th Annual Field ConferenceofPennsylvania Geologists, 1984. Miles, Donald. Lower Macungie Township Solicitor, Personal Communication, 1989. Miller,B.L.LEHIGHCOUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA; GEOLOGYANDGEOGRAPHY.Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Topographic and Geologic Survey, 1934. Myers, P. D. and Michael Perlow. occurrence, and triggering mechanisms in the carbonate rocksofthe Lehigh Valley, eastern Pennsylvania," in BarryF.Beck (ed.).SINKHOLES:THEIRGEOLOGY,ENGINEERING,ANDENVIRONMENTALIMP ACT. Rotterdam, Netherlands:AABalkema, 1986. Whelan, Frank. "Another day in the Valley, anothersinkhole,"THEMORNINGCALL, Allentown, PA,June26, 2986. Wittman,Bob. "Deep historyofsinkholes in Allentown,"THEMORNINGCALL, Allentown,PAApril 10, 1988. Wood, at.WATERRESOURCESOFLEHIGHCOUNTY,PENNSYLVANIAWater ResourceReport31. Harrisburg, PA: Pcnnsylvania Geological Survey, 1972. YoungwOOd, Susan. "Muhlenberg dormitory gets that sinking feeling,"THEMORNINGCALL, Allentown, PA, January 30, 1988.ZONINGORDINANCEAND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCEOFLOWERMACUNGIE TOWNSHIP. Lower Macungie, PA: Lower Macungie Township BoardofSupervisors, 1989.


Taylor URBAN NONPOINT SOURCE MANAGEMENT PLANS IN KARST AREASOFSOUTH-CENTRAL KENTUCKYKentR.TaylorWaterQuality Specialist Warren County Conservation District 925 LoversLaneBowling Green, Kentucky 42103ABSTRACTThepresenceofurban nonpoint source impacts has been clearly documented for South-central Kentucky caves, groundwater and connecting streams. This paper discusses the informational needs for conducting preliminary nonpoint source assessments and a methodology for preparing a phaseoneplan to address remedial and preventative nonpoint source pollution control.Thenatureofkarst use impairmentisemphasized, using a watershed-based approach.Thepaper recommendswaysto use available information in complex groundwater basins to justifyorpreclude potentially expensive remedial programs.INTRODUCTIONNational research, particularly from the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (USEP A. 1983), has shown that urban runoffiscontaminated with pollutants whose concentrations may exceed accepted water quality standards. Likewise, studies in Kentucky have found that water quality in urban karst groundwater basins suchasin the vicinityofBowling Greenisadversely affectedbyurban nonpoint source pollution (Crawford, 1990, 1989). Domestic water supply and recreational uses in connecting surface streams and caves are believed tobethreatenedorsignificantly impairedbysediments contaminated with oils, pathogenic bacteria, heavy metals, and organic compounds derived principally from urban runoff (Kentucky DivisionofWater, 1990). Urban storm water in Bowling Green, for example,isdisposedofbymeansofkarst sinkholes, dry wells and swallets where untreated urban runoffisallowed to quickly penetrate shallow aquifers, potentially contaminating domestic water supplies, impairing cave uses and discharging pollutants at springs to surface watercourses downstream such as the Barren River and the Green River.Itisclear that nonpoint sources, sometimes in combination with industrial point source effluenis and substandard sanitary sewer connections result in impairmentsofcave and groundwater uses. In newly urbanizing groundwater basins, non point problems can be minimizedbyrequiring relatively inexpensive "best management practices" (BMPs) and environmental ordinance controls for new development. In already developed watersheds with identified use impairments, it will be more difficult and expenSivetoidentify and implement the kindsofcontrols necessary to fully remedy the observed impaired conditions.Anotherimportant issue which shouldbeconsidered in addressing existing cave and groundwater use impairment problemsistheunfamiliarity and lackoffinancial resourcesoflocal officials and citizens regarding nonpoint sources and water quality. Becauseofthe long-term historical degradationofurban cave streams in Kentucky, there exists a common perception that thereislittle potential for beneficial uses,otherthan drainage and wastewater disposal. As result, local officials may be reluctant to voluntarily implement control programs and invest limited resourcesinsolving a problem whichisnotaPage 66


high priority. Even with the encumbranceoffederal storm water regulations(U.S.EPArules mandating storm water quality controls for construction sitesoffive acresofmore), it appears that local government officials will need clear and conclusive information from groundwater basin assessments before they are likely to embrace potentially expensive non point source control programs.INFORMATION NEEDSOneofthe objectivesofthis paperisto define a realistic methodology to address the problems raised above.Thepurposeofthis methodologyisto accurately define the causes, effects and practical solutionsofurban nonpoint source impairments in specific cave and groundwater basins. This methodology will require the collection and analysisofsite specific data from demonstration project areas within designated urban groundwater basins.Asthe knowledgeofnonpoint source cause and effect relationships increases, the levelofnecessary data collection and analysis can be reduced to address primarily those factors which are unique tootherbasins. Several important' elements are needed in developinganurban non point source management plan for karst South-central Kentucky: Demonstrationofgroundwater basin specific cause and fact relationships between nonpoint resources and impairmentsofcave stream uses, Prototype studies performed in "representative" groundwater basins that identify critical non point source effects and demonstrate successful best management practices programs, serving as examplesofcost-effective nonpoint source management for karst areasofSouth-central Kentucky, Regional guidelines for groundwater basin analysis criteria, monitoring methods, intergovernmental agree ments, and strategies forTaylorwatershed-based planning programs developed to assist local unitsofgovernment, and BMP design criteria, facilities construction guidance, cost criteria, and maintenance needs. Cave use and groundwater quality enhancement should be the primary goalaswell as the critical measure of the effectivenessofa nonpoint source management plan.Othermeasuresofthe plan's effectiveness can and shouldbeused, e.g. location and eliminationofsubstandard sewer connections, location and cleanupofabandoned underground chemical storage tanks,' comprehensive testing and remediationoffailing chemical storage and septic tanks, water quality improvement, etc.RECOMMENDED METHODOLOGYTherecommended methodology for developing urban nonpoint source management plansisbased on two basic principles. The firstisthat effective planning must be watershed-based.Thesecondisthat the primary goalofthe planning process should be the restoration and protectionofdesirable cave stream uses. The methodologyistwo-phased.Thefirst phase involves the collectionofavailable information on the selected groundwater basin and its adjoining surface streams. This information will typicallybeadequate to draw significant conclusions about the natureofnon point source impacts, make preliminary recommen dations for effective BMPs, and to determine additional monitoring and assessment needs. Itisimportant to note that this information may lack storm event-related water quality data and therefore be inadequatetojustify to local officials significant expenditures for remedial measures, suchasretrofitting detention basins for pollutant removal. The second phaseofthe recommended urban non point source planning methodology involves more intensive data collection and assessment. Several representative groundwater basins shouldbeselected for more thorough water quality assessmentsPage67


(e.g. Turnhole Spring, Lost River, and Harris Spring) in a phase two analysis.Theknowleqge gained in these demonstration watersheds, in combination with existing information, maybeadequate to characterize and control non point problems in most remaining watersheds. The following are the key elementsofa recommended non point source management methodology: Define Water Resource Objectives Collect Groundwater Basin Data Water Quality, Biological and SedimentDatePoint Source EffluentDatePhysical Conditions Cave Habitat Drainage Maps/Sinkholes Land Use Maps Land Cover Maps/Orthophotos Soils Maps Existing Nonpoint Control Programs Perform Nonpoint Source Assessment Use Assessment Impact Assessment Cause Assessment Source Assessment Prepare Nonpoint Source Management Plan Identify Remedial Measures Identify Preventative Programs Develop Implementation Mechanism Develop Plan Evaluation ProgramDEMONSTRATION WATERSHEDThe Harris Spring Groundwater Basinislocated within the Bowling Green corporate limits, and muchofitisunder neworrecently built commercial and residential developments. Numerous sinkhole drainage wells, more than fifty small storm water detention facilities, andonelarge regional detention basin are located there. The functioningofthese facilities could beTaylorthreatened if sediment forms blockages in subsurface streams. In addition, aquatiC life and associated recreational benefitsofthe Barren River shouldbeprotectedorrestoredbyimplementing non point source BMPscin the basin. Damages from any chemical spills in the highly traveled ScottsvilleRoadand Interstate 65 area should be mitigable as well.SourcesofImpairment Once the use impairmentorpotential impairmentisdetermined, using available information outlined above, and the specific pollutants whicharecausing the water quality problem are identified, then those pollutants can be traced to their sources, and critical areas can be defined.Ifthe available informationisinadequate to draw cause-and-effect conclusions, a monitoring strategy shouldbedevelopedasfollows.WaterQuality Monitoring An adequate monitoring strategy should include: 1) weekly surface and groundwater monitoring at Harris Spring andotherselected locations in the basin, 2) quarterly benthic macroinvertebrate samplingofselected perennial and wet weather springs, 3) hourly chemical analysis at Harris Spring for at least twelve storm events, and4)dye tracing to develop a clearer understandingofthe subsurface now patterns. Chemical tests should be performedbya water quality lab certifiedbythe Kentucky DivisionofWater for quality assurance. Tests should be run for constituents including but not limited to: fecal coliform, suspended solids, conductivity, nitrates, total phosphorus, copper, cadmium, chromium, oil and grease, lead, pH, dissolved oxygen, triazine and volatile organic compounds.Fordemonstration purposes, monitoring stations should be set up to correspond with anticipated BMPs and adjacent sub-basins in order to utilize the EPA recommended "paired watershed" approach in lieuofthe traditional "before and after" monitoring. Documentation and data reductionofall water testPage68


results should indicate any significant cause and effect relationship between BMPs, water quality and use support.BMFImplementationThemeansofcontrollingoreliminating pollutants in critical areas should be through the useofbest management practices (BMPs). BMPs prescribed for residential, commercial and industrial land uses should include silt traps, infiltration basins, rock outlet protection, grassed waterways, straw bale dikes, ditch checks, diversions, plantings, seedings, mulching, underground storage tank leak detection and remediation, septic system inspection and ongoing maintenance on all installations for the lifetimeofeach practice. To treat sediment and nutrient problems in selected new and existing storm water detention basins, small constructed wetlands shouldbeinstalled above drainage wells to increase detention time, encourage infiltration, and facilitate settlingofsolids before theyenterthekarst aquifer. These practices along withotherstandard sediment control procedures such as the useoferosion control blanket, straw bale dikes and ditch checks, and temporary sediment traps and diversions during construction with permanent vegetation establishment after constructionareproposed for each BMP installation. Design guidance on these practices shouldbemodeled after those specifiedbythe SoilConservationService TechnicalGuideandsupplementedbylocally accepted engineering practices.CostandBenefitAnalysis A complete evaluationofthe project should be made, linking an assessmentofwater quality improvements with the economic impactsofBMPs and the overall project's impact on participating landowners, the community, and usersofimportant groundwater resources.TaylorCONCLUSIONSTherecommended approach for addressing existing cave stream use impairmentsisto develop a watershed based non point source management plan.Thefirst phaseofthis approachisthe collectionofexisting information and the assessmentofwatershed conditions. Collectionofadditional watershed-specific data and in-depth nonpoint source assessmentisrecommended for representative demonstration watersheds. This information can thenbeused to develop management plans forothersimilar watersheds within the region. A critical elementofthis approachisthe evaluationofmanagement practices after they are implemented, ideally in demonstration watersheds, to determine the effectivenessinreducing identified problems and to modify management plans,asappropriate. Itishoped that impending U.S.EPAstorm water regulations will recognize the appropriatenessofa flexible approach to nonpoint source control. Likewise,itishoped that the regulations will place greater emphasis on the attainmentofdesirable cave stream uses rather than strictly on controlling the qualityofstorm water discharges.REFERENCESCrawford, NicholasC.eta1.1990. Agricultural andUrbanNonpoint Source Pollution Impacts on karst aquifersinthe Pennyroyal Karst RegionofKentucky andPartIIIAgriculture nonpoint source pollution impacts on karst aquifers: Lost River Karst Groundwater Basin, Warren County, Kentucky. Crawford, NicholasC.1989.The Karst LandscapeofWarren County: Warren County Comprehensive Plan Technical Report, Bowling Green, Kentucky. Crawford, NicholasC.1982.Hydrogeologic problems resulting from development upon karst terrain, Bowling Green, Kentucky. Guidebook prepared for Karst HydrolOgy Workshop, Nashville, Tennessee.Page 69


DivisionofWater, Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet. 1990. 1990 KentuckyReportto Congress on Water Quality. Taylor,K.and D.W. Dreher. 1990. Methodology for Developing Urban Nonpoint Source Management PlansinNortheastern IlIinois. Northeastern lllinois Planning Commission. Chicago, Illinois.TaylorU.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1983. Resultsofthe Nationwide UrbanRunoffProgram. Washington D.C.APPENDIXUrban Nonpoint Source Variables and Components Source Category Point Sources Municipal Industrial Nonpoint Sources Construction Urban Runoff Resource Extraction Land Disposal Industrial Activity Filling and Raining Atmospheric Deposition Golf CourseRunoffFertilizer Application Herbicide/Algicide App!. Leaky Storage Spills Cause Category Contaminants Sediments Pesticides Toxic Organics Metals Ammonia Chlorine Nutrients Biological Oxygen Demand Salinity Pathogenic Bacteria Radon Oil and Grease Volatile Organics Suspended Solids Other Causes Modified Hydrograph Streambank Erosion Habitat Alteration Low Dissolved Oxygen (adapted from Taylor and Dreher, 1990) Impact Category Turbidity Sedimentation Odors Taste Noxious Plants Abnormal Water Temperature FishKillsSkin Irritation Other Health Impacts Designated Uses Aquatic Life Fishing Water Supply Swimming Boating Passive Recreation Navigation Industrial Cooling Water Education Research Land and Nature Preservation Best Managcment Practices Detention Basins Vegetative Stabilization Rock Outlct/Inlct Protection Sediment Traps Silt Fences Grassed Waterways Ponds Diversions Infiltration Basins Straw Bale Dikes Leachate Collection Systems Channel Restoration Mulching Erosion Control Structures Storage Tank Inspection Tree Planting Sctbacks/Buffer Strips Permit RequirementsPage 70


Groves/WicksENVIRONMENTALEFFECfSOFACID MINE DRAINAGE IN KARST TERRAINChristopher G. Groves Center forcaveand Karst Studies DepartmentofGeography and Geology Western Kentucky University Bowling Green, KentuckycarolM.Wicks DepartmentofEnvironmental Sciences UniversityofVirginia Charlottesville, VirginiaABSTRACTA common geologic situation occurs along the marginsofthe southern Appalachian Plateaus in which karst-forming carbonate rocks are overlainbysequencesofPennsylvanian clastic rock.Insome locations miningofthis coal has resulted in acid mine drainage (AMD) contaminationofstreams enteringthekarst below, creating potential environmental threats to these flow systems. In the study detailed geochemical sampling and analysis along such a system(camp'sGulfBranch in Van Buren County, Tennessee) was undertaken in order to understand the interactions between the AMD waters andthecarbonate rocks, as wellasenvironmental implications for the karstasa resultofthese interactions. Initially,AMDwaters are characterizedasvery low inpHand high in sulfate, iron, and manganese.Uponcontact with the carbonates, buffering due to calcite dissolution as well as dilution from inputofnoncontaminated groundwater causes a rapidpHrise to approximately neutral levels.Thewatersofcamp'sGulfBranch, for example, range inpHfrom 3.3 to 7.7 alongthestudy reach. ThispHChange, in turn, controls manyoftheotheraccompanying chemical changes impacting water chemistry.Bythetimecamp'sGulfBranch emerges from a large springatthe baseofthe plateau, these naturally occurring reactions have brought eachofthe serious contaminants (sulfate, iron, and manganese) to within drinking water standards.Anenvironmental gradient also exists with respect to varying typesofaquatic life observed along the flowpath during sampling trips.Please contact the authors for further information on this paper.Page71


PasquarelllBoyerWATER QUALITY IMPACTSOFAGRICULTUREONKARST CONDUIT WATERS GREENBRIER COUNTY, WVG.c.Pasquarell and D.B. Boyer, Appalachian Soil and Water Conservation Research Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, U.S.D.A, Beckley, West Virginia 25802ABSTRACTWeekly samples were taken beginning in the Fall1990from four springs draining two Karst basins to determine the impactofanimal grazing agriculture on conduit waters. Atrazine and its metabolites were detected in all springs at low levels 0.2JLgIl) during and after the periodofapplication. Mean nitrate levels were 13.6, and 10.8 mgll from the two basins. Mean bacterial levels for the two respective basins were101,and 139 colonies per 100mlfor fecal coliform, and 266, and 276 colonies per 100mI,for fecal streptococcus. Samples were taken from nine sites in cave streams which underlie oneofthe basins. Mean nitrate levels ranged from 13.4 to 63.7 mgll, with three sites above40mgll, and four below 20 mgll. Fecal coliforrns ranged from 110 to 28,588 colonies per 100 ml.Onesite, which had the highest nitrates and fecal coliforrns, receives flow from a sinkhole whichisimmediately adjacent to a feedlot on the surface.1IntroductionThe impact on water qualitybyagricultural activity in Karst terrainisan important consideration for resource management within the Appalachian Region. Karst areas comprise about eighteen percentofthe Regions' land surface, upon whichislocated an estimated one thirdofits farms and cattle. About one-thirdofthe Regions' agricultural market value production occurs on Karst terrain. Becauseofthe interrupted surface drainage and conduitflowin mature Karst terrain, a relatively rapid and direct connection exists between surface water and groundwater ([9]). Sourcesofcontaminationmaybe detected miles from their origin within very short travel times. Large variations in groundwater quality can occur over short time spans ([5]). Researchers have demonstrated the potential for acute groundwater contaminationinKarst areas. Average well water quality has been shown to degrade with increasing proximity to agricultural activity ([8], [11]). Significant localized increases in well contamination have been shown tooccur due to inflow from barnyard wastes ([3]).Inextensively row cropped areas, high levelsofnitrates and pesticides have been found in major springs ([5]).Page 72Livestock agriculture presents a unique combinationofpotential impacts on groundwater quality. Compared to row cropping, livestock management utilizes less land area for crops, and therefore less agrochemical per acreoffarm. However, livestock wastes constitute a significant sourceofnitrogen and bacteria ([1]). Some animal wasteisconcentrated in feedlotsorbarns, where periodic washings may enter nearby sinkholes. Itisimportant to understand how these factors affect ground water quality. The present study focuses attentiononthe impact animal grazing systems have on conduit water quality. Conduit waters may have characteristics quite different from water in the surrounding fractured material. In mature Karst basins, a portionofsurface runoffistransported to the conduit system through surface features suchassinkholes and sinking streams. These collectedflowstypically resurgeatidentifiable base level springs ([9]). Such springs are therefore logical locations for obtaining a composite conduit water sample. This work presents data from several such springs which drain from agricultural areas.


-. ............,...-:"'80e70260050040230e200103 .----COlinACT CAvES 0 PasquarelllBoyer .ALO;:RSONLl;'cSTONi -",I--------_. GR;:;:IJV]LLESHALE I (L---------l::::lUII:]QN 10 1 G---------io:: PiCKAWAYI LWlcSTONE : gszTAGCARDSHALf-i W----------1WDENMAR1 G FORt1AnON1 1---------.: __I MACCRADY SHI-.LE Figure1:GENERALIZED SlRATIGRAPHIC SECTIONOF TIlE GREENBRIER GROUP IN GREENBRIER COUNTY (FROM HELLER,1980)2StudyAreaandSamplingProceduresThestratigraphicsettingofthestudyareaistheGreenbrierGroup,whichisofMississippian age,andpredominantlycomprisedoflimestonewithinterbeddedshales ([6]).Thegeneralizedstratigraphicsectionispresented in Figure1.Thesurface isrepletewithmatureKarstic expressions.Thepredominatelocationfor cavedevelopmentin thisareaisalongthebasalcontactbetweentheHillsdaleLimestoneunitandtheMaccrady Shale. This topography, lyingontheKarstplateauofthecentralGreenbrierValleyandtermedthe"GreatSavannah", is as well developed as anyotherKarstregion withintheUnitedStates ([2]).Theprincipal studyareaisTheHoleBasin,anapproximately 5.6squaremile agricultural area locatedsouthofSpringCreekandwestoftheGreenbrierRiver(Figure2).Humanenterprisewithin this basin isalmostexclusively agricultural.Thereare38farms inTheHoleBasin. Accordingtoa recent land use survey,about68percentoftheareais in pasture,10percentis in cropsandhay,and20percentisforested.TheHole,anextensivecontactcave system, underliesthebasin,andresurgesoutofseveral springs which immediatelyenterSpringCreek([7]).ThreePage73resurgencepointsweremonitoredfromTheHoleBasin:BurnsCave, Legg Spring,andBlueHole. A second studyareaisDavis Spring Basin, a76squaremilearealocatedsouthof,andadjacent toTheHoleBasin (Figure2).Davis Springistheresurgence point forthebasin, whichisknown to receive flow from allofthecontactcave systemssouthofTheHole, andnorthoftheGreenbrierRiver.Theseinclude Ludington, McClungs, Maxwelton, Benedicts, and Wades caves '([2]). DavisSpringisthelargest known spring inthestateofWestVirginia ([7]). A land use survey wasnotavailable for Davis Spring Basinatthetimeofwriting. However, animal agriculture occupies amajorportionoftheland area.Populationcentersarerelatively small. Weeklywatersamplesweretaken fromthefour springs,andfrom sites within SpringCreekwhichareupstreamanddownstreamofthethree resurgence points. Sampleswereanalyzed for triazine herbicides, nitrates, fecal coliform (FC), and fecal streptococcus (FS).


PasquarelllBoyerLegend Dye Trace Spring --Drainage Divide Surlace Stream >--Sink Figure2:Drainage Basin Boundaries and Principle Dye Traces, Jones,1973Attention was given to triazine herbicides because atrazineiswidely usedoncorn crops which are harvested as feed for livestock. Elevated concentrationsofnitrogen and fecal bacteriaaregood indicatorsoffecal contamination ([1]). Triazine herbicides were determined usinggaschromatography/mass spectrometry. Nitrates were determinedbycadmium reduction ([10]). Bacteria were enumerated using the membrane filter technique, and verifiedbygas productioninlauryl tryptose andECbroth ([10]).Page74Thepresent work was initiated ia several phases. The nitrate, FC, and FS data analyses werebegun in October 1990, February 1991, and March 1991, respectively. Sample analyses for triazines began in April 1991, one month prior to the principal periodofapplication. The data presented below almost exclusively represents basenow conditions. Becauseofthis, it was not possible to develop correlations between any ofthe measured parameters and either rainfallorspring level. However, such relationships will likely emerge once a more complete data setisassembled.


PasquarelliBoyerAtrazineNitratemean.1range CVnmean1rangeCVnSite (ltg/I) (%)(mg/I)(%)Upstr.Spring Ck.0.000.00-0.00 113.21.5-5.63546Downstr. Spring Ck.0.00 0.00-0.00 9 4.21.5-7.03446BurnsCave0.07 0.01-0.16 68 10 13.3 10.6-15.9 10 46Legg i Spring0.03 0.00-0.09 83 10I14.0 10.6-16.71145Blue Hole0.02 0.00-0.06 1721112.6 8.7-17.3 1546Davis Spring0.05 0.00-0.16 93 12 10.8 7.4-13.11446Table1:SummaryofWater Quality Data: Nitrate and Atrazine3RESULTSANDDISCUSSIONInTables 1and3arepresentedthemean, minimum-maximum, coefficientofvariation (CV), .andnumberofdata(n)for atrazine, nitrates, fecal coliform,andfecal streptococcus.Thepresenceofatrazineandits metabolites inconduitwaterspresentsthemost certain evidenceofagricultural impacts(Table1). Basedonthesepreliminary investigations, itappearsthatatrazine levelsarewell belowtheEPAaction limitof3 ppb.Ontheotherhand,thepresenceofanyatrazineconstitutescause for reasonable concern, since itisappliedtolessthan10percentofthewatershedlandarea.Totheauthors'knowledge,therearenocropping areas which' immediately adjoin SpringCreekanywhere. abovethedownstream sampling site.Therefore,any atrazineenteringSpringCreekislikely derived primarily fromgroundwaterratherthansurface runoff.Thesesmallconcentrationsareapparently diluted in SpringCreekto levels whicharebelowtheminimumdetectionlimitofabout O.01JLg/l. Theconsistently highnitratelevels in all four springsdemonstratesthepotential impactofsurficial Karst featuresonthequalityofwaterintheconduitsystem.InTable2,meannitratevaluesarelisted fromthepresentwork, and for waters from portionsoftheGreenbrierGroup,asmeasuredin wellwatersamples byHeller([6]).Thenitratelevels from Burns Cave, Legg Spring, andBlueHoleareaveragedtogetherto yieldthemeanforthe"HoleSprings". Well samples generally characterizethediffuse,orfracturedportionoftheaquifer. Heller'sdataisthereforeconsideredrepresentativeofdiffuse flows withineachformation.Nitratelevels intheMaccrady Hillsdale aquiferareaboutone fi(th ofthoseintheHoleSprings,andonefourthofthosein Davis Spring.Thehigher nitrates inthespringsareinterpretedas being derived fromnitrateenrichedrunofffrom pastures, feedlots, etc. whichiscapturedbyKarst features and delivered directly totheconduitsystem. AsseeninTable3, fecal bacterial levels arel1igh enoughtoindicate significant animal and/Qrhumanimpacts.Theiralmost continu,Ous presence at all sites suggeststhatelevatednitratelevelsareclosely associated with fecal pollution.BothFCandFSinthespringsareofthesameorderofmagnitude as in Spring Creek. Thisisin contrast tothemarked differences innitrateconcentrationsbetweenthetwo.Page75


PasquarelllBoyerAlderson Pickaway-TaggardMaccrady-HoleDavisLimestone UnionShaleHillsdaleSpringsSpringn=31811 3913846 NO; 1045.9 11.9 2.713.610.8(mg/I)Table2:Mean PropertiesofFormation Waters (Heller,1980),compared to Mean PropertiesofHole Springs and Davis Spring (present work).Fecal Coliform FecalStreptococcusmeanIrange CVnmeanIrangeCVnSite(#/100ml)(%)(#/100ml)(%)Upstr.SpringCk. 116 0-633 108 29 660 16-2093 90 24Downstr.SpringCk. 183 0-520 80 29 517 13-1920 10324BurnsCave134 0-1000 152 29 441 20-3793 20324LeggSpring104 4-540 116 2824111-1453 15724BlueHole 66 0-980 268 29 117 1-535 12124DavisSpring139 6-1434 199 29 276 13-2333 182 24Table3:SummaryofWater Quality Data: Fecal Coliform and Fecal Streptococcus4 Preliminary Cave SurveyAnother aspectofthe present work which has just begun,isto determine the impactofagricultural activityonthe cave environment. Two different systems are being studied, each o( which consistsofa main stream receiving several feeder streams. Sampling sites include each feeder stream, and points within the main stream which are upstream and downstreamofthe feeders. Samples have been analyzed for nitrate and fecal coliform concentrations. The resultsofthe survey are presented in Tables 4 and5.Sampling began in July, 1991, and eachofthe values in the table are basedontwo sample sets from different sampling dates.Page76Nitrate levels in the System I main stream decrease in the downstream direction. This decreaseisnot due to dilutionbythe feeder streams.Themain streamisvisually observed tobelarger than anyofthe and all three feeders have nitrate levels close toorabove the 13.6 mgllievel at the downstream site. This decreaseisapparently causedbydilution from unseen sources, suchasinfiltration waters. Neither the three feeder streams, nor any unseen input produce a measurable change in the System I main stream fecal coliform counts. AllFelevels are quite close, with the mean count in the three feeder streams at135.Given the inherent variability in the


PasquarelllBoyersiteNitrateFecalColiformdescription(mg/I)(#/100ml)Upstream17.2154Feeder115.9170Feeder213.4110Feeder340.1124Downstream13.6153Table4:Cave Stream System I Nitrates and Fecal ColiformssiteNitrateFecalColiformdescription(mg/I)(#/100ml)Upstream20.4114Feeder128.11430Feeder263.728,588Downstream42.3>1867Table5:Cave Stream System II Nitrates and Fecal Coliformsenumeration technique, itisnot contradictory that measuredFealongthemain stream remains nearly constant while nitrates decrease. Nitrate values are generally assumed to be accurate to within 5 percent, while fecal coliform levels are considered significant to within 100 percent. In contrasttoSystemI,the main stream in System II was substantially degradedbyits feeder streams. Nitrates were about doubled, and fecal coliform levels increasedatleast one orderof magnitude!, from upstream to downstream. In both feeders, the fecal coliform levels wereatleast one orderofmagnitude higher than for anyofthe sampling sites in System I. Feeder 2 contains both the highest nitrates, and the highest fecal coliform levels among the nine sites. Nitrates inbothsamples from Feeder 2 were above theEPAaction levelof44.5 mgll. This stream originates from a sinkhole whichislocated near, and downslope from a feedlot.Themarked contamination levelsmayarise from washingofanimal waste into the sinkhole.Thestateofaquatic fauna in the cave provide another indicator for the presenceofpollution. Enumerationofaquatic invertebrate species were performedatall sampling sites (data not shown). The results were indicativeofa nutrient enriched environment. Species diversityoftroglobiteswassubstantially reduced from that found in other, less contaminated contact cavesinthe same county ([4]). Cattle are -periodically present at,ornear, all spring and surface water sites mentioned in the previous section.Thepresent data suggests, however, that a major portionofthe fecal bacteria in springsiscarried therebyconduit waters. Thisissupportedbythe fact that the portionofthe cave system sampled contained fecal coliform at levels consistent with,orgreater t!tan those discovered in the springs.IThe fecal coliform count for the downstream site could only be given a lower bound because levels were too high on the plate to enumerate. This valueiscalculated from the highest allowable plate count (200 colonies according to [10]), and the dilution used. Higher levels were discernableinFeeders 1 and 2 because they were anticipated, and higher sample dilutions were employed.Page 77


PasquarelliBoyer5 Concluding RemarksA better understandingofthe movementofagricultural contaminants in Karst terrainisessential in order to safeguard groundwater in such areas. Nitrate and atrazine were belowEPAaction levels in the springs and surface waters studied. However, the sensitivityofthe Karst system topotentiarcontaminationisapparent.Forexample, although the percent land use for cropsissmall, atrazine was discovered in all four springs. The nearly continuous presenceoffecal bacteria suggests that untreated spring waters cannot be assumed to be safe sources for domestic use. Also, acute fecal pollution was observed in localized areas within some cave streams. Efficient and affordable management practices must be developed to aid farmers in minimizing these impacts.References[1][2][3] [4][5][6]Agriculture and Groundwater Quality,May 1985, Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, Ames, Iowa, Report No. 103, 33 37. Balfour, W.M.,The OriginofCavern Passages Developedatthe Contactofthe Greenbrier Series and the Maccrady Series, Greenbrier County, J.v.v. TheRegion Record, Win ter/Spring 1973, 1(3), 15-17. Brown, c.J., and Ewers,RO.,1991,ImpactsofBarnyard Wastes on Groundwater Nitrate-N Concentrationsina Maturely Karsted Carbonate AquiferofSouth-Central Kentucky.Proceedingsofthe Appalachian Karst Symposium, ed. E.H. andKM.Kastning, Radford University, Radford, VA 205-210. Culver, D.C., personal communication. Hallberg,G.R,Libra,RD.,and Hoyer, B.E.,1985, Nonpoint Source ContaminationofGround WaterinKarst-Carbonate AquifersinIowa.Perspectives on Nonpoint Source Pollution Proceedings,EPA440/5-85-001,109 114. Heller,S.A,1980,A Hydrogeologic Studyofthe Greenbrier Limestone KarstofCentral Greenbrier County, West Virginia.M.S. Thesis, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV.[7] [8] [9][10][11]Page78Jones,W.K,1973,HydrologyofLimestone KarstinGreenbrier County, West Virginia.West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey Bulletin 36, 49 pgs. Ogden,AE.,Hamilton,K,Eastburn, E.P., Brown, T.L., and Pride, T.E., 1991,Nitrate Levelsinthe Karst GroundwatersofKentucky.Proceedingsofthe Appalachian Karst Sympo sium, ed. E.H. andKM.Kastning, Radford University, Radford, VA. 197-204. Quinlan, J.F., Alexander, E.C.,How Often Should Samples Be TakenAtRelevant Locations for Reliable Monitoring or Pollutants FromAnAgricultural, Waste Disposal,OrSpill Site In a Karst Terrane? A first Approximation.Proceedingsofthe 2nd MultidisciplinaryConferenceonSinkholesandtheEnvironmental ImpactsofKarst, Orlando, FL, Feb. 9-11, 1987,277-286.Standard Methods for the ExaminationofWater and Wastewater.Ed. L.S. Clesceri,AE.Greenberg,RRTrussel, 17th edition, 1989, American PublicHealthAssociation, Washington, D.C. Tyron, c.P., 1976,Ground-Water Quality VariationinPhelps County, Missouri.Groundwater, 14(4),214-223.


LangeHYDROLOGICFLOWNET MAPPING AND KARST-CONDUITDETECTIONUSING TIIE NATURALELECTRICFIELD-ArthurL.Lange The Geophysics GroupABSTRACTWhen waterflowsthrough conduitsora porous medium, an electric currentisgenerated whose potential gradientisproportional to the driving pressure. Thiselectrokineticeffect occurs wherever waterflowsin the ground and gives rise to a voltage distribution on the surface corresponding to the horizontal componentofthe underlying hydrologic flownet. Thus the surfaceelectriccurrentpatternproduced from a natural-potential survey can be interpreted in terms of the subsurfacefluid-flowregime.Examplesofflownet interpretations from natural-potential (NP) surveys around wells in non-karstic terrain are shown. In karst, caverns and active conduits give risetocharacteristic electric signaturesonthesurface expressive of the nature of the undergroundflow.These signatures form discrete anomalies in the deduced karst flownet that correspondinlocation to the subterranean voids and streams. The natural-potential techniqueisof particular value for mapping karst conduits between the endpointsoftracer tests in karst. Thus itisan effective tool for targeting monitor wells and for detecting and mapping caverns beyond their known extents. Introduction Patternsofd.c.electric potentials occur everywhere upon the ground surface and beneath it. These are the resultofambient electric currents generatedbynatural phenomena, including oxidation/reduction reactions around mineralized bodies, localized thermal heating, mixingoffluids, and theflowofgroundwater through pores, fissures and conduitsofearth materials. The productionofa natural-potential (NP) fieldbymoving fluids constitutes the family of processes referred toaselectrokinesis,orelectrofiltration.Inthis report,weshall focus on the meansbywhich measurementsofelectric potential on the ground surface can illuminate active karst conduits in the subsurface. First, however, itisnecessary to summarize more generally the principles underlying the electrokinetic,orstreaming,phenomenon.Page79Basic electrokinetic Figurelaillustrates the relationship between the driving pressure and the resulting electric potential gradient in the simple one-dimensional laboratory caseofa liquid solution passing through two separated permeable plugs subjected to equal pressure gradients. A charge separationisnormally present around material grains immersed in an electrolyte, such that,inthe caseofsilica, a double layerofions developsasthe grain surface, where negative ions attach to the solid, and positive ions surround the grains within the fluid. With fluidflow,the most mobile positive ions are displaced from the double layer, leaving an unbalanced negative charge on the grains. the cumulative effect of charge separationisa potential gradient positive in the directionofflow.In Figure la, fluid movement generates a greater potential in the


a+ --Lange-----Figurela.Aliquidforcedthrough a tubecontainingsilicasand (upper example)generatesanelectricpotentialgradientpositiveintheflowdirectionandproportionaltothegradientofdrivingpressure.Thelesserpotentialgradientdevelopedinthelower example ofagravel-filledtubeistheresultofalessercouplingcoefficientassociatedwiththelargergrain-sizeofthegravel.Figurelb.Ifthetwoabove conduitsabutoneanother,butremainpartitioned,thevoltageprofilemeasuredacrossthedownstream endsre1ativetotheinfluxisa pos itivestepfunction,correspondingtothepotentialgradientsofFigure6a.cFigurelc.Uponremovingtheseparatorbetweentheabove channels aportionoftheflowofthesandmediumisrefractedtowardthemediumofgreaterhydraulicconductivity,butoflower couplingcoefficient,sothattheterminalvoltageprofileisgradational.Page80


tubeofquartzsand (upper case) than inthelower exampleofgravel.Undernormal circumstances the relationship between potential and pressure differentialsislinear;theslopeofthelineisthecoupling coefficient.Thecoefficientistheresultofchemical and hydrologic propertiesofboththesolid and the fluid; for example, inthecase illustrated, couplingisinversely related to grain size, permeability and salinity (Ahmad, 1964)1.TheeffectsoftemperatureandpHaremorecomplex (Ishido&Mizutani, 1982);thUS,inthecaseofa carbonate in waterthatis the couplingisinverted; that is, the potential becomesmorenegative in the directionofflow, according to Scherer&Ernstson, 1986. In the caseoffissure-flow, Bog

Lange 2L_ _', Figure2a.Topography andgridofareconnaissancenatural-potentialsurveyinloessofnorthern Logan County, Kansas. Contoursinfeet;shadingshigh1ightthehigherandlowerregions.(TGGdata).Figure2b.Natural-potentialpatterninmillivoltscontouredfromtheabovegrid.Inthisveryhomogeneous medium, astronginversecorrelationhasresultedbetweenNPresponseandelevation.Orthogonalarrows(directedtowardthepositivepotential)areheresuperimposedontheelectricpotential.Thesearrowscorrespondtothehorizontalcomponentofpotentialgradient,orcurrentlines.Thecurrentpattern,inturn,approximatesthehorizontalprojectionofhydraulicflowpathsoftheflownet. .--.. \ "" \"0,I,,!Figure2c.Currentpositiveattractionhydraulicflowpaths ...., arrowssuperimposedontopographydemonstrateastrongtowardthedrainages(lociofdischarge),typicalofina homogeneous medium.Page82


oIoLange200400100600FT200MFigure 3. Natural potential distribution (solid contours) correspondingtothe coneofdepressionarounda pumped well on the Kilty ranch, Goshcn County, Wyoming.Theorthogonal arrows (dashed) depict the configurationofthe electric gradients, which approximate the hydraulic now paths during recovery.(TGGdata, courtesyofKevin Kilty).Field instrumentation and proceduresOstensibly simple,thenatural potential apparatus usedbytheauthorconsistsofa pairofsealed non-polarizing copper/copper sulfate electrodes, an 800m reelofcadmium-bronze wire (color-calibratedbydistance) and a digital multimeterofultrahigh(l000MU)input impedance. A base electrodeisburiedata point central to the area being surveyed, and a connecting wireisunreeled out to the starting pointsofsuccessive lines.Itispreferable to refer all readings toonecommon base, ifatall possible; if not, secondary electrode bases must be establishedbymultiple ties.Fourreadings in shallow holes (Z 10 em) are read within a radiusofaboutonemeter around the baseatthebeginning and endofeach line traverse. Readings are then madeatsuccessive points along a line; usually two holes are sampled and averaged at each station: more, if they exceed a designatedPage83threshold; e.g., 4 millivolts. Typical spacings used for detecting karst conduitsis7.5m (25ft)orless, with line separationsof30 to 60m (lOO-2ooft). Occasional resistance readings are made to insure continuityofthe wire. Following completionofa line segmentorthe complete line, theoperatorreturns to the base station and rereads its four holes.TheVOltagedifferencesinanytwobase observations represents temporal drift, for which the line data must be compensated. Data are entered into a computeratthe endofeach day and drift corrected. Plotsofvoltage versus distance can then be generated using agraphiCSprogram eitheronthe screenorasa printout. Additional data treatment mayberequired,such:asremovalofelevation effects, cathodic protection trends, etc. Finally the NP data are contoured to provide an areal mapofpotential distribution, which may be translatable into an approximate flow net,asdemonstrated above.


LangeFigure 4.Natural-potentialresponsearisingatthesurfaceduetowaterelectrokineticpolarityiftheinfiltratingtheroofofa cave.anoma1yisexpectedtobenegat ivewaterisbasic,andpositiveifacidic.Thein --/ NPresponseFigure5.Natural-potentialresponseresultingfromupwardmigrationofwater undercapillaryaction,fromthemoist environmentofthecaverntothearidsurfaceterrainwhereevapotranspirationtakes place. Inthiscaseapositivesurfaceanomalyisexpected inthecaseofbasicwater.Page84


LangeFigure 6.NPresponse over the main passagesofKartchner Caverns State Park, Arizona.Theanomaly hereisa compound feature consistingofa double positive flankedbylows, possibly the resultofupward migrationofwater from the very moist cave environment. (From Arizona Conservation Projects,Inc"fundedbythe Arizona State Parks Department).ORIGINOFCAVERN ANOMALIESTheinfiltrationmodelBefore addressing the relationship between the natural electric field and karst streams, we shall consider the more general caseofthe effectofan empty void on the electric fieldatthesurface. In a carbonate environment, infiltration occurs primarily through joints and fissures. Intheroofofa cave, downward flow ispreferentially favored,butbecauseofthe difference in rock chemistry, an anomaly can be expected whose polarity depends on thepHofthe electrolyte (Scherer&Ernstson, 1986). A negative anomaly, corresponding to apH>7isillustrated in Figure4.Inthe caseofacidic water, a positive anomaly can be expected overthevoid.Thepreceding mechanismisbut oneofseveral that might be invoked to explain the NP anomalies observed over actual caverns.ThereportbyLange&Quinlan (1988) ,summarizes severalotherlikely explanations. In addition, the possibility that waterismoving fromthecave upward towards the surface under capillary flow must be seriously considered as an explanationofpositive anomalies observed over caves in desert environments (Figure 6).Page85PreviousNPsurveysovercavesTheGeophysics Group previously mapped NP responses over caves in Missouri, Kentucky, Arizona and Nevada; however, polaritiesofthe anomalies did not always conform to the simple rules outlined above.Forexample, while the responses along two lines over Cave Valley Cave, Nevada exh.ibited sharp positives superimposed on broad lows, typicalofa limestone overlainbyalluvium, there occurred hereatmost only afewcentimetersofsoil over the rock.Atthe Ozark Underground Laboratory, Missouri, negative anomalies coincided with underlying cave passages (Lange&Quinlan, 1988), wherethecountry rockisa dolomite. At Kartchner Caverns State Park, Arizona a compound anomaly is observed (in summer) over the caveasa whole (Langeetal., 1990) (Figure 6). Lange and Wiles (1991) found an overall low zone characterizing the mazeofJewel Cave, South Dakota. Meanwhile, the NP profile over Inner Space Cavern, Georgetown, Texas, produced prominentpositiveanomalies developed over the mapped cave passages (Figure 8). Clearly, different rockorfluid properties are influencing the resulting surface expressions in the different environments.


ftlillivoltt'"N o '" LangeINNERSPACE CAVERN, TEXAS <", co cci:Z'" Z Q:wUO<-0-1Vl",ei -, '" Figure 7.PositiveNPanomalies correspondingtopassages inInnerSpace Cavern, Texas.Theextreme negat iveanomalyalongsidethehighwayisduetoa buriedpipeline.Figure 8.Electricflowlineswrapping around akarstconduit as aresultofapotentialgradientsetupbywater flowingfroma sourceatAtoa dischargepointat8.TheresultingNPsurfaceprofilesmeasured overthetwoconduitendsareofoppositepolarities.Theoretically,acrossthemidlineoftheconduit,noanomalywouldappear.Page86


Lange !J'" HONEYCREEKWATERCAVE, E "Figure 9. Compound anomalies over segments of the longest eaveinTexas. Here each conduitisexpressed as a sharp M-shaped positive.ThecavestreammodelLaboratory experiments have demonstrated that measurable potential gradients can be generatedbyan electrolyte flowing through fissures (Bogoslovsky&Ogilvy, 1972). Itistherefore reasonable to expect a response from a flowing cave stream, wherein a separationofions can occur along the conduit walls. Thus, referring back to Figurela,if we emptyoutthe sand and gravel from the tubes, negative ions still collect aroundthewallsofthe conduit, while the positive ions align themselves towards the discharge end, resulting in a downstream opening thatismore positive than the upstream intake.Thetube becomes a charged half cellofa battery, which, because the surrounding earth is somewhat conductive, sets up a return,orconduction, current following the flow paths that wrap completely around the conduit.Theprocessisillustrated in the simplified conduitofFigure8.Waterenters the constricted underground conduitatA and moves (either under free-flowingortube-full conditions) to the discharge endB,where it can form an underground poolora surface rise.Thepotential measuredatthe surface over the downstream endispositive relative to the mid-lineofthe system; andattheupstream end, negative. These peaksofopposing polarity are accompaniedbylesser contrary excursions to either sideofthe conduit as a resultofthe electric field pattern generatedbytheflow.Becausethepeak response on a profile over thePage87downstream endispOSitive, and that over the upstream end, negative, it stand to reason that,aswe read successive profiles towards the middleofthe system, these amplitudes decline. Somewhere, about the mid-lineoftheconduit, response should be flat! This effect may explain why different polarities can be observed over different segmentsofthe same cave system. And if somewhere the signal dwindles awaytonothing,onemaybestanding over the electrical midriffofthe system.Natural-potentialanomaliesobservedovercavestreamsIn his penetrating monographongeo-electricphenomena,Krajew (1957) cqncludesthatelectrokinetic effects over stream channels develop only along the axisofthe stream, not transverse to theflow.A numberoftraverses carriedoutbyusover mapped cave systems demonstrate that Krajew's conclusionisincorrect; very clear-cut NP anomalies have been observed over karst streams. Texas' longest cave system--Honey Creek Water Cave--produces sharp anomalies both positive and negative over different segmentsofthe system (Figure 9). Strong signals"are detected through more than 94m (310ft)ofoverburden above Big Spring, Missouri, the nation's largest spring (Figure 10). A small limestone spring in Cave Valley, Nevada (O.025m3/sec;pH=5)produces a 20mV very sharp negative anomaly some 75m (250ft) from the orifice (Figure 11).


BIG SPRING. MISSOURILangeFigure10.NP anomalies over possible conduitsofthe nation's largest spring-Big Spring, Missouri. Prominent negatives appeared along the ridge, 95m (315ft) above the orifice. (CourtesyofOzark National Scenic Riverways).CAVEVALLEY SPRING, NEVADAN/SPROJECTION westward projection of orillce onto rans Figure11.Sharp NP compound anomaly recorded over a small underground streaminCave Valley, Nevada.o ciC'l!! IDo "0::::;EhC!Q.oz-Eoji'1OQ. lIlo Wo ui o u1+_-.--r--_r--._-._ 1-20-100,102030meters '! ;. DuringJuneof1991, Iranthree traverses over cave streams in karstofthe Central Lowlands. Lost River in Bowling Green, Kentucky windsaround beneaththecity and dischargesataparkinthenorthwest partoftown. A profilerunabout 45m (150ft) back from the entrance yielded a double-peaked positive anomaly less than 10mV in amplitude (Figure 12). Parker Cave, outsideofMammothCave National Park, Kentucky produced a sharp 10m V low overthelikely extensionPage 88ofBrown River (Figure 13), which farther downstream appeared as a positive inthesurveyofwinter 1988 (Lange&Quinlan, 1988). Finally,atLost River, Indiana, I ran a traverse alongStateRte37"6.4krn (4mi) southofOrleans, wherethehighway cross'es over the dry surface channelofLost River Cave. Figure14depicts the 45m-wide positive expressionoftheunderlying river.


LangeLOST RIVER GREEN,KENTUCKY e.. ,.c ::; 0 zl ig... g oI response allot -100 .....,....original response 100Figure 12. Response overthecave passagenearthedischargeofLostRiver,Kentucky. Informationontheexactlocationofthepassageisnotyetinhand.PARKER CAVE KENTUCKYoI ItFigure 13.NPprofilealongtheroadcrossingoverBrownRiverofParkerCave, Kentucky.Page 89


LangeLOSTRIVERINDIANAFigure14.Natural potential along Highway 37 crossing the dry channel of Lost River, Indiana. The cave depth and location are estimated.ConclusionsThe basic principlesofflownet mappinginclastic rocks still applyina karst environment,orin situationsoflocalized channeling. Thusundernormal conditions water moves fromthenegative NP region towardsthepositive;thatis, towardsthedischarge points. Where the flowisconcentrated along a particular conduitorchannel, however, we expect to see parallel fringe effects aroundtheconduit walls; thus,nearthedown stream endofthetube,thepositive anomaly characterizingtheconvectivecurrentis accompanied by lesser negativesoneitherside (see Figure 9);andvice versaattheupstream end.Asa result, we cannot simply draw flow vectors from negative to positive regions as inthecaseofdistributed flow. Hence, constructionoftheflow paths becomesaninterpretive processratherthananautomatic one; and while this might sound likeanencumbrance,theinterpretationisgreatly facilitated bythediagnostic signatures observed inthesuccessive profiles overthestream courses.ReferencesABAZA, M.M.I.&e.G.CLYDE(1969). Evaluationof rateofflow through porous media using electrokinetic phenomena.Water Resources Research,v.5 (2): 470-485. AHMAD, M.U. (1964). A laboratory studyofstreaming potentials.Geophysical Prospecting,v.12: 49-64.Page 90BOGOSLOVSKY,V.A&AAOGILVY(1972).Thestudyofstreaming potentialsonfissured. media models.Geophysical Prospecting,v.51(1): BOGOSLOVSKY,V.A&AAOGILVY(1973). Deformationsofnatural electric fieldsneardrainage structures.Geophysical Prospecting,v.21: 716-723.


ERNSTSON,K&H.D.SCHERER(1986). Self-potential variations with time and their relation to hydrogeologic and meteorological parameters. Geophysics,v.51 (10): 1967-1977. ISHIDO, T.&H.MIZUTANI(1981). Experimentalandtheoretical basisofelectrokinetic phenomena in rock-water systems and its applications to geophysics. JournalofGeophysical Research,v.86 (B3): 1763-1775.KRAJEW,AP.(1957). Grundlagen der Geoelektrik V.E.B. Verlag Technik, Berlin,DDR.357p. [In German, with separate Russian and non-Russian bibliographies ]LANGE,AL.(1991). Flow-net Mappingofthe Natural Electric Field.TheGeophysics Group,Report11March 1991. 20p.LANGE,AL.& J.F.QUINLAN(1988). Mapping caves fromthesurfaceofkarst terranesbythe natural potential method. National Water Well Association, Second Conference on Environmental ProblemsinKarst Te"anes and their Solutions, Proceedings,p.369-390.LangePage91LANGE,AL.,P.AWALEN&R.H.BUECHER(1990). Cave mapping fromthesurfaceatKartchner Caverns State Park, Arizona. American SocietyofPhotogrammetry and Remote Sensing: Third Forest Service Remote Sensing Applications Conference, Proceedings: 163-174.LANGE,AL.&M.WILES (1991). Mapping Jewel Cave fromthesurface! Park Sciencev.11(2).OGILVY,A.A.,M.A.AYED&V.A.BOGOSLOVSKY(1969). Geophysical studiesofwater leakages from reservoirs. Geophysical Prospecting,v.17:36-62.SCHERER,H.U.&KERNSTON(1986).UntersuchungenzurLithologie-AbhangigkeitgeoelektrischerEigenpotentiale[Astudyofself-potentials and their relationtolithology]. Neus Jahrbuch fur Geologie und Palaontologie, Abhandlungen,v.172 (1): 21-45.SCHRIEVER,W.&c.B.BLEIL(1957). Streaming potential in spherical-grain sands. Journalofthe Electrochemical Society,v.104 (3): 170-176.


RyanDEVELOPMENTOFA FLOW-TIIROUGH FILTER FLUOROMETERFORUSE IN QUANTITATIVE pYE TRACING AT MAMMOTH CAVE NATIONAL PARKMartin Ryan DivisionofScience and Resources Management Mammoth Cave NationalParkMammoth Cave, Kentucky 42259ABSTRACTA seriesofquantitative traces were completed in the Buffalo Spring ground water basin inMammothCave NationalParkas partofthefield testingofa newly developed filter fluorometer.TheRMEflow-through filter fluorometerisan inexpensive, labor-saving, battery-operated, submersible device that, when interfaced with a digital datalogger,iscapableofprecisely measuringthetravel timeoftwo dye slugs (rhodamine wr and fluorescein) simultaneously. Itisalso able to measuretheapproximate dye concentrations passing a recovery point. InterpretationofRMEdata yielded unprecedented information concerningthehydrologyofthe Buffalo Spring basinnincluding the unanticipated discoveryofa major flow-route.INTRODUCTIONFluorescent tracer dyesarecommonly used in the studyofground water movement in karst terranes. Qualitative dye tracing, using passive dye-detectors like cotton and activated charcoal to recover the dye,isfrequently employed to approximate ground water flow-routes and define ground water basin boundaries. Quantitative dye tracing, which requiresthemeasuringofchanging dye concentrationsata recovery point,isuseful in the determinationofground water velocities, conduitcondition (phreaticorvadose), unexpected flow routes, and water "budgets" (for basins with multiple discharge points).Ifthe flowofdye through an aquiferisclosely documented using quantitative tracing, modelsofsolublepointsource contamination events maybegenerated. Such models maybeusedbyground water managers to aid in drafting contingency plans for dealing with acute ground water pollution. Quantitative dye tracingnmuch more expensive and labor intensive than qualitative tracingnis generally performed only as a supplement to qualitative traCing. Typical methods used to recover dye include grab sampling, automatic sampling, and flowthoughPage 92fluorometry. Eachofthese methods has inherent drawbacks. Grab sampling is enormously'laborintensive. Automatic samplingismoderately labor intensive and costly--automatic samplers cost over $2000 each. Samples obtained using graborautomatic sampling mustbequantitatively analyzedona fluorometer.Fluorometerpricesstartataround$7000. Flowthrough fluorometersareable to directly measure concentrationsofdye at a recovery point; however, in addition to being expenSive, they require a pump to generate flow through the instrument.Theenergy requirementsofthepump and fluorometer make this method impractical in remote areas where electrical serviceisnot available. A need exists for the developmentofcheaper and easier techniques capableofobtaining resultsofsimilar precision.THERME FILTER FLUOROMETERAnalternative to conventional dye recovery nfethods has been developed andisbeing used extensivelyatMammoth Cave National Park.TheRMEflow through filter fluorometerisan inexpenSive, battery-operated, submersible probe,supported-bya digital datalogger. It may be deployedinthefield for


Ryan __ PHOTORSISTOR ARlUr--t';i i, t'!NEUTIU.LDENSITY ___>TlLTER: ..I.EDFlLT"-====-> EXCITATIO/'FlLTliilSETEXCITATIOST/LTIliSC' IINCHFigure1.Diagrammatic cross-sectionoftheRMEfilter fluorometer.extensive periodsoftime, and requires only occasional servicing.TheRMEuses 6 voltsDCand draws less than 100 ma/hr. Sinceitissubmerged into the spring and is designed to slowly draw water through itself, nopumpis required.TheRMEiscapableofcontinuously measuring small concentrationsoftwo dyes simultaneously--rhodamine WT(C.1.Acid Red 388) down to 0.5 ppb and fluorescein(C.1.Acid Yellow 73) down to 5 ppb.Thematerial costofbuilding anRMEis approximately $175 per unit. A datalogger with versatile programmingisrequired to execute and record the data measurements.Thedatalogger andRMEbattery power supply, attached to theRMEthrough waterproof wire, must be placed above the highest possible water level in a weatherproof enclosure.TheRMEfluorometeristwo filter fluorometersinone package. It hasonelight source, a 4-watt clear quartz mercury ultraviolet lamp, sandwiched between two flow-through sample tubes (Figure 1).Theflow-through tubes are madeof6 inch sectionsofI-inch ID aluminum box tUbing.TWoelongate windowsaremilled into each tube at right angles to each other. Clear microscope slide glassismounted across each window from the inside using a silicone sealant.LIGHTFILTERSETS Situated between the lamp and the rhodamine sample tube is an excitation filter set, composedofa Kodak Wratten61gel filter sealed between two Corning1-60Page93colored glass filters (recommended in Smart and Laidlaw, 1977). This filter setisdesigned to allow only the 546nm mercury line light to illuminate the insideofthe sample tube.Theothermajor spectral lines emittedbythe mercury lamp (578nm, 436nm, 405nm, 365nm, and 254nm) are absorbedbythe filter set.The546nm light illuminating the interiorofthe rhodamine tubeiswithin the excitation spectrum for rhodamine WT (its excitation maximumisabout 555nm), so if that dye were present in the sample tube, it would be induced to fluoresce. An emission filter set, composedofa Corning 3-66 and a Corning 4-97,islocated between theotherwindow and the photodetective array.Thesecondary filter setisdesigned to transmit a spectrum that has peak nearly coinciding with the emission maximumofrhodamineWT(about 580nm); the filters are nearly opaque to wavelengths outside this relatively narrow spectrum.Theexcitation filter set forthefluorescein tubeis a combination Wratten 2A and a Wratten47B.Ittransmits the 436nm mercury line, whichiswithin the excitation spectrumoffluorescein (the excitation maximumis490) andisnearly opaque to the other lines.Theemission filter, located between the emission window and a photodetective array,iscomposedofa Wratten 2A, a Wratten12,and a Corning 4-97 (recommended inTurnerDesigns, This filter set transmits a portionofthe excitation spectrumoffluorescein (the maximumisabout 520nm) to the photodetective array. All Wratten filters are scaled inside clear glass to help preserve them.


Ryan '-+HI-n'IlolR[FRONTLIGHT'--'-....p-=-SAFFLE ITOPFigure 2. Diagrammatic cut-awayviewsof the RME.THEPHOTODETECTORSTheRMEuses cadmium sulfide photoresistorsasphotodetectors. The electrical resistanceofaCdSphotoresistorvaries--inaninverselogrelationship--witb the intensityoflight striking it. The photoresistors are extremely sensitive even to tiny changes in light intensity--especially in the 500nm to 600nm range. Bothofthe RME's sample tubes have an arrayofthree photoresistors, connected in parallel and located outside the emission filter (Figure 1). Anotber photoresistor, along witb a protective neutral density filter,"isused to monitor intensity fluctuations in the mercury lamp.PROGRAMMINGTHERMETo conserve battery power and to extend the life of the beat sensitive Wratten filters, the lamp, and the lamp circuitry, the lamp is only operated periodically. The datalogger (campbell Scientific 21X microloggers were usedbythis investigator), via a relay, switches the lamp on for one minute outofevery ten.Atthe endofthat one minute the resistances of the rhodamine array, fluorescein array, and the lamp reference are measured, using a DC half bridge, and stored.Ifdyeabove a pre-chosen concentrationissensed, the sampling interval will change to once perfiveminutes and then revert back to ten minutes when that concentrationisnolonger exceeded. This insures a better probability of documenting short duration features.Page 94cadmium sulfide photoresistors have an undesirable inherent behavior called a memoryorlight history.Ifthey are placed in total darkness for even a brief periodoftime (as they are when the lampisoff), they will become "stuck" in this very high resistance dark state; small increases in illumination will not cause any changeinelectrical resistance. Minute increases indyeconcentration above background would thereforegounnoticed. To counter this, an LED that keeps the rhodamine array slightly illuminatedisswitched on when the lampisswitched off. The fluorescein array receives enough exciting light through its secondary filter (an otherwise negative trait) that, when the lampisswitched on, the arrayisquickly "snapped out"ofthe memory state.RME ENCLOSUREThe electronics and opticsoftheRMEare enclosed in a watertight 4-inch schedule 40 PVC pipe compartment. The sample tubes are connected to 3/4-inch PVC pipes which pass through the end capsofthe compartment. To prevent ambient light from reaching the sample tubes, light baffles madeof45and90degree ells are inserted between the sample tubes and the outside (Figure 2). The front light baffles are removable to facilitate cleaning the sample tubes. All piping and the enclosure itself are painted blackasfurther protection against ambient light.Onthe downstream endoftheRMEexteriorisan inverted funnel-shaped feature called a drag inducer. When theRMEisproperly oriented in a flowing stream, the drag


inducer produces a vacuum effect which draws water through the sample tubes.Thisinsures that theRMEistaking a sample representativeofthe water around itatany given time.SUMMARYOFHOW TIIE RMEMEASURESDYECONCENTRATIONThe followingisa very basic summaryofthe physical relationships employedbythe datalogger and theRMEto measuredyeconcentration:1)A change in dye concentration results in a directly proportional change in fluorescence. 2) A change in fluorescence results in a directly proportional change in the amountofillumination striking the CdS photodetector. 3) A change in the amountofillumination striking the photodetector results in an inverse logarithmic change in the electrical resistanceofthe photodetector. 4) A change in the electrical resistanceofthe arrayismeasured as a proportional change in the output voltageofa DC half bridgebythe data logger.Thedatalogger records the output voltagesofDChalf bridge measurements, which are downloaded from the logger onto a cassette tapeorinto a data can and thenRyanloaded into a PC spreadsheet where the following transformations maybemade to it:1)Using a conversion formula, output voltages are converted to resistances. 2) Resistances are converted into dye concentrationsbyinterpolating from a calibration curve--calibration curves are created prior to field deploymentbyplugging one endofanRME's flow-through tubes, pouring in a seriesofstandards, and recording the resultant resistances. 3) Concentrations are temperature compensated using the formula providedbySmart and Laidlaw (1977). 4) Instrumentational backgroundissubtracted outby"zeroing" data immediately proceeding the leading edgeofa dye slug. 5) Temperature compensated dye concentrations are multipliedbythe dischargeofthe springorstream to determinedyeload.6)The area under adyeload curveiscalculated to determine the total amountofdyerecovered. Becauseofdeficiencies in the presentRMEdesign (primarily in the light filter sets), fluorescein concentrationsmayonly be roughly determined; therefore, fluorescein may only be reliably used with theRMEinground water timeoftravel study. TIIE DETERMINATIONOF TIIE HYDROLOGYOFTHEBUFFALO SPRING GROUND WATER BASIN USING RME FLUOROMETRY INTRODUCTIONThe Buffalo Spring ground water basin occupies about a 20Krn2portionofMammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky.Itislocated northofthe Green River, just westofits confluence with the Nolin River within the Hilly Countryofthe Chester Upland (George, 1989). Buffalo Springisstratigraphically located near the middleofthe Girkin Formation, the uppermost unitofa thick sectionofhighly karstifiable Mississippian limestone.Analternating sequenceofrelatively thinPage 95Mississippian sandstones and limestones and the basal Pennsylvanian Caseyville Formation are located above the Girkin Formation. The regional dipisa relatively gentle 5 to15 mJKm to the west-northwest. The Buffalo Creek surface drainage splits into itstwo main tributaries, the Wet Prong and the Dry Prong, about1Krnfrom the Green River. Surfaceflowisabsentinbothofthese branches where the Girkin Formation crops out, except under highflowconditions. The surface streams are lost through a seriesofsequential ponors downstream from the upper Girkin contact.


Ryan I1(M SINGLeCHAI;N::L R'.'E aUAL CHt.NtIEI.RME DR'( BEDTERt.lIN,!.LDye: \( DPIOO. AHJDPI03TRACESIt-----INJECTIONPOINi \RHSEIOI ANDRIiSEIO!l TRACES INJECTIOt< PI')jNT';: CUT-OFfNORAIN __ \' :I.4BI02ANDMBI03 TRACES -----...... ",-"_ INJECTION POINT "t:-, ,....? ..... I.....,!:__":.....-....," I ...'...-""",,,); \ ------'l\........ol( -r ..MILLBRANCh .., 0.',.---!_.:. i\ \ I a....''\ CONFLUENCESPIN" \. 1;)" \ "\' --'"\"'.t"-,,'"",,"'. FORT'SFUNNEL-\\ BUFFALO CREEI': CAVE Figure3.Mapofthe Buffalo Spring ground water basin.Manyofthe tributaries to both the Wet and Dry Prongs also sink into the upper Girkin. Buffalo Springisa rise pit type spring. It has a highly variable discharge that ranges between about60and1800lis,with an average dischargeofabout 500lis.QualitativedyetracingbyMeiman and Ryan (1990) confirmed that sinking water from the Wet Prong and Dry Prong sequential ponors resurges at Buffalo Spring (Figure 3). A large tributary to the Dry Prong, Mill Branch, and numerous smaller tributaries to both Prongs were also traced to Buffalo Spring. Qualitativedyetracing showed that Confluence Spring was an overflow spring for Buffalo Spring. Fort's Funnelisa cave located on the flankofCollie Ridge just northwestofthe Dry Prong (Figure 3) and containing a large stream. The dischargeofthe cave streamisroughly half thatofBuffalo Spring. Every qualitative dye trace performed in the basinwasrecovered with positive results at Fort's Funnelaswellasat Buffalo Spring and Confluence Spring(ifConfluence: Springwasflowing). Since the discharge at Fort's Funnelwasconsiderably less than Buffalo Spring, the exact relationship between the Wet and Dry Prongs and Fort's Funnel remained problematic even _after recovering numerous qualitative traces.Page96

PAGE 100

TableI.Summaryofquantitativedyetraces Table 2. RME-d'e terminedresultsoftheperformed10theBuffaloSpringbasinBuffaloSpringbasinquantitativeusingtheRME.traces.Trace-RecoveryApparentDischargeTimetoTi.etoApprox.TraceInjection InjectionRecovcry QyeuSNI/ numberpoint(s)travel(l/s)leadingpeakpeaknumber date sitepoint(s)Quantitydistance edge conc.conc.Bu Halo SpringRhod.w'r/(meters) (hours) (hours)(1119/1) DP1004-10-91DryProngbase flolol ConfluenceSpring150'1DP100BS 4nO 87512.83 14.38 .002sinkpointFort'sFunnelCS400015011.13 14.18 .005 FF 31203958.239.38 .004 DP1034-13-91DryProng Bufhlo SpringRhod.WT/base flolol Confluencespring150'1 DP103BS432095010.0011.90.002sinkpointFort'sFunnelCS40004608.9010.65.006 If;;,0 I FF 31207705.757.50.010 DP33211-28-90DryProngRhod.WT/ bascflowBuffalo Spring 119'1 andDP332BS 4320 28028.75 34.75 .007 '0 sinkpointFluor./ '.I150'1 398094011.2712.37 .004 I1BI02BS I1B102 4-12-91 l1ill BranchBuffaloSpringRhod.WT/CS36303609.7711.02.011quarryConfluenceSpring150'1 FF 27807007.678.37 .024 ponorFort'sFunnelMBI03BS39809609.5010.50MBIO)4-13-91MillBranchFluor./quarryBuffalo Spring 150'1RHSEIOIBS 4850 930 14.72 17.22ponor.0005RHSE105BS 48S0 109012.2516.75RHSEI014-11-91RaymerHoI.Fluor./CS46003)0 11. 85 14.75 .001SEterminal BuHalo Spring150'1 FF 37505957.25 11. 85.0025sinkpointWP330BS200028011.9213.82.100RHSEI054-15-91RaymerHal.BuffaloSpringRhod. WT/ SEterminalConfluenceSpring150'1 FFJJO BS120028018.2020.75sinkpointFort'sFunnel11-26-90WetProngRhod.WT/.BuffaloSpringBSWP3JOConfluenceSpringCSbase {lowBuffalo Spring119'1Fort'sFunnel FF sinkpoint FFl30 11-26-90Fortisfun-Fluor./nelcaveBuffaloSpring100'1stream

PAGE 101

QUANTITATIVEmACESTable 1isa summaryofthequantitative tracer tests performed in the Buffalo Spring basin using theRMEfilter fluorometer. A dual channelRME,capableofrecovering rhodamine and fluorescein simultaneously,wasplacedatBuffalo Spring during allthetraces. Single channel RMEs, rhodamine sensitive only, were placed in Fort's Funnel and Confluence Spring only during the April, 1991 traces. Figure 3 shows the injection points, recovery points, and straight line travel routes for each trace and Table 2 summarizes the resultsofeach trace.NovemberTracesThree quantitative traces were recovered at Buffalo Spring in November, 1990. Flow conditions were low and relatively stable during this period, and Confluence Spring wasnotflowing. Figures 4 and 5 show the recovery curvesoftraces initiated simultaneously from Fort's Funnel and the Wet Prong. terminal sinkpoint. The dye slugs were recovered usingbotha dual channelRMEand an automatic sampler. Surprisingly, the rhodamine injected intheWet Prong (WP330 trace) arrived at Buffalo Spring more thansixhours before the fluorescein fromthemuch closer Fort's Funnel (FF330 trace) (Figures 4 and 5, and Table 2). This shows that a primary flow-route exists between the Wet Prong sink and Buffalo Spring with a gradient thatissignificantly steeper than the flow-route between Fort's Funnel and Buffalo Spring. Consequently, a difference in head must exist between this newly discovered trunk conduit carryingWetProng water and the Dry Prong trunk visible at Fort's Funnel. Enoughofthe Wet Prong trunkisapparently piratedbythe Dry Prong trunk above Fort's Funnel to be detected using qualitative dye tracing methods, butnotenough to cause a noticeable secondary dye slug to appearatBuffalo Spring while using quantitative methods. TheRMEresults (Figure 4) compared favorably with the ISCO sampler/Shimadzu spectrofluorophotometer results (Figure 5).TheISCO sampler, which was programmed to draw a sample hourly, failed to sample the peak rhodamine concentration.Thehigher resolutionRMEdata shows that the peak rhodamine concentration was considerably greater than what wasRyanPage 98determinedbytheISCO/Shimadzu methods. Figures 4 and 5 prove that theRMEisa capable alternativetoconventional dye recovery methods.RMEand ISCO/Shimadzu results were also similar for a simultaneoustWO-dyetrace fromtheDry Prong sinkpoint to Buffalo Spring (DP332).AprilTracesSix quantitative traces--two using fluorescein and four using rhodamine--were performed intheBuffalo Spring basin in April, 1991. Flow conditions were much higher than in November and fluctuated duetoseveral moderate rainfall events received duringthestudy period. During the six day study period the discharge was measured, using a tape measure, a survey stick, and a Marsh-McBirney flow meter, five timesatBuffalo Spring, four timesatFort's Funnel, and five timesatConfluence Spring. Discharges listed in Table 2 for each dye slugateach recovery site were interpolated from these measurements and are presumed to be only moderately accurate.Ifautomatic sampling had been usedasthe dye. recovery methodatall three sites for six days with a sampling intervalofonehour, it would have required changing 432 sample bottles and analyzing 576 samples on the spectrofluorometer. All this toil would have produced only mediocre results because each dye slug would have been sampled only afewtimes (due to temporal compactnessofthe slugs) and only a vague pictureofa slug's true shape would have resulted.Theten (or five) minute sampling frequencyoftheRMEinsures that a more realistic viewofthe dye recovery curve will be recorded. MBI02 Trace Rhodamine trace MBI02 was initiated at a discrete sinkpoint in Mill Branch and was recoveredatFort's Funnel, Confluence Spring, and Buffalo Spring.Theresultant recovery curves are shown in Figure6.Itisapparent in that the peak concentrationsofConfluence Spring and Buffalo Spring are much lower than Fort's Funnel.TheWet Prong trunk converges with the Dry Prong trunk somewhere between Fort's Funnel and Buffalo Spring and dilutes the dye-laden Dry Prong

PAGE 102

Figure4.Recovery curves of FF330 and WP330 simultaneous traces created fromRMEdata. :0t'l 200000 Ul-i> :z240000> >"'l280000-<;0........3: o t'l 3 320000..c ........ 0 ::0t'l 360000 t'l Z 35 RyanI RHOD.UlINEn:r PRONG FLUORESCEIN FORrs FUNNEL \. ./\ I1015202530TIMEFROMINJECTION(hours)50.080.06I-0.04 =--_____. ... \ .... ;"-_. ": .......; ......:' '-" 0.02 o.00 o0.10Figure 5. Recovery curvesofFF330 and Wp330 simultaneous traces createdfromautomaticsampIer/spectrofluorometerresults.1015202530 35 TlME-FROMINJECTION(hours)5 ____ 0.07 ,.----,---,---.,----,.---.----,---,..--,0.4;.:?.:::::..RHODA.\l!!\!: C_ 01_lfE"TPROSG 0 (JJ 0.06/\. 8 z .. nUORESCEINen...........S 0.05 FORT'SruNNEl. 0.3 8Cl 0.04 N l"
PAGE 103

Ryan... -....FORT'S FUNNEL 7001/.-. CONfLUENCE SPRING BUFFALO SPRING 69 12 15HOURS FROM INJECTIONFigure6.Recovery curves from MB 102 trace .3601/. 940 1/... H......n-:.-::_!\.i\ \ .... 0.024 z 0 ;:: 0.020 ....'"...zwUz 0.0160 uwz.i, 0.012 ....'" 0 5 0 :J:'" 00.008 w'"::>II>....w:::I 0.004 w:::I0: 0.000 ..'0 .3 Figure7.SummaryofMB 102 trace. 0:.3601/3269299 MBI02 ,RACE)-150, f DR\!'RONG TRUNI( / &-1<'('/01-':IFORrS FUNNEL 0,7001/1 CAVE 1229 W( PRONGTRlIN" GREEN RIVER Figure 7 summarizes the dye recovery results for the MB102 trace. The percentageofdye(and flow) goingtoeach springwascomputedbyconsidering the total mass ofdyerecoveredatboth terminal springs 100%, then the mass recoveredateither oneofthe springswasdividedbythe total recoveredatboth springs and multipliedby100.The dischargeofthe Wet Prong trunkwascomputedbysubtracting the dischargeatFort's Funnel (whichwasassumed to be the entire Dry Prong trunk flow) from the combined Confluence Spring and Buffalo Spring discharges. Based on this, approximately 47%ofthe discharge from Fort's Funnel resurgedatthe overflow route--so about 329lisof Confluence Spring's 360lisdischarge carne from the DryPrC?ng trunk. The remainderofthe Dry Prong trunkflowand nearly all the Wet Prong trunkflowresurged at Buffalo Spring.DP103TraceFigure 8 shows the recovery curvesatthe three recovery sites for the DP103dyetrace. When compared with the recovery curves from the MBI02 trace, in which the same amountofrhodaminewasinjected, several differences are discemable: the peak concentrations are all lower, the travel times are less, and the slugs are more dispersed longitudinally. Because the dischargewasgreater during this trace, the first two are believable--even though the reductioninconcentrationwaslarger than such an increase in discharge would warrant.Anincreased longitudinal dispersion, however,isthe exact oppositeofwhat would typically be expected for a trace initiated under higherflowconditions.Page100

PAGE 104

RyanFigure8.Recovery curvesfromDP103 trace. COt-lFLU(t-lC( SPRING FORT'S FUNNEL1215BUFFALO SPRING '. -450 1/169HOURS INJECTION.-r-.. 950I/s ---,..-.-.. _-_jz 0.010 Q.....0:.....z 0.008wu z 0uw Z 0.006 :::l:"-0>Cl E0 ::I:'-"c:: 0.004 Cl w c::::lV1 w0.002 :::l: w :::l:c:: 0.000a 3 The reason the DP103 slugs were more dispersed than the MB102 slugs may be related to the fact that DP103dyeentered the subsurface through three widely spaced sequential ponors insteadofthrough one discrete po nor. All three Dry Prong traces were initiated from the same point--just above the Dry Prong baseflowterminal sinkpoint. However, theflowconditions were very different for each trace: the terminal sinkpoint for the DP332 tracewasthe base flow sinkpoint, the terminal sinkpoint for theDPl00tracewasabout 600 meters downstreamata ponor called Kelly's Cut-off, and for the DP103 trace the terminusofsurfaceflowwasa huge ponor 250 meters further downstream called Norain Cave (Figure 3). Dye from the DP103 injection entered the subsurfaceatall threeofthese major ponors.Asa resultofthis the injected slugwassplit into three separateSlugs,each with a slightly different route to follow at first. Flow from the three separate inputs eventually reunited and the three slightlyoutofphasedyeslugs were fused back together--slightly more dispersed and with a lower amplitude than a single input slug would have been. Buffalo Spring (about 347liS).The remainder of eachwassuppliedbythe Wet Prong trunk. When the DP103 trace results (Figure 9) are compared to the MB102 results (Figure 7) several important insights into the behaviorofthis aquifermaybe gleaned: the Confluence Spring waters are mostly derived from the Dry Prong trunk, and the Wet Prong trunkisnot well connected to Confluence Spring. Thus the Confluence Springispredominately an overflow spring for the Dry Prong trunk.Ifthe discharge were increased in both the trunks simultaneously, hydraulic dammingbyWet Prong waters, which basically have no place else togobut Buffalo Spring, would cause a decrease in the percentageofDry Prong water resurging at Buffalo Spring and an increase in the percentage overflowing at Confluence Spring.RepeatedQuantitativeTracesas a PredictiveToolOnly 75gofthe 150g ofdyeinjected(50%)wasrecoveredatFort's Funnel. The amountofthatdyewhich was recoveredatthe terminal springswas73%. The results, summarized in Figure9,suggests that 55%ofthe total discharge passing Fort's Funnel went to the Confluence Spring (about423I/s)and 45% went to The input-to-resurgence travel timeofadye sJug decreases with increasing discharge. Peak con centrations often decrease with increasing discharge because dilution increases, and longitudinal dispersion decreases due to decreaseddyeslug travel time. Figure10illustrates the resultsofa trace from Dry Prongtothe terminal spring(s) repeated three times underPage 101

PAGE 105

WETPRONG TRUN, RyanFigure9.SummaryofDP103 trace.BS.9UFFALOSPRINGCS.CONFLUENCESPRINGo0differentflowconditions. The aforementioned effectsofincreased discharge are very clear. Using results from these three traces, reliable predictions for almost any setofflowconditions could be made concerning travel time, peak concentration, and dispersion for a soluble contaminant accidentally injected into the Dry Prong. Mulletal. (1988)givesa detailed discussionofthis important topic.DeterminationofConduit ConditionConduit conditionmaybe resolved even if a conduitisinaccessiblebyusing quantitative tracing; thiswasdone for segmentsofthe Dry Prong trunk using the RME. The dischargeofa vadose conduitisincreasedbyincreasing theflowvelocity and/or the cross-sectional areaofthe channel(byincreasing stage). The onlywayto increase the dischargeofa phreatic conduit, since itDPI03TRACE )f PRONG TRUN, / -_c-/Clj.-,.J FORrs FUNNEL0,770 lisCAVE 75;GREEN RIVERFigure10.Recovery curvesofDry Prong to the terminal springes) traces .. iscompletely full and stage cannot be increased,isbyincreasing theflowvelocity. So, when log discharge (X)isplotted versus the log travel time(Y)for a seriesoftraces through a phreatic conduit the result would be a line with a slopeofnearly-1(Smart, 1981). A plotoftraces through a vadose conduit would be a line with a slopeofless than -1.0 (but probably greater than -0.3). Figure11shows first order linear regressionsoflog discharge versus log travel time for the three Dry Prong traces recoveredbytheRMEfor, the entire Dry Prong, the segmentofthe Dry Prong trunk upstream from Fort's Funnel, and the ofDry Prong trunk downstream from Fort's Funnel. Judging from their slopes, which are admittedly based on a paucityofdata, the segment downstream from Fort's Funnelisapparently mostly phreatic and the segment upstreamismostly vadose.Page 102

PAGE 106

RyanFigure11.Log-Log plotsofdischargevs.timeoftravel for various segmentsoftheDryProng trunk. ,-..III ... :> 0 .:'-""w<.!l 0 w 10' <.!l Z 0-w;::__ .n ENTIRE DRYPRONGCONDUIT UPSTREAWfROWfORT'SfUNNEL.... yr...OOWNSTREA'"fRO...fORT'SfUNNEL'. 103 BUffALO SPRING DISCHARGE -(1/.) 100 L__ ........._-'---'---'--'-"-'-............ 102WET PRONG TRUNKFigure12.Hydrologic structureofthe Buffalo Spring ground waterbasin.Hydrologic StructureofBuffalo Creekcourseofaction during an accidental contamination event. A pictorial summaryofthe hydrologic structureofthe Buffalo Spring karst ground water basinwasgeneratedbysynthesizing all the qualitative and quantitative trace data and geomorphological data collected (Figure 12). Smart (1988) and Smart and Ford (1986) presented a structural modelofthe Castleguard conduit aquifer and laid the groundwork for this typeofaquifer representation. Models like these could be quite useful to ground water managers charged with determining aSUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONSTheRMEisan inexpensive alternative to conventional quantitativedyerecovery methods. Extensive fieldwork in the Buffalo Spring ground water basin, including some in conjunction with traditionaldyerecovery methods for comparison, proved that the RMEisa usefuldyequantification tool for field study.Page 103

PAGE 107

Through useofthe RME, subtle details concerning the hydrologyofBuffalo Spring basin were recognized and described including several previously unknown ground waterflowroutes. Also generated was new information about the relationshipsofthe primary spring and the over-flow spring to the two primary feeder trunks and the responseofaquifer transmissivity to changes in discharge. InterpretationofRMEdata helped to identify the phreatic and the vadose portions of the Dry Prong trunk conduit. A structural modelofthe Buffalo Spring basin was produced using all the available dye tracing data.RyanACKNOWLEDGEMENTSDr. Ralph EwersofEastern Kentucky University provided to me the initial ideaofdeveloping a submersible fluorometer supportedbya digital datalogger. Joe Meiman,mycolleague at Cave, wrote the datalogger program usedbytheRMEand contributed many hoursofassistance during development and testing. Mammoth Cave National Park provided financial support, laboratory facilities, and other resources. I am extremely grateful to them all.REFERENCESAtkinson, T.C., Smith, D.I., Whitaker, R.J., and Lavis J.J., 1973, Experiments in tracing underground waters in limestone: JournalofHydrology,v.19,p.323-349. Brown, M.C., 1973, Mass balance and spectral analysis applied to karst hydrologic networks: Water Resources Research,v.9,p.749-752. George,AI.,1989, Caves and drainage northofthe Green River: in W.B. White and E.L. White (eds.), Karst Hydrology: Concepts from the Mammoth Cave Area, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York,p.189-221. Hubbard, E.F., Kilpatrick,F.A,Martens,L.A,and Wilson J.F. Jr., 1982, Measurement of timeoftravel and dispersion in streamsbydye tracing: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Book3,chap.A9,44p.Meiman, Joe and Ryan, M.T., 1990, Preliminary resultsofgroundwater dye-tracer studies northofthe Green River, Mammoth Cave National Park: Proceedings of Mammoth Cave National Park's First Annual Science Conference: Karst Hydrology,p.137-142. Mull, D.S., Liebermann, T.D., Smoot, J.L., and Woosley, L.H., Jr., 1988, Applicationofdye-tracing techniques for determining solute-transport characteristicsofground water in karst terranes:EPA904/6-88-001, Atlanta, Ga., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 103p. Smart,c.c.,1988, Artificial tracer techniques for the determinationofthe structureofconduit aquifers: Ground Water,v.26,No.4,p.445-453. Smart,c.c.and Ford, D.C., 1986, Structure and functionofa conduit aquifer: Canadian JournalofEarthSciences,v.23,p.919-929. Smart, P.L., 1981, Variationsofconduit flow velocities with discharge in the Longwood to Cheddar Rising system, Mendip Hills: in Beck, B.F. (ed.), Proceedingsofthe VIII International Congress for Speleology, Bowling Grecn, Kentucky,p.333-335. Smart, P.L. and Laidlaw, I.M.S., 1977, An evaluationofsome fluorescent dyes for water tr.acing: Water Resources Research,v.13, no. 1,p.15-33. Turner Designs, 1983, F1uorometric Facts--F1uorescein, Bulletin No. 103, 3p.Page 104

PAGE 108

MeimanTHE EFFECIS OFRECHARGEBASIN LAND-USE PRACTICESONWATER QUALITYATMAMMOTH CAVE NATIONAL PARK, KENTUCKYJoe Meiman MammothcaveNational Park Mammoth cave, KentuckyABSTRACTA water quality monitoring programwasdesigned at MammothcaveNational Park to determine if there exists any influence on the water quality of the Mammothcavekarst aquifer within the park from various land-use practices of the recharge area. These land uses primarily include: heavy agriculture (row crops andlivestOCk),logging, oil andgasproduction, and residential areas. The program, initiated in March 1990 and extending through September 1992, samplestworivers, and eight springs rechargedbylands with varying land-use. Monthly nonconditional synoptic sampling monitors 36 parameters, including site discharge. The first19monthsofdata demonstrate a strong correlation between drainage basin land-use and water quality. Contaminant entrainment mechanisms and relative pollutant input rates can be discerned when the mass-fluxofselected parametersiscalculated.Byuseofthese data, effective resource management decisions can, and are being made to conserve and protect the irreplaceable natural resourcesofMammothcaveNational Park.INTRODUCTIONForwhat purpose dowemonitor the qualityofwateratMammothcaveNational Park? Aside from pure stoichiometric data to satisfy our curiosity of the water's chemical composition, spatially and temporally, the fundamental missionofthis monitoring programisto better understand, and thus better manage, the aquatic natural resourcesofthe park. During the three year courseofthis program, data will be collected and interpreted to provide information on the current stateofthe surface and subsurface water of the park. This data set will be usedasa datum from which to compare past and future studies. As the authorisnot a biologist, no claims, speculations, conjectures,ortheories pertaining to the present health or futureofthe aquatic ecosystemswillbe made. However, before trained personnel can accurately assess the conditionofthe park's aquatic life, a broad databaseofthe physical and chemical properties must be available. Although this phaseofthe monitoring programisfarfrom complete, there appear to exist afewtrends and correlations which deserve mention. The following pageswillconcern the first nineteen rounds of monthly sampling.BRIEFDESCRIPTIONOFMONITORINGPROGRAMThe monitoring programislargely based upon synoptic samplings. Synoptic,asdefinedbyWebster,is"relating toordisplaying conditionsastheyexis.tsimultaneously over a broad area". Although the water quality monitoring program includestwodifferent synoptic approaches, conditional and non-conditional, the latter comprisesbyfar the bulkofmonitoring activities for the first yearsofthestUdy.The program also includes topical sampling which provides a detailed evaluationofa particularflowcondition, contaminant, basinorriver reach.:.Choosing synoptic stations within a karst aquifer differs greatly from the same task preformed on a surface drainage. In a surface drainage one can choose sites based upon stream reaches (every 20 miles for example) to improve spatial distribution,orinstall a station exactly where a known pollutant sourceisPage 105

PAGE 109

Meimanlocated. The monitoring sitesofthis program were chosen with respect to land-use practicesofthe various recharge basins. These practices range from the naturally wooded park-land groundwater basins where human influence has been absent for at least 50 years, to highly agricultural lands with a shareofurban use and oil and gas exploration.1MASSFLUX. f.lASS FLUX 2CONCENTRATION-TIMEDISCHARGE1 DISCHA.GGE"2---o z(j) w 0::: UZThe ten non-conditional synoptic stations are sampled, regardlessoffloworweather conditions, on the 10thof ea.;:h month for the durationofthe study (Figure1).The sites are sampled during a single daybyone fieldcrew.The need for repetitive sampling (each month for three years) at each non-conditional synoptic station arises from the considerable temporal variability of karst and surface water quality.Thisvariabilityislargely a resultofsudden changes in discharge, and seasonal. availabilityofcontaminant sources. Over the courseofthe study each endoftheflowcontinuum (base and flood conditions) and each growing seasonwillhave been encountered several times,asbyprogram design. The primary useofconditional synoptic surveysisto provide a finer degreeofspatial resolution to the desCriptionsofdiscrete water quality andflowconditions than would be attainable from the non-conditional synoptic station network. Oneofthe goalsofthe conditional synoptic surveysisto identify relatively short reachesofdrainage basins which have demonstrated(bydata from the non-conditional synoptic station network) chronic water quality problems. Although the programisdesigned to allow the park to determine the effectsofland-use practices on water quality after three yearsofsampling,wecan, at this juncture, observe various traits whichmaybe attributed to typesofland-useinthe recharge areas. Each time a sampleisextracted, discharge at the siteisrecorded. Parameter concentration, coupled with discharge will yield flow-weighted values. These valueswillallowusto determine the massflux(loading)ofa particular parameter at variousflowconditions. These data will allowusto better determine contaminant sourceasit pertains to constituent availability, release, and entrainment into the water, and mechanismsoftransfer from the surface to the subsurface.Figure1.Hypothetical massfluxsignatures.A DISCUSSION CONCERNINGMASSFLUX AND FLOOD PULSESIt would be difficult to continue this discussion without first examining massfluxand flood pulses. Massfluxissimply the amount (mass)ofa particular parameter passing a point in a given time interval (flux). A flood pulseisthe portionofwater propagated along a channel and/or conduit as resultofa recharge event, most commonly, rainfall. With an understandingofflood pulse movement, one might better understand massfluxsignaturesofvarious contaminants.MASSFLUXIfa contaminantisreleased into a streamof water at a constant rate, and at some point downstream its concentration and the stream'sflowcan be measured, the massfluxofthe contaminant can be calculated (Figure1).Ifflow(Discharge1)decreasesorincreases, the contaminant's concentration-willproportionally increaseordecrease, respectivelyPage106

PAGE 110

Meiman60:\:\I II\\50\ I./) \c:: w>w, f= ,z,w40, u '., w C><:>30, I./) , 20,,: ------' 100 --12 400 (Jl 350 -0fT1(") J .."0300(") 0z0 c(") 250 z (")1'1 spCC200 ...,:::l::r 0 'l:'-..n150 3stage100-.._-----. .--._---51)24TIME IN HOURSFigure2.Stage and specific conductance responsesofafloodpulseina surface stream, Turnhole Spring groundwater basin.(Concentration). That is, at timesofhighflowthe contaminantwillexperience a greater amountofdilution. The resultant massfluxsignature (massfluxover time)ofa constant source release will consistofa relatively low amplitude disturbance (Mass Flux 1). One may thinkofthis massfluxsignatureasa typeofdestructive wave form interference. Suppose a contaminantisreleased into a stream only when specific hydrologic conditions are met, a rainfall eventofa certain intensity and volume for example. Therefore,ifflow(Discharge2)increases, contaminant concentration also increases (Concentration)asthese stores are displaced into the streams during flood pulse activity. Thatisduring the timesofpeakflow,peak (or near peak) concentrations also occur. The resultant mass flux signatureofa precipitation-trig gered release will beofrelatively high amplitude, perhaps several ordersofrelatively high magnitude greater than the pre-pulse massflux(Mass Flux 2). This massfluxsignature may be likened to constructive wave form interference.FLOOD PULSESFlood pulses in the Mammoth Cave areamayraise a basin's discharge a couple liters per second following minor rainfall, to several thousand liters per second after major rainfall. ResearchbyMeiman (1988 and 1989) has demonstrated that a flood pulse is comprisedoftwochemically and physically distinct components: displaced stores and freshly input recharge. The former, which usually occurs as the leading edgeofa flood pulse and is characterizedbyhigh specific conductances, can be thoughtofaseasily displaced vadose storage. Freshly input recharge, which comprises the bulkofa flood pulse,ischaracterizedbylow conductances,asthereislittle time for interaction between its waters and ionic sources. These relationships are also manifested in water temperature,asdisplaced stores, with longer residence times,willreflect the antecedent system temperature, and freshly input recharge correlative to surface temperature (Meiman, 1988 and 1989).Page107

PAGE 111

CONSTANTSOURCEMeimanPRECIPITATION-TRIGGERED25i l 20 I II 15 r : if, . 10 I 'fU)\aL, -2 I) 24 6TIMEIt I HOURS3Amoss fluxoemr;50(.) z\ 100 '0::U.:'0 ,238moss flux 46810121416 1B20 TIMEHO'.'RS Figure 3. Hypothetical massfluxsignaturesofconstant source release (3A) and precipitation-triggered release (3B).Consider the flood pulse displayed in Figure2.Thispulse, documented over approximately42hours in the fallof1987at a sinking creekofthe Turnhole Spring groundwater basin,clearly indicates the arrivalofthree highly conductive sources during the courseoffloodpulse activity. The majorityofflowgenerated from this rainfall eventwasofthe low-conductance, run-off variety.Ifwater provenance suddenlyChanges,onemayexpect to see a similar change in water quality with respect to available water-borne constituents. Hallberg,etal (1985) identified an acute, albeit brief, water quality degradation associated with this run-off component in the karstofnortheastern Iowa.WATER QUALITY, EXPRESSEDBYMASSFLux,ASITRELATES TO FLOOD PULSESImportant water quality informationmaybe gained if knowledgeofflood pulsesiscombined with massfluxsignatures. As rainfall occurs, flood pulses are generated and propagated through the karst aquifer. Justasstagemaysuddenly vault from its base condition, water qualitymayalso undergo rapid and drastic changeasa flood pulse passes.Ifa significant amount of constituents are releasedbythe precipitation event (entrained in run-off), the massfluxof these elements may rise tremendously. Contemplate thetwohypothetical massfluxsignaturesofFigure3.Itisvitaltonote the relative, unitless scalesofthetwographs. Although the X-axis scales are equal, the Y-axisof3ais1/8th thatof3b. Also note that "Time0"indicates the adventofprecipitation. The same discharge hydrographisemployed for both graphs. Remember, data used in these graphs are hypothetical. Numbers were derivedbynoting the timing, duration, and wave-form characteristicsofyearsofcontinuous data (stage, specific conductance, water temperature and discharge) and monthsofwater quality data. Massfluxesare actual productsofdischarges and concentrations.Ifa constant source parameterismonitored through a flood pulse, oil-field brine chlorides from a leaking well casing for example, a response similar to thatofGraph 3A might be expected. Following an initial upward spike in concentration, perhaps causedbya flushingofvadose stores, chloride concentrationisdilutedasthe pulse's freshly input recharge component dominates theflow.The resultant massfluxsignature, althoiJgh not without structure, displays relatively low amplitUde disturbance.Ifthe same dischargeisused with a precipitation triggered release parameter, certain pesticide residuesPage108

PAGE 112

MeimansAJJ M A .'"iF , ; JDSON .. -, HEA.VY AGRICULTURE ___ LIGHTAGRICULTURE ............. PARK / H[AW AGRICULTURE. '-,PARKLANDS10000r 8000 l6000 I 4000 )',I \\.,\ 2000r ;/:'\'. ..' ..;1 \ I '..' (;M A M JJAozo u w v-, ..OJ a.v,n:w::; MONTHS1990-1991Figure4.Discharge values, March 1990 through September 1991,offour monitoring sites.for instance, a totally different massfluxsignature results (Graph 3b). Again, note the Y-axes scales. The effectsofconstructive wave-form interference are noticeable as a high amplitude massfluxsignatureisgenerated. The passageofthe leading edgeofthe pulse may be reflected in a sharp drop in pesticide residue concentration, as long-residing stores are displaced. This effect will be far overshadowedbythe arrivalofthe freshly input recharge. Not only does thisflowcomponent comprise the majorityofthe flood pulse discharge, it also contains the bulkofsurface run-off with entrained herbicides. The resultant massfluxsignaturemaybe several ordersofmagnitude higher than pre-pulse values. Perhapsbyclose examinationofmassfluxsignatures of fecal coliform bacteria, dominant waste sources, humanoranimal, may be discerned. Human waste, for the most part, should behaveasa constant release source. Human wasteisinjected directly into the aquifervialeach fields, leaking septic tanks,ordry-wells, at a relatively constant rate. A constant massfluxsignature should result. Animals, not nearly intelligent enough to defecate down wells, will deposit waste on the surf!lce. Without rainfall (or a major snow-melt), this waste will not be transferred into the aquifer. Following a significant recharge event, animal waste will be washed into the aquifer, producing a massfluxsignature characterizedbya very high amplitude disturbance. There are many factors that may control the shape of the massfluxsignature: availabilityofconstituents, entrainment method, transfer mechanism from surface to subsurface, rainfall volume and areal distribution, time since last rainfall, and conduit condition, to name afew.It should be noted that the conduit condition used in this exampleishighly vadose. A different Signature, especially with respect to temporal lagsofconcentrations and discharge peaks, will occur when dealing with a phreatic conduit system (Meiman1988, 1989).Current research at Mammoth Cave specifically addresses flood-pulse water quality.RESULTSOFMARCH1990 The following data (based upon non-conditional samples)wasrun from March 1990 through September1991.The summer months, which a disproportionally large percentageofthe data, Win skew the data toward low-flow conditions. Non-conditional synoptic sampling covers a wide spectrumofflowconditions, ranging from flood-pulses to flow-reversals.Ifriver waterisback-flooded into the spring, itisconsidered to be representativeofthePage109

PAGE 113

90rI8070 tiO 5040302010"',',Meiman.-..._. HEAVYAGRICULTURE: LIGHT AGRICULTURE...........PARK/ HEAVY AGRICULTURE --... PARKLANDS I>I II I ,,I,,I\,\,\,,, l ,\, , :)': o M A M JJASONDJF M A M JJASMONTHS1990-1991Figure5.Turbidity values, March1990through September 1991, of four monitoring sites.spring's water at that momentintime. The samplewillbe taken and analyzed regardlessofwater provenance (riverorcave derived). The aquatic communitiesofthe spring and related conduit must liveinthe waters, regardlessofthe source, therefore the sampleisrepresentativeoftheir environment. The presentationofwater quality datainthe following discussionwillbeintwoforms: statistical graphs (bar and whisker) and XY graphs depicting trends at selected sitesofselected parameters. The four selectedsampling sites for this document are: Light agriculture (Pike Spring, PSPS), Park/heavy agriculture (Echo River Spring, ERES), Heavy agriculture (Turnhole Spring area, THNS), and Park lands (Buffalo Creek Spring, BCGR).DISCHARGEDischarge depends,ofcourse, upon prectpltation events. The summer and fall months are traditionally characterizedbylow discharge, with higher discharge through the winter and spring (Figure 4). Overall the largest discharges during sampling occurred on April10,1991.Onthisdate flood-pulse activitywashighasthe aquifer quickly responded to the rainsofthe previousday.This sampling roundisofspecific importanceassamples were extracted near peak discharge timesofthe flood-pulses. Although other rounds saw relatively high discharges, samples were, as dictatedbymonitoring program, taken either well beforeorwell after pulse peaks. During the first nineteen monthsofthe study a major backflooding eventwassampled on June10,1990.At this time all springs,with the exceptionofTHNS, were in a stateofflowreversal water from the Green River flowing back into the aquifer. Notice that Echo River Springisreferred toas"Park/heavy agriculture". During timesofhigh discharge,flowfrom the heavy agriculture basinisshunted through a high-level overflow route into the Echo River basin, whichisnormally rechargedbypark lands. When this routeisactivated, water quality in Echo Rivermay,nearly instantaneously, degrade. Researchinthe next year will documentthe conditions needed to conductflowthrough the overflow route.TURBIDITYTurbidity, correlative to the amountofsuspended sediment in the water,ishighly variable through all non-conditional synoptic sites (Figure 5).As expeC!ed, basins dominatedbyagricultural land-use, discharge more turbid waters than those dominatedbyPage110

PAGE 114

Meimanundisturbed forests. Generally one would expect the higher turbidities associated with areas of high soil loss. Although the Tumhole basin (Heavy agriculture) containsbyfar the greatest area of tilled crop-lands, its turbidities, albeit high, were not the highest recorded; that honor goes to the light agriculture Pike Spring basin. Although containing far fewer acres of tilled land, the rugged topography of the Pike Spring basin amplifies soil loss when disturbed. Displayed in turbidity are the back-flooding and overflow described in the preceding section. The back-flooding eventofJune 1990isevident in turbidity,asback-flooded springs display turbidities close to that of the Green River. The Echo River basin (Park/heavy agriculture) exhibits low turbidities, associated withlowto moderate discharges when the springisrechargebypark lands, and high turbidities when the overflow route from the heavy agriculture basinisactivated.CHLORIDEChloridemaybe indicative of animal/human waste and oil field brines. Figure6ashows the chloride concentration trends of the four selected sites, while Figure6bdemonstrates themassfluxof the chloride ions. Both graphs exhibit interesting data. Figure6ashows elevated concentrationsofchloride in the heavy agriculture basin. Oil field brines seem the prime suspect fortworeasons: presence of associated brine ions, andmassfluxsignatures. Within the headwaters of the basin, and adjacent to the Park City oil-field,isParkerCave.On a low-flow conditional synoptic survey (September, 1990), Parker River (a stream passage within Parker Cave) had chloride levels of1476.1ppm. Further down-basin, Mill Hole chloridewas59.9 ppm,asthe Parker River waterwasdiluted. At the basin's terminal spring, chloridewasfurther diluted to31.6ppm. Bromide and sulphate, also suggestive of brines, were found decreasing at similar rates at the same sites. Similar results were reportedbyMeiman (1989), and Quinlan and Rowe (1978). The massfluxsignature of chloridemayalso indicate brine contamination instead of animal waste. Figure6adisplays a variable, yet predictable pattern of chloride concentrations. Onemayassume that the chloride sourceisofrelatively constant deliveryaschloride concentrations are higher duringlowflowperiods of summer and early autumn, and lower, more dilute, during the highflowperiods of winter and spring. Figure6bindicates an apparently dramatic increase on themassfluxof chloride during months of high discharge. This increase, some eight times themassfluxoflow discharge periods,maynotbeassevereasitmayseem.Thisvariationmaybe normal, even for this relatively constant source parameter. One might expect a much greater (several orders of magnitude) rise in the massfluxsignature if a sourceisreleasedbyrun-off from a precipitation event. A certain portion of chloride can be consideredasa natural, background concentration. Observe the chloride trends of the Park land basin. Not only are chloride concentrations low (Figure 6a), they remain at approximately the samemassfluxthroughout the year (Figure 6b). Upon closer examination, notice the Slight increase in massfluxthrough the winter months. Although seemingly small and insignificant, the relative changes between seasonal massfluxesin the Park land and the Heavy agriculture basins areverysimilar. This trendmaybe an inherent wave-form signature due to the vast increase in discharge. Road saltsasa potential chloride source must be recognized. Although the use of road salts have been prohibited within the park since1987,they areusedthroughout several of the park's groundwater basins. The amountofroadsalt contributing to chloride levels foundinparks watersisyet unknown. Since the first month of sampling there has not been a significant snow fall to warrant the use of much salt. Perhaps this unnatural source will be manifestedina "unique"massfluxsignature, representative of seasonal application and recharge.FECAL COLIFORMFecal coliform bacteriaisfound at all sampling sites (Figure 7). These bacteria are commoninwastes ofall healthy warm-blooded animals.Byfar,basins with high occurrences of dairies, feed-lots and urban areas are characterizedbyhigh levelsoffecalcoliform. A certain amount offecalcoliform can be attributed to wildlife. Note that the Park land basin (BCGR),Page111

PAGE 115

Meiman .... ', HEel')AGRISIJLTURr.: _AGRICULTURE ....,.,....PAR" I HE","", AGRICULTURE PAR"LAN OS \ ,..'.:\ .. '; Hi",.' ".........\4. <.. .':.:.:.."'.,. -'\. ..'....." .....". 'r..... "...,..... :.:. I ....,..:H o ,_...:...---L_.L-_il.---L.--I....---l._---'-----'-_-'-----L_-'-----'-_.l-,---",-----,'MA!.',I;. SeND JrMA fA J 5 3:! ,1I ,e I24E20 ::l. I c.w 16 0ir 0 --J:I: 12 u 8Figure 6a. Chloride con centrations, March 1990 through September 1991,offour monitoring sites.MONTtiS1990 199140000.... H[I.'ff AGRICULTURE--LIGhT AGRICULTURE ............ PARr: I HEAVY AGRICULTURE PARK LANDS .'....,.,.,Figure 6b. Chloride massflux,March 1990 through September 1991,offour sampling sites.A5; i" I ..... -' ..".;.:'.\.:..:" :.:.'".:.: ,.'0M A M JJA5 0NDJFMA M J 30000 u" III"-C7' E w 20000 Cl+.1i: 0'.....J.. :I:U 10000MONTHS1990 1991representativeofpristine conditions, contains a fair amountoffecal coliform bacteria (meanof67colonies per 100 ml), and discharges a relatively stable1.5million colonies per second (not shown). Although the latter number may appear high, a single gramoffecesmaycontain tensofmillions to tensofbillions of cells (Feachem, eta1.,1983). The heavy agriculture basin (TI-INS), with hundredsofhomes without proper waste treatment facilities, and scoresofdairies and feed-lots where live-stock wasteflowsassinking-creeks into the aquifer yielded the highest overall fecal coliform levels. Feachem et Page112

PAGE 116

Meiman50004000Eoo ............ o .3000 u 2a::: o l.L.--' o2000 o--'o w l.L. 1000oPSPSERESTHNS nl;IXimun!95rercentile 75 rercellcileme<.Jnnlerii"n25r<,rcenr:ile) rercentile PIl n) BeGRMONITORINGSITESFigure7.Statistical examinationoffecalcoliform bacterialevels,March 1990 through September 1991,offourmonitoring sites.(1983) reportsthatalthough fecal coliform density per gramoffecesofman and livestock are comparable, a human may excrete 150 gramsof feceS per day compared to15to 20 kilograms for acow.The highest flow weighted value, greater than 535 million colonies/second, was observedatthis spring on April10,1991.Assamples are takenona set monthly date, regardlessofweatherorflow conditions, over the three-year periodofmonitoring some flood pulses are likely to be sampled. April 1991 was such an occurrence. Itisimportant to note the relative temporal position within the flood pulse from which the sample was taken. A great amountofvariance in parameter concentration may exist throughout high discharge periodsofa flood pulse. Itisnot possible to tell fromonesample its temporal relationshiptoconcentrationormass nux peaksofa particular parameter. The chance occurrenceofflood pulseactlVltycoinciding with a predetermined sampling date tends to create a large variance in reported concentrations and mass fluxesoffecal coliform bacteria. A high variance may indicate,asin the heavy agriculture basin, the presenceoflarge amountsofanimal waste stored at the surface, awaiting releasebya rainfall event. Notice that low values dominate the data set in the park land/heavy agriculture basin (ERES). Occasionally these low levelsoffecal coliform are interruptedbybrief periodsofvery high concentrations, as expressed in the elevated mean and maximum values. Recall the overflow route mentioned earlier. During high-stage times, a portionofthe bacteria-laden watersofthe heavy agriculture basin are shunted into the relatively clean park basin.Page113

PAGE 117

MeimanTRIAZINE CLASS HERBICIDESTRIAZINES ppb1.610.6 M A M JJ A SON0JF M A M JJ A S1990MONTHS1991_PARKLAND BASIN EZJGREEN RIVER _HENY AGRICULTURE NOLIN RIVERFigure8.Temporal occurrencesoftriazine-dass herbicides using immuno-assay methods, March1990through September1991,at four monitoring sites.TRIAZINE-CLASS HERBICIDESThe monitoring program indicates the presenceoftriazine-class herbicides (greater than 1 part per billion) within the surface and ground watersofthe park. The occurrenceofthese compounds generally coincided with the peak application period. To avoid costly organic laboratory testing for these compounds, the program employs assay screening tests. Althoughgaschromatography analysis would indeed be desired, laboratory costsofa coupleofsampling rounds would destroy the monitoring budget. Assay-screening can not be thoughtofas a quantitative analysis. Itisused primarilyasa "hit-or-miss" technique, with semi-quantitative values (ie, greater than 1 ppb). The spatial and temporal occurrenceoftriazine-Class herbicides reflect land-use, herbicide application periods, and perhaps the mechanismoftransfer the surface and subsurface (Figure 8). With the exceptionofa back-floodingoftriazine tainted river water, the only groundwater sampling site in which triazines were found was the heavy agriculture basin (THNS) spring. Additionally, triazines were only found in months (June1990,June and July1991)following peak application periods within the basin. Triazines are also foundatboth river sites following peak application.Forthe remainderofthe year no triazine-class herbicide residues were found in the sampled springs. Although rapid transportofthese residues through the karst systemisexpected,onemaynotassume that all, or even the majorityofthese compounds that will move through the aquifer have done so. Research in IowabyHallbergetal. (1985) found that although large amountsofherbicides are quickly transported through the karst system via run-off following rainfall, the bulkofthese materials are slowly released through infiltration in low concentrations. It would not be surprising to see a similar patternofpesticide transfer through the Mammoth Cave aquifer. Aside from occurrence following peak application periods, triazine-class herbicides were found in both the Green and Nolin rivers in the fallof 1990, and possibly in the fallof1991.Two scenarios may be possible:1)Therewasa late applicationofthese compounds in the fall, or, 2) The residues were slowly transferred through a less permeable media (clastic strata).Page114

PAGE 118

Meiman As triazines are applied as pre-plantorpre-emergence herbicides, thereisno reason to believe that therewasa late application, as crops that receive triazines (com, and to a lesser degree, soybeans) were near harvest. River flood plains, with associated unconsolidated fluvial deposits, are favored lands for row-crop production. It may be possible that these persistent compoundsmay:1) become entrained in run-off shortly after application, and 2) slowly infiltrate through the fluvial materials and leach into the river following fall rains. The "half-life"ofthese compounds (3-12 months)iscertainly sufficient to cause such persistency.REFERENCES CITEDFeachem,RG.,Bradley, D.J., Garelick, H., and Mara, D.D., 1983, Sanitation and disease, healthaspectsofexcretaandwastewater management, Chapter13:John Wiley and SonsPubl., p.I99-242. Hallberg, G.R,Libra, R D., and Hoyer,B.E., 1985, Nonpoint source contaminationofground water in karst -carbonate aquifers in Iowa: Perspectives on Nonpoint Source Pollution, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 440/5-85-001,p.109-114. Meiman, J., Ewers,RO.,and Quinlan, J.E.,1988;InvestigationofFlood Pulse Movement Through a Maturely Karstified AquiferatMammoth Cave National Park, aNewApproach,NWWAConferenceonEnvironmental Problems in Karst Terranes and Their Solutions, Nashville, TN,1988,p.227-262. Meiman, J., 1989, Investigationofflood pulse movement through a maturely karstified aquiferatMammoth Cave, Kentucky:M.S.thesis, Eastern Kentucky University, 343p.Quinlan, J.F., and Rowe,D.R,1978, Hydrology and water quality in the Central Kentucky Karst: Phase II, Part A: Preliminary summaryofthe hydrogeologyofthe Mill Hole Sub-basinofthe Turnhole Spring Groundwater Basin: KentuckyWaterResourceResearchInstitution, Research Report no. 109,41p.Page115

PAGE 119

Aley/AleyDELINEATION ANDHAZARDAREA MAPPINGOFAREAS CONTRIBUTING WATER TO SIGNIFICANT CAVES.TomAley and Cathy AleyOzarkUndergroundLaboratoryRoute1,Box 62 Protem, Missouri65733ABSTRACTTherecharge area for a caveisthatarea which contributeswatertothecave. Insomecasestherecharge areaislittlemorethantheland which overliesthecave. However, in many cases (and especially whenthecave contains streamsorlakes) the rechargeareamay encompass severalsquaremiles.Groundwatertracingisa fundamental tool for recharge area delineation.Thegeneralapproachisto introduce fluorescent tracer dyesatpoints where surface waters sinkintothegroundwater system and thensamplefor these dyesatsprings, significant caves, andotherrelevant points. Hazardareaassessment and mappingisa management approaCh for identifying and characterizing those areas which posethegreatest water quality threats to significant caves.Hazardarea delineation integratesthehydrologic functioningofparticular unitsofland withtheusesofthoselands. Thispaperwill help resource managers understandthebenefitsofrechargeareadelineationsandhazardareamappingand understand characteristicsoftechnically sound investigations.IntroductionThearea which contributeswaterto a caveiscalledtherecharge area. Withfewexceptions, identifyingtherecharge area for a significant cave represents fundamentalmanagementinformation. Recharge area delineations are particularlyimportantfor caves with important aquatic cave faunas.Thepurposeofthispaperisto provide resource managers with a workable understandingofhow cave recharge areasaredelineated and how hazardareamappingisdone. Whilethereisnosingle "right" way,thereareclearly many ineffectiveorundesirable ways to accomplish this work.Methodsfor Delineating Recharge Areas Cave Mapping and Topographic Studies While cave maps can provide useful data, they seldom provide anadequatebasis for recharge area delineation.Wesometimes see assumptionsthatthearea overlying a cave plussomearbitrary narrow "buffer zone" ontheorderof100to300feetisthesole sourceofrecharge waters forthatcave. This assumptionisquestionable (and often wrong) even whenthecave containsneitherstreamsnorlakes, and where only drippage watersarepresent. This assumptionisfrequently wrong even when dipofthe beddingistakenintoaccount. Amajorreasonthatthis approachisoften inerroristhat flow paths intheepikarstic zone(theweathered and corroded zone beneaththesoil)arehighly complex, maybedramatically different fromthedip, and may involve lateral water movement over substantial distances.PageIl6

PAGE 120

Aley/AleyWater infiltrates the zone more rapidly than it infiltrates beneathit;this results in appreciable water storage in the epikarstic zone and lateral water movement through the zone since lateral permeabilityisroutinely much greater than vertical permeability. Itissometimes assumed that groundwaterflowdirections and divides are identical,orvery similar to, surface flow directions and topographic divides.Inour experience this assumptioniscommonly false.Anexception couldbea cave in the bottomofan intermittent surface stream channel, although such caves may also receive water from points not tributary to the surface stream. Even whenitappears that the recharge area for a cave may be estimated from surface features, actual delineation studies should be conducted for verification. Equipotential maps, which are contour mapsofthe water table elevation, can be developed for areas. In most (but notaU)karst areas these maps arenotofgreat utility in delineating cave recharge areas. One reasonisthatthe data points are generally widely scattered and poorly distributed; the resulting maps are thus gross generalizations. Well depths vary substantially in many karst areas, and water level elevationsaresignificantly affectedbythe geologic units in which the wellisdeveloped. In one cave area we routinely encountered differences in water level elevationsofover 100 feet between nearby wells 125 feet deep and those 300 feet deep. Differences are generally not this great, yet the differences are commonly sufficient to readily produce incorrect interpretations. Groundwater TracingRealisticrechargeareadelineation requires groundwater tracing.Thetracingisgenerally conducted with fluorescent tracerdyes.Othertracing agents exist,buttheir useissubstantially more difficult than tracing with the fluorescentdyes.Someoftheothertracing agents, suchassodium chloride, are likely to create adverse impacts. Groundwater tracing techniques are described in detailbyAley and Fletcher (1976) andbyAleyetal. (1992;inpreparation). There have been major improvements in analytical techniques sincetheAley and Fletcher (1976) publication.Themost effective and most commonly used tracer dyeissodium fluorescein (Acid Yellow 73, Color Index [CI] Constitution Number 45350). Itiscommonly simply called fluorescein intheUnited States; itissometimes called uranine (especially in Europe). Itismost commonly sold in a powder form which has a strong reddish color. When added to water the dyed solutionisa brilliant yellow-green color. Visual detectabilityissignificantly affectedbybackground color in the dyed water andotherfactors.Anexperienced observer can commonly detect fluorescein in the field in concentrations as lowasabout 30 micrograms per liter (parts per billion).Theconcentrationoffluorescein in dye mixtures soldbyvarious supply houses varies substantially. Someofthe liquid mixtures contain less than5%fluorescein. Powder mixtures generally contain more fluorescein than liquid mixtures, but they also vary widely. In order to achieve a uniform product and, in some cases, to enhance the easeofdyeing a product,itisconventional to add diluents (cutting agents) to technical grade dyes. Thisisstandardization, not adulteration.Thediluent most commonly used with fluoresceinissodium sulfate. RhodamineWT(AcidRed388)isalso a commonly used tracerdye.RhodamineWTshould not be confused withotherRhodamine dyes; someoftheotherRhodamine dyes have undesirable properties. RhodamineWTiscommonly soldasa 20% dye solution. When added to water the dyed solutionispinkish orange. As with fluorescein, visual detectabilityofRhodamineWTisaffectedbybackground color in the dyed water andotherfactors.Anexperienced observer can commonly detect Rhodamine WT in the field in concentrations as low asabout50 micrograms per liter (parts per billion). Various optical brighteners have also been used in groundwater tracing. Thesearepale blue fluorescent dyes commonly used in laundry soaps and detergents to make "whites appear whiter". Becauseoftheirusein soaps and detergents the optical brighteners may already be present in cave waters; this limits their utility for recharge area delineation studies. However, sampling for background concentrationsofoptical brighteners canbeuseful in indicating sewagePage117

PAGE 121

Aley/Aleycontaminationofthe cave waterS (Aley, 1985). We find background sampling for optical brighteners to be a very useful approach during a recharge area delineation study.Itshould be noted that the absence of background optical brighteners in cave waters may result from their adsorption onto fine textured soils; sewage effluents may be present even if optical brighteners are absent. Direct Yellow96(Diphenyl Brilliant Flavine 7GFF)isa fluorescent yellow dye which has been successfully used in a numberofgroundwater traces in Kentucky. Other fluorescent dyes which have received some useinthe United States include Pyranine (CI 59040; CI solvent green7,D&C green 8); LissamineFF(CI 56205; CI acid yellow 7); and Eosine Sodium (CI 45380). Amino G Acid, a dye intermediary, has also been used. Anyone competently using anyofthesedyeswill almost certainly also be using fluorescein, Rhodaminewr,and probably optical brighteners.Ofthe four most commonly useddyes, fluoresceinisgenerally the best for groundwater tracing and Rhodaminewristhe second best. Fluoresceinismore subject to destructionoralteration in sunlight thanisRhodaminewr,optical brighteners,orDirect Yellow96.Significant dye lossesbyadsorption onto charged soil particles can occur with anyofthe dyes; in our experience dye losses to adsorption increase in the orderoffluorescein, Rhodaminewr,optical brighteners, and Direct Yellow96.Useofoptical brighteners and Direct Yellow 96isunlikely to be successful in groundwater systems where appreciable adsorptive losses occur.Otherconsiderations are also involved in the selectionofthe dye or dyes to use. There are sometimes sourcesofbackground fluorescence which can interfere with the detectionoftracer dyes. Additionally, the tracer dyes (or similar dyes)maybe components of compounds already present in the area. Fluoresceinisused in afewhousehold products and as the coloring agent in antifreeze.Itcan sometimes be detected in runoff waters from parking lots and city streets. Pyranineisusedinmore household products than fluorescein; thesedyescannot be readily separated visuallyorwith a fluorometer, but they can be separated with a spectrofluorophotometer operated with a synchronous scan protocol. Adyewhich cannot be fluorescently distinguished from Rhodamine'wr(itisprobably Rhodamine B)isusedasthecoloring agent in many hydraulic fluids.Itisroutinely present in the waste water from manufacturing plants which use hydraulic equipment. Additionally, Rhodamine B has also been used to color seed corn to prevent it from accidentally being fed to livestock. Cumulative samplers capableofadsorbing passing dyes are commonly used in recharge area delineation studies. Activated carbon samplers are used to adsorb dyes such as fluorescein, Rhodaminewr,and someofthe less commonly used dyes. Cotton samplers are used to adsorb optical brighteners and Direct Yellow96."Grab samples"ofwater can be collected for dye detection, but the frequencyofsampling necessary to insure that a pulseoftracer dyeisnot missed limits the general utilityofthis approach. Grab samplesofwater collected simultaneously withthecollectionofactivated carbon samplers can provide valuable data on actual dye concentrations at particular points in'time if the analysis protocoliscapableofproviding credible quantitative results. Cumulative samplers are typically collected and new samplers placed about once aweek, although the frequency can be varied depending upon the natureofthe study. Activated carbon samplers are eluted with a strong base, alcohol, and water solution. Moderate to large concentrationsoffluorescein can be detected visually in the eluting solution. Visual detectionofRhodaminewrinthe eluting solutionisdifficult; thisdyeshould not be used in groundwater tracing unless analytical equipmentisavailable. Simultaneous tracing with fluorescein and Rhodaminewrcan be done with the useofa spectrofluorophotometer operated in a synchronous scan mode. It should not be attempted with a fluorometer since large concentrationsofonedyewill create an apparent detectionoftheotherdye with this typeofinstrument. Cotton samplers are washed with jetsof cleat) water and then examined either under an ultraviolet light orinan appropriate analytical instrument. Experience and care are essentialinvisual analysis. Optical brighteners and Direct Yellow 96 can mask one another unless both are presentinlarge concentrations.Page118

PAGE 122

Aley/AleyThese dyes can be used simultaneously if analysisisdone with a spectrofluorophotometer operated in a synchronous scan mode.Thecommon groundwater trace utilizes cumulative samplers. Background sampling, prior to any introductionoftracer dyes,isgenerally conducted to demonstrate the absenceoffluorescence interferenceorto characterizethemagnitudeofthe interference.Theextentofbackground samplingislargely determinedbythe natureofland use in the area. A well designed delineation study for an important cave is characterizedbythorough field work to identify potential dye injection sites and cavesorsprings through which the injected dye may subsequently pass. Simply studying topographic maps and aerial photos alone will seldom be sufficient. These approaches generally miss many important springs. Groundwater tracers seem to have a propensity to discharge from springsthatwere not sampled. Someofthe missed springs maybein the channelofsurface streams.Asa result, surface streams mustbesampled to address this possibility. Multiple sampling stations are routinely needed along surface streams since tracer dyes deteriorate and are adsorbedasthey are transported down the stream channel. In delineation studies, a trace that goes to the "wrong" spring provides valuabledatafor the delineationofthe caveorspringofconcern. Itisalwaysbetterto know where the trace wentthantosimply know whereit didnotarrive. Thisisnotalways possible;anexample wouldbean area where many springsarebeneath the surfaceoflarge lakes.Theeasiest sites for injecting tracer dyes are points where water alwaysoralmost always sinks into the groundwater system. Sites near roads, on public land,oron propertyoflandowners known to be frieJldly are always nice.Theeasiest sites are frequentlynotthose most useful for a good delineation study.Thegood delineation study must gather the data needed rather thanthedata that are more easily available. A good delineation study must be dynamic;oneshould seldom plan more than oneortwo traces in advance.Theresults fromonetrace must be incorporated into the planning for the next. Tracing should take advantageofweather conditions. Some highly desirable tracer injection sites have flowing water only a few daysoutofthe year. Unlessonecan haul substantial volumesofwater, these sites must be used whenthewaterispresent. Sometimes one can place the tracer dye where it will enter the water the first time flow occurs; this must be done very carefully. Another characteristicofa good delineation studyisthatmanyofthe dye injection sites are located in areas where contaminants enter (or might enter) the groundwater system. We routinely select injection sites which receive waters from dumps and landfills; sewage and sewage effluent discharges; commercial and industrial operations; highways, railroads, and product pipelines; and major sourcesofanimal wastes. The failure to recover dye from such traces in the cave of concernisalways an important finding; however, important caves arenotimmune to impacts from these typesofland uses. A good delineation study should include groundwater traces which are recovered in the caveofconcern plus some traces which are recovered at sitesotherthan the cave.Ifallofthe tracesarerecovered in the cave of concern you have probably not identified the boundaryofthe recharge area. Water that enters the karst groundwater system at a particular point does not always flow only toonecaveorspring.Theflow may be to twoormore cavesorsprings. In one study Aley (1988) found radial groundwater flow throughout a large areainnorthwestern Arkansas. Not only can theflowbe shared among several cavesorsprings,butthe relative quantity moving to each site can vary withflowrates andothergroundwater conditions. We often find that a particular cave (or spring) has some recharge areas which contribute waters only to that cave. Often there are some recharge areas which share water between the caveofconcern and other cavesorsprings.Thetotal recharge area includes both the exclusive recharge area and the shared recharge area. Where feasible, each should be delineatedseparatelyandtheirhydrologic interactions characterized. Shared recharge areas are commonlyPage 119

PAGE 123

Aley/Aleylocated near recharge area bo_undaries, however, distributaries can exist closer to the discharge points for the groundwater system. -Anillustrationofdistributariesisprovidedbythe springs which drain the main stream in Tumbling Creekcave,Missouri. These springs extend for 2,000 feet along Big Creek;noneofthese springsismore than a mile from the cave stream. Identificationofshared recharge areas routinely requires more comprehensive sampling, good analytical approaches, and project directionbyexperienced groundwater professionals. Some shared recharge areas deliver water to a caveofconcern only during moderate to high flow conditions. Fantastic caverns near Springfield, Missouriisan illustrationofthis condition. During low flow conditions the recharge area comprises about 7 square miles. During high flow conditions the recharge area comprises about 20 square miles;atleast six springs share portionsofthis recharge water. Even a small cave stream may have a large recharge area becauseofshared recharge areas. Fire HydrantcaveontheCurrent River in Missouriisan illustration. This cave shares water with Pulltite Spring andothersprings in the area. While the meanflowrateofthis springisrelatively small, dye injected in a losing stream segmentofBig Creek 13.1 miles straight line distance from the cave was recovered in the cave. How large are recharge areas for significant caves likely to be? Thisisa bit like asking the lengthofa typical pieceofstring, yet resource managers concerned with potential recharge area delineation investigations need some understandingofthe sizeofareas likely to be involved.Thecaves with the largest recharge areas are generally those which contain cave streamsorlakes. As a general rule, the greater the mean annualflowofwater through the cave the larger the recharge area.Ifa recharge areaissharedbymultiple caves and springs the recharge areaislikely to be larger than if the cave has an exclusive recharge area.caveswhich receive recharge waters from a significant surface stream have recharge areas which include theentire topographic basin of the stream upstreamofthe recharging point plus anyotherareas contributing water to cave stream. We have delineated the recharge areas for about25caves in seven states. Six biologically significant caves had recharge areasof0.2 to 2.5 square miles;noneofthese received recharge waters from any appreciable surface streams. Sixotherbiologically significant caves had recharge areasof7 to 24 square miles; all but twoofthese involved either appreciable surface streamsorrecharge areas shared withothercavesorsprings. caves in the Western United States donotnecessarily have largerorsmaller recharge areasthancaves in the MidwestorEast. Hazard Area MappingThehydrologic functioningofthe landisnotuniform.Thehydrologic impactsofland use are also not uniform. It is clear that the combined impactsofthese conditionsona caveorspring are also variable. Becauseofthese conditions we can develop maps which depict qualitatively different groundwater quality risks posed to a significant cave. Thisisthefoundation for a karst-specific approach which we call hazard area mapping. We initially developed the approach in 1976 for use in recharge area delineation studies for major springsonthe Ozark National Scenic Riverways in Missouri (a National Park unit). We have subsequently applied the approach in manyofthedelineation studies we have conducted over the last15years, and believe it to be a very useful management tool. It has been applied elsewhere in Missouri and in Arkansas, Oklahoma, Wyoming, Kentucky, and Alabama. A nationally used mapping approach for assessing groundwater contamination risks was developedbythe National Water Well Association and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Aller et aI., 1987) andiscalled "DRASTIC". It is a useful approach, butisneither a karst specific nor a cave resource-sensitive approach.TheDRASTIC approach demonstrates that karst areas are readily subject to groundwater contamination but does not provide for more detailed discrimination nor for integrating land use conditions.Page 120

PAGE 124

A ley/AleyWe develop somewhat different criteria for hazard area classes for each region (and sometimes for each cave) studied. We typically use threeorfour categories, althoughoneormore may be absent in particular recharge areas. In a typical hazard area mapping projectthecategories will include low, moderate, high, and extremely high groundwater contamination hazard categories. Situations associated with the higher risk categories 1) Areas in close proximity to the cave. 2) Sinkhole areas, losing stream segments, and areas within 300 feetofmapped fracture traces and lineaments. 3) Localized areas where substantial volumesofwaterentergroundwater. 4) Areas with shalloworvery rocky soils. 5) Areas where land usesofconcern existorare likely to exist. Point sources are routinely identified, assessed, and shown on the maps with an index number. 6) Areas which exclusively recharge the caveofconcern. SummaryofGoodRecharge Area Study Characteristics1.Thestudy should be conductedby,orbe under the technical direction of, a karst hydrologist who has successfully conducted previous recharge area delineation studies. A person who has previously conducted groundwater traces does not automatically quality since recharge area delineation and hazard area assessments requires more than simple groundwater tracing. However, the person directing the study should have backgroundorexperience in groundwater tracing. Once a yeartheNational Water Well Association offers a week-long professional short course entitled "Practical Karst Hydrogeology with EmphasisonGround Water Monitoring". This course providesthetypeofbackground needed to supplement the conventional backgroundofmost groundwater hydrologists. Recharge area studies lie well outside the fieldofexpertiseofthe typical registered geologistorengineer. 2) Thorough field reconnaissance precedes the startofgroundwater tracing. Background samplingisconducted before tracer dyes are injected. Numerous sampling stations are established to insure that the injected dyes are recovered. Dyes appropriate to conditions in the study area are selected and the quantities used are adequate toinsure, that the failure to recover dyeatthe caveofconcerniscredible evidence that a hydrologic connection does not exist. Depending upon conditions, adsorptive lossesmaycause the failureofgroundwater traces conducted with Direct Yellow 96, optical brighteners, and Rhodaminewr.3)Thedelineation study should be adequatetodetect and assess recharge areas which the caveofconcern shares withothercavesorsprings.Thegood study will notbelimited to just the simple and easy groundwater traces, but will instead include traces from areas where data are needed.Thegood study will routinely conduct traces to assess sites which pose potentially significant water quality threats to the caveorspring being studied.Thestudy will be dynamic; the results from previous traces must be incorporated into the planning for those subsequently conducted. 4) Stateofthe art analysis for tracer dyes uses a scanning spectroOuorophotometer operated with a synchronous scan protocol. Successful groundwater tracing can be done using visual and fluorometric methods, but these approaches slow the tracing program becauseofdye interferences and the necessityofusing more dye to insure positive results. Increasing the quantityofdye increases the durationofthedyepulse and, in turn, the time between traces. Field timeisgenerally the most expenSive partofa recharge area study. Inourexperience, stateofthe art analysis generally maximizes the numberofgroundwater traces conducted; it also produces the most credible Several firms have this typeofequipment; at leasttwoofthese firms will routinely conduct dye analysis work on samples shipped to them. Similar equipment existsPage 121

PAGE 125

Aley/Aleyat afewuniversitiesorother state agencies, yet experienced operators and acceptable protocols fordyeanalysis often limit the utilityof equipment. 5) Hazard area assessments and the developmentofhazard area maps should be a routine componentofrecharge area delineations.ReferencesAley, Thomas.1985. Optical brightener sampling; a reconnaissance tool for detecting sewage in karst groundwater. Hydrological Sci.and Tech. Short Papers, Vol.1:1,pp.45-48.Aley, Thomas.1988.Complex radialflowofground water in flat lying, residuum-mantled limestone in the Arkansas Ozarks. Proc. Second Conf. on Environmental Problems in Karst Terranes and Their Solutions. Assoc.ofGround Water Scientists and Engineers, pp.159-170.Aley,Thomas and MickeyW.Fletcher.1976.The water tracer's cookbook. Mo. Speleol., Vol.16:6,pp.1-32.Aley, Thomas; James F. Quinlan; calvin Alexander; and H. Behrens.1992(in preparation). The joyofdyeing; a compendiumofground water tracing techniques. AssociationofGround Water Scientists and Engineers. Aller, Linda; Truman Bennett; Jay H. Lehr; Rebecca J. Petty; and Glen Hackett.1987.DRASTIC: A standardized system for evaluating ground water pollution potential using hydrogeologic settings. U.S.EPADocument600(2-87-035. 455p.+maps and appendix data.Page122

PAGE 126

ReederNATURALANDCULTURALLANDSCAPE INTERACTIONSINTHE KARST OFBATUAN, BOHOL,THEPHILIPPINESPhilip Reeder DepartmentofGeography UniversityofWisconsin-Milwaukee Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53201ABSTRACTPopulationpressure, periodic drought, insurgency and thenatureofthekarst landscape have combined to degrade Batuan's soil and water resources. Decreased fallow times and slash and burn agriculture have greatly diminished aquifer recharge rates and increased soil erosion. This degradation impliesthatchanges inthecultural landscapearealteringthenatural landscape. This interaction between man and land forms the basis fortheenvironmental problems which currently exist in Batuan.IntroductionThis manuscript examines the relationships that exist between man and land inthelimestone terrainonBohol inthesouthernportionofthePhilippine archipelago. Examplesarecited fromthemunicipalityofBatuan, whichislocated intheCentral Limestone Plateau Regionoftheisland. Batuan's natural landscape includes abrupt isolated limestone hills (mogotes), rugged uplands, broad flat alluvial valleys, springs, caves and dense jungle.Howmanrelates totheland,changing it and being changed,isthecentralthemeofclassical cultural geography (Sopher, 1973). "Its focusisonthesystemic links between man and culture expressed in the appearanceofthecultural landscape-theland remolded by culture" (Sopher, 1973).Theman/land relationship which existsonBohol (specifically Batuan) was examined from antiquity to the present using historical records, scientific writings, folklore, and personal communications to develop a modelofhuman interactionandexploitationofthe natural landscape.Populationexpansionandtheproliferationofagriculture after settlement have degraded soil and water resourcesonBoho\.Howman has dealt with this degradation was studied inthecontextofnatural landscape exploitation shaping cultural attitudes thus forming an evolving cultural landscape. Agricultural developmentintropical karst areasisrelated to the natureofspecific karst resources includingthespatial orientation and interactionofbedrock, soils, sediments, springs, tufa dams, zonesofsaturated bedrock and swallets (Urich, 1991a).Theinter-relationships between these resources often determinetheevolutionofindigenous agricultural systems (Urich, 1991a), with groundwater quantity and qualitybeing paramount intheoperationofthese systems (Urich, 1991b).Thenatural landscapeofBatuan has supported a culture dependentuponintensive wet rice cultivation for a millenniaormoreand continues to maintainmatureand sophisticated wet rice irrigation systems (Urich, 1989, 1990). But in contrast to the pristine natural landscapeofthefirst settlers, today's landscapeisgreatly disrupted.Theheavily forested, perhaps somewhat ominous natural landscapeofthe original settlers has evolved intothedeforested, largely cultivated natural landscapeofcontemporary Bollo\. Through time,theevolutionof.the man/land relationship influencedtheattitudes, perceptions and customs specific to Bohol and served as building blocks forthesocietal structure which currently exists.Page 123

PAGE 127

Reeder120125I ,p 200SOUTHo0 0DCHINAPHILIPPINESEA SEA ",.D ':,'.!0'<;)PAZLAWAN .' SOHOl100 ...... '\J0 SULU 4 SEA '_a..... ".:'CELEBES.SEAFigure 1 The locationoftheislandofBohol, The Philippines.BOhol,Phlllppin Munlcipailly 0'eeluan ITIITI L1mlon. ""plandr Figure 2 LocationoftheLimestone uplandandtheMunicipalityofBatuan, Bohol, The Philippines.Page124

PAGE 128

GeneralOverviewofBatuan,BoholTheislandofBoholislocated in the south-central Philippine archipelago about 500 kilometers southeastofManila (figure 1). Batuanislocated in the Central Plateau Regionofthe island andisalmost exclusively underlainbythe Pleistocene aged Maribojoc Limestone. Batuanisoneof47 municipalities which comprise Bohol (figure 2). It has a populationofabout 11,000 people and a total land areaofnearly 8,000 hectares,ofwhich 60%iscropland and 25%ispasture, with about 35%ofthe cropland used for lowland rice cultivation.Theotherprincipal crops grown in Batuan are corn (16%ofthe total land area) and coconuts (7%). A totalof1,771 hectares are cultivated with lowland rice varieties,ofwhich 619 hectaresareirrigated, with the remaining 1,152 hectares being rainfed. Production data indicates that yields from irrigated fields are double the output from the rainfed plots (Virador, 1988). Fields are irrigatedbyspring resurgences which discharge into a systemofchannels that have evolved over the centuries into a well integrated network which irrigates about 33%ofthe lowland rice fields.EvolutionoftheCulturalLandscapeThefirst population migration to affect the southern Philippine archipelago brought people from northern China who had migrated through southern China, across mainland southeast Asia and into the Malay Peninsulabyaround 4,500 B.P. Then, traveling mainly by water, they migrated east through the Indonesian islands, moving north through Borneo and Sulawesi into the Philippines (Heine-Geldern, 1932). Beyer and de Veyra (1947) note that the southern Visayas, including Bohol were settledbypeople who had come from Borneo between 2,200 and 2,300 B.P. These settlers brought with them the technology to grow wet rice crops in terraced fields. At the timeofsettlement, Bohol was probably heavily forested, which proved inviting to the new settlers' machetes. From the first footstepsonthe beach, to the crudely fashioned homesofthe settlers, to the trails cut through the jungle to penetrate the island's interior, man'smark was immediately put upon the natural landscape.Thedevelopmentofthe wet riceReederculture on Bohol probably began with the cultivationofsmall family plOts. As the island's population increased, more land was cleared for sustained agriculture. Along with accelerated soil erosion due to land clearance, essential water resources necessary to keep the land fertile and producing crops were also degraded.Theavailabilityoffertile soil and irrigation water induced settlement in areas which had the greatestpotential for agriculture. Then a cycleofland development, degradation and abandonment occurred which constantly redistributed the island's population. Throughout these episodesofdegradation and population migrations, Boholanos maintained the indomitable spirit for which they are legendary (Borja, 1989). "Itiscomforting that far from being portrayed in history books as belligerent and easily given to pugnacity, the Boholanoisindeed a manofpeace with a deep senseofrespect and affection towards others" (Borja, 1989p.2). Behind the timid facadeofthe Boholanoisa fervor which can transform disappointment into righteous indignation, then a prolonged burstofanger and finally, to unbridledfury(Borja, 1989).Thenatureofthe Boholanoistypifiedbythe events associated with the signingofa blood compact (sandugo)onMarch16,1565 between Datu Sikatuna, the ruling chieftainofBohol, and Miguel Lopez, a representativeofthe Spanish government. This represents a significant milestone in Filipinohistory,thedevelopmentofinternationalunderstanding. But it was alsoonBohol that the first and most significant armed resistance against the abusive Spanish took place.For85 years, between 1744 and 1829, the Dagahoy Rebellion occurred, whichwasthe longest such rebellion in Philippine history. The final result was freedom for the Boholanos to proliferate their culture. Throughout Philippine history Boholanos havealwaysbeen ready to defend their homeland andwayoflife. Boholanos were noted tobethe fiercest fighters in the American-Filipino War and World WarII.Itisthis spirit which can be traced through history and which still exists in today's Boholano. Although a civil warofsortsiscurrently being fought throughout thePage 125

PAGE 129

ReederPhilippines, with Bohol being no exception, most Boholanos still remain humble farmers who relish their freedom and their wayoflife.Thearmed insurgency and counter-insurgency has prompted families and clan groups to move from traditional, highly decentralized ancestral house sites to relocation sites near village coresoralong roads (Urich, 1991b). This centralized and intensified the patternofdegradation.Theintensificationofland degradation and the lackofany social mechanism to check this problem could greatly affect future preservationofthe Boholano wayoflife, more so than even the violenceofthe current civil war between the New Peoples Army (communist rebels) and the Aquino government.DegradationoftheNaturalLandscapeBatuan's natural landscapeisdominatedbyresidual limestone hills (mogotes) and ridges separatedbybroad, flat alluvial valleys.Otherkarst phenomena include channels which carry ephemeral storm water, sinkholes, caves and springs (Reeder and others, 1989).Theunique natureofthe karst landscape and the lack of understandingofthecomplex systems which exist in such terrain has led to degradationofthe natural landscape. Current environmental problems include1)periodic drought, compoundedbythe dominanlly underground drainage, 2) soil erosion from valley sides and floors, 3) land subsidence, particularly sinkhole collapse, and 4) groundwater contamination (Reeder, 1990). These problems affecting the natural landscape and subsequently the cultural landscape, have been accelerating since settlement, and are directly related to man's impact upon the land. Hillslopes have a thin, patchy soil cover (less than10cmdeep) and are used mainly for pasture.Thevalley floors are used for intensive rice cultivation, although soil depth averages only about15cm. Batuan's economyisalmost totally dependent on agriculture, but productionislimited severelybynatural landscape constraints:1)surface water for irrigationisephemeral and unreliable, 2) underground waterisnot readily accessible, and 3)thethin soils are eroded easily (Reeder, 1990). Paralleling these problems, Batuan has difficulty maintaining reliable domestic water supplies. Springs resurge and sink at thousandsoflocations throughout Batuan. Spring resurgences are typically used for irrigation, the wateringofdraft animals, laundry and bathing. Certain spring resurgences are used onlyasdrinking water supplies. But the complexitiesofthe karst drainage systems arenotwell understood and often spring resurgences used as drinking water supplies are discharging waters previously used for irrigation, laundry, etc. Water quality determinations indicate that many domestic water supplies arecontaminatedbyfecalcoliformbacteria.Gastrointestinal illnesses are common (there were16deaths due to severe diarrhea between 1978 and 1980) and thereisa threatoftyphoid and hepatitis. Itisalso probable that organic contaminant levels are elevated becauseofthe useoffertilizers to increase crop yields which has become a necessity becauseofexpanding population pressures (Municipal Development Staff, 1982).The"Masagana99"program was introduced in 1973 and provided farmers with fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides (Urich, 1991b).NaturalandCulturalLandscapeInteractionsTheenvironmental degradation and associated problems which currently exist in Batuan reflects the transgressionofthecultural landscape affecting the natural landscape.Asthe population expanded, more land was cleared and the natural balanceofnature (and the natural landscape) was altered. This led to severe degradation in some places causing the abandonmentofland becauseofpoor land management practices.Thedegradationofthe land resource affected the cultural landscape in that population outmigration occurred from degraded areas tootherareas where fertile land was still available. Someofthe migrants choose to go to surrounding islands suchasCebu, Negroes,orMindanao, while others attempted to find new land suitable for agricultureonBohol. But becauseofpoor management practices these lands wereeventuallydegradedandotherpopulationredistributions occurred. In many instances the cycleofland development, degradation and abandonment ran full circle and once degraded lands were again used for some typeofagriculture.Thepopulation outmigration from Bohol tootherislands served to alleviate some destructive impacts upon the natural landscape, but because most contemporary Boholano'sPage126

PAGE 130

Reederchoose to stayonBohol, population pressure has further strained the land resourcebyreducingoreliminating fallow time. Inanattempt to curb the escalating population throughout the Philippines, the national government has established a moratorium on family size which states that a married couple may only have four children. Any children beyond the limit are taxed thus applying an economic burden upon the family unit impelling families to limit their siblings to four. Since the Central Limestone Plateau RegionofBohol was raised from the sea less than 1.8 million years ago, people have stripped the natural ground cover, channelizedtheflowofstreams, plowed the land, blazed trails, built towns and roads, fought battles and generally disrupted the natural landscape. This uninterrupted disruption has led to the degradationofBatuan's soil and water resources, whichisthe rootofBatuan's agricultural development problems. Batuan currently has no established soil and water management policies, hence, resource degradation continues essentially unchecked.Thepracticeofkaingin (slash and burn) agriculture has greatly contributed tothedegradationofBatuan's soil and water resources. Only 29%ofBatuan's populationisgainfully employed in agriculture and unemployed landless people go to the highlands to cultivate small plots usingthekaingin system. This poses problems forthelowland rice and corn areas, where agricultureismost intense, because the kaingin method greatly affects the hydrologic regime. It was notedbya long time local resident that area spring discharges have decreased approximately 40% (Virador, 1989). Thisislikely a resultofland clearanceinthe upper portionofthe drainage basin diminishing aquifer recharge rates and hence decreasing spring discharges. Only recently has the link between deforestation and the volumeofdischargeatlowland springs been officially recognized. But todateonly 111 hectaresofBatuan's 7,908 hectare land area has been replanted in forest.Thekaingin system also greatly accelerates soil erosion. This system has been practicedonBohol since settlement and thus the degradation causedbythese methods has been altering the natural landscape for several thousand years. But now with growing population pressures, the ramificationsofsuch practices are being vaulted to paramount importance. Only recently has the full extentofBatuan's soil and water resource management problem been recognized, thus prompting a call for the developmentofresource management strategies (Municipal Development Staff, 1982 and Day and others, 1989).Thecomplexities of the karst landscape, the severityofdegradation, increased population pressures, the well established cultural attitude which accepts degradation, and the lackofprevious management policies will make reversalofthe negative environmental spiral difficult.Summary and ConclusionsFrom evidence and ensuing discussions presented in this manuscript, a numberofpoints become apparent. Firstly, Bohol, and Batuan. specifically, face' severe environmental degradation problems which have greatly altered the natural and cultural landscapes. The combined alterationofthese landscapes point to the fact that they evolve simultaneously. What affects the natural landscape eventually affects the cultural landscape, although a certain lag time may exist. Man has alteredthenatural balancebystripping the ground cover, channelizing the flowofstreams, building towns, houses and roads, plowing the land, and blazing trails. These features represent culturally based alterationsofthe natural landscape thus forming an evolving cultural landscape. This points to the almost inseparable relationship that exists between these landscapes. These landscape interactions can produce barren hillsides too degraded for agriculture,orlush fertile fields which produce enough cropstofeed thepopUlOUS.It was perhaps a seriesofunconscious decisions made during the infancyofBoholano society which set the course which future generations followed. During early settlement land was perhaps indiscriminately cleared and resource conservation was unimportant because resources were so abundant. Through time,asthe population grew and more strain was put upon the land resource, the levelofconservation stayed thePage127

PAGE 131

same. Even now, 2,500 years after settlement, conceptsofenvironmental conservation and soil and water preservation are little known to Boholanos. This lackofresource conservation has led to severe environmental degradation problems which have perched Boholonthe precipiceofdisaster.Ifsound management plans are not implemented in Bohol, the environmental degradation may become irreversible destroying the natural and cultural landscapes in its wake.ReederAcknowledgementsData for this investigation could not have been gathered without the assistanceofthe National Irrigation Administration, the Philippine DepartmentofAgriculture and the Mayor and peopleofBatuan. Appreciationisalso expressed to the National Speleological Society which provided some financial support and to Apolonio "Pol" Virador the Municipal Agricultural Officer for Batuan whose assistance was invaluable.ReferencesBeyer, H. and Veyra, J., 1947, Philippine SagaA Pictorial Historyofthe Archipelago Since Time Began. Capital Press, Manila. Borja, T.G., 1989, Handurau. Diamond Press, Cebu City,ThePhilippines: 320p.Day, M., Reeder, P. and Urich, P., 1989, Potential UtilizationofCamara Spring as an Agricultural Water Supply: A Preliminary Investigation, Technical Report Submitted to the Philippine DepartmentofAgriculture.lip.Heine-Geldren, R., 1932, Urheimat und Fruheste Wanderungen der Austronesir, Anthropos. Volume 27, pp. 543-619. Municipal Development Staff, 1982, Comprehensive Development Plan, 1983-1992. Municipal GovernmentofBatuan,110p.Reeder, P., Day,M.and Urich, P., 1989, The Caves and KarstofBatuan, Bohol, The Philippines, National Speleological Society News. Volume 47,No.12,pp. 292-295. Reeder, P., The Camara Cave Project: Batuan, Bohol, The Philippines, Geo2. Volume18,No.1,pp.1-4.Sopher, D., Place and Location: Notes on the Spatial PatterningofCulture,inThe IdeaofCultureinthe Social Sciences. EditedbySchneider,L.and Bonjean, C., Cambribge University Press: London, pp. 101-117. Urich, P., 1989, Tropical Karst Management and Agricultural Development: Examples From Bohol, Philippines, Geografiska Annaler. Volume71B,No.2,pp. 95-108. Urich, P., 1990, Rock Carved CisternsofBatuan, Bohol, Philippines, Asian Perspectives. Volume 29,No.1,pp.89-97. Urich, P., 1991a, ExploitationofTropical Karst Resources for the CultivationofWet Rice, Man and Karst. International Geographical Union, Study Group on Man's ImpactinKarst, Proceedingsofthe1991International Symposium onHumanInfluence in Karst. (in press) Urich, P., 1991b, Stress on Tropical Karst Resources Exploited for CultivationofWet Rice, Man and Karst. International Geographical Union, Study Group on Man's ImpactinKarst, Proceedingsofthe1991International Symposium onHumanInfluenceinKarst. (in press) Virador,A,1988, Updated Municipal Profile for Batuan, Philippine DepartmentofAgriculture Report. Batuan, Bohol, 2p. Virador,A,1989, Personal Communication. Municipal Agricultural Officer, Batuan, Bohol, The Philippines.Page 128

PAGE 132

Vale/JonesIT'S AN OPEN AND SHUT CAVE: PLUGGING ARTIFICIAL ENTRANCES AT ONONDAGA CAVE STATE PARKEugene Vale Missouri Dept.ofNatural Resources Onondaga Cave StateParkLeasburg, Missouri 65535ABSTRACfRonaldH.Jones Missouri Speleological Survey2851AVictor Street St. Louis, Missouri 63104 Onondaga Caveislocated in Onondaga Cave StateParkat Leasburg, Missouri.Thecave has been managed bytheMissouriDepartmentofNatural Resources since 1981,butitwas commercially operated and developed fortheprevious ninety years. Duringonehundred yearsofoperation, numerous artificial openings have been created. These openings have increased opportunities for illegal entry and vandalism and have altered the airflow and climateofthe cave, affecting wildlife and speleothems.Anongoing program to secure and seal these artificial entrances and restore natural conditions tothecave has utilized bat compatible gates, hermeticallysealed doors, airlocks, and sewer plugs.Workwas accomplished using state park employees and caver volunteers fromtheMissouri Speleological Survey. Onondaga Cave State Parkislocated 90 miles southwestofSt. Louis in the Ozark RegionofMissouri. It features Onondaga Cave, a show cave located alongtheMeramec River and formed in the Gasconade and Eminence Dolomites.Thecave has been protected as astateparksince 1981.Thestoryofthecave begins attheDavis Mill in 1886.TheMill Pond was createdbydammingthespring, and a small gap abovethewater wasthenatural entrance through whichtheoriginal explorers enteredthecave.Thefirst artificial opening was created just totheleftofthespring entrance to ease access for development. Just inside visitors wouldenteronboats to traverse 300 feetofwater passage to get tothemain partofthe cave.Latera motel, cooledbythecave air, was addedatthis location. This artificial entrance had been abandoned andthemotel torn downbythe time the MissouriDepartmentofNatural Resources began managingthecave.Thenext artificial opening,theMissouri Caverns Entrance, was created inthe1930's.Thecave was discovered to run under a property line and theotherowner dug intothecave and began his own tours. Lawsuits and World War II put this operation outofbusiness, andthearea has been vandalized.Thecommercial entrance thatisstill in use was also created in the 1930's to speedtourmovement throughthecave. Manyofthe associated buildings were constructed in the 1940's. These included the restaurant, gift shop, and cave entrance. Many changes occurredasthesystem grew organically.The"cemetery Entrance" was later begun near the same location.Theidea was to lessen the slope down which visitors had to descend. However, the area was unstable and was abandoned.Anotherentrance,theSubmarine Entrance,islocated nearthelast two openings. It was used primarily for maintenance access and running power cables into the cave. Additional openings were created as new trails and lights were put in. These were essentially well holes drilled into the cave through which construction materials were dumped and power cables were run.Page129

PAGE 133

Vale/Jones \ Almost allofthese remained open after their use was completed. Allofthese openings have had various negative effects on the cave. Being less than secure, they permitted access to the caves byvandals who have smashed speleothems and partied. At the 1984 Symposium,RonKerbo reportedonthe effectsofaggressive air redissolving speleothems. Moist surface air entering the cave condenses, picks up carbon dioxide from the cave air and forms carbonic acid, which can attack the speleothems. This same condensation can affect the aestheticsofourtourbyfilling areas near the artificial entrances with unnaturalfogsafter summer rains. Atothertimes the unnatural drafts have driedoutthe cave, affecting speleothem activity. This alterationofthe natural cave environment via unnatural drafts also affects cave animals. Fletcher (1985) cited that a2 degree Fahrenheit change in a cave's temperature can decimate hibernating bats. Changes in humidity can also adversely affect animals in the cave which require moist conditions. Amphibians such as frogs and salamanders may abandon areas that dryoutseasonallyorpermanently due to these unnatural drafts. The Cave Management Plan for the Park called for the restorationofthe cave environment by sealing these openings -usually with a removable seal in order that future options for maintenance and development remain Oexible. In looking at openings that offered a potential entrance for cave vandals, we considered how previous gates had failed. Hinges, latches, and corners were weak points and often attacked because they provided a place for vandals to get leverage and pry open the gate. Thus we set out to designournew closures with a minimumofexposed weak points. Each gate offered its own special challenges. At the Boat Dock Entrance, an old wrought iron gate was just leaning against the opening. Any normal personcould easily squeeze past it. Constructionofthe new barrier began just inside this old gate. Anchor holes were drilled into the ceiling and a footing was dug into the Ooor. Vertical members were welded into place, and horizontal bars were bolted to them.Thebars were 1 1/2 inch galvanized pipe filled with mortar and rebar to resist prying and hacksawing. The concrete footing was poured to anchor the bottom and to prevent vandals from tunneling under the barrier. Concrete forms were built, and all attachments were encased in concrete columns.Thehorizontal bar spacingof6 inches permitted bat flight and also allowed air exchange similar to what the cave may have experienced before alteration.Tomake the barrier more secure, it was permanently installed and no gateordoor was included in the design. Plans to seal the Missouri Caverns Entrance allowed for no air flow because originally there had been no opening at that location.Theoriginal design had exposed bolts and corners and we modified it considerably. Lookingatthe door from the outside, one sees a featureless metal plate recessed in concrete; there are no obvious points for a vandal to attack. Inside, a metal frame has been bolted to the concrete foundation.Otherbolts have been welded to the door's interior. These bolts pass through three cross pieces where wing nuts hold the entire assembly tightly against the frame. The upper and lower cross pieces keep the corners tight andresistant to prying. The entire structure has been caulked. The old cave entrance building has been replacedbyournew visitor center. Included in the plans for this center was an airlock to control air flow through this constantly used entrance. This airlock has ample space to contain the maximum allowabletoursize. The Cemetery Entrance was a self-solving problem. Since it had already collapsed, we considered it adequately sealed. No work has been done on the Submarine Entrance, but a structure similar to the one at the Missouri Caverns Entranceisplanned, although it will be smaller and horizontal. The bore holes presented a special problem. While we could have plugged the bottom and filled the holes with grout, we had to take a different approach because ofthe requirement that the seal be removable. After consulting with a well-drillerand some engineers, wePage130

PAGE 134

Vale/Jonescame up with a plan.Thebottomoftheborehole was sealed using a mechanical sewer pipe plug. Into the topofthe hole we poured a 100 pound bagofpowdered bentonite clay. Bentonite absorbs water and swells, creating a water-tight seal whichisresistant to the pressureofthewater now filling the hole. A second plug was placed in the top and covered with rock flushtothesurface. Hopefully grass will soon obscuretheopening. Onondaga Cave is nottheonly cave in the park that required such attention. Cathedral Caveisalso toured and had been modifiedbyartificial openings.Thevisitor building lay in ruins, and access to the cave was through a door inthefoundation. This foundation was modified intoanairlock by removing someofit and constructing extensions to the walls.Abox,ontopoftheQnebore hole into Cathedral Cave, blocks mostofthe airflow through this opening. We couldnotuse sewer plugs hereasin Onondaga becauseofcables which descend through the hole. These cables arethepower and data link to a seismic station whichislocated in the cave.Thenatural entrance has a barrel gate on it.Itwas designed to keep people out, but it was not a good design for wildlife. Indeed, it hasn't been keepingReferencesFletcher, MilfordR.,1985, Endangered bat protection at Buffalo National River, Arkansas: Missouri Speleology, vol. 25, pp. 147-150. Kerbo, Ronal, 1984, Aggressive air dissolutionofspeleothems and its significance to cave exploration: 1984 National Cave Management Symposium oral presentation. people out either. Someone dug a rather long and deep tunnel under it. Recently volunteers from the Missouri Speleological Survey filled the tunnel with rock, rebar, and cement. A new wildlife-friendly gate has been designed to replace the barrel.Oneadditional change, unrelated to openings,wasmade at Onondaga.Theold parking lot and associated visitor buildings were removed from the hill directly above the cave, and the hillisbeing restored to a wild state. This removed possible pollution sources and barriers to the natural movementofwater. We have had some indication thatourefforts are paying off. Sincethenew closures we are unable to confirm that unauthorized people have beeninthe cave. Monitoring shows the radon level in the visitor centerismore thanoneorderofmagnitude lower thanitisin the cave. As onemightexpect,_the radon level in the airlockisintermediate between thetwo.Formerly dry areas are once again moist and active. Steam plumes which appearedatopenings on cold winter days are no longer there.Themoney budgeted for these projects was insufficient, andoursuccess was due in great measure to volunteers from the Missouri Speleological Survey, whose free labor really helped us to stretchourbudget. Wesley, Frank and Greg lffrig, 1983, Cave management plan, Onondaga Cave State Park: Missour-i DepartmentofNatural Resources, Jefferson City,65p.Page 131

PAGE 135

Tanaka ANALYSISOFSURVEYMETHODOLOGYIN A HAW AllAN LAVATUBEDarrel T. Tanaka Graduate Student/Geography, Department UniversityofHawaiiat Manoa ABSTRACfDr. Fred D.StoneBiology Department UniversityofHawaii at Hilo Darkness, high humidity, geological limitations, archeological evidence, time constraints, cave biology are things to consider in the collectionofsurvey data for a detailed Hawaiian lava tube map.Anongoing projectofthe Hawaii Caves Conservation Task ForceisthepreservationofPahoa Cave, a major lava tube in thePunaDistrictofthe islandofHawaii. In 1987, the Hawaii State DepartmentsofLand and Natural Resources and Agriculture requested the surveyofa portionofthis cave underlying the Keonepoko lId Farm Lot Subdivision.Theproblemofcave roof collapse due to heavy equipment had caused safety concerns among farmers leasing land from the State.Threenon electronic survey methods: theodolite, plane-table and tripOd-mounted compasses, were used to survey Pahoa Cave. We initially believed that the tripOd-compasses method wouldbeunreliable due tothepaleomagnetic effect in the lava rock. We neglected triangulation due to time factors and occasional narrow passages.Thetheodolite, while giving the highest precision for individual readings, had the greatest closure error: 18.7m.Theplane-table also had an unacceptable closure error: 11.4m.In spiteofpaleomagnetism, the tripOd-mounted compasses gave the least closure error: distance. We decided that closure reductionbystatistical methods wasnotacceptable, so we re-shot several stations. This resulted in the correctionofsome large survey reading errors. During the survey, we also determined that Pahoa Cave contained significant archaeological, biological and geological features worthyofprotection.TheHawaii Caves Conservation Task Force has been instrumental in developing a proposal in which the State has agreed in principle to lease 25 acresofland, including 2 milesofPahoa Cave, to the UniversityofHawaiiatHilo as a Cave Preserve. Designating the land as a conservation zone would be the first step in the protectionofthis cave resource, overburden, and surface environment.Thequestion arises as to whether the tripod-mounted compasses cave survey methodisaccurate enough for planning conservation buffer zones. Perhaps a combinationofmethods using tripOd-mounted compasses for detailed cave mapping, Ground Penetrating Radar(GPR)for superimposed surface map application and GPS surveying for cave entrance locating would be a satisfactory combinationofmethods. Since cave survey accuracyisa functionofnot only the typeofequipment used but also the observational procedure and distance between stations, over a large area errors can accumulate quickly.TheGPRmay provide a needed horizontal positional accuracy checkofcave survey points with the surface. Overburden thickness could possibly be determinedbyaPR.We are currently using OPS (MagellanNAV 1000PRO)for cave entrance location. SuccessoftheaPRmethod would provide an independent checkofstation points along the cave traverse.Futureand pending lava tube survey projects, under the nameofthe Hawaii Caves Conservation Task Force, will be affectedbythe chosen survey method.Theresultsofthe Pahoa Cave surveysupportthe hypothesis that the tripod-mounted compasses surveyisthe most accurateofthe cave survey methods. An optimization method would help to average the closure errors over the traverse. An optimum traverse length for a compass survey, whichisbased on the standard deviationsofangle and distance measurements, should help eliminate survey reading errorsbutwouldPage132

PAGE 136

Tanakasignificantly lengthen survey time.Areall three methods subject to cumulative errors? Reading errors may account forourlarge closure errorsonthe theodolite and plane-table. Inorderto measure the reliabilityofthesurvey methods, a statistical analysis wouldbenecessary. However, due to time constraints in redoing this difficult cave traverse, a frequency distribution basedonmultiple sampling would be prohibitive. Field workatPahoa Cave was donebyED.Stone, with survey assistance fromT.Stone, D.T. Tanaka andB.Tashima from 1987 through 1989.Thecompilation and eventual merging of, (1) surface survey,Le.StateofHawaii land platsand(2) Pahoa Cave survey data, was accomplished byED.Stone and showsthevertical relationship between these two dimensions. 'The Hawaiian archipelago, a groupofislands, atolls and seamounts, stretches 1600 miles across thenorthernPacific Ocean. Theyareseparated fromotherhigh islands and continentsbymore than 2,000 milesofsea water. Few speciesofterrestrial plants and animals have been able to reach and colonize the islands through natural means.Duetotheyouthoftheeastern high islands, which assumed a voidoflife in the young lava tubes, it joltedthescientific community whenEG.Howarth documented a diverse communityofObligate cavernicolous endemic arthropods in Hawaiian lava tubes. Subsequent workbyHowarth andED.Stone has led totheknowledgeoftroglobitic species from Hawai'i island through Kaua'i in lava tubes, cracks and fissures. Lavatubeecosystems are defined by geologic processes. Understandingthemodesofformationisuseful in observingtheadaptationsofcave animals to their environment. Although controversy still surroundstheprocessoflava tube formation, I have chosen to followtheworkofPeterson and Swanson. Duringthe197071eruptive episodeofKilauea volcano, they recorded their field observations in lava tube formation. Shield volcanoes produe:e two typesoflava, pahoehoe and a'a. They differ in gas content, fluidity, and surface texture.A'ais cooler, has had more gas escape from its matrix, and flows sluggishly compared to pahoehoe.Pahoehoeishotter, has a higher gas content essentially because the velocityofthe lava has given the gas less time to percolateoutofthematrix, and moves faster than a'a. During timesofsustained volume, a pahoehoe channel can form a crustof crystallized rock betweentheatmosphere above and the molten lava below. This forms the lava tube, a terrific insulator, which allows the 1150-1160 degreeC.pahoehoe to travel as faras10 k.m. with a lossof10to 20 degreesC.Theceilingofthelava tube may thicken with splashing lava, overflows withinthelava tube, and surface flows advancing over it.Thecave ecosystem canbedivided into four distinct units. Theseare(1) the entrance zone where surface fauna and flora are present and the light sourceisgreat; (2)thetwilight zone where decreased lightispresent; (3)thetransitional zone where complete darknessispresent but some outside environmental effects are present; (4) the deep cave zone where troglobitic cave speciesarefound.Thesurvey study was conducted at a partofPahoa Cave located along a predominately agricultural corridor, whichisrapidly losing its rural ambiance, betweentheurban centersofKeeau and Pahoa on Hawaii island. As Pahoa Cave winds through partsofthis corridor, under roads and farms, it remains poorly understood and frequently misused,bythe human community.Thecave entrances, used as a dumpinplaces, epitomize the "out-of sight,outofmind" philosophy that has impacted Pahoa Cave.Byproviding a mapping method that will help completethetaskofdatabasing lava tube locations, management willbeable to concentrateonconserving the resource. Because lava tubes are difficult to survey, limited mainly by geologic and environmental restraints, decidingonthesurvey methodisthe first step towards managingtheresource.Threenon-electronic survey methods were chosen.for cave mapping, basedonthe comparative easeoftransporting equipmenttoand within the mapping site. Two people were used for each mapping method and all distances were measured with steel tape.Page133

PAGE 137

TanakaPerpetual darkness allowed the eye to respond only to the stimulusofportable light. This caused judgement and depth perception difficuities, related to the voidofsensory receptors, and led to observation errors such as bad survey station placement. Atmospheric air saturated with water vapor caused condensation, with concomitant focal problems, on the lensofthe survey instruments. This resulted in distance and directional survey errors when we were unable to read to instruments. Discrepancies in measured quantities due to human mistakesiscommon with the inexperienced instrument operator. We got more knowledgeable as the survey progressed. Small passageways presented intensesetuprequirements for the bulk area required in theodolite and plane-table mapping. This was still a problem for tripod-mounted compasses, in small passages, but to a lesser degree.Materials and Methods2)A disadvantageofthe plane-table, becauseofits large size,wasthe possibilityofaccidental jarring. It was easy to bump plane-table in small passageways when you were. close to the wall. Movementofthe stadia rod was a problem for plane-table mapping. Person 2 caused angle errors due to inattention. An unstable stadia rod often resultedina plusorminus 5 degree horizontal error reading. The second mapping method used tripod mounted compasses utilizing forward.and back shots. Angles were noted as the survey progressed in a non leap frog method. Person 1 read only forward shots and Person 2 read only back shots. Person 2 marked all stations with flagging tape. Sketchesofcave passage were done from station points and included cave profiles.Thescaleofthe sketches and profiles lacked the consistency of magnitude found in the plane-table survey.1)The first method was with a plane-table, wooden tripod, telescopic alidade and English stadia rod. Person 1 levelled the plane-table, operated the alidade and noted angle measurements. Person 2 set the station points, called out the distance measurements to person 1 and held the stadia rod. At each station Person 2 noted distance measurements to left and right walls, perpendicular to the line between survey stations. The marginoferror for this survey was plus or minus 0.5 degrees. The plane-table had the advantage, over the other two mapping methods, in having a drawing surface for field recording. The plane-table allowed Person 1a visual context aid in reconnoitering map problems. The marginoferror for this survey was plus or minus1.0degree. The advantageofthis survey method was that (1) independent readings were taken from each station; (2) relative light weightofsurvey equipment compared to the heavier plane table and theodolite. The disadvantagesofthe survey method, which resulted in directional and closure errors were (1) sightingwasdone without the benefitoftelescopic sights found in the theodolite and alidade and resulted in increasing errors; (2) leveling the instrumentwasneglected for this method. The compasses lacked any leveling device built into the equipment. Angle accuracywasaffected and vertical angle measurements were unreliable; (3) the variationinmagnetic attraction, of terrestrial magnetism versus paleomagnetismofa lava cave,isa source of potential survey error.Page 134

PAGE 138

3)TanakaThethird methodofmapping used a theodoliteandmetal tripod.Thefirst personoperatedihetheodolite.Thesecond person setthesUIVeystations with a flashlight.Thelightbulboftheflashlight was placed at thepointin spaceofthesurvey station which was focuseduponbythefirst person. Cave passage sketches, which included cave profiles, weredonefrom station points.Thescaleofthesketches and profiles, as withthetripod mounted compasses, lackedtheconsistencyofmagnitude found in plane-table survey.Themarginoferrorfor this surveyisplusorminus 1 minute. Advantagesofthe survey method were (1) very accurate centering over station points was possible usingthebull's eyeofthe optical plumb bob; (2) the theodolite providedtheconvenienceofswivelling 360 degrees to map points; (3)thelarge, lighted (outside light source) vernier display provided optical easeinmeasuring readings; (4) direction was obtained withoutthepresenceofmagnetic anomalies found in compass surveying; (5) a telescopic lens, built into the assemblage, both enhanced faint Objects and allowed greater optical clarity. Disadvantagesofthe survey method which can lead to errors in direction and resultinsignificant closure errors were (1) the absenceofa visual product, i.e. the field map drawninplane-table survey, results inthelackofa mental construct to which theoperatorcan be remindedofcertain fallacies in the field situation. This was also true forthetripod mounted compasses; (2) the equipmentisvery bulky, heavy and requires a substantial tripOd. This was alsotruefortheplane-table; (3) wavesofradiant energy fromthesunistransmitted tothemetal legsofthe tripOd,dueto solar energy transfer into a sinkofthe lower temperature tripOd, and resultsinexpansionbyexcitation. Near cave entrances, when theoperatorisconcerned about vertical angles, transit levelling maybeoverlooked. this problem becomes moot withinthecave.ResultsThemappingofa portionofPahoaCave was completed asthestatement of: cave traverse+surface traverse=closure.Thefollowing errors were noted. Over a distanceof906 m., we the map closure fortheplane-table survey.Anerrorof18.7m.was recorded, in map closure, for the theodolite survey.Anerrorof1.3m.was recorded,inmap closure, forthetripod mounted compasses survey. A standard 1/500 rationisacceptable to most surveying operations (Stone, 1986). Basedontheabove resUlts, it seems reasonable to believe that the tripod-mounted compasses methodisthe most accurate non-electronic methodofsurveyinlava tubes.Cave ManagementA cave map increases in value when detailisenteredina cartographicaUy pleasing manner.Theinformation gathered in a cave survey can delineate the extentoftheresource.Thecave map as a historical tool can be used as an indicatorofchange since the mapwasdrawn. PartsofPahoa Cave lie under StateofHawaii agricultural plots. When a farmer clearing land broketheoverburdenofPahoa Cave,hebegan the practiceofusingthetwilight zone to ripen his banana crop. Foreignmattercan nowenterthecave ecosystem at this manmade entrance. Leaking fuel tanks which belong to a trucking company, were situatedontopofPahoa Cave. This resulted in theodoroffuel in the lava tube.Thefuel may impair organism survival abilities and result in organism occupation decreases in that geographical areaofthe cave. Unless actionistaken to correct the problem, pollutionoftheecological unit, the unfortunate "outofsight,outofmind philosophy prevails (Howarth, 1981). It can also blow up the neighborhood.Page 135

PAGE 139

TanakaSince theanthuriumgrower needs a placetodump garbage,Pahoacavehas become a natural rubbish container. Empty cansofherbicide (brandnameRoundup)and insecticide, flower cuttings, broken farm implements, irrigation tubing, and scrap metal have been shoved into a cave entrance.Futurestudy should assess the capabilityofcave organisms to withstand this hostile man-made environment, assuming diminished organism survivabilityatthepointofpol1ution, with survivability increasing with increased distance fromthepollution point.Thehorse (Equus cabal1us), used extensively in plantation work, was dumped in large numbers in a Pahoacaveentrance. Sewage disposal, where local drillers try to please the homeownerbytappingintoa lava tube, can impact the cave.Thecommunity needs tobeeducatedonthe consequencesofdumping things into the ground.Ourrole as educators would be to provide a sourceofreliable information tothecommunity on how they would benefit by adopting conservation measures.Thecave management plan that employs an informational network from various sectors in the community, in concurringonthe greatest and best useofthe resource, will become a tool during land management decisions.Thegeographical positionofcaves will provide land-use classification andtheend resultofland-use mapsofthearea.Thepresenceofa viable mapping program can insure, on further surveysoflava tube ecosystems, a methodology for land managers to collect and access information. A location plan, showing a proposed cave management area, will indicate the geographical relationshipofthe cave totheexisting surface features.cavemapping would be incomplete without the examinationofsurface topography, which may reveal such featuresaslinesofskylights,thedispositionofwhich may be related to the lava tube ecosystem below. DefinitionsArthropoda Thelargest related grouporphyluminthe animal kingdom. Adults generally have a hardenedoutercovering (sclerotized), segmented body and many-jointed segmented limbs. Azimuth Horizontal direction measured on a 360 degree one-dimensional plane. Breakdown Material from the walls and/or ceilingofa passage which has formed a pile on the floorofthe cave. Cave Profile Sketchofthe cross-sectionofa cave takenata point along a traverse. Used as an aid to visualize the vertical two-dimensional aspeetofa cave passage. Closed Traverse A traverse that returns to a previous station point andinso doing forms a survey loop. Closure -Themeasurementofa seriesofmapstations linked togetherbymeasured distances and endingupona starting point. LavaTube-A meandering insulated corridor, which moves lava through the allractionofgravity, towards the earth. Level Toportray the surfaceoftheearthon a horizontal plane. This is a critical aspectinmeasuring survey angles because the angular measurement,otherthan the horizontal,willgive a different azimuth reading. Location Plan Used to show the positionofunderground featuresinrelation to existing surface features. MarginofError-A value which delineates the boundariesofthe acceptable range. Open traverse A lineofstation points that endsina portionofthe cave without returning to a station point. Overburden Theinterstitial ground between the airofthe atmosphere above and the airofthe lava tube below. Paleomagnetism -Thedirection and intensityofthe earth's magnetic fieldingeologic time.Page 136

PAGE 140

TanakaPositional Accuracy -Thegeographical locationofa placeinrelation to the surfaceofthe earth. SensoryReceptors.Stimulus provided to sensory organsbya collectionoffocal pointsinthe area. Survey Loop A seriesofsurvey points that connects together when the endofone survey point returns to a previous survey station. Survey Station Pointsinspace to which a surveyisconnectedbydirection and distance (Thomson, K and Taylor, R. 1981). Taxonomic Category Hierarchyoflevelsinthe biological classificationoforganisms. Categories are kingdom, phylum, class, order,family,genus, species. Telescopic Alidade -Analidade used with a plane-table, that has a telescopic sight which enables the user to see a survey station markerata distance, thatismounted to a straightedge. A bubble levelisattached, which ensures that the plane-tableison a vertical plane, and a vernierisused to measure vertical angles. Temporary Survey Station Removable station markerswhichdo not permanently mar the caves natural state after a survey. Terminal Breakdown -Theendingofa cave passagebythe physical barrierofrubble. Traverse Connecting a seriesoflinesofmeasured length, made along a setofsurvey stations, that intersect at measured angles on the endsofthose lines. Welded Breakdown Breakdown that has fallen into the liquidlavaandSOlidifiedupon cooling.ReferencesEaston, R.M. and Easton, M.G., 1987, Highway Geologyof Hawaiian Islands, Easton Enterprises, Brampton, Ontario, Canada, 158 pp. Godman, Arthur, 1981. Longman IlIustrated Science Dictionary, LongmanGroupLimited. Essex, England. Greeley, Ronald, 1987.TheRoleofLava Tubes in Hawaiian Volcanoes. in Volcanism in Hawaii, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1350., Ch. 59, pp. 1589 1602. Harter, Russell G., 1978. StrataofLava Tube Roofs.TheNSS Bulletin, Oct. 1978, Vol. 40,#4.Howarth,EG.,and Stone, P.O., 1982.TheConservationofHawaii's Cave Resources.inthe4th ConferenceofNatural Sciences, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. Howarth, F.G., 1980.TheEcologyofHawaiian Lava Tubes. in Proceedingsofthe National Cave Management Symposia. EditedbyRonaldC.Wilson and JulianJ.Lewis. Howarth,EG.,1987.TheEvolutionofNon-relictual Tropical Troglobites. Journal of Speleology, Vol.16(1-2), PublishedbySocieta Speleologica Italiana. Kovas, James E., 1991. Survey ApplicationsofGround-PenetratingRadarin Surveying and Land Information Systems, Vol. 51,No.3,1991, pp. 144-148. MacDonald,GordonAand Abbott, and Agatin, T., 1979, Volcanoes in the Sea, the GeologyofHawaii,TheUniversity PressofHawaii, Honolulu, HI,441pp. MacGraw-HiU DictionaryofScientific and Technical Terms,FourthEdition, EditedbySybilP.Parker, MacGraw-HiU Book Company. Peterson, Donald W., and Swanson, DonaldA,1974. Observed FormationofLava Tubes During 1970-1971atKilauea Volcano, Hawaii. Hawaiian Volcano Observatory,StudiesinSp Ieology, Vol. 2, Part6,Jan. 1974, page209.Page137

PAGE 141

TanakaRennie,M.A,1965.ThePresentationofacaveSurvey.Studiesin Speleology, Vol.1,Parts2 3, Dec. 1965,London,125 pp. Sterns,HaroldT., 1967,GeologyoftheHawaiianIslands,StateofHawaii,Bulletin8,Honolulu,HI,112 pp. Sterns, H.T., 1985,GeologyoftheStateofHawaii, Pacific Books,PaloAlto, CA. 335 pp. Sugden,Andrew(Editor),Trendsin Ecology&Evolution.inHawaiianEvolutionaryBiology.Thapa,KhagendraandBurtch,Robertc.,1991.PrimaryandSecondaryMethodsof'DataCollectionin GIS/LIS. SurveyingandLandInformationSystems, Vol. 51,No.3,1991, pp. 162-170.Thomson,Kennethc.,andTaylor,RobertL., 1981. AnIntroductiontocaveMapping.MissouriSpeleological Survey, Vol. 21.Wentworth,ChesterK.,andMacDonald,GordonA,1953.StructuresandFormsofBasalticRocksin Hawaii.GeologicalSurveyBulletin994.I ''''O'V''''''' 0, uL Page138

PAGE 142

Tanaka .....?LuCl-Lu-J0::::J.<:)0-'-Lu<:>-ClLu-Jt....J 0 f-'"?,,0 0 0 0 g" 0 0 '" .,'"5<.LJJJClL...Ja-.Jc:lI >c: 0 Cl 0 a
PAGE 143

", o .,k TanakaPAHOACAVEPROPOSCO NATURAl.AREAI.:)PIIOt'OSEliR[S[ARe.tlISUlVE;FllSTFOUR LOTS {l } (Tho,,",sonch) re of .....1tAgdc:wlwr.l lotit .....,...)&M:Ipropos.df',II"MTifE 'OHI'. FOUSTCU.AlU.D'OMI'.fOU1TotV[LOP[D LOTS MlIVE,,-T_-__oIll._/_P_'._no_T._OI_._S_"_"'_"".:-.--,I.Qlil 1.1 lilu;I.,'.3 1.2IJI O.QOil 0.1 0'"0""0.'O.J02 OJ o0.' Oil1.2lil(Thouund,J FClT--r AStone, CAVE:AG.LOTS PAHOA CAVE: AG. LOTS, .,-...:;...:".:.:D.:DD:::".::".:./..:.:;.:DD::D:::'/:..:8:::'-:::.::'o.:: .:..:::""::D::,::,/8:,.:-:::'..:::.:C::,:D:,:m:,:po:::'::'..:'::"':,:',::' " 8 ..,I. U"l.J1.2t.1 o.0. 01 0 0.' 0.' 0.30.2 0.1 5'0t'I TorMJlto:1'870.' 0.1.2 1.6 (ThChisond.)n.2." lOTS "'-52 2. 3.'5*.....y",,"",-: I'" J . . 2 .t.'(ThoUMf'd.)n. '.' LOTS 4', S2-M.)1'.8 Cave Preserve located within dark borderPage138-b

PAGE 144

JamesonMANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONSFORCLAY VERMICULATIONSRoy A Jameson DepartmentofGeology and Geophysics UniversityofMinnesota Minneapolis,MN55455ABSTRACTVermiculationsare fragile stringers, spots,orpatchesoffine sediment, usually clay. They display distinctive morphologies, including hieroglyphic and dendritic forms. Vermiculations are most prominentonwhite bedrockorspeleothems, against which their typical dark brown, black,orred colors strongly contrast. Easily smearedordislodgedbytouching, vermiculations and associated deposits aretoooften colonized by plants when near commercial lights.Inmany cases, vermiculations are degradedbytheadditionofforeign substances. Vermiculations canbehard to restore; restoration strategies include doing nothing, removing partofthe smearedorforeign material, adding material scraped from elsewhere, and cleaningtheaffected surfaces completely. Vermiculations areanintegralcomponentofcaves, provideanunstudied biological habitat, and deserve greater recognition, protection, and study. In trod uction Vermiculations are stringers, spots,orpatchesoffine grained material, usually clay, with varYing amountsofwater and organic matter. In caves, they form thin coatingsonbedrock surfaces, breakdown,orspeleothems. Vermiculations display distinctive patterns as shown in Fig.1.In simple terms, the intricate patternsofvermiculations result from the wetting and dryingoffine sediments.Thesediments are first deposited as dustsoraerosols, typicallyonmoist surfaces wettedbyseepageorcondensation drops and films.Thesediments can also originate as uniform coatings left by floodwaters. Wetting and drying cycles result in shrinkingofthe sediment, which pull together as agglomerations under the influenceofsurface tensions and electrostatic interactions (Bini et &, 1978). Mostofthe workonvermiculationsisfrom Europe; that workisgenerally inaccessible to Americans, being published in Italian, French, and Spanish journals. However, vermiculations are common in cavesofthe eastern and midwesternU.S.,even if they rarely appear inourcave descriptionsorspeleological literature.Theauthorhas observed vermiculations in cavesinMinnesota, New York, West Virginia,Virginia, and Kentucky, including several locations along the HistoricalTourroutein Mammoth .Cave. Hedges (1974) noted their occurrence in Rainy Day Cave of Iowa, and published a photographofdendritic vermiculations. Hedges (1986) also reported clay vermiculations from Iowa, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia caves, and discussed factors controlling their occurrence. Hill and Forti (1986), in a book devoted almost entirely to speleothems (Cave Mineralsofthe World), provide the most accessible EngliSh-language reviewofvermiculations to date, and publishphotographsofhieroglyphic and tiger-Skin vermiculations.Theirreviewislargely based on a paperbyBinietaI.(1978), which describes non-karstaswellaskarst occurrences and critically discusses theories for the originofvermiculations. Jameson and Alexander (in prep.) describe tbe occurrence, composition, and distributionofvermiculations and associated deposits from Snedegar'S and othercaves-of the Greenbrier karst in West Virginia.Thepresent paper reviews some issuesinthe management ofvermiculations. BecausevermiculationsPage139

PAGE 145

JamesonMorphology ofVermiculations '4 .. 4',c
PAGE 146

Jamesonare rarely noted in this country, and their significance as a cave resourceisrarely recognized, vermiculations are increasingly being subjected to degradation.RecognitionofVermiculationsVermiculations are too easily missedbyvisitors, whether cavers, tourists,orcave managers and staff. Vermiculations often blend into their surroundings and may be difficulttosee. Many are composedofbrownorblack muds and cover dark bedrock in generally muddy geologic settings.Yetvermiculations can be highly prominent. The prominenceofvermiculations is largely a functionofcolor contrasts between them and their substrate,butalso depends on moisture content. Textural contrasts, including the regularityofforms and grain-Size variations in the sediment, canplayarole. Afewexamples may help clarify these remarks. In canyonsoftheSaltpetre MazeofSnedegar's Cave (West Virginia) vermiculations are abundant, prominent, and distinctive. Their colors are usually yellow-brown, red-brown, brown,orblack. The vermiculations contrast strongly with lighter-hued bedrock substrates which have tanorwhite weathering rinds. A varietyofpatterns appear, including spots, hieroglyphic forms, and dendritic forms. The vermiculations are particularly prominent when wet. The passages are wet during the summer and early fall as a resultofcondensation; some areas are perennially wet. Wetting intensifies the colorsifthe clays have absorbed the water. In some areas, the clays donotabsorb the water very well,orare so saturated that additional condensation can appearonsurfaces only as tiny1-2 mm) drops. The drops hang as nearly spherical protuberances from the clay particles on walls and ceilings. When illuminated, the drops reflect light in complicatedwaysand impart an erie glistening character to the cave. Locally, the reflections have a yellowish cast; the cast derives, apparently, from a yellow fungus that grows on moist vermiculations. InUpperMartha'sCave (West Virginia), vermiculations consistofbright red and red-brown clays depositedbyfloodwaters on ceilings. The bright colors contrast strongly with the tan and white bedrock substrate. Spots and hieroglyphic forms predominate.InHowe Caverns (New York) and to a lesser extentinSnedegar's Cave, vermiculations cover speleothems, including white stalactites, stalagmites, columns, andflowstone. The vermiculations vary in color and pattern,butall are prominently visible against the lighter substrates. Even the most unobservantofvisitors are likely to notice such vermiculations, if for no other reason than that they occuronspeleothems.SignificanceofVerrrnculationsasa ResourceEvenifvermiculations are seen, itisall to easy to ignore them. Few cavers worry much about touching, walking, crawling,orclimbing on dark muddy surfaces while exploring. The degradationofthe appearance of mudbysmears, footprints, and the likeiscommonly considered a necessary and justifiable degradation of the cave, if the caveisto be exploredatall. Consequently, itiseasy to seewhysome people might consider many vermiculations to be insignificant: after all, vermiculations are "just mud". Worse, some might even consider vermiculations to be detrimental: where they cover speleothems, vermiculations could be considered a blemish on the beautyofthe cave. Nonetheless, vermiculations are an integral part of caves that constitute a valuable, if little recognized and studied resource in this country. Vermiculations are important foratleast four reasons. First, they really are an integral partofcaves, part of the richly-textured milieu that constitutes the stimulus forourexperiences while exploring, studying, photographing, or,ingeneral, enjoying caves. Tosaythat vermiculations are an integral componentofcavesisto claim that they are more than isolated features. Binieta1.(1978,p.14) state that vermiculations "can be found in nearly any cave if looked for very carefully". The claim may be hyperbole, but vermiculations are found to be surprisingly common once they are sought. Second, vermiculations are clearly features withanaesthetic value. Those who have seen unmarred, intricately-patterned, and often brightly-colored vermiculations, have no difficulty agreeing that removalofvermiculations would constitute an aesthetic degradation of the subsurface environment.Page 141

PAGE 147

JamesonThird, vermiculations may preserve valuable information aboutthesedimentary and hydrologic historyoftheir host passages.Somevermiculations are composedofwind-borne dust and possibly pollen; these could provide information about past climatic conditionsaswell. Fourth, vermiculationssupporta biotic communitythatremains unstudied.Thatcommunity includes the previously mentioned fungus, bacteria, transparent roundworms, and possibly beetles and cave crickets. Observationsofclay vermiculations and associated sediments in Snedegar's Cave clearly show evidenceofbiological activity, for mudsareoften pelletized, suggesting bioturbation.FormsofDegradationVermiculationsarefragile and are subject to several formsofdegradation. Degradationismost commonly a resultofdirect contact, but can result from undesirable fungal, algal,orotherplant growthS. Contactbytouching, climbing, walking, crawling,ordraggingofequipment can be detrimental. Smearingispossible if vermiculalionsarerelatively moist; this formofdegradation need not result in a lossofmaterial,butdoes entail a destructionofthedistinctive patterns.Partofthe surfacethatwasnotcovered may become coveredbythe smear. Such degradation disrupts the appearanceofvermiculations and can be aesthetically displeasing. When dry, friable disintegrationorflaking may be a problem. Contact loosens clustersofgrainsorflakes, which detach and accumulate downslope on ledges, in surface irregularities, on speleothems, on breakdown,oronthe cave floor.Ofcourse, friable disintegration and flaking can be natural processes. In Snedegar's Cave, ledges and undercuts on canyon walls often have accumulationsofclay from overlying vermiculations. Such depositsarereadily deformedorsmearedbycontact and loose their natural appearance.Atsome locations, however, condensation rates are high, and human degradations are partly mitigatedbythe influenceofdescending filmsofwater, which redistribute the clay, restoring a natural appearance.Anotherformofdegradation results when vermiculationsarecoveredbyforeign substances.Thebiggest problemisthat muds from elsewhere (oftenofdifferent colors and texture) are transportedbycaver's clothes, gloves, and equipment:themuds come offbycontactorflaking and canbesmearedorplasteredontovermiculations. Survey marks from carbide lamp black, torch black from saltpetre mining, and mudsorotherdebris fromdigging projects,arealso known to cover vermiculations.RestorationDegraded vermiculations can be hard to restore.Thechoiceofa restoration strategy dependson(1)thetypeofdegradation, (2) its extent, (3) its location and visibility, (4) the aestheticorotherimpactofthedegradationontheexperienceofvisitors, (5)theaccessibilityofthe vermiculations, and (6) possible impactsofthe actual restoration activitiesonthe cave. Five main restoration strategies canbeidentified. In some cases, the best option is to do nothing.Forexample,thedegradation maybeprominently visible yet relatively inaccessibleona canyon wallora passage ceiling. Merely getting tothedegradation may create further degradationsthatare unwarranted. A second optionisto removepartofthe material. This option applies where vermiculations are smearedorcoveredbyforeign substances. Care must be taken in removal; too much removalofvermiculations may impart anunnatural appearanceofbare spots uncharacteristicofthe setting. Putty knives, knife blades, and toothbrushes maybeneeded.Gentlesprayingofthe vermiculations with a spray bottle maybehelpful, andtheoverall goalisto restor as natural an appearanceaspossible.Thedetailsofthe procedure will dependonthe typeofvermiculations and the characterofthe claysorforeign substances. Some smearingsofclay maybevery cohesive and difficult to remove without disturbing surrounding vermiculations and adjacent clay coatings, especially where the coatings are relatively continuous. In such cases, removalofthe smearedorforeign materials will expose bare bedrock in patterns that look very unlike natural bare spots in the vermiculation patterns.Page 142

PAGE 148

JamesonAthirdoptionis to add material scraped from elsewhere. Thisoptionmay help fill in minor gaps in vermiculations,butcare mustbetaken to obtain clayofthepropercolorandtexture.Theclay mustbecarefully added intheappropriatepattern. This strategy shouldberarely used;itisbestnotto add such artificial "deposits" unlessthedegradationsareprominentandoften seen.Thefourthoptionisto clean clear tothesurface, thus removingthevermiculations. Such cleaning maybenecessary where vermiculations have been irretrievably smeared,orwhere fungalor g-ther growths have taken over.Theproblem is most acute in commercial caves, where lightspromoteplant growths. In Howe Caverns, vermiculationsandotherclay deposits often support growthofbacteria, fungi, and even ferns where lights shine too closely.PreventionofDegradationPreventionofthedegradationofvermiculations must proceedonseveral fronts.Weneedtobettereducate cavers as tothevalue ofvermiculations, and discouragethetouchingofthem.Aswithotherfragile features, it maybenecessary to flag vermiculation-covered surfaces so as to warn caversoftheir presence and discourage contact.Intourist caves, we need to encouragethemovementoflights to prevent unwanted growths; it may alsobenecessary to re-orient tourist railstokeep vermiculationsoutofreachofvisitors.ReferencesBini,A,M. Cavalli Gori, andS.Gori, 1978, A critical reviewofhypothesesontheoriginofvermiculations, International Journal0f Speleology, v.'10,p. 11-33. Hedges, J., 1974, Field Trip Guidebook (Geology), 1974 Decorah, Iowa 1974 ConventionoftheNational SpeleologicalSOCiety,139 p. Hedges, J., 1986, Clay vermiculations in Iowa, Pennsylvania,andWest Virginia, abstract, ProceedingsoftheNational Speleological Society Annual Meeting,June23-June 27, 1986, Tularosa, New Mexico, inTheNSS Bulletin,v.48, No.I,p.37. Hill,C.A,and Forti, F., 1986, Cave Mineralsofthe World, National SpeleologicalSOCiety,Huntsville, 238p.Page143

PAGE 149

BuecherPRE-DEVELOPMENTSTUDIESATKARTCHNER CAVERNSRobertH.Buecher Arizona Conservation Projects, Inc.ABSTRACTKartchner Cavernsisa beautiful limestone cave in pristine condition, consideredbyexperts tobethe premier caverninArizona. It will be protected and displayed to the public as the 25th Arizona State Park.Thecavern was discovered in 1974 by two Tucsonans, Gary Tenen and Randy Tufts. They kept the cave secret for fourteen years to protect it from vandalism and to maintain it in its original condition.Itislocated approximately 8 miles southwestofthe townofBensononthe west sideofState Highway 90.Thepark siteis550 acresinsize andissituatedatanaverage elevationof4700 feet.Thecavernisover two miles long with spacious rooms,oneofwhichisas long as a football field, (Figure 1). Itisa wet, 'live' cave into which water still percolates from the surface and whose calcium carbonate features are still growing. It contains an unusually wide varietyofmulticolored cave formations stalactites, stalagmites, flowstone, shields, helictites and soda straws someofwhichareamong the best examples in theU.S.Itisalso a summer home to a colonyofapproximately 1200 bats.Thecontrast between the moist interiorofthe cave (over 99% relative humidity) and the dry desert above makes Kartchner Caverns particularly vulnerable to damaging changes. Changes in airflow, temperature,orhumidity causedbyimproper development could quickly dryoutthe cave, halt speleothem growth, and diminish the cave's beauty.Toprepare for the public openingofKartchner Caverns in an environmentally sensitive manner, Arizona State Parks has contracted for a two year pre-development studyofthe cave with Arizona Conservation Projects (ACPI). This report presents the preliminary resultsofthat 24 month study. The studies focusonfour main aspectsofthe cave environment: (1) cave microclimate and meteorology, (2) hydrolOgy, (3) geology, and (4) biology.CAVE MICROCLIMATE ANDMETEOROLOGYMaintaining the moist conditions within the cave has been identified as the most important consideration in developing the cave. Dryingofthe cave can resultinpermanent damage to manyofthe features which make the cave so attractive. Thereisa marked contrast between the surface conditions and the interiorofthe Kartchner Caverns.Thesurfaceisa semi-arid desert while the caveisa moist stable environment. On the surface, temperatures fluctuateby85'F over the courseofthe year. Deep inside the cave the annual temperature changeisless thanl'F.Thedifference between evaporationonthe surface and in the caveiseven more dramatic. Outside, the yearly evaporation can exceed65inches, inside the cave itisless than 0.08 inches.Therateofevaporation outsideis800 times greater than inside the cave.Ifoutside air were allowed to freelyenterthe cave it would deplete the entire annual supplyofmoisture to the cave in only three days. The cave receives moisture from percolating rain water and infiltration from surface washes. Significant infiltration from washesissporadic and occurs only during years with above average precipitation. It is, however, the largest sourceofwater for the cave when it does occur.Theinfluxofwater from the washesisvery important in maintaining the microclimateofthePage 144

PAGE 150

Buechercave. Precipitation and the subsequent percolationofwater into the caveishighly variable from year to year. Itisstillthemost reliable sourceofmoisture for the cave. Waterislost fromthecavebya systemofnatural drains andbydirect percolation through the floorofthe cave. Evaporation from cavern surfaces and the removalofthe moist air from the cavebyair exchange with surface airispresently responsible for only a small fractionofthe moisture loss. However, developmentofthecave will unavoidably increase the air circulation within the cave resulting in increased evaporation. Surface climate measurements indicate that becauseofthe desert environment, the exchangeofoutside air with cave air will always have a drying effectonthe cave.Ananalysisofthe moisture balanceofthe cave indicates that air exchangeisthe only parameter which can be effectively managed. Increased airflow from development will unavoidably remove additional moisture from the cave. Minimizing the potential for increased air exchange should be a primary considerationofthe cave development in order to maintain the moist microclimateofthe cave.Environmental Monitoring ProgramThe environmental monitoring systemisdesigned to provide data necessary for determining the nature and magnitudeofmicroclimate changes which will likely result from the developmentofthe cave and the constructionofoneormore man-made entrances. The programofenvironmental monitoring was initially outlinedbythe Ozark Underground Laboratory (OUL) with instrument installation, maintenance and data collection performedbyACPI. Approaches suggestedbyOULhave been modifiedbyACPIasnecessary in order to obtain useable dataThemicroclimate studies at Kartchner Caverns have measured the following parameters: Air Temperature Soil Temperature Relative Humidity Evaporation Rates Air Trace Gasses Airflow ACPI has installed a totalof22 environmental monitoring stations (EMS) distributed throughout the cave. The locations were decided on after consultation with Tom AleyofOzark Underground Laboratory (OUL). The majorityofthese stations are placed in pairs.Oneislocated as close asispractically possible to the locationofa potential entrance. The second stationislocatedonehundredormore feet into the cave and acts as a reference station. The distributionofthe monitoring stationsisnotuniform nor was the original intentofthe system to provide uniform coverageofthe interior portionsofthe cave. These stations have been placed so that the existing and future impactofan entranceorproposed entrance on the microclimateofthe cave could be assessed. At each EMS, the following equipment was placed: a9"diameter water evaporation pan, a PVC pipe stand to hold thermometers, an air temperature sensor and a soil temperature sensor. In the back portionsofthe cave, temperatures are also taken with a digital thermometer which stores the high andlowtemperatures. In the front of the cave, each EMSiswired into a computer data logger which records a wet bulb, dry bulb and soil temperature each hour. Approximately once a month, each stationisvisited and additional independent air, soil and water temperatures are taken with a portable thermometer. The volume of water lostby isalso measured at this time.Othermeasurementsofrelative humidity, alpha radiation levels and carbon dioxide are usually takenatthe same time. In addition to the manual temperature measurements taken at each station on a monthly basis,twocomputer systems record temperatures on an hourly basis. Gathering temperature databycomputerized data loggers has several advantages: More measurements can be taken. Simultaneous measurements can be taken at different locations. Probes have come to equilibrium. Thereisno interference from the presence of the observer. Readings can be taken without disturbing the bats.Page 145

PAGE 151

BuecherTwo separate systems have been installed in Kartchner Caverns. InMarch 1989 a data logger and seven probes were installed in the entrance passages. Twoofthe probes measure unventilated wet bulb temper atures. These allow an estimateofrelative humidity to be made. A second, more elaborate computer data logger systemwasinstalled in the BigRoomin May 1989. Initially this system had 30 temperature probes. Three temperature probes were connected to each of the ten environmental monitoring stations around the Big Room.Ateach station, a probe measures air temperature, wet bulb temperature and soil temperature.The initial system measured temperatures with a resolutionof0.5F. In October and December 1989, the system was expanded to 40 probes and the temperature resolution increased to 0.1F. See Figure 2 for a graphofthe average daily temperature and monthly evaporation rate foroneofthe stations in the Big Room.TemperatureThe temperaturesoflarge caves are generally considered to be at the same temperatureasthe mean surface temperature.AtKartchner Caverns State Park the surface weather station hasa mean surface temperatureof 62.5"F. This agrees well with temperatures basedoncorrelationsofthe Kartchner temperatures with nearby weather stations. Inside the cave temperatures vary from 69.7F to 65.5"F with a mean temperatureof67.7F for the whole cave.Thediscrepancy between the range of temperatures inside the cave and the mean surface temperatureisthe resultofthree processes.1)Temperatures in Kartchner Caverns are elevated primarily becauseofregional geothermal heatflow.The above average heat flow over much of Arizonaisresponsible for an increaseincave temperatures of 2.4ofto 6.5F above the mean surface temperature. This indicates that the temperatureofKartchner Caverns should be in the rangeof64.9F to 69.0F. 2) Floodingofthe cave duringthewinteristhe causeofthe cold temperatures intheBack Section. While flooding does not occur every year thereisinsufficient time for the Back Sectionstocompletely return to equilibrium temperature. 3) Stratificationofair in the Big Room during the winter causes this partofthe cave to become the warmest area inthecave. Cool, dry air from the surfaceflowsalong the floor through partsofthe Big Room and into the River Passage.Atthe interface between the cool aironthe floor and warmer air above, a condensationfogforms. Condensation releases heat which warms the overlying air.EvaporationThe moisture contentofthe air within the cave can become a critical management issue.Atthe present time, evaporation from cave surfacesisthemajor sourceofmoisture in the air. The rate at which water evaporates within the caveisexpected to be very low.Onthe surface the energy required to evaporate water comes from the sun, differences in air and soil temperatures and the relative humidityoftheair. Inside the cave, temperatures are relatively constant, thereislittleorno wind and the relative humidityisalmost 100%. The rateofevaporation within the caveislargely determinedbythe relative humidityofthe air.Itisimportant to understand that evaporationisproportional to the difference in relative humidity from 100%.Ifthe relative humidity changes from 99.5% to 99.0%, the evaporation rate will double! This means that very small changes in the relative humidity could have major impacts on the moist conditionsinthe cave. Precise relative humidity (RH) has been measured with a dewpoint microvoltmeter at eachofthe monitoring locations. This instrumentiscapableofmeasuring the relative humidity and dewpoint temperature with an accuracyof0.05%. The relative humidity ranges from 96.32% to 100.00% RH.Theaverage relative humidity for all measurementsis99.42% butishighly skewed toward the higher values.Page146

PAGE 152

BuecherEvaporation rates have been measuredateachofthe 22 environmental monitoring stationsona monthly basis andatanumberofotherlocations adjacent tothe"natural entrance.Ateach location a9"diameter aluminumpan(surface area 59.2 square inches)isfilled with a volumeof750 mlofdistilled water.Thevolumeofwater can be carefully measured and the evaporation rate determined withanaccuracyof0.05 mlperday.Theaverage evaporation rate for all stations is 0.36 mlperday (0.14"/year). Because a large proportionofthe evaporation occursnearthenatural entrance evaporation rates have been divided into two categories. 1) Those stations which are locatednearthe natural entrance and have higher evaporation rates (0.91 mlperday (0.34"/year)) due to cool dry air enteringthecave. 2) Stations distant from the natural entrance and which have lower (0.22 ml per day (O.OS"/year)), more consistent evaporation rates.Therelationship between evaporation rates and relative humidity has been approached in twoways.Correlating precise relative humidities withpanevaporation for those stations with the most data gives the relationshipof1.0 mllday per%RHbelow 100%. A larger sampleofevaporation and relative humidity measurements was evaluatedbya purely distributional comparison. This yields an estimateofevaporation tobe0.65 ml/day per%RHbelow 100%. A valueof1.0 mlldayper%RHbelow 100%isconsidered to bestfitto the data.Underpresent conditions evaporation plays a minor role in removing moisture from the cave. Thisisbecausethepresent entranceisquite small and thereisrelatively little air exchange withthesurface. Developmentofthecave for public viewing can greatly increasetheamountofevaporation. Poorly locatedorconstructed entrances can induce a strong airflowpatternwhich in turn will greatly increase the evaporation. This has been observed in manyotherdeveloped caves. These problems canbelessenedbycare in locatingorenlarging entrances and connecting tunnels. Steps can also be taken to control the airflow entering the cave. Entryway doors can be constructed to act as airlocks and preventtheentryofoutside air. Developing the cave soasto prevent increased airflow and evaporationisthemost easily controllable partofthemoisture balance.DRIP WATER MEASUREMENTWater which percolates intothecave directly from precipitation fallingonthelimestone surfaceofthe hillisan important sourceofmoisture for the cave. Understanding the moisture balanceofthe cave requires that we make a reasonable estimateofthe quantityofwater which enters the cave in this manner. Additionally we need to understand how various patternsofprecipitation affecttheamount and rateofwater percolating intothecave.Inorder to understand these processes, a programofcollecting and analyzing drip water was established. A seriesofS drip water monitoring locations were establishedbyACPYthroughout the cave. Once amonthdrip water was collected, with additional samples frequently taken duringothertrips into the cave. A totalof292 samples were taken during the study.Foreach sample the rateofflowwasdeterminedbymeasuring the volumeofwater collected in a known lengthoftime. Samples were taken fromthecave and later measured to determine the specific conductivityofthe water.Theconductivityofthe waterisrelated to the total dissolved solids. When the measured conductivityofdrip water samplesisplottedbydate, a consistent pattern emerges. Conductivityisslightly higher duringthesummer and early fall than at o.ther timesofthe year. During the winter the conductivityisatits lowest values. The most obvious interpretation for this seasonal variationisthat itisa reflectionofthe levelofbiologic activity in the soil. Carbon dioxideisproducedbythis biologic activity. Higher concentrationsofcarbon dioxideinthe soil allow rain water to dissolve greater amountsoflimestone which increases the conductivityofthe drip water. Levelsofcarbon dioxide in cave air have been periodicallymeasured. When drip water conductivityisplotted against carbon dioxide levels itisapparent that the two are related.Foreachoffour drip water stationsinareas where CO2has been measured, dripPage 147

PAGE 153

Buecherwater conductivity increases at a rate proportional to the increase in CO2 ,Froma nomograph in Palmer's "Origin and morphologyoflimestone caves" itispossible to estimate the change in conductivity due to a change in CO2 ,This worksoutto be18uMHOS per 1000 ppmCO2 ,only slightly higher than the observed. This may also indicate that mostofthe variation in cpnductivity observed in theotherdripsisdue to changes in CO2concentrations within the cave rather than changes in CO2production in the soil. While the concentration in CO2within the soil undoubtedly increases during the summer, the amountofwater percolating through the soil also increases.Theincreased flow appears to maintain a relatively uniform concentrationofCO2while itismoving within the limestone.Theincrease in CO2observed within the cave during summer monthsisdue more to increased drip waterflowthan to changes in CO2concentrationsinthe drip water. Water which enters the cave from the surface drips from the ceilings creating the numerous formations in the cave. A significant amountofwater enters the caveinthisway.Unfortunately theamountofwater entering the caveasdripsisdifficult to estimate. Drips are randomly spaced throughout the cave and many are inaccessible.Theflow rateisalso highly variable and dependent upon surface precipitation. Several approaches have been devised to estimate the quantity of water entering the caveasdrips. The sourceofdrip waterisprecipitation which fallsonthe surfaceofthe limestone hill above the cave. Water whichisnot lost to evapotranspiration and direct runoff percolates down into the limestone.Thequantityofwater which does reach the cave can be estimatedbydetermining the excess moisture available after accounting for evapotranspiration. A general approach for determining the excess soil moistureisthe Thornthwaite Method. In this method excess soil moistureisdetermined from the mean daily temperature, precipitation, timeofyear, geographic location and soil moisture capaCity. We can estimate what the long term excess soil moistureisbyassuming that Sierra Vistaissimilar to Kartchner Caverns State Park. Both sites have the same elevation, mean temperature and average yearly preCIpItation. Basedonan analysisofweather records for Sierra Vista from 1955 to 1990, the average excess soil moistureis1.70" per year.Theexcess moistureispartitioned between direct surface runoff and water which percolates into the limestone bedrock. A rough guessisthat onlyonethird will percolate into the cave,orapproximately 0.60"peryear.Theamountofwater which actually reaches the cave has been estimatedbythree methods. 1)Bycounting the numberofdrips. Frequently when ddp water samples were collected, the rateofdripping was also recorded.Fromthis data a general correlation has been found between the numberofdrips per minute and the flowratefor stalactites in Kartchner Caverns.Theflowratein ml perhourisfound tobe4.75 times the numberofdrips per minute. Therefore,bycounting the numberofdripsperminute in a given area,itispossible to estimate the quantityofwater entering that areaofcave.Thismethod estimates that 0.17"ofwater that enters the cave each year. 2)Bydrip water collection in randomly placed pans. A setof10 empty,9"evaporation pans were placed randomly about the Big Room. During this period (145 days) the volumeofwater, if any, was measured and the pan emptied.After.each measurement the pan was moved to a new location. This experiment yielded estimatesofthe amountofwater reaching the cave that range from 0.07 to 0.13 inches per year. This rate must be corrected for the amountofevaporation which occurred. Adding the estimated evaporation to the amounts collected in the pans gives an estimated 0.24" to 0.30"ofwater reaching the floorofthe cave. 3)Byevaporation rates in dry areas.Thereare veryfewareas that canbefound in the cave where the floor and walls are actually dry. Only portionsofthe entrance passages up to Main Corridor and the TarantulaRoomhave a dry floor during winter months.Theevaporation rateatthese areas must exceed the moisture supply.Bycomparing the evaporation recordsofmonitoring stations in this area we can determine the evaporation rate that will just balance the dryingofthe cave.Page148

PAGE 154

BuecherDatafrom stationsnearthe natural entrance were examined to determine average evaporation rates during those months when dryingisknown to occur. Basedonthese measurementsitwas estimated that 1.3 mlperdayofevaporation an areaofcave would dryitoutwithin a few months. This corresponds to 0.49 inchesofevaporationperyear. Since these areas do dryoutthemoisture supplied must be suppliedata rate lessthan0.49"peryear. This setsanupper boundaryonthe moisture influx into the cavebypercolating surface waterof0.49" per year.Thethree estimatesoftheannual drip water influx are: Drip count estimates 0.17"peryear.Randomcollection pans 0.24" to 0.30" per year Dry areas 0.49" per year.Theaverageofthese estimates is0.3"ofwaterperyear enteringthecave in the formofdrips (60,000 gallonsperyear).HydrologyTwo off-site drainage areas, Guindani Wash and Saddle Wash have been shown to be the sourceofthe water which sporadically floodstheback portionsofthecave. Two flooding events occurred duringthecourseofourstudy. In August, 1990theback sectionofthe cave was flooded. This wasourfirst indication thatcombinationsofintense, localizedsummerthunderstorms could produce enough surface runoff to cause flooding.Thefloodingwasnotobserved but was determined to be rather slow, taking a weekormore to floodthecave.Thecave was also found to respond slowlytorunoffonthesurface.Theadjacent washes must flow for several weeks before water begins toenterthe cave. This indicates that rapid floodingofthe cave is highly unlikely.Byobserving the rate at which flood water left the cavewewere able to determine thatthedrains are very small and inefficient. It took over two months for the flood water to completely disappear. Because the flooding wasnotdiscovered until after the peak had passed, it was difficult to determine the pointsatwhich water enteredthecave. A small flowing stream was found entering the caveatSue's Room.Thesourceofthis stream was determined to be Saddle Washbydye tracing.Thesecond flooding event occurred in the winter of 1991. Once againtheback sectionsofthe cave flooded. This timethewhole sequenceofflooding was closely observed. We were able to measuretheamountofwater being lost from the surface stream and identifytheareas where infiltrationistaking place. Waterwasfound to be entering the caveatGranite Dells. This confirmed that only a small amountofwater enters the caveatSue's Room.Bymeasuringtherateatwhichtheinterior water level Changes,thequantityofwater reaching the cave was determined. Approximately '/, ofthe water which disappears fromthesurface stream reappears in the cave. Positiveproofofthe connection was madebydye traces from the surface stream intothecaveatGranite Dells. These two surface streams appear to beoneofthe most significant sourcesofwater for the cave. Changes in land use within these drainage areas can directly affect the quantity and qualityofwater entering the cave. These watershedsarelocated on Coronado NationalForestlands. Arizona State Parks will be taking steps to see that the caveisadequately protected from detrimental changes in these watersheds.Ananalysisofweather recordsatnearby surface stations has allowed us to develop a correlation between floodingofthe cave and precipitation patterns. This indicates that while flooding of the cave has been rare in recent years, historicallyitisa common occurrence. Floodingofportionsofthe back areasofthe cave has a 67% chanceofoccurringinany given year. A majorityoftheflooding events will occur during the winter months. Because the winter runoff which floods the caveiscold water, it has a lasting impacton the microclimateofthe cave.Theareasofthe cave which are flooded have temperatures which are several degrees below thatofthe adjacent areasofthe cave. This creates a zoneofcold, dense air which has a controlling influence on airflowpatterns in the cave. Understanding the responseofthe cave to the heating and cooling from flooding has been useful in predicting the post-development temperatures in the cave. Floodingofthe back portionsofthe cave can have two different effects on the rateofevaporation in the cave.Ifthe flood waters are warmer that the cavePage 149

PAGE 155

Buechertemperature, as they were in August, 1990, then the water actsasa moisture source and decreases the rateofevaporation in the cave. Warm moist air rises from the water, when this air comes into contact with the walls and other cave surfaces which are cooler, water condensesontothe surfaces. A decrease in evaporation was observedatseveralofthe monitoring inAugust, 1990.Ifthe floodwateriscolder than the cave temperature, then the water will act as a sink for moisture in the cave, increasing the rateofevaporation in adjacent areasofthe cave. Air whichisin contact with the wateriscooled sufficiently to cause condensation on the surfaceofthe water. The net effectisto produce a gradientofrelative humidity. Near the cool water, the relative humidity will be 100%. Further away, moisture will move toward the cooler water and thus increase the rateofevaporationinareas adjacent to the water. Increased evaporationwasnotedatseveral monitoring stations during and after the winter,1991flood.CarbonDioxideandVentilationRates.The quantityofcarbon dioxide(CO,)gas contained in the cave air has been used to approximate.the rateofair exchange between the cave and the surface. The outside air contains approximately 300 ppmCO,.The chief advantageofCO,as a traceristhat itispredominantly removed from the cavebyventilation. The primary source of the carbon dioxideisthought to be theCO,produced in the overlying soil and brought into the cave dissolved in drip water andbyair exchange through small cracks in the ceiling. A small amount ofCO,may be producedbythe decomposition of bat guano, bat respiration and tree roots which enter the cave. Most, if not all,oftheCO,isremoved from the cavebythe naturally occurring ventilationofthe cave with surface air. Carbon dioxide concentrations have been measured in the cave at two locationsona monthly basis.Theupper Throne Room location has an annual average of 3125 ppm and a rangeof1660 to 5400 ppmCO,.At Sharon's Saddle, the annual averageis2095 ppm 1320 and ranges from 852 to 4680 ppm.CO,concentrations vary seasonally from a minimuminlate winter to a maximuminlate summer. The amount and rate ofCO,entering the cave follows an annual cycle, being dependentonthe rateofdrip water entering the cave and the biologic activity in the surface soils. A relatively simple modelofCO,concentrations in the cave can be constructed from a knowledgeofthe cave volume, the rateatwhichCO,enters the cave and the ventilation rate. The volumeofthe caveisreasonably well known from the survey data.Theairflow rate has been measured primarily during the winter atthenatural entrance. The rate at whichCO,enters the caveisnotknown. but we can make afeweducated guesses basedonthe rateofrise and declineoftheCO,measurements.Forthemodel, the rate at CO,enters the caveisconsidered to be proportional to two other parameters, the rateatwhich drip water enters the cave and the biologic activity in the soil. These two parameters are used to index the rate at whichCO,enters the cave. The proper values for the ventilation rate and rateofCO,introduction which most closely fits the observations has been determinedbytrial and error. The measured ventilation rate and inferredCO,influx were used as starting points.Thefinal modelisbased on an influx rateofCO,that varies from 20 ppm/day in winter to 80 ppm/day in summer.ThemeasuredCO,concentrations reasonably fit a ventilation rateof170,000 to 36,000 ft'/day. The good overall fit indicates that the rangeofventilation ratesisreasonably well known.AirExchangeAir exchange between the cave and the surface has been identifiedasoneofthe major routesby :-vhich moistureislost from the cave.Forthis reason controlling the rateofair exchangeisoneofthe most important tasks in developing the cave. Airflowisalso strongly related to other processes within the cave such as the concentrationofcarbon dioxide and radon gas. Unfortunately the concentrationsofthese trace gasesisalso an important management issue. Increasing ratesofair exchange would lower the concentrationsofthese gases but would also result in increased evaporation, dryingofthe cave and potentially irreparably damage the beautyofthe cave. A knowledge of how these three parameters,evaporation, carbon dioxide and radon, are related to airflow is Page150

PAGE 156

Buechernecessary in order to predict the likely effectofdevelopment. The maximum concentrationsofbothofthese gasesisdeterminedbythe air exchange rate. Estimates ofthe rateatwhich airisexchanged have been madebyseveral different approaches. These range from direct measurementofairflow to estimates basedonconcentrationsoftrace gases, and modelsofair exchange. No one method has given a clear cut picturebuttogether they give a consistent overall estimateofthe air exchangeTate.The patternof airflow through the cave can be deducedbyseveral different methods. First, the airflow direction canbesensed in constricted passagesifthereissufficient air movement. In larger passages and rooms the air velocityistoo slow to be observed directly. A second methodisto observe the growth patternsofthe cave formations. Sustained patternsofairflow for long periodsoftime can influence the growth, orientation and typeofspeleothems. A third method involves the measurementofthe propertiesofthe air.Theamountofalpha radiation particles, relative humidity and CO2in the air are all indicationsofhow long the air has been in the cave and how frequently itisexchanged with outside air. A final methodisbyexamining the rateatwhich soil temperatures change throughout the cave. Areas near existing connections to the surface will have large horizontal temperature gradients. The sizeofthe area influencedbyan entranceisdependent on thesize-ofthe opening and predominant directionofair movement. The volumeofair entering the cave has been measuredbyACPIatthe Blow Hole and startofthe River Passage for a totalof6.07 days. The average volumeofair measured entering the caveis140,000 fe/day. Airflowisalso thought to be entering the cave through other small openings in the entrance passages than those measured. Based on the estimated areas of these passages, the total volumeofoutside air entering the cave is estimated to not exceed three times the observed airflow,or420,000ft3/day. During all periods of measurement, the direction of airOow was overwhelmingly into the cave (97%). The simplest explanation for this would be the existence of another opening(s)atan elevation above the natural entrance. No evidenceofsuch an opening has been found within the cave. Itisthought that the upper opening(s)iseither very smallorpartially blockedbyrubble. It appears that the sizeofthis upper openingiswhat controls the volumeofair entering the natural entrance. The annual patternofair exchange can be qualitatively understoodbycomputing the densityofthe surface air and the cave air during winter and summer. Assuming that a higher opening exists, the cave will then actaschimney. During the winter, surface airisdenser than air in the cave andflowsinto the cave. During the summer, surface airisless dense and airflowsout the natural entrance. This simple relationshipiscomplicatedbytwo other effects. First, the caveisseveral degrees warmer than the average surface temperature. This increases the density difference during the winter and decreasesitduring the summer. As a result, winter air exchangeistwiceasgreatassummer and summer air flowoutofthe cave lasts for only 4 months. This asymmetric reversalofairOow creates the second effect. Because more winter air, whichiscooler, enters the cave, the entrance passages become quite chilled. This in turn creates a pocket of cool dense air which partially blocks the summer airflowoutofthe natural entrance.ALPHA RADIAnONAlpha radiation levels in all caves are elevated and Kartchner Cavernsisno exception. While the levelishigher in Kartchner Caverns than in most developed caves, it must be emphasized that itisnot a hazard for the public visiting the cave. The levels are high enough to beofconcern for employees whomaywork in the cave for many years. ACPI has researched the available literature regarding guidelines for permissible exposure levels for the general public. The following statementistakenfrom"Air Exchange and mRn ConcentrationsinthePage 151

PAGE 157

Buechercarlsbad caverns", M.H. Wilkening and D.E. Watkins, Health Physics, Vol 31, pp 139-145. "Although there are no explicit guidelines for exposure of the general public to radon and its daughters, both the International CommissiononRadiation Protection and the National CommitteeonRadiation Protection have recommended that individuals in the general public be limitedtoexposuresatlevels one-tenth as highasthose for occupational exposure. Also for a suitably large sampleofthe general population, the general guidelineisanother factorofthree smaller." The average radon daughter level in Kartchner cavernsisapproximately one Working Level. Applying the above guidelines would allow the general publictospend up to 22 hours and 40 minutes within the cave based on a permissible standardof4 working level months for employees. A tourofthe caveisanticipated to take less than 2 hours. It would appear that the visitors to the cave would experience less than one-tenthofthe guideline exposure. The radon levels within Kartchner caverns average approximately 100 pCiIl and varybya factoroftwo on a seasonal basis. Radon daughters resulting from the radioactive decayofradon average approximately 0.8 Working Level. These concentrations are high enough to beofconcern to those who will work within the cave. Prolonged exposure to radondaughters for many years has been linked to increased ratesoflung cancer. Radiation exposure to human lung tissue results from inhalationofradioactive radon-decay products that adhere to lung tissue or to airborne particles that become trappedinthelungs. Due to inhalationofthese products, the lungsofmost people receive more radiation than any other body organ. Health consequences of radon exposure to underground miners are the primary basis for determining health risk to people exposed to lower, more common radon levelsinhouses and other buildings. Most estimatesoflung-cancer risk due to low-level radon daughter exposureinhomes and buildings use a linear extrapolation from high exposure rates experiencedbysome groupsofunderground miners. In a linear extrapolation, exposure and risk are proportionally related; for example, half the exposure would constitute half the risk. Thereissome question about whether the exposure rates determined for miners are applicable to the much lower exposures encountered in homes and most caves. Mines typically contain large amountsofdust and exhaust from equipment and miners are not a representative sampleofthe general population. Despite these differences most risk assessments are based on studiesofuranium miners. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has used the risk coefficients determined for uranium miners to project lung cancer rates at lower exposure levels.EPAhas determined lifetime risk coefficients that range from 2.4 to 9.4 X 10" per WLM.Otherstudies have generally recommend somewhat lower risk estimates. A comparisonofrisk estimates from 7 studies compiledbyNazaroff gives an average lifetime risk coefficient of2.1 X 10" per WLM.Thelowest risk coefficient cited in any study was approximately 1X 10" per WLM.Ifweuse the NPS proposed guidelinesof3.5 WLM per year and a lifetime maximumof105WLM as reasonable maximum exposure estimates we can calculate the lifetime lung cancer risk. Thisisbetween 2.5% and 9.9% based onEPArisk coefficients and 2.2% based on the averageofotherstudies. We can compare these estimates withotherrisks commonly facedbyworkers inotherindustries. The rateoffatal accidents in American industryisabout1.1per 10,000 workers per year. Basedon30 years ofwork, the riskisabout 0.33%. The riskiest industryismining with a fatal accident rateof6 per 10,000 workers per year. Basedon30 yearsofwork, the riskis2.0%. The estimated rangeofrisk associated with radon daughter exposure can be the same as or greater than thatofjobs that are commonly perceivedofas being risky.Page 152

PAGE 158

BuecherForcomparison,thelow endofthe estimate (2.2%)isslightly greater than the riskofdying in an auto accident. The high endofthe estimate (9.9%)iscomparable to the risk associated with cigarette smoking. These comparisons indicate that exposure to the levelsofradon daughters expected to be found inthecave can be a significant risk for those working in the cave for many years. Exposure and risk to the general public is yery much smaller because they will be inthecave for a very short periodoftime. Basedonaoneand a halfhourtour length, the risk to the publicisapproximately the same as that associated with a 60 mile automobile trip.Thenatureofthe radioactive decay sequence provides three approaches to mitigatingtheproblem. First, itisnecessary to understand that radongasand radon daughters have very dissimilar properties. While radon daughters are the actual health risk, radon gasisthe direct sourceofradon daughters. Radongashas a much longer half life than radon daughters(bya factorofover 100.).Ifradongasiseliminated or reduced, then the radon daughters will also be eliminated or reduced. The three approaches can be categorizedasfollows: ControlofRadon Gas Removalofradon source Removalofradon gas from the air Ventilation to remove radon gas ControlofRadon Daughters Ventilation to remove radon daughters Air circulation to increase radon daughter plateout Filtering air to remove radon daughters Passive filtrationofair to remove radon daughters Protectionofthe individual employee Personal protection methods Manage the lengthofemployee exposure Manyofthe processes that allow high levelsofradon and carbon dioxide to accumulate in the cave are also those which maintain the moist cave environment. Valuable insight into the operationofthe cave's microclimate can be gainedbymodeling the behaviorofradon within the cave.Anadditional benefitisthe ability to make generalized predictionsofthe consequencesofdevelopingthecave for public viewing. Two modelsofradon and radon daughter concentrations have been considered.Oneconsiders those factors which create the individual radon daughters and effect the removal processes. The other model considers the rate at which radon enters the cave andisremovedbydecay and ventilation. In 1972, Jacobi published a mathematical model for predicting the concentrationsof radon daughters under the influenceofvarious sources and removal processes. The initial modelwasformulated for use in uranium mines, but the same processes are active inside caves. The modelisgenerally referred to as the Jacobi Model. Applicationofthe modelisdependent on knowing the rates at which the various radon daughters are createdbyradioactive decay and removedbyvarious processes.Therates at which the individual daughters are createdbyradioactive decay are well known physical constants. The rates at which the daughters are removedbyventilation, deposition and attachmentisquite variable but has been studied extensively in recent years. Five additional parameters are needed to describe the deposition and removal processes.1)Ventilation rate 2) Aerosol attachment rate. 3) Unattached plateout rate. 4) Attached plateout rate.S)Probability of recoil detachment. Once the model has been calibrated on the undeveloped cave, the effect of developmentofthe cave on alpha radiation levels can be estimated. Several important parameters of the modelwillchange after development. The principal change will be an increase in air circulation causedbyconvective heating from lights and visitors. This will result in a more uniform mixing of cave air and bring the air into more frequent contact with cave surfaces. This will increase the rate at which radon daughters will plate out. The numberofcondensation nuclei will also increase. These will be produced by visitors and condensation of water vapor near cooler surfaces.Page 153

PAGE 159

BuecherThe Jacobi model results predicts that alpha radiation measured in Working Levels will decreasebyapproximately 15% as a resultofdevelopment. Applicationofthe Jacobi Model indicates that developmentofthecave will tend to decrease alpha radiation levels. Radon enters the cave from the wallsofthe cave and from cave sediments.Asradonisan inert gas there are only twowaysin which itisremoved from the cave. The primary mechanismisbyradioactive decay into the daughter products. The half-life ofradon is 3.82 days and if it were. not constantly entering the cave, 99% would have decayed within25days. The second process which removes radon from the caveisair exchange with the surface. A simple modelofradon levels within the cave can be constructed based on thesetwoprocesses. The only parameters are the rate of radon entry and the ventilation rate. The model must also be consistent with the following general conditions which have been observed inside the cave. Average Radon gas concentrationis100 pCiIl. Peak radon gas concentrationsof400 pCiIl. Radondaughterconcentrationsandpresumably radon gas concentrations varybya factoroftwo on an annual cycle, being lowestinthe winter and highest in the summer. Air exchange rates areatleast 140,000 cubic feet per day but are less than 1,000,000 cubic feet perday.The model has been set up as a steady state system with the influxofradon and ventilation rate being constant for a period thatislong compared to the removal rates. The caveisalso treated as a lumped system which assumes that radon levels are uniform throughout the cave and surface airiswell mixed with cave air. Neitherofthese assumptionsislikely to be correct and so we can only expect the model to predict the gross behaviorofthe cave. The influxofradonisfirst estimated to be 0.45 pCi per square meter per second. Thisisa general average for most materials. Basedonthe surveyed volume and estimated surface area, this corresponds to 0.92 pCill per hour inside the cave.Thedecay constant for radon can be determined from the half-life andisprecisely known. We can first solve the modelto determine the ventilation rate which would allow radontobuild up to the observed average levelof100 pCi/l and determine the likely annual variations causedbychanges in the ventilation rate throughout the year. The resultsofthe model run are contained in Figure3.The fact that radon levels are significantly different in various areasofthe cave indicates that radon influx rateisalso variable throughout the cave.Themodel showsthatvariations in the influx rate are directly proportional to the maximum radon concentration. The impactofvarious ventilation rates can alsobeexamined with the aidofthe model. The aironthe surface has a very low radon content compared to the airinthe cave. Surface air brought into the cave will dilute and transport radonoutofthe cave, resulting in lower radon concentrations.Themodel can be used to assess the importanceofventilation in determining the radon concentration and also to investigate the effectofartificially increasing the ventilation to control radon. The model indicates that ventilation has little effectonthe radon levels within the cave until the ventilation rateisless than 30 days. It would be necessary to completely change allofthe air within the cave. every 5.5 days in order toreduce the radon levelby50%. Such a high ventilation rate would certainly destroy the existing moist conditions within the cave.SURVEYOFTHEINVERTEBRATE CAVE FAUNAInvertebrates, especially arthropods, make up the majorityofall known cave organisms.Ifdevelopmentofthe caveisto minimize disturbance to all cave organisms and their habitat, the invertebrate species present and their significance must be assessed. With this information the Arizona State Parks Department can prevent the extinction, and/or reductionofspecies during and after developmentofKartchner caverns. After development, the information gathered oILthePage154

PAGE 160

Buecherinvertebrate fauna can be used as a baseline for monitoring cave species and for interpretive programs. Preliminary work indicates there are several new speciesofcave adapted invertebrates, including at least one new speciesofcave isopod and a new mite species.ThestudyofKartchner caverns isa unique opportunity foranextensive baseline studyofthe invertebrate cave fauna before development that will allow future follow up studies to determine the effectofdevelopmentonthecave fauna. Thirty three invertebrate species were found in Kartchner caverns during this study.Ofthe33species, 5 (15%) are considered to be obligate cave dwellers (troglobites) and16(48%) are facultative cave dwellers (troglophiles). The camel cricket, Ceuthophilus pima,isa trogloxene because they leavethecave to feed. The remaining 11 (33%) species are either accidentals (10)orObligate parasites (1). Allofthe troglobites and troglophiles in Kartchner caverns aredependentonorganic material from the surface. Mostofthis organic materialisdepositedasMyotis velifer bat guano every summer. Small amountsoforganic matter carried into the cavebyperiodic floodingofthe Back Section provide a limited food supply in that area. The camel crickets are the only cave arthropod thatisnot dependent on organic material carried into the cave. Few invertebrates were found in the Back Section (Pyramid Room, Rotunda Room, Mushroom Passage, Throne Room, Subway Tunnel, Pirate's Den, and Sue's Room)ofKartchner caverns. The Throne Room, Sue's Room and the upper portion of the RotundaRoomare without invertebrates. The Granite Dells areaisbiologically interesting. The presenceofC.pima, a surface spider, and a lepidopteran indicates a direct connection to the surface. Even with a connection to the surface there werefewindividuals and species in this area due to lackofavailable organic material at the Granite Dells level.Thearea between the Pyramid Room and Big Room (River Passage, Bathtub"Room, Grand canyon, Thunder Room)isa transition zone between thetwopartsofthecave. No invertebrates were regularly found in this area. TheFrontSection (Big Room, Cul-de-Sac Passage, Echo Passage, Red River Passage, Grand Central Station, Main Corridor, Tarantula Room, Scorpion Room,LEMRoom and entrance area)isthe biological centerofthe cave with more than13invertebrate species in some areas.Inthe Big Room and Cul-de-Sac there are a number of Myotis velifer guano piles of different sizes and ages that serve as the primary food source for most of the invertebrate cave fauna. The bats currently roostintwomain areas, near the Lunch Spot and on the west sideofSharon's Saddle.Thearea from the Pop-up Junction to the entranceisvery different from the restofthe cave. Thereisa significant seasonal fluctuation in temperature and humidity and organic inputisprimarily limited to scattered guano pellets and occasionalsurface material carriedinbyrodents.Thedominant cave arthropodisthe camel cricket,C.pima. The other faunainthis area varies seasonally with moisture, but includes manyofthe accidental species found in the cave. The invertebrate cave fauna and cave community of Kartchner caverns isunique. Although the cave faunaofArizonaisnot well known, some comparisons can be made. There are significant differences in the cave faunaofKartchner caverns and other cavesinthe Huachuca, Santa Rita, catalina and Whetstone Mountains. Most notableisthe absenceinKartchner caverns ofseveral relatively common arthropods (a troglophilic opilionid, a carabid beetle, and a dipluran) foundinother southern Arizona caves There aretwopossible explanations for the absence of these cave forms.Oneisthatthey were present at one time, but for an unknown reason they became extinct in Kartchner. Another possibilityisthat Kartchner caverns wasonly available for colonization when the climatic conditions were such that these cave forms werenotable to colonize the cave. Additional information on the climatic historyofthe area andPage 155

PAGE 161

Buechermore detailed studyoffauna inothercaves may help to understand the differences in the cave fauna. Based on work with the cave fauna there are currently only two openings from Kartchner Caverns to the surface.Oneisthe current entrance used by the bats, humans and arthropods, while theotherisin Granite Dells. The Granite Dells entranceistoo small for anythingotherthan arthropods and small rodents.Thepresenceofmore thananoccasional camel cricket has been found to be a reliable indicatorofa direct connection to the surface. The invertebrate faunaofKartchner Cavernsisunique with several new species that may be endemic to Kartchner Caverns. Every effort shouldbemade to keep disturbanceofthe cave soil to a minimum. DevelopmentofKartchner Caverns must be scheduled in awayto preserve the bat population in the Big Room.Thelossofthe bats from the Big Room in Kartchner Caverns would result in the extinctionofmostofthe arthropod fauna in the cave. Development in the Back Section, especially the Throne and Rotunda Rooms would have the least impactonthe cave fauna. Care must be taken during construction and subsequent tours to insure the cave environment remains unchanged and exotic species are not introduced into the cave. A changeofthe environment and/or the introductionofsurface species could result in thedisruptionofthe cave community and eventually the lossofcave species.BATSBat studies at Kartchner Caverns have been performed under the directionofRonnie Sidnerofthe UniversityofArizona. The purposeofthis study was to obtain a biological inventoryofbats at baseline level prior to the developmentofKartchner Caverns.Theacquisitionofsuch data before the population has been impactedbymuch major disturbance provides a vehicle to study the effectsoffuture activitiesonthe population. This purpose has been paramount in the activities carriedoutthus far concerning bats at Kartchner Caverns State Park. Among its manyothervalues, Kartchner Cave'rns isimportant because itisa natural refuge for a large colonyofbats. From May to mid-Septemberofeach year, the cave is home to 1000 to 2000 Myotis velifer, a speciesofinsectivorous bat. These bats, primarily pregnant females return each year to Kartchner Caverns to rear their young. These bats provide an important link between the ecosystemofthe cave and the surface. Thebatguanointroduces a rich food source for Kartchner's cave limited organisms. During the summer, bats are usually found roosting togetherina small clusterontheceilingofthe Big Room. Accumulationsofbatguano inotherpartsofthe BigRoomindicate that they may occasionally use different partsofthe room. Thereisno indication that bats presently use anyotherpartofthe cave. The importanceofthe bats to Kartchner Caverns StateParkisthree-fold.Forthe Arizona State Parks, they are an exciting educational experience for the park visitor.Thepublic has become increasingly awareofthe many benefits providedbythis often misunderstood animal. Cave parks such as Carlsbad Caverns fillanamphitheateronsummer evenings for a natural history talk about bats duringthebats' nightly emergence. The bats also act as a natural insecticide for the park property. A conservative estimate indicatesthatthe bats roosting in Kartchner devour approximately one-half tonofinsects every summer.Thethird benefitofa healthybatroost within Kartchner Cavernsisits introductionofexcrement (guano) below the roost. This bat guanoisthe primary sourceoffood for the permanent organismsofthe cave. At this point, we have garnered much information about the bats with minimal disturbance to the population and only little disturbance to some individuals.Forspeciesofbatwhicharereadily identifiableata distance, low-disturbance techniques achieve identification with high confidence. This has been the case withourobservationsofPlecotus townsendii and Choeronycteris mexicana which occur in small numbers inouterareasofthe cavern.Ontheotherhand, a speciesofMyotisisnot so easily andothermeasures mustbeemployed.Wehave not netted the bat population in residence in the cavern, however, becauseofthe potential risks that disturbance within a roost can cause. Fortunately, itPage156

PAGE 162

Buecherhas been possible to patiently gather much evidence withotherlow-disturbance techniques to identify the bats in residence. During the study, trips into the cave duringthesummer were greatly reducedortaken during the night while the bats were outofthe cave feeding. Head lamps, with red filters, were used whenever work was performed near the bat roost. Additional low-disturbance techniques have included examinationofbone material and carcasses inside the cavern for species identification; handling only a coupleofisolated bats within the cavern for species identification; noting changes in the guano after bats have exitedatnight to determine which areas are utilizedbybats; observing the presenceofnon-volant juveniles after adults have exitedatnight to determine maternity use; banding animals outside and away fromtheroost to confirm cavern usebythese individuals 'when the reflective tags were observed while bats flew fromtheentrance during the eveningexit;and netting bats outside and away from the roost in order to determine events in the reproductive cycleofthe population. Using these techniques a numberofbat species have been identified from the interiorofKartchner caverns. These identifications are based upon observationsoflive bats and collectionofpreserved material. From observationsoflive animals: Myotis velifer Plecotus townsendii Choeronycteris mexicana "small bat" species (small Myotis spp.orPipistrellus) Bone specimens: Myotis spp. Myotis velifer Myotis occultus Leptonycteris sanborni vespertilionid bat bones The numberofbats using the cave has been estimatedbycareful countsofindividuals during the exit flight. Due to the constricted passages near the entrance, bats are forced to leave in smallgroups which are easily counted. The resultsofnumerous counts made in past three yearsisshowninFigure4.The increase in estimated population size from Aprilthrough Augustispartially due to the summer birth rate and to recruitmentofvolant juveniles or adults from other roosts. However,otherroosts are not known in the area.Fromboth public-interestand scientific viewpoints, Kartchner cavernsiseven more exciting as a bat roost because it houses a maternity colony. This means also that continued responsible and knowledgeable managementisnecessary for the bats. From our observations in the cavern andatthe cattle tank,weknow the period from mid-June to early Augustisthe time when females are in late stagesofpregnancy, parturition,orlactation, and juveniles are developing and fledging. Thisisthe critical periodoftime when the bats require non-disturbance to assure healthy behavior, and in turn, successful reproduction and continued population growth. In 1990 a BCI bat housewas on a pole below the main roost site to see if it would be used if available. A temperature probe was also installed and hooked up to the data logger. This allowedusto determine if the bat house was being used from the temperature record. Apparently the bats never used the bat house. We felt that the reason bats did not use the housewasthat itwasmuch lower than the ceiling and alsowasattached to a pole which might interfere with flying. In the springof1991the original bat housewasremoved and two new ones were installed on the ceiling near the roost site.OneofthesewasanewBelwooden bat house similar to the one previously installed. The second bat housewasconstructed from two large plastic flower pots, nested together and hung upside down. A temperature probewasinstalledinthe BCI bat house. Both bat houses were washed with a mixture of water and bat guano from the cave to provide a familiar "lived in odor". Preliminary results indicate that neither of these bat houses were occupied during the summer of 1991. This indicates that itisunlikely that attemptstorelocate the bats to other areas of the cave would be successful. The presenceofa healthy bat population in Kartchner caverns provides much potential for scientific interest. For a state park, however, whatisperhaps more importantisthat the bat population providesPage157

PAGE 163

Buecheropportunity for public eduction about these increasingly popular animals and about the exciting and interesting ecologyofa subterranean ecosystem.Thiswillrequire that developmentofthe cave not disturb the batsordrive them from the cave. Options for maintaining the bat population after development are: Limit visitor useofthe Big Room while bats are present. Attempt to entice the bats to use another portionofthe cave. Mitigate the impactsofdevelopment on the batsbytrail alignment, low level lights and providing a bat house on the ceiling. The first optionisclear but would limit visitation to theBigRoom from Maytomid-September. The second and third options have never been successfully in any other cave. The preliminary results from the bat houses placed in Kartchner indicate that thereislittle reason to expect that the bats could be successfully relocated.GEOLOGICSTUDIESThe geologic study was conducted to provide a detailed understandingofthe geologic settingofKartchner Caverns and the surrounding area. The objectivesofthe surface and subsurface geological investigations are twofold: (1) to provide geological engineering information critical to the evaluationofpotential visitor access points and (2) to provide a detailed understandingofthe geological setting and speleogenesisofthe cave. The geological studies include investigationsofthe surface geology, subsurface geology, speleothems (cave decorations), mineralogy, sediments, speleogenesis and geophysical explorations to identify unknown extensions to the cave. The detailed geologic database referenced above provides geological engineering information critical to the evaluationofpotential visitor access points. It also provides geological interpretations essential for the understandingofhow meteoric water enters the cave--along faults, fractures, andasperched aquifers on top of impermeable marker beds. This understanding should ultimately allow better managementofthe delicate cave resources. The surface geologyofthe entire Kartchner Caverns State ParkwasmappedbyDr. KennethC.Thomson as partofthe initial geologic study. The geologic mappingofthe Kartchner Caverns State Park revealed a highly faulted and fractured blockofPaleozoic limestones. These limestones, consistingofPennsylvanian Horquilla Limestone, Pennsylvanian Black Prince Limestone, Mississippian Escabrosa Limestone, Devonian Martin Formation, and Cambrian Abrigo Limestone, have a general dip to the west ranging from10to45degrees. The fracturesorjoints have been solutionally enlarged near and at the surface. These minor fractures were probably formedinconjunction with the major normal faults which cut through the limestone with displacements up to several hundred feet. The rock units have been covered in many placesbyunconsolidated sedimentsofvarying ages from very recent back to Late Tertiary/Quaternary time. This outlying blockoflimestone has both an east bounding fault (revealedbygeophysics) and a west bounding fault. A more detailed mapofthe geologyofthe cave and surface geologyofthe area overlying the cavewasperformedbyDavidH.Jagnow. His study focused in greater detail on the structural geology and subdivisions within the Escabrosa Limestone block that contain Kartchner Caverns.Kartchner Cavernsiscontained entirely within a highly faulted and fractured blockofEscabrosa Limestone. The detailed mapping focused on thekeymarker beds within the EscabrosaFormation,andtheassociatedstructures.Identificationofkeymarker beds allowed the surface and interior geology to be closely correlatedbyprojecting surface features into the cave. The majorityoffaults cutting Kartchner Caverns are high-angle normal faults that trend northeast from20to60".Mostofthese faults are either verticalordip steeply to the southeast from 90 to75:.The displacement on these faultsisusually less than10feet, being down-thrown on the southeast side--a typical normal fault. There are occasional reverse faults, where the fault planeisdipping to the southeast, yet the southeast sideisupthrown.Page 158

PAGE 164

BuecherThe present study has identified no less than 60 faults that cutorbound the Kartchner Block. The vast majorityofthese faults are high-angle normal faults that trend NE. Where the displacement and dipofthe fault planeisknown, there are only 5 known high-angle reverse faults. There are three low-angle faults (dipping 40 to45),ofwhich two are normal, and the third shows reverse displacement. There donotappear to be any true thrust faults cutting the Kartchner Block. The most complexly faulted portionofthe Kartchner Blockisdirectly over the Big Room.Thehigh concentrationoffaultsinthis areais probably responsible for the increased solubility that formed the Big Room.Themajorityoffaults cutting Kartchner Caverns are high-angle normal faults that trend northeast from 20 to60.Mostofthese faults are either verticalordip steeply to the southeast from 90 to75.Thedisplacement on these faultsisusually less than 10ft.,being down-thrown on the southeast side--a typical normal fault. There are two reverse faults, where the fault planeisdipping to the southeast, yet the southeast sideisupthrown. During the courseofthis study, particular attention was paid to the unstableorpotentially dangerous areas throughoutthecave. A separate map was prepared locating geologic hazards. These were classified into three categories: A) Structurally Hazardous Areas B) Hazardous Ceiling BlocksC)Incompetent Beds Geophysics Studies were performedbyArthurL.Lange and PhillipAWalenofThe Geophysics Group. More complete resultsoftheir investigations are included in a separate paper in these proceedings. Geophysical investigations have been performed to map the sub-surface and to detect the presenceofauxiliary caverns. Electromagnetics were employed to map near-surface groundwater levels, while a natural-potential survey over the entire Park identified zonesofinfiltration in the valley alluvium and likely cavern targets in the carbonate outcrop. A gravity survey delineated range-front faults and resulted in a mapofdepth-to-bedrock beneath the valley alluvium. Although the gravity survey could not resolve the carbonate/schist boundary, it portrayed the regions of shallow bedrock that control ground-waterflowand storage. The gravity survey also produced significant anomalous lows over twoofthe three main cavern sections and identified sites likely underlainbycave galleriesnotyet discovered.MINERALOGYAnassessment and inventoryofthe cave minerals and sedimentsofKartchner caverns was performedbyCarol Hill.ThemineralogyofKartchner Cavernsisboth diverse and significant.Itisdiverse in thatsixdifferent chemical classes are representedbythe cave mineralogy: the' carbonates, nitrates, oxides, phosphates, silicates and sulfates.Itissignificant for a numberofreasons:1.World's longest soda straw 21'-2".2.Largest and most massive column in Arizona 58 foot high Kubla Khan.3.First reported occurrenceofnontronite and rectorite as cave minerals.4.First cave occurrenceof"birdsnest" needle quartz. This typeofquartzisknown only from Jeffrey Quarry, Arkansas.5.Rare occurrenceofnitrocalcite as a cave mineral. First modern descriptionofthis mineral.6.Oneofthe most extensive occurrences of brushite moon milk in the world.7.First reported occurrenceof"turnip" shields:" The diverse and interesting mineralogyofKartchnerisdue to an unusual setofcircumstances. Unlike most limestone caves, Kartchner Cavernsislocated near igneous terrain. A1asklte granite borders the Escabrosa Limestone along fault zones to the west, and the Pinal Schist underlies the cave. The dry Arizona desert supplies another condition: the low relative humidity causes the efflorescenceofnitrocalcite in the entrance zone of the cave. Bats add the third ingredient, phosphates and nitrates. In setting and mineralogy, Kartchner Caverns most nearly resembles the caves of the Transvaal, South Africa, where a hot and dry climate combined with an igneous rock-bat guanoPage 159

PAGE 165

Buechersourceofcations and anions has producedanunusual cave environment in which a numberofminerals can form (Hill and Forti, 1986). The carbonate mineralogyofKartchner Cavernsisrelatively Simple, consisting almost entirelyofcalcite, CaCO). While mineralogyissimple, the numberofcarbonate speleothem types and subtypesisextensive. Kartchner Cavernsisdistinguished in that it has the longest known soda strawinthe world "The Soda Straw" in theThroneRoommeasuredat6.45m (21.16 ft) long. This length beats the previous worldof6.24 m (20.47 ft) in a western Australian cave (Hill and Forti, 1986). Columns form where a stalactite and stalagmite grow together. Kartchner Caverns has the tallest, and probably most massive, column in Arizona the 58 foot tall Kubla Khan in theThroneRoom. Nitrocalcite. (Ca(NO))2"4HP)isa deliquescent mineral, efflorescent only under very low humidity conditions (around 50%orso for a normal rangeofcave temperatures (Hill and Forti, 1986). In Kartchner Caverns, nitrocalcite occurs as cave cotton growing from sediment in scattered areas along the Entrance Passage (e.g. Babbitt Hole,LEMRoom) where cold, dry winter air flows into the Entrance Passage from the surface.Thegrowthofnitrocalcite in the Entrance Passage correlates with episodesoflow relative humidityinthe winter months. Two phosphate minerals have been identified in Kartchner Caverns: Brushite,CaHP04 .2/-I20,and hydroxylapatite, Ca s(P04h(OH). Both are common cave minerals which derive from bat guano (Hill and Forti, 1986).Foursilicate minerals have been found in Kartchner Caverns: illite, nontronite, rectorite and quartz. The lastofthese, quartz, occurs as vein deposits within fault zonesoras needle crystals inornear fault zones. The first three are all phyllosilicate [(Si,AJ)4010]clay minerals which are found as floor sedimentorasclay material filling fault zones.PotentialEntrancesAtthepresent time thereisonlyoneentrance into Kartchner Caverns, the original discovery entrance.Toreach the main roomsofthe cave,onemust crawl for several hundred feet through small passages.Todevelopthecave, a new entrance will need tobeconstructed.Thepreferred access point must lead conveniently to thepartofthe cave people will see, dovetail into a planned traffic pattern, accommodate the numberofpeoplethatthe cave can carry,beamenable to microclimate controls, structurally stable, able tobeexcavated, and accessible to security supervision. A totalof10 different locations for constructing a new entrance into the cave were investigated.Foreachlocation, three schematic designs were considered: a wheelchair-accessible ramp, a flightofstairs and an elevator.Foreachofthese 30 combinations,anassessment was madeofthe potential for disrupting the microclimateofthe cave. Preliminary results from the microclimate study indicate that the potential for increasing airflow and subsequent moisture lossisthe most important issue tobeconsidered.Otherfactors included in the assessment were impactsonthe supplyofmoisture to the cave and impactsonthe biota.Thebiotaisnot only an important featureofthe cave but also provides a sensitive indicatorofthe conditions within the cave.rnthe analysisofthe potential entrances, a numberofsevere impacts to the cave were found. These are impacts associated with a particular entrance configuration which would jeopardize the integrityofthe cave if that entrance were tobeconstructed. Three typesofsevere impacts were identified. Entrance tunnels which would disrupt the infiltrationofwater from the adjacent washes. Identificationofportionsofthe cave which are subject to frequent flooding. Such flooding would prevent visitors from entering the cave for several months. Entrances which impact a known active bat roosting siteorwhich would result in visitors conflicting with the bats' flightoutofthe cave.Page160

PAGE 166

BuecherPotential entrances were also evaluated in regard to development considerations. These include distances to major cave features, length and slopeofaccess tunnels and distance from potential visitor center locations. Based on a weighted point system, the following three potential entrance locations were judged to be the most favorable. Taran.tula Room Echo Passage ThroneRoomFuturedetailed studies will focus on the geology of these locations. Additional studies should be performed to determine a suitable trail system for the interiorofthe cave based on these entrances.ReferencesArizonaConservation Projects, Inc., 1991, Environmental and Geologic Studies for Kartchner Caverns State Park Interim Report: unpublished report,171p.Graf,e.G.,1990, Kartchner Caverns State Park: A Geologic Showpiece: Arizona Geology, v.20,nO.1,pgs. 2-5. Hill,e.A,Forti, P., Cave Mineralsofthe World: Huntsville, Alabama: National. Speleological Society.; 1986, 238pgs.Hill,e.A,1991, Mineralogy, Sedimentology and Speleogenesisof Kartchner Caverns: Final report to Arizona Conservation Projects, Inc., 100 pgs. Jagnow, D.H., 1991, Detailed Surface Geologyof Kartchner Caverns, Arizona: report to Arizona Conservation Projects, Inc..Lange,AL.and Whalen,P.A,1990, Geophysical Investigations at Kartchner Caverns State Park: report to Arizona Conservation Projects, Inc., 2 vol. National Park Service, 1990, Cave Radiation Safety andOccupationalHealthManagement:Regulation NPS-14, ReI.No.2,July, 1990, 52pgs.Nazaroff,W.W., Nero, AV.Radon And Its Decay Products In Indoor Air. New York: John Wiley&Sons; 1988. Palmer, Arthur N., 1991, Origin and MorphologyofLimestone Caves: Geological Society of America Bulletin,v.103,pgs1-22. Sidner, R., 1991, InterimReporton Biological InventoryofSurface and Subsurface Featuresof Kartchner Caverns State Park: Report to Arizona Conservation Projects, Inc., March1,1991,27p.Spencer, J. E., 1986, Radon Gas: A Geologic Hazard: Fieldnotes Vol.16,No.4,Arizona Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology, Tucson, Arizona. Thomson,Ke.,1990, Geologyof Kartchner Caverns State Park, Cochise County, Arizona: unpublished report to Arizona Conservation Projects, Inc., 29 pgs. Welbourn, W.e., 1991, Survey ofthe Invertebrate Cave Faunain Kartchner Caverns, Arizona: Report to Arizona Conservation Projects, Inc.,10pgs.Wilkening,M.H. and Watkins,D.E., 1976, Air Exchange and ZURn Concentrationsinthe Carlsbad Caverns: Health Physics.v.31(August),pgs139-145.Page 161

PAGE 167

BuecherSharon's Saddle EMS #13 Daily Air Temperature andPanEvaporation Rate-0.6 68.0 Jun-89 Sep-89 Dec-89 Mar-90 Jun-90 Aug-90 Dec-90Mar-9lJun-9lFigure2.24 month record of temperature and evaporation from one of the 22 monitoring stations. Onemlper day of evaporation is equal to 0.38 inches per year.120 100 R 80d0n60PC40I I20I 0oNoNoData ...... sAir exchange 170,000 to 36,000 cubic feet per dayAMJJMONTHAM FPredicted Radon Levels For Low Air Exchange RatePredicted Radon (pCill) ........ 0.9 AI0.8PM0.7ha0.6 R0.5 udr0.4Id0.3 tW0.2IL0.10n0JFigure3.Annual variation in radon gas concentration modeled by ventilation.Notethat no conversion factor is implied between radon gas and Working Level.Page 162

PAGE 168

BuecherBison Burial GroundRedRiver Room Deepest Point in Cave74feet below Entrance SinkRedRiver Strawberry Room Pyramid Room Onyx Passage Triangle Water Room Granite Dells Angel's Wing100 200 leelI ,Jared's SECTIONCrows' Nest Rock PIRATES' DEN o \;\ JfJ/0,ROO"t? Meteorological Monitoring Station ... Notable SpeleothemsFigure 1, Outline map of Kartchner Caverns. Reprinted from Graf, 19902000 1500 CDl.L 01000 ll:: w CD=> 500Z010 ZOl.'30 MAYJUNE10 '52030 JULY10 U 20 25JO AUGUST10 15 20SEPT. 45 Dead Bats FoundDATEFigure 4, Number of bats utilizing Kartchner Caverns from 1989 to 1991 as determined by exit flight counts ..Page 163

PAGE 169

Tranel/Mayo/JensenPRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONOFTHEHYDROGEOLOGYANDHYDROGEOCHEMISTRYATTIMPANOGOS CAVE NATIONAL MONUMENT, UTAH, AND ITS IMPLICATIONSFORCAVE MANAGEMENTMichael J. Tranel National Park Service TimpanogoscaveNational Monument American Fork,UT84003 AlanL.Mayo Dept.ofGeology Brigham Young University Provo,UT84602ABSTRACTThomas M. Jensen Dept.ofGeology Brigham Young University Provo,UT84602 The Timpanogoscavesystemissituated in an areaofhigh relief in the central Wasatch Range,Utahand has formed along minor faults.Thefault-fracture system initially provided conduits for acid laden waters, enabling dissolutionofseveral caves in the Paleozoic carbonate rocks. Manyofthe caves are decorated and decorationisan active process. Eachofthe caves hasa distinct groundwater flow regime which has affected the typesofdecorations present. Drip rates in Hansen and Middle caves respond rapidly to high intensity storms and snowmelt due to conduit flow along fractures. Bothofthese caves are close to the surface. Timpanogoscaveismuch deeper below land surface and has smaller drip rates and greater delays between surface recharge events and increased drip rates. Analysisofsolutedata suggests that mineral deposition does not occur uniformly throughout the year, and that during periodsofhigh groundwaterflowrates thereisa thermodynamic tendency for dissolution to occur. The 02H and 0180 data suggest that evaporationisa significant factor in the formationofcave decorations. Past managementofthe Timpanogoscavesystem has been basedonincomplete information and to a certain extent trial and error. New findings about cave hydrogeology and hydrogeochemistry should figure prominently in future management decisions on protecting the cave watershed, setting visitation levels, expanding or reducing visitor use facilities, and protecting speleothem appearance and condition.INTRODUCTIONThis report contains the preliminary resultsofan ongoing hydrogeologic investigationofthe TimpanogoscaveNational Monument, Utah. The investigationisdesigned to help provide a scientific basis for cave managementbythe National Park Service andwasinitiated in response to the recently approvedcaveManagement Plan which calls for scientific cave management (Tranel, 1990). Recent management and research efforts include:Page 1641)the restoration of the natural cave climate, 2) an ongoing programofremovalofalgae growth whichispromotedbyelectric lightsinthe cave, 3) the installationofa comprehensive atmospheric and hydrologic monitoring system, 4) the initiationofa cave hydrology study,_

PAGE 170

Tranel/Mayo/JensenThegoalsofthe preliminary cave hydrology study are: 1) To determine how management practices, such as pumping cave lakes for visitor drinking water supplies and the useofanopen, developed trail network, affect the cave system. 2)Tocompile baseline watershed and cave hydrogeologic data to help guide future management decisions. 3)Toprovide an opportunity for the micro studyofgroundwater recharge mechanisms and shallow sub-surface flow in carbonate terrains in the central Wasatch Range. 4)Todevelop interpretive information suitable for presentation to cave system visitors. Timpanogos Caveissituated high in a steep wallofthe rugged AmericanForkCanyon in the central Wasatch Range,Utah(Figure 1). Geological developmentofthe cave system accompanied upliftofthe Wasatch Range and the deep erosional incisionofthe AmericanForkRiver (Bullock, 1962).Thethree cavesofthe monument, Hansen, Middle, and Timpanogos, are"live"caves in that groundwater seeps andflowsfrom cave ceilings and walls and dripstone formations are actively forming. Eachofthe caves developed along separate fracture systems.TheTimpanogos Cave system includes just over a mileofpassageways, one-thirdofwhich have been developed as atourroute(Figure 2). The three caves were discovered separately and were connectedbytunnels drilled in the late 1930s (Iorio, 1967). Outstanding featuresofthe caves include a varietyofdelicate formations such as helictites and aragonite crystal. Previous research includes studies in geology and cave origin (Bullock, 1942, 1954, 1962; Green, 1975) and mineralogy (White and Van Gundy, 1974). More recent work has emphasized the varietyofprocesses that may have originally formed the cave system (Palmer and Palmer, 1990). Although some water quality data had been previously collected and both temperature and relativehumidity data are available for the past several years, the hydrogeologyofthe caveispoorly understood.METHODSThehydrogeology sampling plan included weekly measurementofcave lake levels and speleothem drip rates, monthly samplingofsolute chemistry, and quarterly samplingofisotopic chemistry. Isotope samples are collected for 02H, 0180,034S, and 3H.Morefrequent drip-rate measurements were taken in Hansen and Middle Caves to assess peak recharge after major precipitation events and during timesofrapid snowmelt. Data collected from December 1989 throughSeptember 1991 are discussed here. Sampling sites for measuring speleothem drip rates were chosen to represent a varietyofgroundwaterflowpaths and mechanisms, and to assess hydrologic conditions in all sectionsofthe three caves. Lake levels were measured with staff gauges. Flow meters were installedatpumping locations to measure volumesofwater removed from each lake. Lake levels were monitored before, during and after pumping events to develop a stage-volume calibration curve for each lake. Drip rates were measured with both pyrex flasks and graduated cylinders which were placed beneath dripping stalactites. Most drip rates were measured for 3 minute intervals using 10 to 500mlgraduated cylinders. Where drip rates were slower than 0.5mlper 3 minutes, drips were collected in pyrex flasks and volumes were measured weekly. Known volumesofoil were used in the flasks to prevent evaporation. Solute analyses were performed on samples from each drip rate sampling site and from eachofthe cave lakes. Ph,HC03 '" H-, and temperature were determinedinthe field, andothersolute analyses were performed at Brigham Young University using IC andAAmethods. Isotopic samples were sealed and sent to Geochron Laboratories in Massachusetts for analysis. 02H and 0180,aBC and3Hare reported relative to SMOW, PDB, and in Tritium Units (TU), respectively. A weather station was installed above the cave system in the likely recharge area. Both temperature andPage 165

PAGE 171

Tranel/Mayo/Jensenprecipitation data were collected. Snow samples were collected from the likely recharge area, melted under controlledlaboratoryconditionstoprevent evaporation, and analyzed for solutes and isotopes. Water samples from a spring in the cave watershed were also collected and analyzed.RESULTSSolute and isotopic data are presented in Table1.Mean monthly precipitation data are graphically displayedonFigures 2 and3.Drip rate data arenotpresented; however drip rates for Hansen Cave and Chimes ChamberareillustratedonFigures 2 and 3, respectively. Saturation indices (SI) were calculated using the computer codeWATEQF(Plummer and others, 1976) and the temporal variation in selected SIs for Hansen Cave dripareillustratedonFigure5.Results to date demonstrate the general spatial and temporal variations in drip rates and hydrochemistryinthe cave system. Both Hansen and Middle Caves exhibit considerable conduit flow, responding rapidly to major precipitation and snowmelt events (Figure 3). Both snow depth and moisture equivalent were greaterinthe winterof1990-1991 than the previous year, resulting in greater recharge to the cave system. Significant rainfall events, especially the 100-year eventofSeptember 1991, resulted in an immediate response inside Hansen Cave (Figure 3).TheSeptember1991drip rate measured was essentially conduit flowonthe exteriorofa large stalactite.Bycontrast, most sampling locations in Timpanogos Cave showed a larger componentofbeddingplaneflow,with maximum drip rates occurring two tosixmonths later than in Hansen Cave. Drip rates for a small stalactite in the Chimes Chamber sectionofTimpanogos Cave were quite different (Figure 4). Peak recharge was observed at least two months later than that in Hansen Cave, indicating more diffuseflowalong bedding planes.Asexpected, total dissolved solids andpHchanged significantly with flow rates at eachofthe sampling locations. Values for both parameters were much lower during and immediately after peak recharge into the cave system. Ostensibly thelowvalues occurred when recharge water moved quickly through the system and did not have time to reach equilibrium with the surrounding rock. Analysisofsolute chemistry in eachofthe three caves showed relatively high levelsofbicarbonate, calcite, and magnesium (Table 1), indicating dissolutionofthe aquifer dolomite, which has the misleading nameof"Deseret Limestone." Sulfate levels were the next highestateach sampling site, indicating that some gypsumisbeing dissolved by recharge water as well. Magnesium-rich waters occurredatthe highly decorated CavernofSleep and Hidden Lake areasofTimpanogos Cave. Both areas contain shallow lakes with relatively large surface areas. Lake levels exhibit little response to precipitation and snowmelt events. Speleothems in these areas include abundant helictites, beaded helictites, and aragonite crystals. Drip rates are the slowest in the Timpanogos Cave system(Le.many are<20mlper week). Plotsoflog SIvs.time show considerable temporal variation, especiallyatsampling sites with high flow rates in Hansen and Middle Caves (Figure 5). During periods when the log SIisnegative thereisa thermodynamic tendency to dissolve rather than precipitate minerals, and this accompanies peak drip rates in both Hansen and Middle eaves. Bycomparison, saturation indices for most minerals remained positive throughout the year in the Chimes ChamberofTimpanogos Cave, whichisoneofthe most highly decorated areas in the cave system. This finding also supports the ideaofa greater percentageofbedding plane flowasopposed to conduit flow into Timpanogos Cave. Most stable isotopic valuesof 02H and 0180 from both drip and lake samples plot along an evaporation line relative to the meteoric water line (MWL; Figure 6), representedby 02H =8 0180 +100/00(Craig, 1961). Snow samples from two separate years and the water from an ephemeral spring (Table1;Figure 6) plotonthe MWL. Not surprisingly, the lake waters exhibit the greatest evaporation.Therelatively deep Hansen Cave Lakeisleast affectedbyevaporation.Bycontrast, relatively shallow lakes in Timpanogos Cave (CavernofSleep Lake and Hidden Lake) and Middle Cave (Middle Cave Lake) exhibit the greatest evaporation. Although Middle Cave Lake receivesPage 166

PAGE 172

Tranel/Mayo/Jensensubstantial recharge during spring snowmelt events, the lake level slowly subsides throughout the summer and fall. Water levels in Hidden Lake and CavernofSleep Lake remained nearly constant throughout the sampling period. The o13C data also support the ideaofevaporation in the three shallow lakes. The more positive valuesofthe o13C data from these shallow lakes relative to the 013C data from both drips and Hansen Cave Lake (Table 1) suggest isotopicfractionation accompanying carbonate mineral precipitation due to evaporation.Thetemporal variations in 02H and 0180 drip compositions also provide insight into groundwater flow system mechanisms. During the fall and winter, when rechargeisnegligible and drip rates decline, the isotopic compositionsofdrip waters tend to exhibit greater evaporation than do the isotopic compositionsofspring and early summer drip waters (Table1;Figure 6).Theisotopic compositionsofChimes Chamber drip waters have the least seasonal variation, whereastheisotopic compositionsofHansen Cave drip waters have the greatest seasonal variation. The high variabilityofthe Hansen Cave drip reflects the change from predominantly conduit flow during major recharge events to predominantly bedding plane controlled diffuse flow during the fall and winter months. Thereisconsiderable variation in the 034S data from samples collected in the cave system (Table 1). The significanceofthis variationisnot yet fully understood and additional data collectionisplanned. In general, manyofthe data suggest that water reaching the cave through bedding plane flow often reaches isotopic equilibrium with the gypsumoranhydrite in the surrounding rock and that shallow lakes in the cave system may be subject to significant evaporation. A comparisonofvalues for precipitation (snow samples), a spring in the cave watershed, and water samples from speleothem drips and cave lakes revealed no indicationofdegradation from acidic precipitation.DISCUSSIONThe preliminary findings outlined above raise several questions for both future research and cave management.Forcave hydrology, results to date indicate that most groundwater reaching the cave systemisfault controlled, and that both Hansen and Middle Cave are subject to a high percentage of conduitflow.Sampling sites in Timpanogos Cave,bycontrast, show that thereisa higher degreeofbedding plane flow or at least mixing flow paths. The Timpanogos Cave systemissubject to considerable spatial and temporal variation in both recharge rates and water chemistry. Hansen and Middle Caves respond rapidly to precipitation events and especially to spring snowmelt, whereas sampling sitesinTimpanogos Cave respond much more slowly to spring snowmelt. However, there are some locations within Middle Cave where bedding plane flow plays a more important role, and likewise points in Timpanogos Cave that respond quickly to surface recharge. Solute chemistry indicates that limestone, dolomite and gypsum are dissolved in the geologic layers above the caves. Groundwaters which reach the caves are richin HC03"'H-, S04+,Ca2+,Mg2+ (Table 1). Both pH and total dissolved solids vary considerably throughout the year at most sampling sites, demonstrating the relationship between flow rates and solute compositions. AnalysisofSIisparticUlarly revealinginthat it suggests that thereisa thermodynamic tendency for precipitationofcave formations during timesoflow surface recharge and corresponding low drip rates and for dissolutionofcave formations during periodsofrapid surface recharge and elevated drip rates. Itissignificant to note that those areas where the drip rates are consistently low have the longest periodsofpositive carbonate mineral SIs and tendtobe the most decorated areasofthe cave system. Common helictites, beaded helictites, and aragonite crystal are abundant in these locations. Several management considerations stem from hydrology research in the cave system. Most importantisthe overall documentationofcave hydrochemistry; baseline values have been established which will guide future monitoringofthe cave system. The approximate location of the cave system watershed has been determined, and asiscommon in many National Park System areas, it extends beyond the park boundaries. The adjacent area for the Timpanogos Cave systemisthe Uinta National Forest where the cave watershedPage167

PAGE 173

Tranel/Mayo/Jensenhas been protected due to its general inaccessibility. However, the long term managementofthe watershed remains problematic. Because Hansen and Middle caves are subject to significant conduit flow, any perturbations to the watershed likely affect the cave system immediately and profoundly. Although no effectsofacid precipitation are apparent thus far in the study, a baseline has been established to which future analysesmaybe compared. Current threats tothe cave system correspond to heavy visitor use and related development, including artificially removing water from cave lakes. Although the effectsofpumping have been quantified, impacts upon speleothem development and overall cave conditions such as relative humidity must still be investigated. Determining the specific effectsofhydrochemistryonspeleothemsisbeyond the scopeofthe present study,butsome general trends are indicated and some important questions raised. Preliminary results point to a thermodynamic tendency to dissolve speleothems during periodsofhigh recharge and a tendency to precipitate minerals during the drier fall and winter. However, National park Service management mandates preservation of the system; simply enhancing spele othem developmentisnot a separate management goal. The importanceofevaporation in the cave systemissomewhat surprising given the consistent 98-99%. humidity in many partsofTimpanogos cave. Preliminary results indicate that there may be a delicate balanceofpH, carbonate mineral saturation levels, recharge rates, relative humidity, and evaporation in the most decorated areasofTimpanogos cave, such as thecavernofSleep, Hidden Lake, and Chimes Chamber. This supports management efforts to monitor visitor effectsontemperature and relative humidity and recent restorationoforiginal cave climate. Finally, new informationonthe cave system enhances not only cave management,butinterpretation for visitorsaswell.Theoutdated "fairylanding" approaCh has been supplantedbynew information thatisinteresting to cave managers and cave visitors alike. Research in cave hydrology has stimulated new approaches to cave interpretive programs, and the combinationofresearch and interpretation have aroused the interestofvolunteer groups such as the National Speleological Society (NSS). Local grottosofthe NSS have made significant contributionstocave management since hydrology research started in late 1989, including restorationoforiginal cave climate and a complete re-surveyofthe cave system. Considerable efforts in both research and cave management will continue during the nextfewyears as the newcaveManagement Planisfully implemented.ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThis researchwaspartially supportedbygrants from Southwest Parks and Monuments Association and the BranchofScience, National Park Service Rocky Mountain Regional Office.REFERENCESBullock,KC.,Geologic Notes on Timpanogos Cave, Technical Note No.14.Salt Lake Grotto, National Speleological Society,p.1-6,(1954).-'GeologyofTimpanogos Cave National Monument, SpecialReportfor the National Park Service,p.1-9, (1962).-'A Studyofthe Geologyofthe Timpanogos Caves, Utah, (Unpublished Masters Thesis), Brigham Young University Research Studies,p.66, (1942). Craig, H., Isotopic variationsinmeteoric water: Science,v.133,p.1702-1703 (1961). Green, DaleJ.,ResultsofDetailed Mapping .in Timpan ogos Cave National Monument, Utah County, Utah, Technical Note#76,Salt Lake Grotto, National Speleological Society. Includes detailed cave map (1975). Iorio, Ralph M., The History of Timpanogos Cave NationalMonument, manuscript, no copyright obtained (1967). Palmer, Art and Peg Palmer, "Comments on Factors Involvedinthe Origin of Timpanogos Cave," unpublished manuscript (1990).Page168

PAGE 174

TranellMayo/JensenPlummer, L.N., Jones, B.F., and Truesdell,AH.,WATEQF -AFORTRANIVversionofWATEQ, a computer program for calculating chemical equilibriumofnatural waters: U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resource Investigation Report 76-13,61P (1976). Tranel, Michael J., "Hydrology Study Proposal," unpublished manuscript (1990). White, WilliamB.and James J. Van Gundy: Reconnaissance GeologyofTimpanogos Cave, Utah County, Utah. TheNSSBulletin, 36(1):5-17, (1974). Figure 1 Location and topographic map.Page 169

PAGE 175

TraneVAfayo/Jensen TIMPANOGOSENTRANCEELEV.6717FT. COMPASS ANDTAPE)SURVEYUTA H COUNTY, UTAHFEETMETERSHIDDENLAKECAVERNOFSLEEP o100200I'"".,,o 10io30..050 Jerry 8 June Underwood Jam..8 Judy Von Gundy William8.8ElizabethLWhiteTIMPANOGOSCAVE CHIMESCHAMBER BIG ROOM MIDDLECAVEENTRANCE--HANSENENTRANCEELEV. 6730 FT.TRUE MAGNETIC NORTHNORTH1960CROSS-SECTIONSAT2X SCALEFigure 2 Mapofthe Timpanogos Cave systemshowing the localionofvarious caves and lakes (modified after White and Van Gundy, 1974).Page170

PAGE 176

Tranel/Mayo/Jensen76 l.4ay Precipitation(in) Monthly TotalApril1990 .A \ A'V \ 24 3c..uC1>L0.. "......,.c'--" 5 c o700600500400300200100 OL.-L...----'_---'_---J._---'-_.........._-'-_-'-_--'--_-'-_...1...-_.L.-_.L...-----' oDayHansenCoveE E '--" 3000250020001500 1000500 AC1>+-'o0:::c..La 100908070605040302010o o100200300400500600700DayFigure 3 Scatter plots of drip for a major dripinHansen Cave and mean monthly at the weather stationinthe recharge area. Day zeroisJanuary1,1990.Page171

PAGE 177

Tranel/Mayo/Jensen7006005004003002001000.0o7 May Precipitation(in)6 Monthly Total r-...r:::"'-J 5 r::: 0 4 April1990 +-' C +-' 3Nov c.. .0 2 COLnO0100200300400500600700Day2.0ChimesChamberDrip r-... 1.5 r::: E ""-E "'-J 1.0 CO+-' c n:::c.. .L 0.5 Cl DayFigure 4 Scatter plotsofdrip for a typical dripinChimes Chamber (Timpanogos Cave) and mean monthly precipitation vs. dayatthe weather stationinthe recharge area. Day zeroisJanuary1,1990.Page 172

PAGE 178

TraneVAfayo/Jensen I/I:...... ,I I". :'.1\1 I' '" 'II .. I,' :1 ':"': ': l ': f". '.'300400500600700DayDolomite Mognesite ,-, .............. -'..HansenCaveDripCalciteAragonite1002000.0 I-------------"":">O'.,e,------"T----IT----:f-'+--------=I 0.5 1.0-1.0-0.5(f)3000 ,...-...c 2500E ........... 2000-E -..1500 (l)+' 01000 0::0..L 5000a0700600500400300200100-1.5 __' __'_---J. ____'_ ____'_ ____'_ ____'_ ____'_ __'_ __' oDayFigure 5 Scatter plotsofdrip for a major dripinHansen Cave and corresponding saturation indices for selected carbonate Day zeroisJanuary1,1990.Page 173

PAGE 179

TraneUAfayo/Jensen -6-8-16-14-12-1018 c5 a(0/00)-18-140-20-600HansenCaveDripHansenCaveLake/ ...\l MiddleCaveDrip ... MiddleCaveLake -800ChimesChamberDrip/-HiddenLake/Evaporation ...........D. Snow/0 .... CavernofSleep/-0 0 Spring V... / 0-100 '-" /0 t\l'0 -120Figure 6 Scatter plotof 02H and 0180 relative to the meteoric water line (MWL). The dashed lineisan evaporation trajectory.Page174

PAGE 180

--------Isotopes-------.DateDayTDSPhTempCa Mg NaKHC03504CIFSi02 018002H013C034S 3Hmeq/I(C)---------------------meq/I----------------ppm0/00 0/00 0/00 0/00TU=======================================================================:==================================TimpanogosCave ChimesChamberdrip6/06/90 155 14.71 2,860.205 0.0185.72 1.33 0.1410.03716.55 a6/30/9018115.507.909.5 4.44 2.980.179 0.0176.28 1.39 0.1720.03715.44 08/07/90 219 15.70 7.659.34.51 3.010.195 0.Q18 6.31 1.460.175 0.03415.10 ..... 9/07/90250 15.72 7.879.04.56 3.060.1930.0076.291.42 0.155 0.035 16.40 en 10/06/90 279 15.63 7.82 8.8 4.42 3.010.3120.0236.40 1.310.126 0.02616.55-13.4-110-9.7 -8.9011/09/90 313 14.95 7.658.44.22 3.090.2020.011 5.94 1.33 0.1300.02716.37 C"" 2102/91398 15.54 7.958.34.49 2.980.182 0.0156.341.38 0.129 0.031-13.4-108 l 3/23/91 447 14.788008.43.91 3.270.178 0.0165.83 1.41 0.1330.036 ;:l 4/13/91 468 14.878.008.44153.18 0.1550.0155.88 1.34 0.1280.028;' 5/02/91 487 14.65 4.01 3.080.202 0.0165.85 1.28 0.1940.025-13.4-11033.2 t:l 05/23/91 508 11.68 2.62 3.050.188 0.0154.34 1.27 0170 0.024 ;=$0(1)'0 7/01/91 547 12.538. 0.Q15 4.64 1.290.1780,049 o' 9/07/9161515.26 3.030.1900.0276.201.300.1400.030 c. 9/18/9162615.067.909. 1.290.130 0.028 l'c5t;; -------...... mean14.76 7.928.94.10 3.050.197 0.0175.87 1.340.150 0.03216.07 ()ltJ stdev1.15 0.090.034 0.0050.600.060.0220.0060.58 (1);=$l..,'<(1) NCavernofSleeplake Cll.... 6/04/90 155 12.48 4.050.4020.0363.85 2.04 0.276 0.053 25.270 fi;' 6/28/90 179 12.16 8.05 8.3 1.73 3.770.3620.0383.931.960.305 0.05223.46 ..... 8/10/90222 12.81 4.080.383 0.0334.15 1.980.282 0.05525.05 l 9/05/90 248 13.418.158.4 2.02 4.180.4920.0464.20 2.060.367 0.05326.49 0c 10/05/9027813.00 7.95 8,6 1.92 4.050.467 0.0404.24 1.89 0.3580.04025.20-8.4-76-6.5-15.5 l 11/09/90 313 12.95 8.308.41.93 4.110.4640.0404.13 1.89 0.344 0.042 25.91 r 3/13/9146811.768.048.3 1.70 4.120.4300.0363.161.96 0.307 0.043 ..... 5/02/9148712.11 7.608.31.63 4.100.4230.0343.62 1.96 0.301 0.045-8.4-97-3.8-12.3 \0 5/23/91 508 12.02 1.65 3.940.4130.0343.68 1.96 0,310 0.045 \0P 7/01/91 547 12.49 7.71 8.3 1.71 4.170.5000.0363.77 1.950.3160.046 8/05/91 582 13.077.758.8 2.523.090.866 0.0724.00 2.030.4450.046 9/07/9161513.368.008.51.84 4.210.613 0.0684.13 1.96 0.4990.050--------mean12.63 7.988.41.86 3.990.485 0.0433.90 1.97 0.3420.048 25.23stdev0.520.210.20.23 0.290.1310.0130.30 0.050.065 0.0050.93CavernofSleepDrip 9/07/916158.308.91.76 4.210.2490.021 4.22 1.75 0.1990.045HiddenLake6/28/90 179 12.85 7.758.82.473.080.7500.0294.36 1.500.620 0.03819.27 8/10/9022213.61 7.95 8.9 2.90 3.090.6330.0324.75 1.56 0.600 0.040 16.65

PAGE 181

--------Isotopes----DaleDayTD5PhTempCa M9 NaKHC03504CI I'" 5i02 0180a 2H 013C0345 3Hmeq/I(C)---------------------meq/I----------------ppm0/000/000/000/00TU == ==;::;::================;::;::==;::;::=====;::;::====== ==:::: ================;::;::;::;::========== == =====================;::;::==;::;::================================================::9/05/90 248 13.65 7.87 8.92923.29 0.580 0.025 4.84 1.37 0.590 0.042 18.55 10/05/90 278 13.51 7.43 8.8 3.043040.570 0.031 4.84 1.47 0.499 0.029 19.60-10.3-90-8.5-9.911/09/90 313 13.94 7.70 8.7 3.37 3.16 0.48600214.98 1.48 0.413002918.38 4/13/91 468 14.43 7.28 8.7 3.90 3.10 0.214 0.156 5.36 1.48 0.1920.028 5/02/91 487 14.01 7.37 8.7 3.62 3.11 0.2860.019 5.15 1.53 0.2750028-14.1-110-10.3-1405/23/91 508 13.51 3.24 3.27 0.291 0.023 4.86 1.53 0.267 0.029 7/01/91 547 13.96 7.40 8.7 3.483230.302 0.019 5.14 1.44 0.318 0.028 8/05/91 582 14.12 7.50893.71 3.16 0.313 0.024 5.13 1.47 0.278 0.032 9/07/91 615 13.61 7.40 9.0 3.35 3.16 0.364 0.021 4.90 1.45 0.3270034--------mean13.75 7.57 8.8 3.273.15 0.435 0.036 4.94 1.48 0.398 0.032 18.49stdeY0.400.220.10.40 0.08 0.168 0.038 0.25 0.05 0.147 0.005 1.02HansenCaveHansenCavedrip6/06/90 155 11.83 8.00 7.2 3.88 1.78 0.135 0.013 4.79 1.07 0.140 0.022 14.12 6/30/9018111.76 7.98 7.4 3.71 1.85 0.13000104.83 1.07 0.140 0.022 14.48 8/07/90 219 11.99 7.95 7.2 3.72 1.9501400.016 4.98 1.02 0.1440.022 15.01 ;J 9/07/90 250 12.30 7.80 7.2 3.872000.1440.0105.03 1.08 0.144 0.022 15.58 t:l 10/06/90 279 12.73 7.717.14.08 2.16 0.1440.0065.12 1.10 0.102 0.017 16.41-11.2-110-9.8-13.6 ;::s 11/09/90 313 11.95 7.53 7.5 3.80 2.06 0.1480.0094.74 1.09 0.095 0.016 15.70 r1:lct::::: 2/02/91 398 10.20 8.30 7.4 2.8620101500.011 3.90 1.15 0.1000.017-14.4-107 3/09/91 433 12.52 8.10 7.5 4.17 2.0401260.009 4.92 1.15 0.097 0.014 ...... 3/23/91 447 12.06 7.60 7.6 4.01 1.93 0.1170.0094.88 1.02 0.086 0.013 '-
PAGE 182

--------Isotopes-------.DateDayTDSPhTempCa Mg NaKHC03S04CIFSi02 0180o 2H 013C034S 3Hmeq/l(C) --------------------meq/l----------------ppm0/000/000/00 0/00TU=========================================================================================================3/09/91 433 10.38 8.15 7.3 3.03 2.01 0.147 0.011 3.96 1.10 0.108 0.017 3/23/91 447 10.45 8.00 7.3 3.151.910.129 0.0084.111.03 0.093 0.016 4/13/91 468 9.97 8.05 7.3 3.231.610.088 0.007 4.17 0.77 0.081 0.013 5/02/91 487 9.64 7.68 7.3 3.18 1.46 0.088 0.007 3.88 0.93 0.083 0.013-15.1-116-10.2-5.321.3 5/23/91 508 10.20 7.70733.45 1.43 0.102 0.007 3.83 1.27 0.0930.013 7/01/91 547 10.39 7.95 7.4 3.47 1.49 0.106 0.008 3.96 1.25 0.097 0.014 8/05/91 582 10.75 8.05 7.3 3.671650.135 0.011 3.99 1.19 0.094 0.014 9/07/91 615 11.02 7.80 7.4 3.631.710.146 0.009 4.24 1.17 0.100 0.017 9/18/91 626 10.55 8.00 7.4 3.55 1.58 0.124 0.009 4.29 0.90 0.0880.015--------mean10.717.88 7.4 3.42 1.74 0.127 0.011 4.17 1.12 0.1070.016 14.74 5tdey 0.61 0.20 0.2 0.26 0.21 0.021 0.005 0.30 0.15 0.025 0.003 0.65 I::l MiddleCave (1) MiddleCavedrip 6/06/90 157 13.61 8.05 7.7 3.63 2.91 0.2070.023 4.92 1.73 0.158 0.033 16.02 ...... 6/30/9018112.87 8.10 8.9 3.44 2.87 0.223 0.0324.411.69 0.187 0.028 16.96 "-<:::'l 8/08/90 220 13.64 8.10 8.33622930.214 0.018 4.931.710.183 0.028 15.81 C'l 9/07/90 250 13.66 7.79 8.3 3.62 2.91 0.2070.023 5.00 1.69 0.183 0.02916.21 (1) 10/06/90 279 13.60 8.06 7.8 3.60 2.88 0.1930.018 4.99 1.76 0.138 0.020 16.02-14.6-110-9.7 v, 11/09/90 313 11.70 8.32 6.4 3.03 2.50 0.1930.012 4.33 1.49 0.128 0.021 15.02 (1) 2/02/91 398 11.00 8.40 6.8 2.67 2.34 0.171 0.017 4.15 1.49 0.140 0.020 14.86-12.3-973/09/91 433 11.40 7.65 6.8 2.732.27 0.236 0.125 4.27 1.56 0.190 0.023 3/23/91 447 10.92 8.10 6.9 2.65 2.25 0.153 0.017 4.28 1.43 0.121 0.020 4/13/91 468 10.87 7.95 6.9 2.702.20 0.148 0.018 4.20 1.45 0.131 0.020 5/02/91 487 11.37 7.32 6.9 2.822.33 0.1530.018 4.40 1.49 0.140 0.020-15.1-113 -8.2 -13.75/23/91 50812.617.55 6.9 3.23 2.68 0.2080.017 4.701.610.140 0.021 7/01/91 547 12.52 7.89 8.7 3.27 2.75 0.181 0.018 4.55 1.64 0.0920.020 8/05/91 582 12.63 7.90 9.0 3.19 2.90 0.2080.0234.611.53 0.1480.026 9/07/91 615 12.55 7.80 8.5 3.31 2.70 0.204 0.019 4.62 1.53 0.148 0.022 9/18/91 626 12.11 7.95 8.5 3.07 2.63 0.200 0.021 4.501.510.148 0.023--------mean 12.32 7.93773.16 2.63 0.1940.026 4.55 1.58 0.148 0.023 15.84stdev0.98 0.27 0.9 0.350.26 0.025 0.026 0.28 0.10 0.026 0.004 0.66MiddleCavelake6/06/90 157 8.898.07 6.7 2.37 1.84 0.1780.029 3.34 0.96 0.1500.024 15.30 6/28/90 179 9.76 7.95 7.4 2.482.06 0.2390.027 3.57 1.08 0.284 0.023 18.16 8/08/980 220 10.22 8.15 8.3 2.49 2.29 0.244 0.019 3.691.210.259 0.024 22.24 9/05/90 248 10.688.118.0 2.632.44 0.285 0.024 3.701.310.262 0.025 29.04 10/05/90 278 10.41 7.75 7.9 2.53 2.42 0.2620.022 3.58 1.37 0.197 0.021 29.98-6.7-73-4.9-16.011/09/90 313 9.42 8.19 6.6 2.272.23 0.231 0.028 3.29 1.18 0.1830.020 26.10 2/02/91 398 10.16 8.30 6.7 2.63 2.33 0.223 0.026 3.47 1.29 0.170 0.021-12.1-94

PAGE 183

----Isotopes ---DateDayTDSPhTempCa Mg NaKHC03S04CIFSi02 618062H613C634S 3Hmeq/I(C)-------------------meqll----------------ppm0/000/00 0/00 0/00TU;:;;:=========;:;;:====;:;;: == ============;:;;:====;:;;:======;:;;:=:;;::;;:;;::;:;;::;;::========;:;;::;;::;:;;:====;:;;:==::::;=;:;;:======;:;;:========;:;;:==========;:;;:========:3/09/91 433 5.75 8.00 6.8 1.651.210.084 0.0152.210.50 0.080 0.012 3/23/91 447 5.75 8.00 6.91631.2200840.0152.210.50 0.079 0.015 4/13/91 468 7.80 8.01 6.9 2.16 1.72 0.116 0.0172.910.76 0.108 0.015 5/02/91 487 8.47 7.85 7.02271.87 0.126 0.019 3.23 0.83 0.113 0.016-13.8-98-7.3-7.85/23/91 508 9.64 8.21 7.2 2.532.110.149 0.024 3.66 1.03 0.125 0.018 7/01/91 547 2.48 1.96 0.149 0.030 3.49 0.92 0.120 0.016 8/05/91 582 9.70 7.90 7.8 2.54 2.07 0.204 0.034 3.65 1.03 0.1490.022 9/07/91 615 9.83 7.95 7.92602.110.278 0.039 3.58 1.05 0.168 0.018 9/18/91 626 6.97 7.90 7.9 1.88 1.45 0.148 0.028 2.76 0.59 0.102 0.017-------mean8.918.02 7.3 2.32 1.96 0.1880.025 3.27 0.98 0.1590.019 23.47 st dev 1.52 0.14 0.5 .0.32 0.38 0.065 0.0070480.27 0.062 0.004 5.43SurfaceWaterCattleCreekheadwaters6/29/91 545 7.75 7.0 3.57 0.38 0.110 0.005 3.82 0.21 0.047 0.003CattleCreekspring 6/29/91 5457726.0 4.37 0.41 0.1350.008 4.43 0.38 0.122 0.005-16.3-120-15.5-10.4 l::l;:sC1:> Stormrunoff-MiddleCavesurfacedrainage ...... 9/13/916211.12 0.66 0.071 0.008 1.46 0.24 0.041 0.008 '-.:::a SnowPack C1:> 3/09/90 68-17.1-125-25.6+8.3 ;:s"" 2/24/91 420-17.5-131-28.011.7 C1:>;:s

PAGE 184

WeferA PROFILEOFTHEBUTLER CAVE CONSERVATION SOCIETY, INC.Fred L. Wefer Vice President,BCes,Inc. 4600DukeStreet,Unit#1310Alexandria,VA22304ABSTRACfTheButlerCave Conservation Society(BCes),Inc.isa non-profit scientific, education, and conservation organization incorporated in Virginia.Formedin 1968, theBCesistheoldest such organization to employ ownershipofwilderness resources as amajorelementofits conservation strategy. Originally formedtomanage and conservetheButler Cave-Sinking Creek System, neithertheBCesconstitutionnorits bylaws geographically limit its activities.MostBCesactivities, however, have been concentrated inanareaofwest-central Virginia caIled BurnsviIle Cove.ThegoalsoftheBCesare: to perform scientific studiesofcaves, to conserve caves for future study,andto educatethepubliconthevalueoftheseuniquewilderness resources.Thescientific, educational, and conservation projectsoftheBCesarediscussed. A keyelementoftheBCesconservation strategyisaccess control via the techniquesofownership, leasing, gating, and secrecy.Thethirty-seven memberBCesisoperatedby a sevenmemberBoardofDirectors(BOD)thatincludesthethreeofficersofthesociety (President, Vice President,andSecretaryrrreasurer).Themain responSibilitiesoftheBODareto runthesociety between annual membership meetings and to manage its membership policies. New membersareelectedbytheBODin compliance with a strictly controIledmembership limit. Historical membership trends and characteristicsofthecurrentBCesmembershiparepresented.Currentassetsofthe BCCS include both the longest cave and the deepest cave in Virginia andmorethan thirty surveyed milesofpassages.Majorevents inthehistoryoftheBCesarediscussed.1.INTRODUCTIONTheButlerCave Conservation Society, Inc.isa non-profit scientific, education, and conservation organization incorporated in Virginia.Itwas formed in Novemberof1968 andistheoldest such organization to employ ownershipofwilderness resources as a major elementofits conservation strategy.TheBCeswas originaIly formed to manage and conservetheButler Cave-Sinking Creek System commonly known as Butler Cave. Butler Cave was discovered in Mayof1958 (see Nicholson and Wefer, 1983), so thatbythe timetheBCeswas formed,thecave hadbeenknown for ten years. Although access during that period had been generaIly limited to exploration and survey trips, unauthorized "tourist" and "orientation" trips were beginning to have an effect onthecave in the formsofspent carbide, litter, graffiti, and breakage. Several related events contributed totheformationoftheBCes.Forexample, becauseofan earlier involvement intheexploration, survey, and mappingofnearby Breathing Cave, membersoftheNittanyGrottoofthe National Speleological Society (NSS) were in 1968 leading thesesameactivities in Butler Cave.TheNittanyGrottocaversnotonly had considerable skills in the surveying and mappingofPage 179

PAGE 185

large caves, they also possessed some unique experienceinthe managingofwild caves. Hosterman's Pit Cave (located in Centre County, PA) had been discovered in1961(Davis, 1963). Concerned about liability, the owners had requested that the Niuany Grotto gate the cave and limit access to qualified cavers, a process begun in 1963.By1968 Nittany Grotto members hadfiveyearsofexperience at managing a gated wild cave, experience that clearly demonstrated that gating and strict access control were viable (if unpopular) conservation techniques. The Hosterman's experience gaveusconfidence that the same techniques would work in Virginia. Whatwastousthe obvious need for conservation via access controlwasthe main reason that theBCeswas formed, and the reason that manyofits early supporters were cavers from Pennsylvania. While mostBCesactivities have been concentratedinan area of west-central Virginia called Burnsville Cove, it should be noted that neither the BCCS constitution nor its bylaws geographically limit its activities. In recent years theBCeshas expanded its horizonsbysponsoring an international expedition to Mexico and several to the Dominican Republic.2.SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITIESOFTHEBCCSScientific activities of theBCesinclude: geography, cartography, geology,hydrology, biology, meteorology, and related subjects. Eachoftheseistouched upon very briefly below. The intent hereisto mention the existenceofthe activity and to provide a reference to more detailed information. The referenced works describe activities officially sponsoredbytheBCes,scientific works which have drawn upon the resources of theBCes,and activities stimulatedbyinteraction with theBCes.2.1GEOGRAPHYThe primary activitiesofgeography include exploring, surveying, and mapping. Exploration activitiesoftheBCeshave been extensively discussedinthe literature. They include exploring the caves in Burnsville Cove aswellascaves inotherareasofthe world.Weier2.1.1EXPLORINGIn Burnsville Cove the explorationofBreathing Cave, Butler Cave, Better Forgotten Cave, and Aqua Cave have been documentedbyWefer and Nicholson (1982). Some statistical characteristicsofButler Cave revealed as a resultofits exploration were presentedbyWefer (1986a).Themore recent explorationofLockridge Aqua Cave has been coveredbyRosenfeld (1986). The explorationofBobcat Cave has been partially coveredbyClemmer (1988), only partially because the processisfar from complete. The beginningsofthe explorationofthe Cathedral System have been discussed Simmons (1990). In other areasofthe world the explorationofCueva Diamante in San Louis Potosi, Mexico has been discussedbyRosenfeld (1987), Shifflett (1987), and Wefer (1988a). The explorationofcaves in the Dominican Republic (an on-goingBCesproject) has been describedbyWheeland and Frank (1987), Veni (1987), Wheeland (1987), Veni and Wheeland (1987), Frank (1987a and 1987b), and Veni, Frank and Wheeland (1987). Aspectsofthe expedition activity itself as it relates to Butler Cave have been discussedbyO'Holleran (1979) and Maxwell (1986) in attempts to better understand how expeditions should be organized and run. CurrentBCespractices for expeditions both within and outside of Burnsville Cove are discussed below.2.1.2 SURVEYINGTheBCeshas an active programofsurveying the caves it explores. The survey and explorationofButler Cave and Breathing Cave have involved the useofradio location equipment for finding surface points above key locations in the caves. A detailed studyofthe radio location technique, especially as it relates to the radio frequencies most useful,waspublishedbyDavis (1970). The computer processingofcave survey data was discussedbyWefer (1971). The computer correctionoferrors in surveylOOpswasstudiedbyWefer (1974a and 1974b) using data fromBCessurveys. TechniquesPage 180

PAGE 186

used in surveying the cavesofthe Sinking Creek System were discussedbyIgoe (1982) andbyWefer (1982). Studiesoftheorigin, detection, and correctionofblunders in survey data have been extensively documentedbyWefer (1987, 1988b and 1988c).2.1.3 MAPPINGTheBCeshasanactive programofproducing maps from the data gathered during the surveying process. Maps have long been available (see, e.g., David and We fer, 1976) for severalofthe smaller caves in Burnsville Cove including: Armstrong Cave, Chestnut Ridge Blowing Cave, Boundless Cave, and Better Forgotten Cave. A foldout versionofthe mapofBreathing Cave was provided in Wefer and Nicholson (1982) whose paper also presented several mapsofButler Cave. More detailed mapsofButler Cave are available in eleven large sectional maps currently in the processofbeing field checked. In addition to mapsofthe caves themselves, mapsofthesurface showing the locationsofthe cave entrances and maps showingtherelationshipsofpassages to surface features have been generated. Detailed large scale mapsofBurnsville Coveofthe latter type are closely held; however, less detailed versions have been published, for example in Wefer and Nicholason (1982).2.2 CARTOGRAPHYIn theareaofcartography,Le.,thescienceofmakingofmaps, new ideas and techniques in the computerized generation and displayofthree-dimensional maps have been explored. Results have been presented in a numberofforums:atthe 1983 NSS ConventionbyWefer, Igoe, and Gillen (1983),attechnical conferencesbyWefer (1985a and 1986b), in a seriesofarticles in Compass&TapebyWefer (1989a, 1989b, 1989c, 1990a, and 1990b), and at the1991NSS ConventionbyWefer (1991a).2.3GEOLOGYWhite and Hess (1982) documented the studyofthe geomorphologyofBurnsville Cove and the geologyofthe Butler Cave-Sinking Creek System.TheWefermineralogyoftheButler Cave-Sinking Creek System was discussedbyWhite (1982). Chess (1982) presented preliminary resultsofa studyofthesediments in Butler Cave. White (1984) describedthebeginningsofa studyofpaleomagnetism intheclastic sediments in Butler Cave. A preliminary value for the ageofthese sedimentsisgreater than 730,000 years. White and White (1991) used Burnsville Coveasan example in their studyofkarst erosion surfaces in the Appalachian Highlands.2.4HYDROLOGYA studyofthe hydrogeologyofBurnsville Cove was presentedbyHess, Davis, and Wefer (1971)atthe 1970 NSS Convention. Davis and Hess (1982) presented the resultsofa six-year studyofthedrainage areas of Burnsville Cove, delineatingtherecharge areasoffour major springs in the Bullpasture Gorge. Harmon and Hess (1982) studiedthegeochemistryofBurnsville Cove. Chess (1983) described a research projectinenvironmental pollution in the Burnsville karst.Hethen carriedoutthe project (see Chess (1987 performing chemical analysesofwater from surface and subsurface streams in Burnsville Cove and also performing analysesoftotal plate bacteria and total coliform.2.5BIOLOGYA preliminary report on the cave faunaofBurnsville Cove preparedbyHolsinger (1982) listed nineteen speciesofcave animals. In the areaofpaleontology, a small sectionofpassage in Bobcat Cave contains hundredsofmud footprints identified as thoseofan extinct fisher (martes pennanti) (Clemmer, 1989). Robbins and Haas (1989) discovered filamentous bacteriaonthe surfacesofred stalactites in Butler Cave, bacteria thought to be responsible for the red colorofthese formations.2.6METEOROLOGYThevariationsofthe temperature, partial pressureofwater vapor, and relative humidity in Butler Cave are being studiedasfunctionsoftime (season) and position (within the cave). More than 600 pairs of temperature measurements (wet-bulb and dry-bulb)Page 181

PAGE 187

have been made since the study began in April 1984. Preliminary resultsofthe study and related information have been presented in a numberofforums: at the 1989 NSS ConventionbyWefer (1989d),atthe 1991 Appalachian Karst SymposiumbyWefer (1991b), and in a seriesofnewsletter articles by Wefer (1984a, 1985b,198&1,198ge, 1989f, and 1990c).Anannotated bibliographyofcave meteorology has also been publishedbyWefer (1991c) for usebyotherresearchers in the field.3.EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIESOFTHEBCCSEducational activitiesofthe BCCS include publishing articles on the scientific activitiesofthe society (inNSSgrotto newsletters, theBCesNewsletter, the NSS Bulletin, etc.) and giving papers at NSS conventions and scientific and management symposia, as discussed above. In addition, in Butler Cave theBCeshas held hands-on training sessions on cave surveying techniques and rescue techniques (see Jones (1982), Maxwell (1982a and 1982b), and Williams (1982a and 1982b). A very important aspectofeducationisland owner relations. Efforts at maintaining good land owner relations have included: frequent contact withotherland ownersofBurnsville Cove, slide presentations to them introducing theBCesand explaining its activities, andBCesmembers individually becoming land owners (eight members now own property in the immediate area).4.CONSERVATION ACTIVITIESOFTHEBCCSThe conservation strategyoftheBCesderives from an attempt to balance two conflicting desires, to understand the caves and to conserve the caves.Theconflict arises because the processofunderstanding the caves (the scientific studyofthe caves) almost always requires human visitation, and itisrecognized that any human visitation has effects, often adverse, on the cave environment. The strategyisto decrease the quantityofhuman visitation while simultaneously increasing the qualityofthat visitation, in an effort to ensure that whatever effects the visitation hasarecost-effective in termsofbalancing the two desires.WeferIn a studyofAmerican cavers and their caves Wilson (1978) estimated that the human visitation in Butler Caveisapproximatelyonetenthofwhat it would be if the cave were open. Allowing entry only for specific purposes and requiring the presenceonthe tripofaBCesmember (orotherresponsible person) are measures used to increase the qualityofthe visitation. A favorable assessmentofthe conservation techniques and effectivenessoftheBCeswas madebyWilson (1981a) who compared five groups which manage wild caves in Virginia and West Virginia.4.1ACCESS CONTROLTheBCesemploys a numberoftechniques to control access to the caves it manages in Burnsville Cove, including: ownership, leasing, gating, secrecy, benign disinformation, and local expeditions. Leasing and ownershipofthe land surrounding the entrances have both been employed. Once controlofthe land has been achieved, the entrances can be gatedtoprevent entrybypeople who will not respect notices and signs.TheBCeshas gated only twoofthe cavesitmanages. Wilson (1981b) has discussed some important considerations associated with cave gates and the gatingofwild caves for conservation purposes. Ownershipispreferred over leasing because it gives some immunity to problemsthatcan arise with the change in ownership resulting from the deathofthe owner. Sons and daughters may not share the valuesoftheir fathers and mothers, and this can cause real problems for cavers leasing the land. Burnsville Coveisa relatively large area containing many caves not controlledbytheBCes.Thesimplest (and perhaps the most effective) way to conserve these caves (to decrease visitation while increasing the valueofthe visitation)isto not publicize their existence.Insome cases, this means keepingtheexistenceofa cave secret from the caving communityatlarge.TheBCestries to avoid situations where the existenceof cave must also be kept from the landowner. In at leastonecase, benign disinformation has been used to forestall interest in a cave being explored and mappedbytheBCes.Bobcat Cave had been "discovered" during the autumnof1983 (see Clem-merPage 182

PAGE 188

(1988bypushing very difficult passages in a previously known cave. The cave was renamed Bobcat Cavetomake it possible to refer to it without giving away its true identity.By1984 wordofthe explorationofa new, large, and beautiful cave in Burnsville Cove was beginning to leak out. The cave's name was beginning to be known, but management controlofthe entrance hadnotyet been achieved. That year theBCesNewsletter contained an article called "The SecretofBobcat Cave" (see Wefer 1984b)). The titleofan already written article as well as the name of the cave in this workoffiction were changed in order to create confusioninthe caving community.Thehonest mentionofthe articlebyDyas (1985) in the NSSNewsonly added to the effect. In the end theBCeswas able to achieve access controlbygating the cave (with the owners' permission), and in Mayof1988 theBCespurchased the tractofland containing the entrance. Local expeditionsnotonly serve to provide manpower forBCesscientific projects, theyalso,provide an important safety valve.Ifthe caves were simply closed, leaving cavers with no hopeofgetting in, frustration would likely build until serious and probably illegal actions would be taken to gain entry. The fact that nearby Breathing Cave has been open to the public almost continuously during the entire historyoftheBCeshas also acted as a safety valve. Thisisthe major reason theBCeshas not attempted to gain management controlofBreathing Cave.4.2MANAGEMENT PLANSManagement plans (see Wefer (1989g)) have been developed for the two major caves ownedbytheBCes(Butler and Bobcat). These plans take into account both the similaritiesofthe two caves (comparable size, location, ownership, and access control methods) and their differences (difficultyoftravel, lengthoftravel, need for camping in the cave, and team size limitations). Bothofthese caves originally had very small entrances and some digging was required to gain initial entry. Access to both cavesisnow controlledviacave gates that control accessbyhumans without restricting the movementofthe indigenous fauna. VisitationisWeierrestricted primarily to expeditions heldinfurtheranceofthe scientific studyofthe caves.4.3EXPEDITIONSTheBCescurrently holds fiveorsix expeditiOns per year at Butler Cave.Atthese expeditions cavers (members and non-members) meetatthe Butler Homestead (the field houseonthe Butler Homestead Property) and are assigned to work details based on matching their talents and skills to the listofongoing projects. Butler Cave Expeditions are essentially open to all qualified cavers willing to help further the aimsoftheBCes.Itiscommon practice to make adjustments in expedition plans based on the skills and equipmentofthe people who actually show up at the expedition. The actual workisusually performed within Butler Cave,butmay, on occasion, take placeinothercaves in Burnsville Cove. Bobcat Cave Expeditions are restricted to those people who, in the judgmentofthe Bobcat Expeditions Leader, are physically and mentally able to withstand the rigorsofthe cave, have the necessary equipment for camping and caving for extended periods underground, and have skills specifically required for the particular expedition.Asa conservation measure, expeditions involving camping in the cave are restrictedtoa total team undergroundofnine people. International expeditions, sponsored on an ad hoc basisbytheBCes,are approvedbythe Board of Directors (see below). Normally no financial backingisprovided withBCessponsorship. A reportofthe scientific findingsofthe expeditionisrequired to be provided for publicationintheBCesNewsletter.5.THEORGANIZATIONAsstated above, theBCesisa non-profit scientific, education, and conservation organization. Itisrecognizedbythe IRSasa tax exempt organization under section 501(c)(3)ofthe Internal Revenue Code. Details of the structureoftheBCesare containedinits articlesofincorporation (seeStellmack, Davis, and Nicholson (1970 and in its bylaws (Sproul (1972)). The existence of theBCeswasbrought to thePage 183

PAGE 189

attentionofthe general caving communitybyStellmack (1971). Hess (1976) discussed theBCesatthe 1976 NationalcaveManagement Symposium. His paper also included a copyofthe articlesofincorporation. The three recognized elementsofthe organization are: theBCesBoardofDirectors, theBCesMembers, andBCesFriends, eachofwhichisdiscussed below.5.1BCCS BOARDOFDIRECfORSA seven member BoardofDirectors (BOD) runs theBCesbetween regular annual membership meetings. The BOD consistsofthe three society officers (President, Vice President, and Secretatyffreasurer) plus four directors at large. All seven membersofthe BOD are electedbythe members each year at the regular annual membership meeting. The only formal requirementisthat membersofthe BOD must already be membersoftheBCes.The BOD has the major responsibility of managing membership policies. New membersoftheBCesare electedbythe BOD, notbythe existing membership. A strict limitisprovided in the bylaws on the total number of members, a limit that can be changed onlybya unanimous voteofthe seven membersofthe BOD. This bylawwasspecifically designed to empower the minority,asdescribed in some detailbyWefer (1980).5.2BCCS MEMBERSThere arenoformal membership procedures.Bydesign, anyoneiseligible for membership in theBCes.In contrast to the NSS, thereisonly one classofmembership in theBCes.Annual dues are currently$45,life membershipis$1500. Readers interested in additional informationonmembership in theBCesare referredto We fer (1978a and 1978b) and Williams (1978). MembershipintheBCesisviewedasa long-term commitment. New members typically have demonstrated this commitmentby:past support, agreement with society goals, compatibility with the existing membership, acceptanceofpossible financialWeferobligations, possessionofsuperior caving skills, and considerable patience. Membership in theBeesisnot touted; there arefewbenefits, participationispossible without being a member, and membership only means responsibilities.BCesmembers are responsible for helping to define the goalsofthe society, helping to develop policies that support the goals, providing guidance to the BOD in making major decisions, and providing the necessary resources for achieving the society goals, namely: ideas, labor and money. The following statistical informationontheBCesmembershipisbased upon data available in October1991.The numberofBCesmemberswas37 (the membership limitwas38).Itmay be interesting to note that while membershipinthe NSSisnot a requirement for membership in theBCes,33BCesmembers (89%) were alsoNSSmembers.Infact, 9oftheBCesmembers (24%) were life membersoftheNSSand14(38%) were fellowsoftheNSS (iIl:cluding sixofthe BOD members). Included in the1991BCesmembership were: two membersofthe NSS BoardofGovernors, two CertificateofMerit winners, two Honorary Members,oneOutstanding Service Award winner, and one Lew Bicking Award winner. The total numberofpeople who had ever been membersoftheBCeswas47, hence there were 10exmembers in the23year historyoftheBCes.Ofthese10ex-members, 9 were no longer membersofthe NSS, indicating that they had simply lost interest in caving vice lost interest in theBCesper se. The membership turnover ratewasvery low, less than 1% per year. In theBCesthe member/ex-member ratio was 3.7 (there were 3.7 times as many membersasex-members).Bycomparison, in theNSSthis ratiowas0.36,Le.,ex-members vastly outnumbered members. Table 1 below shows the distributionbystateofBCesmembers for the three decade years spannedbythe historyofthe society.Ascan be seen, initially the majorityofthe members were from Pennsylvania. In tlJe earlydaysofthe society this factwasa major pointofcontention between theBCesand more local cavers (from Maryland and Virginia).Astime went on and itPage 184

PAGE 190

became clearthattheBCeswas a successful enterprise, local cavers began to supportBCesefforts and gradually became members.ThemembershipisWefernow more evenly splitbetween Pennsylvania and Virginia, with a smatteringofmembers from states across the country. STATE 1970 1980 1990 PENNSYLVANIA 16 (67%) 10 (33%)13(36%)VIRGINIA5 (21%) 9 (30%) 10 (28%) MARYLAND 1(4%)3 (10%) 4 (11%) N.CAROLINA1(3%)3(8%)IDAHO1(3%)1(3%)NEVADA1(3%)1(3%)COLORADO1(3%)1(3%)TEXAS 1(3%)WASHINGTON 1(3%)FLORIDA1(3%)OHIO1( 3%)CALIFORNIA1( 3%) ALASKA 1( 4%) 1( 3%) MICHIGAN 1 ( 3%) INDIANA 1( 4%)TOTAL2430 36Table1.BCesMembership Distribution. This table shows the distributionofBCesmembersbystateinthree decade years. Representation from Pennsylvania and Virginia have been comparable for the last decade.5.3BeeSFRIENDSFriendsoftheBCesare non-members who partiCipate in the activitiesoftheBCes.This participation maybeinlocal expeditions (Butler Cave, Bobcat Cave,orothers)ornon-local expeditions (Mexico, the Dominican Republic,orothers).Itmay also be in such activities as helping to maintain the road to the field houseorhelping to maintain the field house itself. Friends may also attendBCesmeetings and participate in discussions, but have no vote.BCesFriends receive freeofcharge the annualBCesNewsletter that chronicles the year's activities. Included among theBCesFriends are those people who make financial contributions to the society, which are,ofcourse, tax deductible.BCesFriends number betweenoneand two hundred, the number varying from year to year.5.4 RELATIONSHIP TOTHENSSTheBCesisnot an Internal OrganizationoftheNSS.TheBCeswas founded during a period when theNSSwas still in the processofdeciding the appropriatenessofcave ownership as a conservation strategy. In addition, no clear consensus had yet developed on the controversial topicofgating wild caves. Had theBCesbeen limitedbythe then current thinkingoftheNSS,itwould likely never have been formed. Independence from the NSSisfelt to be essential to the operationofthe society. Accordingly, theBCesisnot boundbyNSS policies and/or guidelines on items suchas:membership availability, neophyte training, caving practices,orconservation strategies.TheBCeshas been termed a "supergrotto;Le.,an organization that draws its membership from a much wider geographic area than traditionalNSSGrottosPage185

PAGE 191

(see Dyas (1980.Otherattributesofsupergrottos include a veteran constituency with less emphasis on novice training, entertaining programs, etc., and only a loose association with theNSS.TheBCesrecently became a conservancyoftheNSS. As such, theBCesservesonthe NSS Cave Ownership and Management Committeeofthe Departmentofthe Secretaryrrreasurer. This committeeischarged with developing a consistent and workable long-term program for the ownership and managementofcaves. The committee endeavors to answer any questions on cave management and encourages groups or individualstoask for assistance relating to cave management.6.CURRENTASSETSTheBCescurrently owns two properties in Burnsville Cove. The Butler Homestead PropertywaspurchasedinJanuaryof1975 and paid for in Novemberof1983. It contains the single entrance to the Butler Cave-Sinking Creek System. Butler Caveisthe largest caveinthe stateofVirginia with an approximate lengthof17.2 miles and a depth of 624 feet. The property also contains the Butler Homestead, a field house that sleeps fifteen and servesasheadquarters for local expeditions. There are some other minor assets on the property, e.g., a log barn and some very small caves/pits. The Chestnut Ridge Propertywaspurchased in May of1988andisnot yet paid for. It contains the singleWeferentrance to Bobcat Cave. Bobcat Caveisthe deepest cave in the stateofVirginia with an approximate lengthof9.3miles and a depthof722 feet.Theproperty also contains the entrance to infamous Better Forgotten Cave with an approximate lengthof0.8 miles and a depthof420 feet, plus the entrances to several other minor caves and pits.7.SUMMARYTheBCesisa Virginia based non-profit scientific, education, and conservation organization. Formed in 1968, its goals are: to perform scientific studiesofcaves, to conserve caves for future study, and to educate the public on the valueofthese unique wilderness resources. TheBCes is the oldest such organization to employ ownershipofwilderness resourcesasa major elementofits conservation strategy. The thirty-seven memberBCes is operatedbya seven member BoardofDirectors whose main responsibilities are to run the society between annual membership meetings and to manage its membership policies. New members are electedbythe BOD in compliance with a strictly controlled membership limit. Current assetsoftheBCesinclude both the longest cave and the deepest cave in Virginia and more than thirty surveyed milesofpassages. Further information about theBCesand its activitiesmaybe obtainedbywriting the author.7.REFERENCESClemmer, G.S. (1988), "Finding Virginia's Deepest Cave,"BCesNewsletter, Vol.14,pp. 3-15, 1988. Clemmer, G.S. (1989), "Bobcatin1989",BCesNewsletter, Vol.15,pp. 3-9, 1989. Chess,D.L(1982), "Butler Cave Sediments", BCCS Newsletter, Vol. 8, pp. 44-48, 1982 Chess,D.L(1983), "Thesis Proposal for an M.S.inEnvironmental Pollution Control",BCesNewsletter, Vol.9,pp. 26-32, 1983. Chess, D.L. (1987), "ComparisonofMicrobiology and Selected Anions for Surface and Subsurface Stream Waters for the Aqua Spring WatershedofBurnsville Cove, Virginia", Master of Science Thesis, The Pennsylvania State University, 116 pages, May 1987. Davis, N.W. (1963), "The DiscoveryofHosterman's Pit Cave", Nittany Grotto News, Vol. XII, No.2,pp. 33-40, Nov.-Dec. 1963. Davis, N.W. (1970), "Optimum Frequencies For Underground Radio Communication",NSSBulletin, Vol. 32,No.1,pp. 11-26, January 1970.Page 186

PAGE 192

Davis, N.W. and Hess, J.W. (1982), "Hydrologyofthe Drainage System, Burnsville Cove, Virginia",NSSBulletin, Vol. 44,No.3,pp. 78-83, July 1982. Davis, N.W. and Wefer, F.L. (1976), "Maps Available",BCesNewsletter, Vol.2,p.17,1976. Dyas, M.D. (1985), "Dyas Digest",NSSNews,Vol.43,No.7,pp. 237-239, July 1985. Dyas, M.D. (1980), "Supergrottos, ObservationsbyMike Dyas", D.C. Speleograph, Vol. 36,No.6,pp. 17-19, June 1980. Frank,E.(1987a), "DRSE Science Summary", Nittany Grotto News, Vol. 34,No.2,pp. 34, March 1987. Frank, E. (1987b), "Speleogenesisinthe Pedernales Area of the Southwestern Dominican Republic", Nittany Grotto News, Vol. 34,No.2,pp. 36, March 1987. Harmon, R.S. and Hess, J.W. (1982), "Ground Water Geochemistryofthe Burnsville Cove Area, Virginia",NSSBulletin, Vol. 44,No.3,pp. 84-89, July 1982. Hess, J.W. (1976), "The Butler Cave-Sinking Creek System and the Butler Cave Conservation Society", National Cave Management Symposium Proceedings, pp. 22-26, Mountain View, AR, 26-29 October 1976. Hess, J.W., Davis, N.W., and Wefer, F.L. (1971), "HydrogeologyofBurnsville Cove, Virginia", Nittany GrottoNeWSletter,Vol.19,No.3,pp. 148-158, July1971.Holsinger, J.R. (1982), "A Preliminary Report on the Cave FaunaofBurnsville Cove, Virginia",NSSBulletin, Vol.44,No.3,pp. 98-101, July 1982. Igoe,J.w.(1982), "Musing on Mapping", BCCS Newsletter, Vol. 8, pp. 41-44, 1982. Jones, D.S. (1982), "FirstAid",BCCS Newsletter, Vol.8,pp.20-21, 1984. Maxwell, G.M. (19813), "Rigging and Hauling", BCCS Newsletter, Vol.8,pp. 21-24, 1982. Maxwell, G.M. (1982b), "Additional Rescue Notes-Sand Canyon to Entrance", BCCS Newsletter, Vol.8,pp.25-30, 1982. Maxwell, G.M. (1986), "How to Run an Expedition",BCesNewsletter, Vol.12,pp. 24-25, 1986.WeferNicholson, I.K. and Wefer, F.L. (1983), "Hnding the Cave That Had to Be", BCCS Newsletter, Vol.9,pp. 3-7, 1983. O'Holleran, T.P. (1979), "LOGOFF (Logistics Officer) Report",BCesNewsletter, Vol.5,pp. 27-30, 1979. Robbins,N.and Haas, J. (1989), "Bacteria&Stalactites -Microbial StegosaursinCaves", RASS Register, Vol.17,No.4,pp. 15-16, April 1989, reprinted from The Cross Section (USGS Geologic Division) November 1988. Rosenfeld, J.H. (1986), "Lockridge's Aqua Cave",BCesNewsletter, Vol. 12, pp. 11-23, 1986. Rosenfeld, J.R. (1987), "Diamante Recollections", BCCS Newsletter, Vol.13,pp. 23-26, 1987. Shifflett, T.E. (1987), "The Return to Cueva de Diamante",BCesNewsletter, Vol.13,pp. 5-14, 1987. Simmons, R.W. (1990), "In Search of the Cathedral System", BCCS Newsletter, Vol.16,pp. 1-8, 1990. Sproul, M.M. (1972),"BylawsOfThe Butler Cave Conservation Society, Incorporated", BCCSfiles,27 June 1972. Stellmack,J.A(1971), "Butler Cave And The Butler Cave Conservation Society, Inc.",NSSNews, Vol. 29, No.3,pp.30-31, March 1971. Stellmack,J.A,Davis, N.C., and Nicholson, I.K. (1970), "Articles of IncorporationofThe Butler Cave Conservation Society, Incorporated",BCesfiles,25March 1970. Veni, G. (1987), ''The 1986 Dominican Republic Speleological Expedition", Nittany Grotto News, Vol. 34,No.2,pp.8-16, March 1987. Veni, G. and Wheeland, K (1987), "Dominican Republic Caves", Nittany Grotto News, Vol. 34,No.2,pp.18-33,March 1987 and Speleo Digest 1987, pp. 278-290. Veni, G., Frank, E., and Wheeland, K (1987), ''The1986Expedition to the Dominican RepUblic",NSSNews,Vol.45,No.7,pp. 256-262, July 1987. Wefer, F.L. (1971), "The Cave Survey Computer Program", Nittany Grotto Newsletler, Vol.19,No.1,pp. 5-22, January1971and Speleo Digest 1971, pp. 307-313.Page187

PAGE 193

Wefer,F.L(1974a), "On the Compass Rule", Nittany Grotto Newsletter, Vol. 22,No.2,pp. 51-58, 1974. Wefer,EL(1974b), "More on the Compass Rule", Nittany Grotto Newsletter, Vol. 22,No.5,pp. 158-164, 1974. Wefer,EL(1978a),"BCesMembership Policy",BCesNewsletter, Vol.4,pp. 19-22, 1978. We fer,EL.(1978b), "MembershipintheBCes",BCesNewsletter, Vol. 4, pp. 22-25, 1978.Wefer, F.L. (1980), "The Ike Clause", BCCS NeWSletter, Vol.6,pp. 37-40, 1980. Wefer, F.L. (1982), "Surveying the Butler Cave-Sinking Creek System",NSSBulletin, Vol. 44,No.3,pp. 64-66, July 1982. Wefer, F.L. (1984a), "Cave Meteorology",BCesNewsletter, Vol.10,pp. 33-49, 1984. Wefer, F.L. (1984b), "The SecretofBobcat Cave", BCCS Newsletter, Vol.10,pp. 16-32, 1984. Wefer, F.L. (1985a), "A User Interface for the Manipulation of 3D Objects", Proceedingsofthe 2nd AnnualTEMPLATEUser Network Conference, New Orleans, LA, 25-27 February 1985, 25 pages.Wefer, F.L. (1985b), "More On Cave Meteorology", BCCS Newsletter, Vol. 11, pp. 25-56, 1985. Wefer, F.L. (1986a), "Characteristicsofthe Butler Cave-Sinking Creek System", BCCS Newsletter, Vol.12,pp. 36-42, 1986. We fer, F.L. (1986b), "A Script Processor for the Manipulationof3D Objects", Proceedingsofthe 3rd Annual TEMPLATE User Network Conference, San Diego, CA, 26-28 February 1985, 22 pages.Wefer, F.L. (1987), "On Cave Survey Blunders", Compass&Tape, Vol. 5,No.2,pp. 23-43, Fall 1987. Wefer, F.L. (1988a), "The Diamante Disappointment",BCesNewsletter, Vol.14,pp. 21-39, 1988. Wefer, F.L. (1988b), "More on Cave Survey Blunders", Compass&Tape, Vol. 5,No.4,pp. 69-93, Spring 1988. Wefer,F.L(1988c),"StillMore on Cave Survey Blunders", Compass&Tape, Vol.5,No.4,pp. 94-113, Spring 1988.WeferWefer, F.L. (1988d),"StillMore on Cave Meteorology",BCesNewsletter, Vol.14,pp. 76-84, 1988. Wefer, F.L. (1989a), ''The Computerizationofthe Cave Map", Compass&Tape, Vol. 7,No.1,pp. 3-14, Summer 1989. Wefer,F.L(1989b), "A North Arrow and Scale for Stage-4 Cave Maps", Compass&Tape, Vol.7,No. 2, pp. 3-12, Fall 1989. Wefer, F.L. (1989c), "Viewing Definition and Control for Stage-4 Cave Maps", Compass & Tape, Vol.7,No.3,pp. 3-19, Winter 1989-90. Wefer, F.L. (1989d), "The Meteorologyofthe Butler Cave -Sinking Creek System", paper given at the 1989NSSConvention, Sewanee, TN,31July-04 August 1989. Wefer, F.L. (198ge), "YetStillMore on Cave Meteorology", BCCS Newsletter, Vol.15,pp. 18-38, 1989. Wcfer, F.L. (1989f), "On the MeasurementofRelative HumidityinCave Meteorology Projects", Nittany Grotto NeWSletter, Vol. 36,No.1,pp. 6-14, Winter 1989. Wefer, F.L. (1989g), "A Management Plan for Butler Cave and Bobcat Cave, Bath County, Virginia",BCesfiles,08 March 1989. Wefer, F.L. (1990a), "Content Definition and Control for Stage-4 Cave Maps", Compass&Tape, Vol. 7,No.4,pp. 3-23, Spring 1990. Wefer, F.L. (1990b), "Miscellaneous Operations for Stage-4 Cave Maps", Compass&Tape, Vol.8,No.1,pp. 3-21, Summer 1990. Wefer,EL.(1990c), "Even Yet Still MoreonCave Meteorology",BCesNewsletter, Vol.16,pp. 20-41,1990. Wefer, F.L. (1991a), "Passage Walls Construction For Stage-4 Cave Maps", paper given at the 1991NSSConvention, Cobleskill, NY,1-5July 1991. Wefer,F.L(1991b), ''The Meteorologyofthe Butler Cave-Sinking Creek System", Pr
PAGE 194

Wefer,F.Land Nicholson,I.K(1982), "'The Exploration and MappingoftheSinking Creek System",NSSBulletin, Vol. 44,No.3,pp. 48-63, July 1982. Wefer,FL.,Igoe, J.W., and Gillen,P.A(1983),"AnApplicationofInteractive Computer Graphics to the StudyofCaves",NSSBulletin, Vol. 45,No.2(Insert), April 1983. Wheeland, K (1987), "General Descriptionofthe Caving AreainPedernales Province", Nittany GrottoNews,Vol. 34, No.2,p.17,March 1987. Wheeland, K and Frank, E. (1987), "DRSE Chronology", Nittany Grotto News, Vol. 34,No.2,pp. 5-7, March 1987. White, W.B. (1982), "Mineralogyofthe Butler Cave-Sinking Creek System",NSSBulletin, Vol. 44,No.3,pp. 90-97, July 1982. White, W.B. (1984), "Compassesinthe Clastics (Or MagnetsintheMUd)",BCesNewsletter, Vol.10,pp. 62-63,1984. White, W.B. and Hess, J.W. (1982), "GeomorphologyofBurnsville Cove and the Geologyofthe Butler Cave-Sinking Creek System",NSSBulletin, Vol.44,No. 3, pp. 67-77, July 1982.WeferWhite, W.B. and White,E.L(1991), "Karst Erosion Surfaces in the Appalachian Highlands", Proceedingsofthe Appalachian Karst Symposium, pp .. 23-26, Radford University, Radford, VA, 23-26 March 1991. Williams,T.L(1978),"BCesMembership, A New Member's Perspective",BCesNewsletter, Vol.4,pp. 25-26,1978.Williams, T.L. (1982a), "Organizing the Rescue",BCesNewsletter, Vol. 8, pp. 18-20, 1982. Williams,T.L(1982b), "Rescue Notes, Sand Canyon to En trance",BCesNewsletter, Vol. 8, pp. 24-25, 1982. Wilson, J.M. (1978),"AProfileOfThe American Caver and HisCaves",The Brass Light,No.5,pp. 12-43, January 1978. Wilson, J.M. (1981a), "Cave Management The Virginia Experience1970-1978",The Brass Light,No.7,pp. 1-33, September 1981. Wilson, J.M. (1981b), "Cave Gates, YouWillBe KnownByThe Gates You Build", The Brass Light,No.7,pp. 34-37, September 1981.Page189

PAGE 195

Saberton"PETER PIPER MAPPED A CA VB IN PICKLE PARK"Pam Saberton Missouri Speleological Survey, Inc.ABSTRAcrMeramec State Park has long been a Pied Piper to Missouri's prolific mappers and speleologists. MapsofFisher Cave record successive improvements in cartographic techniques as each new generation became obsessed with accurately representing this cave. A stateoftheartmapisin the process,butthe map perfecting process will never end. For centuries now, man has been attempting to findnewwaysin which to accurately depict and interpret the surface featuresonthe planet Earth.Ifwe were to examine someofthe early methods and compare them to today's informational gathering and production techniques, we too would be able to see how the maps and the information contained therein are more valuable tools. Speleologists, on the other hand, became intrigued with the features contained under the surface and began the processofaccurately depicting the subsurface environment. Essentially, thisisa process which continues to challenge the speleologistsofthe MissouriSpeleological Survey. The Missouri Speleological Survey, Inc. developedasan inspirationofthreeofMissouri's most honored speleologists--JerryD.Vineyard, Dr. Oscar Hawksley and Frank Dahlgren.In1956, these men saw a need for an organization that would be dedicated to locate, record, explore, study and conserve Missouri's cave resources. Many cavers throughout the U.S. and abroad have probably readofLuella Owens speleological endeavors in the 1800's and early 1900's, orof J Harlan Bretz's speleological studies in the 1950's in Missouri. In his book,"CavesofMissouri" published in1956,Dr. Bretz located, explored and reported on133ofthe 437 caves that were known within the state. Perry County, Mo. alone had 650+cavesin1991,however, Dr. Bretz recorded only threecavesin1956.Presently, Perry County contains the four longest caves in the State. After thirtyfiveyears, theM.S.S.has developed the folJowing information base through the cooperative effortsofthe Geologic Survey and the cavers.a.a huge database which contains Cave Reports, Maps and Photo files.b.numerous scientific projects and studies have been completed and published in its scientific journalMissouri Speleology.c.cavers throughout the state have located 5,000+ caves.d.M.S.S. cartographers have taken cartographic techniques from their infancy stages to a highly technological stateofthe art modality. The cave maps, being produced today, are usedbymany State and Local agencies to provide relevantinformationregardingtheplanningandimplementation stagesofprojects. One such exampleisthe stormwater project within the CityofPerryville. Perryvilleislocated on a karst plain very similar to Bowling Green Kentucky and shares manyofthe same problems. The mapping techniques employed were so accurate that the information was used in planning a stormwater drainage system utilizing the cave systems. We accurately determined the trendofthe Streiler City Cave and how a tunnel and moat system could be utilized to prevent the widespread which occurred in this low lying area while minimizing impact on the subsurface drainage patterns. For drilling purposes, the Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District used an electronic "water witching" device to determine the drill site; the cavers stated that if the city wouldPage190

PAGE 196

Sabertondrillinanotherarea, they would intersectthecavern passage.Thefirstholewas drilledandmissedtheopenpassage belowbyinches.Whenthecaver's suggestion was taken,thedrill intersectedthemiddleofthecave passage.ORIGINSOFMERAMEC STATE PARKFisherCave hasbeenprobably knowtothelocal residentoftheFranklinCounty since PhilippRenaultbegan investigating caves intheareaforsaltpetreand lead in 1720.Theparkterrainwas described as "wild, hilly country."Atthetimeofpurchase only nine caveswereknowntoexistontheconsolidated acreage. Howeverour story begins intheearly 1900's withthemembersoftheThomasBentonDill family.ThelandonwhichFisherCaveislocated hashadmany ownersbutatthis time actually belongedtotheLeoandHenryFisherfamilies.LesterDill first visitedFisherCave with his father whenhewas sixandit was loveatfirst sight,thecave provided a fascinationthatwouldcontinuethroughouthis lifetime.LeoFisherallowed Lestousethecavetomakesmall change which wasandstill is a verypopulartourist attraction.Peoplewouldcomeoutfrom St. Louis duringthesummerandstopattheDill farmandaskThomasDill totakethemontours in Fisher. A yearpriortothededicationoftheparka "NamethePark"contestwassponsoredbytheSt. Louis newspapers.Threeoftheformer landowners castonevote each for "Dill-PickleStatePark". Legend hasstatedtheMrs. MaggieL."Dill"wrotethatherhusbandJohnDill was raisedandplayed withthe"Pickle" family youngstersontheland which waslaterdedicated as Missouri's second largeststatepark.Itwas largelythroughtheeffortsofJosephH.Bennettthattheareabecame astatepark. It was dedicatedonSeptember8, 1928andThomasDill becamethepark's firstsuperintendent.Thereforethemeaningof"Pickle Park". Nowtoexplainthefirstportionof"PeterPiperMappeda Cave".Withover thirty caves,MeramecStateParknear Sullivan, Missouri has long been a "Pied Piper" to Missouri's prolific mappersandspeleologists. MapsofitsFisherCave record successive improvements in cartographic techniques as each new generation became obsessed with accurately depicting this very intriguing cave. Newly discovered passagesorobvious errors intheexisting maps have providedtheimpetus forremappingthis cave. Astateoftheartmapisintheprocessbutthecave learning processandmap perfecting process will never end.DEVELOPMENTS INTHEMAPPING PROCESSDuringtheearlymappingprocess,thetechniques employed were generally completed in a haphazard and inaccurate manner.Thepeoplegivingthetours were primarily interested inthecommercialization aspectsoftheenterprise; littleattentionwas paidtotheGeological, HydrologicalorBiological significanceofthesekarst features. Les Dilloncestated that the tourist.s providedtheinformation which governed howhepresentedthecave during his tours. However, today's speleologist asksthequestions--How, Why, Where. They wishtoknowandstudytheinterre lationships betweenthegeologic, hydrologic and speleogenesis factorsanddepict this information intheirmaps.Ifyou examine will seesomeoftheresultsofthis research.Itshowstherelationship betweenthesomeofthesprings and caves located withinthecentralportionofthepark.Thefirst map drawnofFisherCave was completed in 1931, shown in itareessentially onlythemajor features andthewalls.Thecartographerwas challenged to develop whatshethoughtwereappropriatesymbols forthefeatures,atthattime. (Figure 2) Even whenthecave wasremappedin 1958, symbols for depicting features inthecaves were still in a very rudimentary stage. This map showedmoredetail however, ittoohad several problems. (Figure 3)Thecaveisapproximately 5,000 feet in length and inordertocompletethemapin an efficient manner,themembersoftheMiddle Mississippi ValleyGrottodeveloped several mapping teamstocompletethis task andappointeda "Chief Cartographer". Also during this time period, since these were "large" caves, survey orsattemptedtocompleteentiremaps in a weekend's time frame. They usually metonFriday evenings andPage 191

PAGE 197

Sabertonmapped for a while then slept and continued the surveying process on Saturday and Sunday. In1981,Eugene Vale, a seasonal naturalist at Meramec State Park, determined that the entrance passage contained an erroroffortyfive(45) degrees. Since the1931map, several man-made changes had occurred within the cave--an iron entrance gate at the mouth of the entrance had been installed; the CCC had built concretewalkways,stairs, bridges and trails complete with iron handrailing throughout thecave.Therefore establishing the first opportunity for several errorsinthe1958map, compass bearings were taken too near to the "iron" railings or gate. Since there were several mapping teams, another error can be attributed to the lackofconsistent sketching and data collection methods. Were these mapping teams goingfordistance or accuracy? Another inconsistencyisthat most of the instruments used were hand held and depended on thereader to determine the bearing; backsights were a technique of the future. Changes in elevation,aswenow know, will have an effect on the distance of the shot and the placementofsignificant features within a given area.Asthe stagesofcavesurveying have advanced so have our techniques and instruments. The age old debate of distance versus accuracy continues and itisa decision each cartographer must make himself. The third remapping of Fisher Cave began in1980(Figure 4), after the discovery of the45degree error,bythe same gentleman whowasresponsible for the second map of Fisher, Gregory"Tex"Yokum. Sincehismaps in the early 60's,Texhad produced manymapsand strived to advance his cartographic styles and accuracy.Th.e80's mapismore artistic in style andhadthe assistanceofa "significantly" developedM.S.S.symbolstable.Hewasagain the "chief cartographer" however hewasemploying more consistent techniquesinhissurveying efforts this time. The roleofthe "chief cartographer" can be compared to that of an orchestra leader, he or she orchestrates and coordinates the activities of the other members of the mapping team. Neither didTexemploy several mapping teams nor attempt to complete the map in a weekend. AtripOdmounted Brunton compasswasused to obtain the bearings andwaspositioned a sufficient distance from the iron railingsorgates; every bearingwaschecked with a backsight readingof+or -1 degree difference. The Sunto clinometer had placed the water tube, for elevation differences; again with front and back sights being taken to assure accuracy. The Park personnel purchased a telescoping measuring pole for accuracy with ceiling heights whichwecould borrow during the project. Someofthe rooms and/or features are dimensionally very large and the use of radiating angle shots or "Star shots" with station-to-wall measurements were developed at this point. This process aided the correctionofmisplaced features that have been found in the early maps. One hundred foot Fiberglass Kesson reel tapes were used replacing the metal tapes for distance readings, however the Stanley 25' measuring tapes are used for obtaining the station to-wall distances information. This map also includes a completely new feature--the longitudinal profileofthe cave, in addition to the traditional cross sections to illustrate significant cavern features and changes in elevation. The longitudinal profile also allows the cartographer to illustrate geologic, hydrological and man-made features throughout thecave.So itiswithin this longitudinal profile thatTexwasable to illustrate these significant features, so that the "average" touristisable to relate their tour of the cave to the map whichislocated just outside the cave's entrance following the completionoftheir tour. During this surveying process, photodocumentation of significant historical artifacts took place which assists the park personnel in developing the history of the cave, its early visitors or uses. Another benefitofphotodocumentationisthat cave slide presentations can be developed and related to features on the map, so that vandalismorchanges in the cave are recorded. The changes that the CCC made to cave are accurately portrayed.Aswemeasured these features,wefound that the stairs andwalkwaysare consistentinwidth and depth throughout thecavetour.Asa tribute to the highly developed state of the art techniques employedincompleting the commercial sectionofthis cave map, it received and honorable mentionintheN.S.S.cartographic salon. This process of cave surveyingwillcontinue to develop andgrowwithin the boundaries of Missouri's speleologists and whoknowswhat techniques-willPage 192

PAGE 198

Sabertondevelop during the next century. AlreadyGISsystems and other technological advancesinland surveying are being introduced into the cave surveying process. I have illustrated this progression in just one commercially developedcave.Dr. Ken Thomson and Robert Taylor have just rewritten and published the most up-to-date and complete book dealing with the artofcave surveying;itavailable through theM.S.S.REFERENCESWeaver, Dwight H. and Paul Johnson. MERAMEC CAVERNS LegendaryHideout ofJESSEJAMES.Discovery Enterprises: Jefferson City, MO. 1977 Bretz, J. Harlan.CAVESOFMI.SSOURL Missouri Geological Survey and Water Resources: JeffersonCity,MO, Vol. XXXIX, Second Series. 1956FIGURE1:MapofKarstFeaturesincentral portionofMeramec State Park Franklin Co., MissouriNorthlarge cavelarge springfsmall cavesmall spring {/ sinkhole1 milePage 193

PAGE 199

to-.) II .... <&H,IItH6.JJtJ'" CAVE. -OI)TANCe O.20' r.)' 102.'0' 133.". 000,00'.-1-148.'" I.20'II)' 10",73'2.IZ' '10' l07.0!l'"S.7T"2.85' ,. 'n'T 1---'--7-'114.2a'-352.'3'5'IM.ll",.5' 7' 115,043' 172.0" .3'30.,'is'7.!:i 119.32'182.5('4.045.. ,. la'6'119.75'205.5'"I---W,. f24."!)2/5.9]'556.2"_.,o:-e-i..-::g._J.".rjn'.51'5".7"-,......-1f.12' "125.'8' 2 '11.7/'---1---'-12. fO',. 12\;.90' 204',02''''.71'15'4.r141$.40''92.'"/4. /2' "2'i1."S5'728.7" .. :nO.03 777.0" FIGURE 2.. /::"...0....../;, '. '\#r .. '....,-/'-, \ ..,\1 '. //",.-. '. Maus\ i' "// .'1'''.'I" =tt/..'./ .' / ./ l!JAJ..L.IlOOM,./J'. / /"J" -.*:,..:-mr.11/ f7'"';t.c::::J t. ,.'// ..,.'r "t::;;;/' ..'/ -:
PAGE 200

e::t';:l"":!lm /ENTRANCE vfIi::.::!"Mip0,:)((\01(:';U<"';;;'fIt'rIal.; ;0 /II:, .\ nm., b. ('''Ii\1'IlI"'W/Of(a)......l'n!1IeMank1JIr:j.\='\GuR,E.3SCALE INFEET ,} BALLROCM c, FRANKLIN FRA-005 sw,f.SW,f SEC.6,T.40N.,R.IW.SUR',EYED 10-58 BY 1'04.'-4. V.ORYJ. YOKUM, PROJECT DIRECTORo100200 ._-II:ISHER ......

PAGE 201

c:::rCOMi "g;j ENTRANCE CANYON ---=-=-;"// -'--to.. ENTRANCE ELEI/ATION CANYON PASS.l.. E e'","" I',._,",-.. ,.:"'.
PAGE 202


PAGE 203

BaichtalMANAGEMENTOFTHEKARST AREAS WITHINTHEKETCHIKANAREAOFTHETONGASS NATIONAL FOREST, SOUTHEASTERN ALASKAJamesF.BaichtalForestGeologist, Tongass NationalForest,KetchikanAreaFederalBuilding Ketchikan, Alaska 99901ABSTRACTTheKetchikanAreaoftheTongassNationalForestislocated inthesouthernextremeofthepanhandleofAlaska.Over925squaremilesoftheAreaareunderlain bycarbonaterocks, mainly Silurian, massive limestonesandminormarble. Karst topographyisknowntohave developedonapproximately700squaremilesoftheArea,themajority beingonPrinceofWalesandDallIslands. Thirtysquaremilesofalpineandsub-alpine karstisknowntoexist.TheForestis inthebeginning stagesofunderstandingthesignificanceoftheresource, developing standardsandguidelines for resource management,andunderstandingthescopeoftheinventorying process.Thedensevegetationoftheregion makes exploring for cavesbothdifficultanddangerous. Preliminary inventories suggestthathundredsofcaves exist intheArea.Thesurveyed areasonnorthPrinceofWales Island have already yielded several record features."EICapPit"isthedeepestknownnaturalpitintheUnitedStates,aninitialdropof598.3 feet, "Snowhole" ranks third intheU.S.at448.8 feet.Thesevendeepestknown caves in Alaskaandthefive longest havebeenrecorded. Biological studiesofthecaves have begun.Largenumbersofmammalbonesarepresentinthecaves. Salmon swim throughsomecavestospawn upstream,somemay actually spawn in caves. Historically, timber harvest hasbeenhighestonthese well drained areas, wherethenutrientrich soil growsthelargest timber.Theseareas stillaretargeted for timber removal. Itisnosmall tasktoinsurethatsurfacemanagementactivitiesaredesigned toprotectthecave resources. Only recently hasprotectionofthecave resourcesontheAreabeena concern.Thechallengeistoeducatetheland managersandpublic astothesignificanceofthis unseen resource.IntroductionTheintentofthispaperistwo-fold;tobring to lightthetremendousextentofkarst development insouthernSoutheasternAlaska, specificallyontheKetchikan AreaoftheTongass National Forest, and to describetheCaveResourceManagementProgram whichisbeing developedontheArea.TheTongass NationalForestisthelargestNationalForestintheNationalForestSystem, encompassingabout17 million acres. BecauseoftheimmensesizeoftheTongass,theForesthasbeendividedintothreeadministrative areas.TheKetchikanAreacoversabout5.5 million acres,orthesouthernthirdoftheTongassNationalForest.Throughoutthis paper,theKetchikanAreawillbereferredtoas "the Area".Timberharvest is now,andhistorically has been, highestonthelower elevation karst areas which yieldthegreatesttimbervolumeperacre. In 1951theKetchikanPulpCompany (KPC) signed a long-termtimberharvestcontractwiththeU.S.ForestService.Thecontractentitlestheoperatortoharvest approximately 8.25 billionboardfeetoftimber overthe50 year lifeofthesale. Driven bytherequirementsoftheLong-termTimberSaleContract,theAreamustpreparea certain volumeoftimber tobeharvested.Page198

PAGE 204

BaichtalUntilrecently only a few local residents have knownaboutsomeofthecavesandsignificant karst features. As a resultofthepassingoftheFederal Cave ResourcesProtectionAct(FCRPA)in1988,theKetchikanAreaenteredinto a partnership withtheGlacierGrotto,thelocal National Speleological Society (NSS) grotto, to help evaluatethecave resources.In1990theAreabegan a widespread inventory processtogain abetterunderstandingoftheextentandsignificanceofthekarst resources. Emphasis was also placedonidentifying cave resources withinproposedtimber sale units where surfacemanagementactivities could result in damageofkarst resources.Whensignificant karst resourcesarediscovered, mitigation to insure protectionofthefeatureareapplied.Thismitigation is basedonobser vationsoftheeffectoftimber harvestonkarstfeatures withinoldharvest units.TheKetchikanAreaisplanning to stepupits inventory processandstrengthenthepartnership with localandnational caving organizations, research units,anduniversities.TheAreaisactively involved in educationofits employeesandthelocal communitiesonthevaluesoftheresource, caving safety, and caving ethics.Thoughthemajorityofthepublicandresource managersareexcitedaboutthekarst resource,therearethosewhoviewtheresource as "justanotherresource" which further limitstheacreage available for harvest.Hereinliesthemanagement challenge identifyingthesignificant karst featuresonthegroundsothatmitigation toprotecttheresource canbeenacted,andeducationoflandmanagers andthepublic astotheresource valuesofthekarst system.Des'criptionofArea and Geologic SettingSoutheast Alaska consistsofbotha narrow stripofmainland coast averaging 25 miles wide from tidewater tothemountaincrests whichmarktheu.S.-Canadaboundary,andthehundredsofislandsoftheAlexander Archipelago.Thetopographyisgenerally rugged withthelands rising quickly fromthesea.Themodern topographyofthearea reflectstheregion's glacial history. SeveralofthestraitsoftheAlexander Archipelagoaretheresultofglacial scouringofpre existing fault zones.Therounded summitsofthemountainsoflower elevationaretheresultofPleistocene glaciation.Theareaisheavily forested andischaracterized as atemperaterain forest comprised primarilyofhemlockandspruceinterspersed with poorly-drained muskegs and forested muskegs. A cool, moist, maritime climate characterizes Southeast Alaska. AverageFahrenheittemperatures range fromthe40s to mid-60s inthesummerandfromthehigh teensandlow 20s tothe30s and low40sinthewinter.Duetothemoderating influenceoftheocean, summer temperaturesarecooler and winter temperaturesarewarmeralongtheoutercoaststhanfarther inland. Precipitationishigh,about80to160 inches annually, though certain areas receive considerablymoreorlessduetotheinteractionofweathercirculation patterns and local topography (Arndt, et. aI., 1987).ThegeologyofSoutheastAlaskaisvery complex.Thebedrock includes lithologies which range in age from Proterozoic(?)-Cambrian toQuaternary(Berg, 1988; Brew, 1984; Eberlein, 1983; Gehrels, 1991), Portionsoffive tectonostratigraphic terranesarefound in theArea(Berg, et. aI., 1988). Karst developmentislimited mainly to outcropsofuppermostLower toUpperSilurian agedHecetaLimestoneandtheMiddle toUpperDevonian Wadleligh Limestone. Locally these have beenmetamorphosedto marble. Some 950squaremilesofcarbonaterocks underlietheArea. Allbut25 square milesofcarbonatearefoundonPrinceofWales Island andthesurrounding islands. Two thin bandsofPermian marbleareexposedonRevillagigedo Island (Berg, et. al., 1987) (See figure 1).OnHeceta Island,theHecetaLimestone has a maximum stratigraphic thicknessof9,900 feetbutthetotal thicknessofthe formation probably exceeds 12,000 feet.Thelimestonesaremassiveorthick-bedded, fine grained, locally fossiliferous, commonly fractured, and lightto medium-dark gray (Berg, 1988; Brew, 1984; Eberlein, 1983; Gehrels, 1991). Structurallytheareaisdominated by large, northwest southeast trending, high angle faults. Manyofthesearedeeply eroded and very visible from the air. These faults breaktheareainto blocksofcarbonateand noncarbonatebedrock.Page 199

PAGE 205

Figure 1Known OccurancesofJCarbonates on the Ketchikan Area tv8 va Carbonate RocksDaB Island 0JO 2.050405060'TO 10 I!!!! 010 zo5040&0.0 MILES :S'-

PAGE 206

BaichtalFactors Influencing FormationAsmentionedabove, itisestimatedthat950 square milesofcarbonaterocks occur withintheboundariesoftheKetchikanAreaoftheTongass National Forest. Karst topography has developedonapproximately 700squaremilesofthecarbonates.Therearesome30squaremilesofalpineandsub-alpine karst foundontheArea. Significant karst is found from sea level tothetopofthehighest limestone peaks, 3,400 feet in elevation.Thecharacteristicsofthekarst basically divideitintosomewhat distinct types: low-level karst which generally occurs below 1,100 feet elevation, andthesub-alpineandalpinekarsts whicharefound above 1,800 feet.Thefollowing generalizations canbemadeaboutthephysicalnatureofthekarst:1.Developmentofthelow-level karstsisbotha functionofgeologicstructureandthepresenceofmuskegs.Themajorityofa solution features occur along faults, joints, dikes and sills, and changes in lithology whicharegenerally fault bounded. Muskegs formatoppoorly drained non-carbonate rocksandglacial hardpans which overlie carbonates. Surface waters which originate from these poorly drained areas seldom flowmorethana few yardsontocarbonatesubstratebefore diving subsurface down vertical shaftsorintocave entrances.Thehighly acidic waters fromthemuskegs seemtoaccelerate cave development. 2.Thecave passages which occurwithinthelow level karstsarecharacterized byoneormorephreatic tubesatopa vadose canyon.Thecanyons generally widen towardsthefloorofthecave. Commonlythecaves have a vertical entrance down a shaft greaterthan30feet deep. Evidence suggeststhatthecavespredatethelast glacial period.Thecavesareemerging fromtheglacial sedimentsthatfilled muchofthe systems. 3.Thecarbonatebedrock beneath the forest floor hasbeensculptedbythehigh rainfall andtheorganic acidsoftheforest floor.Rootsfollowing soil filled fractures and structural features have guided surface waters downward. This karst surfaceischaracterizedbyhighly dissected,smoothedbedrock with many small pits, arches, and passages. Grikesarecommon in these areas.4.Annualrainfall exceeds 180 inchesperyear insomeofthe areas where karst has developed. Evidenceoftheforceofthetremendous volume"ofgroundwater responsible for formationofthepassages is everywhere inthecave passages. Scalloped walls, spiraling passages, ceiling pendants, deep plunge pools, frequentanddramatic water level fluctuations, flooded passages, and sumpsarecommon. Such pressure tubesorconduits playanimportantrolein cave formation. With large seasonal storms and frequent rain-on-snow events large volumesofwaterareforced through these passages. Bouldersinexcessof2 feet in diameter seasonallybatterthewallsofsomepassages. Walls, ceilings, and clastsonthefloorbearcollision marks from battering during high flow periods.Therapid water level fluctuations in these cavesisoneofthe most dangerous aspectsofcavinginthis region. 5.Groundwatertemperatures range from 36to40 degrees F. in most caves.Airtemperature fluctuatesaround40 degrees F. Withfewexceptions, caves intheAreaarewet. Hypothermiaisa constantthreatwhen exploring these caves.6.Above 1,800 feet elevation sub-alpine and alpine karst is well developed.Thereareareas where thousandsofsolution featurespersquaremilearepresent.Thesefeatures form generally along structural weaknesses, sills, and dikes inthebedrock. Collapse and solution dolinesarecommon where low gradient slopesarefoundatthe higher elevations. Where massive carbonatesareexposed, linesofpits and vertical shafts, and deep grikes form along structural features. Between 1,800and2,400 feel elevationtheslopessupportstunted alpine vegetation. Above 2,400 feet littleorno vegetationisfound. Karst formationisdriven bythehighamountsofprecipitation which fallonthese areas.Themostrecent glaciation has modified existing karst features, leaving a thin mantleofglacial deposits in solution dolines, and chokingsomefeatures with glacial sediments.Frostwedging withinsomeoftheshafts and pits have choked the features with recent rockfall.Surface Features and Cave SystemsHundreds, if not thousands,ofyet unexplored caves exist within the boundariesoftheKetchikan AreaofPage201

PAGE 207

BaichtaltheTongass National Forest.Intheprevious four yearsofcave inventory and exploration (1987-1990)some57 caves hadbeeninventoried (MetzlerandAllred, 1990).Duringthe1991 field seasontheinventory process was greatly accelerated withtheincreased emphasisontimber harvest fortheKPCLong-term Sale Contract.Ina sixmonthperiodsome96 new caves were discovered. Manyofthese were located, withinoradjacent to,proposedtimberharvest units. Karsted surfaces found withintheKetchikanAreadisplay many kindsoffeatures.Thefeatures foundonthe low-level karst differ from those developedonthehigher elevationsandarebest discussed separately.Thelow-level karsts, thosethatareforming below 1,100 feet elevation,arecharacterized by large closed depressions, uvala,solutionchannels, collapse and solution dolines, doline fields, vertical shafts, solution runnels, grikes, and caves. All these featuresaresurrounded and/or covered bydensevegetation. Many featuresareatleast partially covered by a vegetative mat which makes cave resource explorationdangerous inthese areas.Thekarst features found inthelower karst zone show similar characteristics tothosedescribed from tropical regions. Closed depressionsarecommon, many encompassing severalsquaremilesofterrain.Therearevast areas wherenosurface drainage exists in this region where rainfall exceeds 180 inchesperyear. Cockpit/cone karst (Jennings, 1987) have been described fromthenorthwesterncornerofPrinceofWales Island (Allred, C., 1989). Understandingthecomplex geologyoftheareaisthekey to location"ofthesignificant karst features. Timber type, vegetation patterns, slope, and proximity to muskeg soils all play arolein cave location. Though some cavesandsignificant karst featuresarefound far from lithologic boundariesandthefringeofmUSkegs,themajorityarediscovered proximal to these boundaries.Thedispersionofsignificant karst featuresiscontrolledbythedrainage patterns developed offthemuskegs and non-carbonate lithologies and structural weaknesses inthelimestone and marble. Many caves sumporchoke withinthefirst 100 feet. Vertical shafts, 30-80 feet deep,arecommonly found adjacent to muskegsorlithologic boundaries.Themajorityof arechoked with glacial sediments and forest debris. Two large vertical shafts havebeenlocated this year: Bear's Plungsat142 feetdeepandover30feet in diameter,andYukon'sPitat150 feetdeepandgreaterthan65 feetindiameter. "Elcapitancave"isthelongest cave discoveredsofar with 10,190 feetofsurveyed passagesanda totaldepthof256.3 feet(Allred,I991).Eightcaves havebeenmappedbeyond 1,000 feet in length withthreeofthosenearing3,000 feet. Becauseofthelargenumberof "virgin" cavesandtheneedtoidentifytheresources withinthetimbersale units, littleornodiggingtoextendthelengthofthese caves has occurred. Dolinesarethemostcommonkarst feature encountered. Solution, collapse, and alluvial streamsink dolines havebeenfound.Thedolinesoftenoccurinlarge numbers closetogetherforming doline fields. Dolines over 200 feet in diameterand100 feetindepthhavebeenfound. A typical cave withinthelow-level karsts hasanentranceatthebaseofa 30-80 footdeepvertical shaftorcollapse doline.Thesecavesarecharacterized by a vadose canyon which meanders alongstructuralweaknessesinthelimestoneormarble.Thesub-alpineandalpine karsts whicharefound above 1,800 feet elevation,arecharacterized by a wide varietyofsolution features. Besides countless dolines, rillenkarren, wallkarren,rundkarren,solutionripples, grikes,andpinnacle karstarefound (Jennings, 1987). Jointsandfractures have deeplyerodedtoform steep sided narrow canyons a few feet wideandoften tensoffeet deep.Ithas been estimatedthatonthreeselected sub-alpineandalpine areasofnorthernPrinceofWales Islandthedoline densitypersquaremile averages 3,200 (approx. 2ooo/sq.kID.)(Allred,K.,1989).Deepvertical pitsarealigned along structural weaknessesinthebedrock. Manyofthese pitsarechoked with glacial debris and material from frost wedging.Othersaccess yet unexplored cave systems. Manyofthesolution featuresarecontrolled bythenumerous dikes and sills which criss-crossthesealpine regions.Theintrusions acteitheras impervious barriers to groundwateroras conduits which rapidly carry groundwaters subsurface withinopenjoints.OnthenorthendofPrinceofWales Island,thehigh elevation karst occursatopsome3,400 feetoflimestone and marble. "EIcapitanPit",thedeepest knownnaturalpit intheUnitedStates, withaninitial dropof598.3 feet,islocatedhere(Rockwell, 1989). Page202

PAGE 208

Baichta1The alpine karst areas on Dall Island have formed on some 700 feetoflimestone thrust atop granodiorite. Mid-winter reconnaissance flights over these areas have revealed hundredsofmelted openings where air exchange in the cavesisadequatetokeep the entrance freeofthe deep winter snows. Caves in these areas are characterizedbysteep, near vertical passages. Resurgences for these systems are generally found between the 800 and 1,100 foot elevations. Explorationofthese areasishamperedbytheir remoteness. These areas are best accessedbyhelicopter. Weather systems coming off the GulfofAlaska shroud these areas infogand clouds mostofthe year. During the short field season there are only afewdayswhen the weather allows people and supplies to be flown into these areas.KarstManagementThe Forest Serviceisin the beginning stages of identifying the significanceofthe karst resources on the Area. With the helpofthe localNSSGrotto, the inventory process has begun. The focus of the inventory process has beenonthe north endofPrinceofWales Island where timber harvest threatens the karst resources. Next year the Area plans to expand its inventory process to other karst areas. Programs have been developedto educate resource and land managersofthe importance and significance of the karst resources on the Area. Several lectures on the karst resources have been offered to the pUblic through the local museum and schools. Public response to these lectures has been overwhelming. The Area has entered into a cost-share agreement with the National Speleological Society/Glacier Grotto to help the Forest Service inventory and evaluate the cave resources. Last year the Area dedicated over $40,000 to house, feed, and transport <:avers who participatedinthe PrinceofWales Island Expedition V (POWIE V). Eight to twelve individuals worked with the Forest Service for one month during the summer mapping and exploring the caves. Last year during POWIEV,over50caves were mapped and more than 18,000 feetofunderground survey completed. The Areaisalso looking to enter into partnerShips with universities and colleges to promote researchonthekarst resource. The area has proposed that some 14,000 acresofalpine and sub-alpine karst be set aside for its geologic significance. These Karst Special Areas consistoftwelve areas ranging in size from 350 to 4,300 acres. These Special Areas have been proposed in the latest revisionofthe Tongass Land Management Plan. The Plan contains direction and standards and guidelines for managementofthe cave resources on the Tongass National Forest. These guidelines outline how the Forestwillmanage the cave resources for the future. The Area has proposed an Amendment to the Long term Timber Sale Contract which would place in effect these proposed standards and guidelines for karst management. Past surface managementaCtlVltleshave greatly impacted the cave resources. Prior to 1988, and the passingofthe FCRPA,no measures were taken to preserve and protect the karst resources. Surface management activities have in-filled many features with sediment and debris.Itisestimated that over 50% of the significant karst features foundonunharvested land have atmospheric and hydrologic connection to the surface. Mostofthese features canbephysically entered. In existing harvest units, less than 5% of the significant karst features still have atmospheric connection. Logging slash and debris haveaccumulated within dolines because of past logging practices. The slopesofthe dolines are naturally over steepened and unstable. When logs are yarded through and across these features a furrowisplowed into these unstable slopes. In some old harvest units approaching 20 years in age, these furrows have not revegetated.Foryears sediments have bleddown.these slopes and into the karst systems. Manyofthe caves beginasnarrow canyons. In some instances, woody debris from logging have bridged these openings and captured sediment. When this has occurred, cave entrances and lower portionsofthe dolines have quickly filled with sediment and debris. Many dolines have been in-filled for forest road construction. The dolines are historically a convenient place to focus excess surface waters off roadways. Oversized materials and overburden from road and quarry development have been wasted in large dolines. Dolines adjacenttolandings are used not only for slash disposal, but for garbage disposalaswell. The lands in Southeastern Alaska regenerate and heal quickly, but the karst resources have been forever altered. The Standards and Guidelines for Cave Resource ManagementPage 203

PAGE 209

BaichtalIV. Standards & GuidelinesAPrior to determinationofsignificance under the1988Cave Act,or Forest-wide comprehensive cave management analysis, the following directionisapplicable:1.During the cave inventory process, map the subsurface extent and positionofthe caves. Care shall be taken to note subsurface drainage patterns, resurgence areas, surface drainage, and drainage basin characteristics. This informationisnecessary to determine the cave's ecological relation to the surface.2.Designoftimber harvest, road construction, and other related management activities aboveorinthe vicinityofa cave,orthe courseofsuch a cave,willbe designedina way to insure protectionofthe cave resources. 3. Require retentionofvegetationinthe vicinityofa cave or cave course to protect the cave's microenvironment.Theextent and limitsofno harvest buffer surrounding major karst features shall be determined on a caseby case basis. Topographic breaks and vegetation patterns should be utilized during buffer design and layout.Theintentofthe bufferisto insure stabilityofthe cave ecosystem, the integrityofthe slopes surrounding cave, and adequate sediment filtration between management activities and the cave resources. Therewillbe no ground disturbing activities on slopes steeper than 30 degrees adjacent to cave entrances.Anexampleofthis would be protectionofa steep sided, closed basininwhich surface drainageflowsinto a cave systemoron steep slopes immediately adjacent and uphillofa cave opening.4.Similar bufferswillbe maintained around all direct drainages into caves. This includes sinkholes, cave collapse areas known to open into a cave's drainage system, and perennial, intermittentorephemeral streams flowing into caves.Theimmediate area surrounding resurgence springs shall be protected to insure stabilityofthe cave system's ecosystem.Theintentofthis directionisto insure that additional sedimentisnot introduced into the cave system, surfaceflowsare not interrupted, and logging slash and debrisisnot transported into the cave system nor plug the cave entrance.5.Avoid alterationof cave entrances, or their use as disposal sites for slash,spoilS,orother refuse.6.Avoid diversionofsurface drainage into caves.7.Design roads and related construction to avoid altering surface drainage into karst featuresorfocusing sediment from road surface and/or drainage into karst features.8.Design quarry and material sources to insure that location and excavationinnowaythreaten cave resources.9.Where timber harvestisoccurringinthe vicinityofa cave,falltrees directionally away from the cave and its course. Yarding shouldinnowaydrag timber across and/or through cave openings. Full suspension yardingorother mitigation measures whichwillinsure the stabilityofthe karst slopesisrequiredinthese areas.10.Limit public accessifrequired to prevent damage to the cave resourcesorif there are safety hazards.11.Information concerning the specific locationofany significant cave may not be made available to the public unless disclosureofsuch information would further the purposesofthe Act and would not create a riskofharm, theft,ordestructionofthe cave.12.Scientificoreducational useofcaveswillbe authorizedbythe Forest Supervisor, where appropriate.13.Communication and cooperation between the Forest Service, caving organizations, and recreationistswillbe. fostered. Exchanged informationwillnot be made public ifitcould lead to the degradationofsensitive caves.14.Emphasize enforcementoflaws protecting caves from relic collectors and vandalism. Figure 2 Proposed Standards and Guidelines for Tongass Land Management Plan Revision for Cave Resources.Page204

PAGE 210

Baichtalproposed in the Tongass Land Management Plan Revision have been formulated from these field observations (See figure 2). Though the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act only charges the Forest Service with protectionofsignificant caves, the Tongass National Forestisworking to protect all significant karst resources. Until resource values are determined, the Areaisconsidering all caves significant. Great emphasis has been putonidentifying the significant karst features and caves within the proposed timber sale units.TheAreaisslowly getting aheadofthe timber sale unit identification and offering process in identifying and inventorying significant features.Theintentisto mitigate the effectsofsurface management activitiesonthe karst and cave resources. New and creative methodsoftimber harvest are being proposed to protect these unseen features.TheAreaisusing the mitigation applied to and surrounding the karst resources asanexample for implementationofthe Forest Service's New Perspectives Program.Ifitisdeterminedthatparticular cave's resource valuesaresuchthatmanagementorprotectionisrequired, the cave willbeplaced inoneofthe three following classes:1.Class1:Sensitive Caves: these caves are considered unsuitable for explorationbythe general public becauseoftheir pristine condition, unique resources,orextreme safety hazards.2.Class2:Undeveloped Caves: caves that are undevelopedorcontain minimal developments that are suited for persons who are properly prepared.3.Class3:Directed Access Caves: caves with direct public access and developed for public use and enjoyment.10addition, each cave placed withinoneofthe above classes will be given a rating from 1 to5.A ratingof"1"will mean that no caving experienceisneeded and access and explorationisnot physically demanding. A ratingof"5"will signify that only the most experienced and physically capable cavers should explore the cave.TheAreaisinthe processofidentifying several caves that can be opened to the public within the nexttwoyears. The Areaisworking closely with the Glacier Grotto to examine the resource valuesofvarious caves to select candidate caves appropriate for the general public to explore. Sadly, vandalism and speleothem collectionbythe general publicisa real problem. Through public education programs, the Area hopes to stop the degradationofthe resource. RegrettablY, some gatingofthe most significant cavesisneeded to insure that their pristine natureispreserved. The Area now hOpes to put some emphasis on studying the cave formation processes, cave ecosystems, and monitoring the effectsoftimber harvestonthekarst resources.Thefollowingisa summaryofsomeofthe significant resource values that have been found within the inventoried karst features: Thekarst features giveusa unique look into the sub-surface geologyofthe region. Mostofthe caves have formed along faults and shear zones. Many caves are closely related to dikes and sillsoralong lithologic contacts. Silurian and Devonian marine invertebrate fossils canbeseen in the wallsofmany passages. Strong evidence that the caves pre-date the last glacial periodisfound in nearly all caves. The recessesofmost caves contain bedded glacial sediments, varved glacial clay, and layered organic debris and silts. It appears that the cave passages are emerging after being nearly choked with glacial deposits. During more recent years, more sediment has been added to the deposits in the caves. Two samples from logs which have been exposed within the floorofone cave have yielded Carbon-14 datesof6,500 and 4,120+/-60 years before present. The caves found within the low-level karst display a wide varietyofspeleothems. Stalactites, stalagmites, draperies, fans, flowstone sheets, helictites, popcorn, cave coral, etc. are found decorating the passages. Soda straws are common in the drier passages. Some soda straws approaCh three feet in length. Moonmilk covers manyofthe walls. Large columnar crystalsofmoonmilk reach a thickness greater than16inches in some cavcs.Page205

PAGE 211

BaichtalOnerecently discovered poolislinedbybotryoidal crystal forms resembling whatisbest describedasunderwater moonmilk. They depress to the touch and rebound quickly, resembling radiating crystalsofcotton. Some passages are lined with calcite crystalsfiveto eight inches in length. Caves foundinhigher elevations containfewspeleothems. Anadromous fish speciesareknown to spawn through some caves and may spawn within afewcave passages. Resident trout and anadromous fishfryseek shelter in cave openings from bird predation. Many insect forms use the photic zoneofthe caves to deposit their eggs. This also supplies fish withanabundant food source. Batsareknown to inhabit manyofthe caves. Thousandsofhours have been logged while exploring the caves during the summers and no bats have been seen, although their fecal deposits and remains have been found. Itispossible that bats from the interiorofAlaska migrate to these caves to winter (Cook and West, 1991). Itisalso possible that the Keen's bat, a sensitive species, may inhabit the caves. Working with the UniversityofAla ka this winter, a bat trapping and tagging programisplanned. Almost without exception, the caves and vertical shafts contain the remainsofvarious mammal which have fallen in.Thebonesofblack bear and Sitka blacktail deer are common. The remainsofbirds, beaver, andothersmall furbearers have been reported. Some animals have survived the fall, to walk through the cave and find a place to lie where their articulated remains were found. Fish bones from the stomach contentofsome bears can be found. Most recently, the remainsofwhatisthought to be a giant short-faced bear(Arctodus simus)have been discovered (Heaton and Grady, 1991).Theremainsofwhatispossibly a Pleistocene wolverine have also been located (Allred, 1991). Next year the Areaishoping to excavate the remainsofthe bear and other mammals to gain further understandingofthe natural historyofthe area.Ifproposed grants are approved, the excavation will be under the directionofthe Smithsonian, National Geographic, National Speleological Society, and the Forest Service. Therearemany littoral caves along the western shorelinesoftheouterislands. Manyofthese caves are now well above mean high-tide due to isostatic reboundofthe earth's crust after glacial retreat and/or sea level fluctuations. These caves range in size from those only afewfeet deep to those well over 300 feet in depth and over 150 feet in width. Beach logs, deposited in the caves centuries ago, lie stackedonthe floors.Onesuch log sampled has yielded a Carbon-14 dateof4,200+/70 years before present. Scatteredonthe floorsofthese cavesaremammal bones and bonesofsea birds. Deer utilize several littoral caves for shelter andonecaveishome to a packofwolves. Someofthe less accessible caves act as rookeries for a wide varietyofsea birds. Early natives also sought shelter in these littoral caves (Autrey, 1991).Thewallsofonecave are decoratedbymagnificent paintings which incorporate the structural foldingofthe limestone and speleothems into the art.Anotherlittoral cave shows possible human habitation dating back some 2,250 years (Reger, et aI., 1986). Smaller solution features were utilized as burial sites along the shore (Autrey, 1991). A wide varietyofinsects utilize the recessesofthe caves. No detailed analysisofthe species have been carried out, but collections have been made. Severalinsects, unfamiliar to the cavers working during the summers, have been collected (Allred, 1991). Collections have been forwarded to the Burke MuseumofNatural Historyonthe UniversityofWashington campus for analysis, and afewspecies have been identified (Crawford, 1989).ConclusionsThekarst resources found within the Ketchikan areaofthe Tongass National Forest are as unique as they are vast. Karstiswell developed from sea level to alpine mountain tops.Thekarsted surfaces display many kindsoffeatures. Caves are numerous, but pften obscuredbythe dense vegetation and glacial deposits.Page 206

PAGE 212

BaichtalThe karst found withintheArea may be oneofthe best examplesoftemperate rain forest karsts in the world. Though past surface management activities have affected some karst systems, the Forest hastheopportunity to learn from the negative effectsofpast surface management practices. The Areaisworking hard to mitigate impactsofsurface management ac tivitiesonthe karst resource.Anaccelerated inventory process will work toputthe Area aheadofthe timber sale unit design and offering process. This will allow more time to be devoted to understanding the karst systems andnotsolely to protection. The AreahOpesto enter into partnerships with universities,COlleges,state and private organizations, and caving or ganizations to begin research in the following areas: Gain anunderstandingofthe role the organic acids from the soils and muskegs play in karst development. Monitor the long-term effectsofsurface manage-ment activities on the cave systems. Study the effectsofwater infiltration and saturation rates as the resultofremoval of the forest canopy over cave systems. Study the importanceofkarst waters for anadromous fisheries. Begin an intensive insect and small mammal inventory program. This would include determinationofthe relationship between bats andthecave systems. Begin studies which would look into the passage formation rates, agingofspeleothems, and long term climatic studies utilizing oxygen isotope ratios and palynology. Through dye tracing and close monitoringofatmospheric conditions and rainfall, gain a better understandingofthe relation between the surface and subsurface hydrologic systemsofselected karst areas. Continue paleontological and cultural resource evaluation when discoveries are made. The extensive karst resourcesofthe Ketchikan Area are unique. They are truly "Tongass Treasures".Literature CitedAllred,C.(1989) -Caving Through a Stereoscope:TheAlaskan Caver, Volume9Number1,pp.5-9.Allred, K (1989) -Hole Checking, Anyone?: The Alaskan Caver, Volume9Number4,pp.16-17.____(1991) -Personal Communication Arndt,K,R.SaCkett, and J. Ketz(1987) A Cultural Resource Overviewofthe Tongass National Forest, Alaska. PreparedbyGDMand Associates Inc. for the USDA Forest Service under contract No.53-0109-6-00203.Autrey, J.(1991) -Personal Communication, Area Archaeologist, Ketchikan Area, Tongass National Forest. Berg,H.c.,R.Elliott,R.Koch(1988) Geologic mapofthe Ketchikan and Prince Rupert Quadrangles, Southeastern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Investigations Series, Map1-1807, 27p.Brew,D.A,A Overshine,S.Karl,S.Hunt(1984) Preliminary Reconnaissance Geologic Map of the Petersburg and Partsofthe Port Alexander and Sumdum1:250,000Quadrangles, Southeastern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report84-405, 43p.Cook,J.(1991) -Personal Communication: Curator of Mammals, UniversityofAlaska Museum, Fairbanks, Alaska.Page207

PAGE 213

BaichtalCrawford, R. (1989) IdentificationofInsects from PrinceofWales Island Caves:TheAlaskan Caver, Volume 9 Number4,p.14.Eberlein,G.D.,M.Churkin, Jr.,C.Carter, H. Berg, A Overtine (1983) Geologyofthe Craig Quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report 83-91, 52p.Gehrels, G. E., H. Berg (1984) Geologic MapofSoutheastern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report 84-886, 28p.____(1991) Geologic MapofLong Island and Southern andcentralDall Island, Southeastern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2146. Grady,F.(1991) Personal Communication, Vertebrate Paleontologist, Smithsonian Institute, Washington, D.C. Heaton, T. H. (1991) Personal Communication, Vertebrate Paleontologist, UniversityofSouth Dakota, Vermillion, South Dakota. Jennings, J.N. (1987) Karst Geomorphology: Basil Blackwell Inc., New York, New York, 293p.Metzler,C.,C.Allred (1990) Index to the Alaskan Caver, Volumes 1 through10:The Alaskan Caver, Volume10Number6,pp. 10-21. Reger, D.R.,C.Campbell (1986) Early Historic UseofSakie Bay Cave, CGR-230: Alaska DivisionofGeological and Geophysical Surveys and U.S.D.A Forest Service, DGGS Public Data File 86-48, 36p.Rockwell, J. (1989) Record Pit Found in Alaska: The Alaska Caver, Volume 9 Number4,pp. 3-4. West, E. (1991) Personal Communication: Conducting Bat Research in Alaska for Alaska Natural Heritage Programs, Anchorage, Alaska.Page 208

PAGE 214

RothOREGONCAVETOURSTANDARDS, 1989-1991JohnE.RothNationalPark'Service Oregon caves National Monument19000cavesHighway Cave Junction,OR97523ABSTRACTIn1989,the National Park Service (NPS) wrote an audit form to evaluate concession tours.Thestandards wereto1)be fairly short, 2)beeasily understoodbypark and concession staff, 3)bea training document, 4)bemeasurable, 5) enhance conservation, and 6) result in consistent scores when usedbydifferent auditors.The1990average scores for each element were higher than1989scores. Improvement since1990has slowed overall.Theaveraged scoresofonly two elements (Content and Presents Whole) increased overthe1990scores.1991tours are more educational than1989tours but often don't show good interpretation. Scoresbyten NPS interpretersofthe same guidesatsimilar times show an average spreadofseven percentage points, indicating that most elements are consistentlymeasurable. However, the most variable scores were also those showing the least improvement between1990and1991.Improvementofthese more complex, subjective elements must continue.caveorsurface toursbyfirst-time NPS seasonalsatOregon caves and Crater Lake, Mammothcaveand Redwoods National Parks scored an averageof81,consistent with the goalofbringing concession guides up to NPS standards. However, park and concession returnees averaged four points higher than first-time seasonals, indicating that increasing turnover decreases interpretive quality in both park and concession staff.IntroductionRequests from most commercial caves in the US and a reviewofover 60 audit forms from National Park Service (NPS) areas showed that no single audit form came close to meetingtheeight goals. So a new form was built on elements taken from mostofthe forms. Critiquesona draft sent to most commercial caves were merged into the certification standards.ResultsTheabstract summarizes the most important results.DiscussionThemore concrete, factual elements (either you have a correct themeornot, either your facts agree with the manualornot) have been improved upon.TheSpeech element had the lowest average score, perhaps because speeCh problems are difficult to correct within a single season. Guides with substantial speech deficiencies need to be screened out during the selection process. However, better selectionofpotential guides in.1991has probably made tours more educational. Initial overall scores were higher thanin1990.Page209

PAGE 215

Thereneedstobemorein-cave auditsandcontinued trainingandevaluation bytheHeadGuideandParkRangerafter initial certification.RothThefollowingarethoseimportantperformance elements withthelowest average final certification scoresandthose withthemost improvement. Extended comments follow for all elements. 199169%73%78%81% 83%88%93%ElementsSuggestions for Improvement SpeeChReducemeaningless and/or distracting soundsfwords.78%in 1990,76%in 1989. Combines ManyArtsUsemorestories, metaphors, role playing, anecdotes,word piCtures, sensory involvement, analogies,anddemonstrations.Usemorecreativeandspontaneoushumor.88%in 1990,66%in 1989. Non-verbal 1990 score was 91.Beless flippantanduse silenceandmorevisual body movements. RelatestoVisitorsSeekoutvisitor interests&use questions.91% in 1990,75%in 1989Aimis Provocation Challenge expectations.89%in 1990, 61 % in 1989 PresentsWholeTiein questionstotheme. 75%-1991, 73%-1989ContentStick tocurrentmanualsandcheck extrapolations withHeadGuideorNPS.85%in1991,64%in 1989 1989 Average 1900 Average 1991 AverageWrittenTest Score 77 85 87 ProvisionalAudit7178 728286 87SUMMER1991STANDARDSFOROREGONCA VBTOURGUIDES INTRODUCTIONReasons for Standards: Performance standards and training to meet these standardsareneeded because the NationalParkService (NPS)ismandatedtoconserveparkresources, provide for a meaningful, enjoyable, value-for-money experience for visitors, and find uses compatible with such mandates.TheNPS requiresthatOregonCave guides haveenoughcommunication skillstoaccomplish these mandates. Even aftersomeunderstanding occurs,moretrainingisneededtomake useofnew informationandto give dynamic and exciting interpretive tours in a seemingly unchanging Cave.HOWTHESYSTEM WORKSTheOperatingPlan (CC-ORCAOO1-87) statesthat"the NPS naturalist determines iftheguide-in-trainingPage210

PAGE 216

is sufficiently knowledgeable before he/she is certifiedtoconduct cave tours.Toallow the guide to become familiar withthecave and the performance standards and to conduct toursatthe beginningoftheseason, certification is divided into provisional certification and full certification. Provisional certification means a concession employee can give cave tours upto14 days before he/she isorisn't fully certified. A person is provisionally certified ifheorshe: 1) correctly answers 80%ormoreitemsona written test; 2) attains a final scoreofatleast 65%onthe first audit; 3) gives all required beginning messages; 4) has a visitor restate the tour's themeatthe tour's end. 5) gives a theme-oriented interpretivetourthat doesn't imitate tours preparedbyotherpeople, and; 6) meetsatleast twoofthree measurable, written objectives. Provisional certificationiswithdrawn after 14 daysorifthereislessthanan80%score on the second audit. A noncertified guide who gives a publictourwhilenotaccompaniedbya certified guide cannot be certified foroneyear fromthedateofthe tour. Written Test:TheOperating Plan (CC-ORCAOOl-87) requires cave guides to take a written test. All test questions derive from material in this document, including all appendices. Questions are multiple choice, true-or -false,fill-in-the-blankoressay.Ifthe guide scores below 80%,heorshe may takeanothertest after two days. Failure to pass both tests results in the guide not being certified. A guide must pass a test within ten daysofhislher first dayoftraining. Audits: Each guide hasatleastoneaudit.TheHead Guide has each guide read and sign the audit form (Appendix A). ThentheHeadGuide tapes and scores the 1st audit. Basedonanalysisofthe audit, the park ranger gives a final score, either agreeing with the score givenbythe Head Guideorchanging it.Ifthe final scoreisless than 80%, a subsequent auditisdonebythe park ranger within seven daysofthe first audit.RothThe100 total possible paintsarespread among threesections:MECHANICS(20points),COMMUNICATION (40 points), and Tll-DEN'S INTERPRETATION(40 points). Each section intumis divided into four elements. Ahighscore can be reached without using mostofthemethods listed in these standards; quality ismoreimportant than quantity. Guides who develop clear themes, are accurate, inspire,proVOke,share their excitement and love fortheCave, relate well with visitors, and follow procedures usually score above 80%. Improving how themes, humor, questions, etc. are presented oftenwillraise scores in several elements. Although observing audience reactionsisvital in scoring an audit, allowance will be made for an unusually unresponsive groupaslong astheguide strives to provoke, build rapport, etc. Full Certification: A guide who scoresatleast 80% onbothan audit and the written testisrecommended for full certificationbytheAreaManager. Full certification remains valid unlesstheguide scores less than80%ona future audit. Guides are re-certified withinatleastoneyearoftheir last certification. To be re-certified, a guide must improve basedonatleast halfofall suggestions from the last audit.AUDIT STANDARDSNote: See Appendix A for the score sheet. MECHANICS (20ofthe 100 total possible points) Appearance (5 points): Follows written standards. Control(5points): Encourages participation in resource-protectionbyexample and theme. Head counts occuratthe 110 Exit and the Ghost Room. Closes and/or locks cave doors. Has a firm, tactful, and effective direction and arrangementofthe group. The reasons for the rules are explained clearly.Thelowest control level needed to insure complianceisused. Keeps within sightofthelead visitor. Observed federalorstate law violations are reported to theORCAranger office whenthefirst phoneisreached. A callismade if thereisa doubtasto whether an offense has occurred.Theexceptionistouchingofformations. However, theORCArangerPage211

PAGE 217

officeiscalled if a visitor continues to touch forma tions after being asked several times not to do so. Safety(5points): Alerts all visitors to hazards. Diplomatic, tactful, and sensitive to potential embarrassments. All life-threatening emergencies are reportedassoonasthe nearest phoneisreached. The report includes locationofthe subject, extentofthe injury, typeofillness, stateofconsciousness, breathing or pulse condition, and any condition that could have contributed to the incident. Less serious incidents in which swelling, bleeding, limping,orillness occurs are reported to the ORCA ranger officeassoonasthe tourisended.Ifa personisinjured or becomesillon a tour, the guide calmly getshimorher comfortable. The personisnot moved if a spinal injuryissuspected. Gives first aid only uptoone's level of training.Ifthe ill person does not begin to recover after afewminutes of rest and observation, the tour guide reaches the nearest phone and calls the ORCA ranger office. Nobodyisplaced in charge of the group while the guide obtains help. The groupistold to remain where they are andisassured the guidewillreturn shortly. Upon return, the guide stays with the group andisavailable to assist until relievedbya ranger. The tour continues when directed tobyNPS staff. When lightsgooutinthe Cave, the guideuseshislher light,givesspare light to the last person on the tour and tells all to stay where they are. He/she stays puts and does not proceed until the lighting systemison or until told tobypark staff. Paradise LostisbypasSed.Extra safety warnings aregiven. Timmg (5pOints): Tourison time. Chats with visitors before tour. The introduction begins at the scheduled time. Gives a required introduction that includes:1)a welcome, 2) a statement that the guide works for a private concession, the Oregon Caves Company,3)NPSobjectives that include the rule about touching and stresses the Cave's fragility;4)the strenuous nature of the tour and it not being recommended for anyone with walking problems,5)distance and time to be covered; and6)the tour's theme. The themeRothalso must be restatedortouched uponatthe endofthe tour andtwoofthe three measurable objectives must be met in order for the guide to befullycertified. COMMUNICATION (40ofthe100total possible pOints) Content(16points): Information agrees with this document and the current ORCA Training Manual. Uses information mostly for theme support. Teachable times suchasunexpected events relate to the theme. Doesn't imitate other tours. Stops and talksvary.Explainsnewconcepts inwaysone can understand. Doesn't state the obvious. Para-verbal Communication (16 points): Enthusiastic, confident, courteous, warm, sincere, and relaxed.Isnot bored or "burnt out." Shares excitement about and love of the Cave, first-time-in-caves experiences, and other feelings. Does not lecture.Bodymovements add to effectiveness. Has potentialeyecontact with all visitors most of the time. Number and extent of stops and silent periods are appropriate. Makes visitors feel safe. Talks with visitors, not at them.Isnot flippant. Speech (8 points): Languageiswell-enunciated, readily grasped, relates to an actual, specific thing or instance andisoften tangible. Words are colorful, not off-color. Sentences are complete. Verbs are active. Uses proper grammar. Style isn't stilted or tape-recorded. Avoids unneeded sounds. When talking, usuallyfacesthe group and avoids walking. Insures all can understand. Rate and changeofdelivery and pitch are adequate and conversational.SpeeChisslow enough to be understood and fast enough to maintain interest. Uses transitions. Hintsasto what to look for ahead. TILDEN'S INTERPRETATION (40ofthe100total possible points) Successful interpretation increases understanding, appreciation and protection of park resources. Page212

PAGE 218

Relates to PersonalityorExperienceofVisitor (8 points): Alters content and styleasappropriate. Uses themes, tour stops, and/or interpretive methods not used during the 1st audit. New terms and concepts arefew.Questions are encouraged, repeated, one-at-a-time, relevant to visitor interests and experiences, and directed to the entire audience. Rarely answershisorher own questions.Ispatient, allowing time for visitors to answer questions. Guide corrects answers in a supportive manner and drawsoutdiscussion. Doesorsays the kindestormost fitting thing without compromising NPS policies, and shows respect for others' points-of-view. Combines Many Arts (10 points): Gives content life and imagination.Humorisappropriate and builds rapportordepicts an important point. Much humorisspontaneous and not "built" into a certain partofthe tour. Familiar things are seen in a new light. Different pointsofview are offered. Chief AimIsnot Instruction but Provocation (8 points): Visitors are inspired to widen their under-Rothstanding and alter behavior. Reveals/connects meanings, processes, and relationships insteadofstating facts suchasnamesofroomsorformations. Visitors are provoked but not offended; they still have a good time. Challenges expectations, what the visitor believes hasorwill happen. Maintains anticipation, attention, and curiosity. Tour pace, surprises, suspense, ironies, and initial "grabbers" engage/provoke interest. Equally attentive to all visitors. Presents Whole rather than a Part (14 points): A themeisa concept stated in one sentence and which ties together whatistalked about. A theme provides continuity and organization and leads visitors in the direction the guide wishes them to follow. Acceptable themes are those found in Appendix Borthose approvedbythe Area Managerorhis/her appointee. To be both provisionally and fully certified, all guides must1)present a central acceptable theme and2)have at leastonevisitor restate that theme near the end of the tour. Guide infersordeducts new information from the tour's theme and encourages visitors to do the same. Some answers are tied back to the main theme.Page 213

PAGE 219

Appendix ARothCAVBTOURAUDITFORMProvisionalFullI,(print name) have studied the1990STANDARDSFOROREGONCAVETOURGUIDES and am ready tobeaudited using this form.Mytheme#ofthe 5 themes* found in the standards. Listedatthe bottomofthe pagearemy3 measurable objectives. Auditor scoresoneach blank underline before the maximum numberofpoints for each category. Maximum scoreis100.Passing for full certificationis80orabove. Circled items are those in needofimprovement. MECHANICS (20 points) COMMENTS AppearanceLof5) (Conforms to dress, uniform, grooming, and posture standards) ControlLof6) (Firm; appropriate; model; credible; explains rules; monitors all persons on tour; positions self and audience; teaches preservationbyexample, explanation, theme, and appreciation) SafetyLof5) (Gives warnings, follows emergency procedures; monitors group; uses tact; has appropriate concern; adjusts suitably) TimingLof4) (Says required elementsatstartoftour. Allows for warm-up time; tours are well spaced and on time)_._--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------..------...-----------------------------_._---------------_..-----COMMUNICATION (40 Points) COMMENTS AttitudeLof8) (Enthusiastic; confident; shares feelings; courteous; friendly; relaxed; curious, not flippant, "burned out"orboring) ContentLof16) _(Uses up-tO-date information; separates opinion from fact; purposive; appropriate for theme; uses surprises; creative;giveshislher own tour, doesn't imitate other tours; uses and rearranges new data and techniques) Non-verbalLof8) (Gestures, pauses, silence, and stops appropriate and purposive and instill credibility; distractionsfew;personable; congenial, sympathetic, accepting; involves multiple senses)SpeeChLof8) (Articulate; conversational; concrete; clear; colorful; avoids meaningless sounds, jargon, trite sayings, and breathiness; transitions are smooth, linked, varied, and more than two)----_._--_._-_._--_._--...-------_...._--------------_._----------------_._--..._--------------------------------------------------------------------_._----------_._-_...Page 214

PAGE 220

(To be certified, must state their theme at the beginning and end of a tour, have visitors state it, and give a theme oriented tour; consistent; linked; illustrated; supported; approved; goal oriented; structured; unified; deductive) NPS Total Scoreispoints. GENERAL COMMENTS Objective#I Objective#2_ Objective#3_ *List theme if notin#1-#6HEADGUIDEINITIALS PARKRANGERCONCURSPage 215DATE

PAGE 221

KerboMANAGEMENTOFLECHUGUILLACAVE,NEWMEXICORonald Kerbo National Park Service SW Region Post Office Box 728 Sante Fe, New Mexico 87504-0728ABSTRACTThe recent explorationofmore than 50 miles of new cave passages in Lechuguilla Cave have focused national attentiononthis New Mexico discovery. The large amountofpublicity accompanying these discoveries has brought increasing numbersofcavers interested in exploring the cave; interest from the communityincommercializing the cave; and a renewed interest in the conceptof"underground wilderness". This session will discuss the management implicationsofthe Lechuguilla discovery.NoPaper Received Please contact the author for further information.Page 216

PAGE 222

HallidayCAVE MANAGEMENT IN HAWAIIWilliamR.Halliday, M.D.,ChairmanHawaii Speleological SurveyoftheNationalSpeleological SocietyABSTRACTAsinotherstates, cavingandspeleological studyareincreasing rapidly in Hawaii. Cavemanagementheremustconsiderspecial factors rarely if ever relevant inotherstates.Geographic,demographic,andpoliticalisolationhashindereddevelopmentofbroad-basedcavemanagementplans, with small,single-purposefactionsthenorm.Withthe recentcharteringofa HawaiiGrottooftheNationalSpeleological Society (N.S.S.), itisproposedthatitistimetocoordinatethecaveconservationandmanagementactivitiesofallconstituenciesbasedonminimum-impact,tread-softly concepts. Cavemanagementisin its infancy in Hawaii.Yet,as inotherstates,cavingandspeleologyareincreasing rapidly here, with caves increasingly inthepublic eye. InHawaiiVolcanoesNationalPark,ThurstonLavaTubeisperhapstheworld'smostwidely advertised lavatubecave, visited bythousandsmonthly.EvenmorepaytovisitFernGrottoontheislandofKauai,andsomecontinuenorthtotheroadsideattractionsofManinoholoDryCaveandWaikapalaeandWaikanaloaWetCaves.WainapanapaWetandDry CavesaresimilarattractionsofastateparkontheislandofMaui,andLongCave inMaui'sHaleakalaNationalParkispartially developed for visitors.OntheoutskirtsofHonolulu,MakuaCaveappearsininnumerabletouristitems.Locatedalongsidea main highway,urbanizationhasturneditintoahorribleexample;thoughhistoric,nooneseemsinterestedinprotectingit. Arecentarticle inMaui,Inc. told allabouta sensitiveburialcaveonthegroundsofa famousWaikoloahotel. Severaltouroperatorsconductwell-advertisedboattripsintolarge littoral cavesonthespectacularNa Pali coastofKauai. ApicturesquecaveentranceonMokuManuIsletadornstheIlyerofanOahuboatingcompany. Cave and cavern divesareadvertised by several diveshopsonvarious islands. InthesuburbsofthecityofHilo,thecountyeven has providedstepsfor local beginners downintoanotablecaveandnamedthesiteKaumanaCaveCountyPark.Manylocalspelunkersgettheirstarthere.ThestaffofHawaiiVolcanoesNationalParkcommonlyencountersill-informed local cavershuntingfor cavestovisit inthatpark,notknowing that apermitisneededtoenterany cavethereexceptThurstonLavaTube.Andindeed, in talking to localpeopleliving inburgeoningnearby subdivisionscontainingimportantcaves, I have found much thesamespectrumofattitudesto caves and to theirpreservationandtocaving asonthemainland. Progressofurbanizationofthesepoorly planned subdivisionsisa specialandever-growingthreatto the caves within them.Anotheristhestate'swillingness to abolish cave-containingNaturalAreaReserves without even apublichearing(recentlyopeningonesuch wildernesstodestructivecommercialuse). With land prices recentlysoaringinmuchofthecave countrynearHilo, few cavers can afford to buy lotscontainingcaveentrancestoprotectthem,andaftera decade, theproposedHawaii Caves Conservancy still does not exist.Someownersoflarge tractsofland doenforce notahly stringentexclusionoftrespassers, including cavcrs, speleologists,environmentalists,andjust about everyone else.Butfromthestandpointof cave conservation,theseexclusionsarefringe benefitsoftraditional oligarchy.Andinsomecases, currentdevelopmentoftheseoligarchal landsisthreateningvital habitat caves with littleorno knowledgebyconservat ionists.Page 217

PAGE 223

HallidayTheNative Hawaiian communityissplintered in its aUitudes,buta highly respected segment properly viewsatleastsomecaves as inviolate "kapu" burial vaults sacred to certain families.Onecontroversial lawofuncertain constitutionality seems to have vested title to all Hawaiian caves inthestate, without recompensetoowners.YetIcannotfind anystateagencythatconsidersthatit has title to the cavesofHawaii, andnostateagency known tomehas promulgated acaveManagementPlan. As for federal cave managers, geographic, demographic, and political isolation fromthemainstreamofAmerican cave management has hindered developmentofrational cave management plans.Perhapsworse,somelocal representativesofatleastonehighly respected national conservation organization to have placedotherfactors above preservationofthreatenedcave habitats, and thefewspeleologists who were awareofthis problem kepttheinformation within a very small, tightly knit local network. Each constituency concerned with protectionofcavesinHawaii has its own data base, jealously guarded against everyotherconstituency, as well as againstthepublic and agencies.ThefilesoftheHawaii Speleological Survey (H.S.S.)areguarded no less closely than thoseofcave biologists, consulting archaeologists,stateagencies, andthenational parks. Data in filesofHawaiian Burial Councils perhapsisthe most guardedofall(otherthan family burial information not written down anywhere). Often itiseven difficult to findoutwhat cavesare"kapu" toonegrouporanotherand should be avoidedbysomeorbyall. Bad-mouthingofotherconstituenciesisso common as to be almostthenorm. An N.S.S. HawaiicavesConservation Task Force has existed for almost a decade,butmostofits work was secretive, and until very recently there was no perceptible N.S.S. presence inthestate. Now thereisan N.S.S. Hawaii Speleological Survey and a HawaiiGrouo,withanothergrottobeing formed. All arecommiuedto tread-softly, minimum-impact caving.Underthese circumstances, strategies aimedatprotection andmanagementofcaves and their resources and valuescannotbe based successfully ontheostrich principle,norontherelated principlethatonly scientists and administratorsareproperly concerned with cave protection and management. But cave management in Hawaii must consider certain factors rarely if ever relevant inotherstates. As intheGalapagos andotherisolated oceanic islands,theremotelocationofHawaii has produced a specialized biota above and below ground. Hawaii hasnotableand vulnerable caveandinterstitial habitats for specially adapted creatures liketheno-eyed big-eyed hunting spider.caveburials andothercultural featuresareatleast as needfulofprotection, as well asthefragile geological and paleontologic features. Wilderness, recreational, andotherresources and values mustbe. meshed into this unique nexus. In late 1990atleast twobittercontroversieseruptedoutofthis nexus.Thepersoncharged withpreparationofacaveManagementPlan for a large Hawaii national park had neverbeenin a wild cave,norhad anymemberofhis staff. While his intentions were good, he clearly had a distorted conceptofcavers and speleological organizations, and in a private conversationherevealed himself as hostile to organized caving. While he made good useofscientific input, initially he also was hostile toinputfrom a very experienced speleologistofequalrankinthatpark. After a considerablebrouhahahe promulgated a finalcaveManagementPlan which was considerably improvedbutstill included personalinterpretationsthat distorted theintentand languageoftheFederalCave Resources Protection Act.Thenin December 1990 a frustrated localspelunkerwenttothe newspapersaboutdamage and threats to culturallyimportantcaves in what had beentheWaoKele 0 Puna Natural Area Reserve--now a site for geothermal exploration and development. Normally, information on culturallyimportantcavesisclosely guarded, and going to the press was anunheard-oflast resort.Thesituation was especially complicated because he had promised certain families that he would not showtheir"kapu" family caves to anyone else.Fromwhatheconsidered bitter experience, he had lost all confidenceinthestateagencies which hethoughtshould protect these cultural values. Although he knewonememberoftheN.S.S. HawaiicavesPage218

PAGE 224

HallidayConservationTaskForce,hehad neverheardoftheN.S.S.northeAmericanCave Conservation Association(ACCA)untiltheH.S.S.contactedhim.Thushehadnowaytoknowthathelp was available fromtheseorganizations.TheN.S.S.ConservationCommitteeimmediately investigated,anditsBoardofGovernorsquickly passed astrongresolutionofconcernandsupport,calling foranEnvironmentalImpactStudy asdemandedbytheSierraClubLegalDefenseFund.This SUbsequently was adjudged in federal court, withtheN.S.S.resolutioncited inthejudge's favorable decision.TheHawaiiSpeleological Survey subsequently hasvolunteeredtoundertakethenecessary field work fortheEnvironmentalImpactStudyatnoexpensetothegovernment.Thiscurioussituationremainscurious.Despitewithdrawaloffederal fundingpendingcompletionoftheEnvironmentalImpact Study,thestateofHawaii hascontinuedtofundthegeothermalexploration.Atthemoment,theworkis in abeyance becauseofnumeroustechnicalproblemsand public outcry. And only inthehassle did it corne to lightthatonestateagency was intheprocessofprotectingoneofthecaves intheWaoKele0Punaarea and a wide striparoundit, as aresultofinputfrom a Hawaii CavesConservationTaskForcemember. In addition, this agencyhaddeveloped an especially curious plan toprotectsomeothercaves inthearea which might bereportedby bulldozingordrilling teams.Theprincipalrequirementforprotectionisthatthey be 8 feetormorein height.Sincemostcave burialsencounteredbytheHawaiiSpeleological Surveyareincaves lessthan4 feet high, thisishighly controversial, andthereasonforselectionofthefigureof8 feet remains obscure. Areportonthisprotectionplan promisedbyJanuary1991 still hasnotbeen released, supposedly as a resultofoppositionbythebranchofthestategovernmentpromotinggeothermaldevelopment.Despitetwo face-to-facemeetingsand promisesofcooperationwiththeH.S.S., asofthisdatethisstateagency has nevercommunicatedin writing withtheHawaii SpeleologicalSurveyortheHawaiiGrotto.In such a milieu, local recreational caversarecarefulnottotellanyonebuttheirfriendswherethey go caving.Mostarecompletely unawareoftheimportanceoflocal conservation essentials such as avoidingpendantroothabitatsandotherfragile cave features, much less tread-SOftly, minimum-impact concepts andtheexistenceoftheN.S.S. andACCACavesaresuffering as a result. This has spawnedoutreachbytheH.S.S.andtheHawaiiGrotto.Plansareunderway foraneducationalsignattheentranceofKaumanaCave, for example.ButfactionalismcontinuestobeharmfultothecavesofHawaii. In nearly every state,therearevalid reasons for cavemanagementconsensusesthatcertain caves,orpartsofcaves,shouldbeaccepted as closed seasonally, temporarily,orpermanently,tosomeortoall. Similarly, reasons exist for similar consensusesontherelative valuesofcave resources and values, thuspermittingpro-activemanagementand preservation strategies(thesemiquantitativeNieland systemofrating cave resources and valuesisonesuch methOd).Atpresent, factionalisminHawaiiispreventingdevelopmentofsuch consensuses, withunfortunateresults.Forexample, inthePunaDistrictnearHilo, I know twoimportantburial caveswherespray paint hasappearedonthecave wal1s,andtheburials have been disturbed recently.Threeseparatetrails leadtotheentranceof one ofthesecaves, andtheotherisalongside a paved road.NothinghascomeofHawaii Speleological Survey's efforts to bridgethegaps between constituencies concerned with such matters. I havenotbeen able to find anygrouporagency willingtogivemorethanlip servicetoprotectingeithercave. Essential tothesuccessoftheconsensus approaChismutualaccountabilityofall concerned.Atpresent, each constituency in Hawaii seems toseeitself asaccountableonlytoitselfandwoeful1y uninformedaboutat leastsomeoftheothers. Noncavers'perceptionsofcaving practices lags 20or30 years.Recognitionoftread-softly, minimum-impact caving andoftheconservationethicand action basesofthe N.S.S. andtheACCAisbadly needed. I do notcontendthatallofthefactions should mesh their data bases.TherearesomeHawaiian caves for which thisisinappropriate,anddatashould remain restricted. But consensusesonwhich caves shouldPage 219

PAGE 225

Hallidayremain restricted implythatrestricted caves will remain at risk whentherisk to othersisreduced through broad consensual agreement. Fortunately, I think I perceive the first beginningsofcooperative cave management in Hawaii, albeit at a very informal level. Developersofa new golf courseofKauai have posted a sign proclaiming their protectionofa cave containing a populationoftheno-eyed big-eyed hunting spider (albeitthecave still is being used as a dump for trash and grass clippings).Onthe recent oral recommendationofa Hawaiian activist in state government,theH.S.S.isplanning an ethnologic approach to older Hawaiians, someofwhom do not speak English, to determine what caves are kapu family burial vaults. BoththeHawaii Caves Conservation Task Force andtheHawaii Speleological Survey have begun educational campaigns for caver visitors totheislands, andthemembersoftheformertookpartin the recent 6th International SymposiumonVolcano-speleology held inHilain September 1991. But much remains to be accomplished. I propose that, as a step towardbettermanagement and protectionofHawaii's caves, all constituencies examine their postures toward and knowledgeofotherfactions. Hopefully, each will conclude that accountability towardtheothers will provide better protection for Hawaiian caves. And beyond Hawaii lieotherisolated islands where hard-learned lessonsofHawaii speleology mayyield,even greater biological, cultural, andotherspeleological dividends.Page 220

PAGE 226

WilsonBLASTINGFORCONSERVATION: TIlEETIlICS OFBLASTING AND DIGGING IN CAVESJohnM.Wilson 9504 Lakewater Court Richmond,VA23229ABSTRACfTh'e justification for modifying a cave using objective comparison (consequencialist) methods requiresthatallofthe consequencesofblasting and diggingbeweighed against not blasting and digging.Theresultsarethen comparedintermsofwhich courseofaction contributes to attaining one's highest value. A case history using Perkins Caveasan example will be presented.Please contact the author for jW1her information on this paper.Page 221

PAGE 227

NepstadAN INVENTORYSYSJEMFORLARGECAVE SYSJEMSJim Nepstad Wind Cave National ParkABSTRACTWith the adventofGeographic Information System (GIS) software designed specifically for caves, complete resource inventoriesofcave systems have become more important than ever. After several yearsofexperimentation, Wind Cave National Park has devised an inventory system which allows data to be collected in a form easily usedbya cave GIS. The system consistsofa seriesofforms used in the cave for recording information, and a data entry program which the amountoftime spent entering the information into a dBASE III Plus database for usebythe GIS. The systemwasdesigned to be used in both previously explored passages, and in newly discovered passages during the survey process. Designed for use in a large cave, the system allows detailed inventory information to be collected and entered in a minimal amount of time.IntroductionThe explorationofWind Cave has taken place sporadically over a one hundred year period of history. The earliest explorers recorded nothing more than vague written descriptionsoftheir adventures.Inonly afewinstancesisit possible to determine the rooms or passages being described. After the 1890'sfewadditional discoveries were made until the mid 1960's, when explorers discovered the Spillway. Beyond this crawl, the cave seemed to openupsignificantly, with passages leading off in virtually every direction.Bythis time, the standards of cave exploration required a surveyofthe passages being discovered. Although these surveys were performed, very little information concerning the contentsofthenewlydiscovered passageswasrecorded. Exploration accelerated in the early 1970's with the involvement of the Windy City Grotto. The discoveries were once again numerous and dramatic, but the explorers neglected to record much information beyond the usual measurements taken during a survey. The prevailing survey standardsofthedaydid not require many detailed observations. During the mid the National Park Service (NPS) grew concerned about this lackofinformation. In effect, the NPSwascharged with managing a cave whichitknew almost nothing about. Basic cave management decisions, suchassetting limits on group sizes in off trail areas, were being made without the benefitofknowing what resources could be impacted. At that time, roughly42milesofthe cave had been explored. The only information regarding the contents of mostofthese passageswasintheformofmemories locked in the headsofexplorers who were dispersed throughout the entire country. It seemed obvious that if its responsibilities to the cave were to be met, the NPS would need to initiate some kindofan inventory program which would address this lack of information. Exactly how this would be donewasnot obvious, however. Early Attempts The first attemptsatinventorying individual passages in Wind Cave were performed in the springof1985.Sinceweknewof !-to other large cave system which had performed a passagebypassage inventory, the initialPage 222

PAGE 228

Nepstadwork crews were given complete freedom to record the information in anywaythey saw fit. The varietyofinventory methods was as largeasthe numberofgroups inventorying in the cave. The results ranged from afewillegible scribblings to detailed, meticulously recorded observations. Three important lessons were learned as a resultofthis experience. First, if the NPS wished to have ofconsistent quality, it would have to establish specific instructions for inventory. Second, in order for the information to beofuse, it had to be tied to cave mapsinsome fashion. Unless an inventory party had recorded their observationsona cave map,itwas difficult to determine with certainty which passages contained the features being described. This relations!lip between inventory data and cave maps would change over time, but it would remainoneofthe fundamental issuesofthe project.Thethird important lesson learned as a resultofthese early attempts was that this project would be generating a hugeamountofdata. Some system would have tobedesigned to make this information both accessible and useable.Strike One!During the summerof1985, the first cave inventory procedureswer.ewritten.Theinventory procedures contained instructionsonrecording data in the cave, and also outlined how the data would be usedonthe surface. Inventory crews were asked to enter the cave armed with pencils, paper, and a copyofthe 1:600 master -map ofthe cave. A single notetaker was responsible for recording all observations.Uponreaching the area to be inventoried, the crew would spreadoutand begin to look for itemsofinterest. When something worthyofnoting was found, its discoverer would stand near it until the notetaker arrived. A method for recording the information was suggested. The area tobeinventoried would be divided into sections roughly 100 feet in length.Foreach section, a general description suchas"classic upper level cave, walking sized, with smooth, sandy Ooors" was recorded. Descriptionsofindividual itemsinthe inventory were recorded either directlyonthe map itself,oronanother pieceofpaper if insufficient spacewasavailable. To ensure that a location in the cave was tied to each item, a letter reference was notedonthe map, with a corresponding letter reference and descriptionontheotherpieceofpaper.Theprocedures also outlined what would be done with the data once it wasoutofthe cave. A seriesofoverlays were tobedeveloped which couldbealigned with the master mapofthe cave. There were to be overlays corresponding to speleothems, cave levels, biological items, historical items, and hazards. Each transparency would have a color code for eachofthe items it highlighted.Forexample, on the speleothem overlay orange represented Oowstone, brown repre sented boxwork, plue corresponded to popcorn, and so on. Since each inventory crew recorded locationsofthe inventory itemsoncopiesofthe master map they brought into the cave, it was a simple matter to transfer this information to the overlays. This arrangement allowed any interested person to recognize at a glance what each inventoried passage contained. The system worked, but in a short time someofitsfailings became apparent.Asbefore, the most serious shortcomingofthis system was a lackofconsistency. Although inventory crews were now recording all of their information in a consistent manner, consistent quantitiesofinformation were not being recorded. This was largely due to vague instructions in the procedures. Inventory crews were asked to record all "notable resources", yet no definitionofwhat constituted a notable resource was offered. Whatwasnotable tooneperson often was not notable to another. Also at this time, the park began to acquire increasingly powerful personal computers which were capableofstoring and retrieving the raw information in a much more efficient manner.Thepresent systemofrecording information in the cave provided nearly exact locationsofindividual featuresinthe cave, but did not tie that information to anything which could be easily referencedbya computer. Due to allofthese shortcomings, a new setofprocedures was developed early in 1987.Page223

PAGE 229

NepstadStrikeTwo!The new procedures were designed to retrieve dataasdetailedasthat obtainedbythe older system. All items mentioned in the inventory were to be referenced to the closest survey station. Detailed computer databases, with each recordofthe database corresponding to a survey station in the cave, could then be constructed. A special checklist was brought into the cave to remind crewsofthe resources they should be looking for.Thechecklist contained lines next to the nameofeach resource which were used to listthesurvey stations which contained the resource.Thenotetaker would move throughout the cave, recording the nameofthe closest survey station on the lines for each resource being seen. Additional details were recorded in special sectionsofthe checklist devoted to notes. Exact locations for each feature being inventoried were recorded either on a copyofthe master map or, if the master mapwasnotaccurate, on a new sketchofthe passage. This new system resolved the problems associated with earlier inventory systems.Thechecklist assured the park that all inventory crews would be looking for the same cave features, thus providing more consistency. Referencing each feature to the closest survey station simplified the switch to computer databases for data storage and retrieval. Once again armed with pencils, maps, and forms, inventory crews entered the cave to test the new procedures.Thesystem worked well, but after many tripsitbecame obvious that it had one remainingflaw. It wastoo slow.Bythe endof1989, less than two milesofthe cave had been satisfactorily inventoried. The cave, which had grown to 53 miles in length, would require decadestoinventoryatthe current rate.ThePresent SystemInearly 1990, inventory procedures were again reviewed, this time to improve efficiency. It had been obvious from the beginning that the notetaker had been the bottleneckofthe process.Oneperson was responsible for recording alloftheinformation obtainedbythe inventory crew.Toeliminate this bottleneck, the inventory checklist/form was divided into three different forms. Insteadofonenotetaker, there would now be three. Each notetaker would be looking for, and recording information about, a subsetofthe original checklist.Onewould be providing information regarding the physical characteristicsofthe passage,anotherwould look for only speleothems, and the third would search for itemsofhistorical, biological, and general geological interest. See Figures1,2,and 3 for examplesofthese forms.Itwasalso decided to eliminatetherequirementofproviding exact locationsofitemsonmapsorsketchesofthe passage being inventoried.Theaverage distance between survey stations in Wind Caveisroughly25feet, soonaverage, simply referencing the nearest survey station locates a resource to within 10 to15feetofits true location. This was decided to be accurate enough for most purposes. Eliminating these two bottlenecks from the old inventory system drastically increased the efficiencyofthe process. A well trained crew can now inventory in an hour what used to take an entire day. In ad4ition, efficiency was improved to the point where it was suddenly possible to perform an inventory during the surveyofnew passage. Although it adds an additional duty to the survey process, it does not slow the survey down in anyway.Oneperson, usuallytheperson assigned to the tape,isresponsible for all inventory work. Even though this personisfillingoutall three forms, heorsheisstill able to stay aheadofthe sketcher, who remains the bottleneckofthe survey process. Marking the main routesoutto the areas requiring inventory in this exceptionally mazy cave has enabled a larger numberofvolunteers to assist withtheproject. During 20 months in 1990 and 1991, over 17 milesofpassages were inventoried in Wind Cave, largely due to the effortsofa dedicated groupofvolunteer cavers from Colorado. Roughly halfofthis total was in previously surveyed cave, while the remainder was performed in passages surveyed during this time period.Page 224

PAGE 230

EnteringtheDataNepstadorateonany itemnotedintheinventory.Oneofthe data entry screens formodeBisshown in Figure5.Soonafterthedecision was made to reference all inventory data tothenearest survey station, work beganondesigningthedatabases which would hold theenormousamountofinformationtheinventory project would generate. Withmorethan12,000 survey stations inthecaveatthetime,itwas desirable toautomatedataentry as much as possible. A program was written which created a record inthedatabase for each existing survey station inthecave. The fields corresponding to featuresinthecave were left blank,butthefields representingthestation name, its x,y,z coordinates, and surveydatewere automatically filled in. This left us with databases representing allofthecave,butthedatabases were largely empty. Filling in the blanks for inventoried stations couldbedonein two ways.Thefirstmethodwould involve entering the data astationata time.Thedata entry person would scantheinventory forms for items occurring at a particular station, fill in theappropriatefields, then moveontothenext station intheinventory. Alternatively, a program couldbewritten toenterthedata fromanentireinventory all at once.Bothmethods have advantages and disadvantages, so a program was written to handle data entrybothways.Thestandard database management software for the National Park ServiceisdBASE III Plus. Therefore, it made sense to use dBASE to producethedata entry program. This program, called INVENT.PRO,waswritten inthedBASElanguage.Itallows the user to choosethemodein which data entry takes place.Theinitial screen for this programisshown in Figure4.Ifmode B (data entrybyindividual station)ischosen,theuserisfirst asked for thenameofthestation for whichdataentryisto take place. After first checking tobesurethestation exists inthedatabase, the program displays the firstofseveral data entry screens.Thenamesofall features listedontheinventory forms, inthesameorderas theyappearonthe inventory forms,appearin these screens.Ifa particular feature was noted in the inventoryatthegiven station, some kindofa code, often justan"X",isplaced in the space provided next tothatfeature. A memo fieldisavail able toentermiscellaneous observations,orto elab-ModeA (data entry by groupofstations)isthemethod most often used toenterthedata from anentireinventory trip.Afterbeing asked fortherangeofstations intheinventory, and ensuringthatthose stations exist inthedatabase,theuserispresented with anumberofscreens which strongly resembletheoriginal inventory forms.Ifa particular featureisnotedatleast once sometime duringtheinventory, a codeisplaced inthespace in front-ofthefeature name, and the station numbers wherethatfeaturewasnotedarelisted inthespace afterthename.Theprogramisquite flexible intheway stationsarelisted in this space, so data entryisusuallyjustamatteroftyping exactly whatis'foundontheline for each feature intheinventory forms.Afterall linesarefilled in,theprogram automatically updates allofthe records intherangeofstations provided to contain theproperinformation. Figure 6 showsanexampleofa data entry screen for modeASince data entry for a groupofstationsisoften just amatterofcopying exactly whatisonthe original forms,thedata for anentireinventory canbeentered in amatterofminutes. This may take a bit longer if many detailed comments and observations were recorded, since all memo field text mustbeentered a station at a time.UsingtheDataOncetheinventory informationisinthedatabase itisimmediately useful.ModeDofINVENT.PROallows the user to produce a printedreportwhich summarizes whatisfoundata stationorgroupofstations. Querying the database from within dBASE can provide quick answers to complex questions suchas"what percentageofupper level passages contain aragonite?". But whentheability to querythedatabaseiscombined with computer generated mapsofthe cave, the real powerofthe data becomes apparent.Computergenerated line plotsofcaves have been around for decades. Theyareuseful for illustrating the extentofa cave,orfor providing quick profiles, butbythemselves they provide little to no informationPage 225

PAGE 231

Nepstadregarding whatisin the cave. Another programwaswritten at Wind Cave to interact between the inventory databases and line plotsofthe cave producedbyAutoCAD, a popular computer aided design program. This program allows the user to query the database foranygiven setofconditions. The program then checks the database for the conditions specified, and highlights the stations in the line plot which satisfy the conditions. Thus itispossible to quickly and easily look forspacialrelationships in the data. Sometime in1992,the NPS will receive copiesofan expanded versionofSMAPS, Doug Dotson's cave survey data management program, which provides these and other GIS capabiJities. The first illustrationofhow this information could be used came in the summerof1991. Donald Davis,asa part of some ongoing research regarding the originsofWind Cave's unusual helictite bushes, requested line plots (both plan and profile) showing the locationofall helictite bushes in the cave. Davis felt that the helictites had some kindofa subaqueous origin.Hebelieved that rising water entered the cave from below,mixedwith cave watersofa different chemistry, and formed the helictites. Wanting more evidence to substantiate his theory, he forwarded his request for the lineplOts,along with a maphehad found which showed a magnetic anomaly in the vicinityofthe cave.AsFigure 7 illustrates, helictite bushes in Wind Cave, with only a single exception, align themselves along the cave's major northwest/southeastaxis.Figure8,which consistsofa profileofthe majoraxisarea, shows that the bushes are always, with no known exceptions, located in the very lowest passage in the area where they are found. In other words, they are located precisely where mixing would have taken place had water entered the cave from below. While this certainly does not prove Davis' theory, it does provide compelling circumstantial evidence. Further evidencewasprovidedbydigitizing the magnetic contour map Davis had located, and geographically referencing it with a mapofthe cave.AsFigure 9 shows, the western flank of the magnetic anomaly runs directly along the helictite bush areaofthe cave. Could this have provided the sourceofthe rising water? The fact thatweare now able to look for such relationships so easily and so quicklyisexciting. Hundredsofcavers had viewed the helictite bushes in Wind Cave, but because they lacked the "big picture" that inventory data provides, none had ever noted these simple spacial relationships.Inthe future, the inventory data will probably serve as a starting point for many research projects in the cave. The inventory projectatWind Caveisnow finally proceeding at full pace. During an average month, a half mileofpreviously surveyed passageisinventoried, along with roughly a half mileofpassages surveyed during the same time period. This results in more than a mileofinventory data being gathered per month. Even when the backlogofpreviously surveyed caveisinventoried, the inventory project will not end. Since itisnow a partofthe survey process, the inventoryofWind Cave will not be complete until the cave has been fully explored. All indications are that this will not be for quite some time.Page226

PAGE 232

NepstadAREANAMEORSURVEY:DATEINVENTORIED: PARTICIPANTS:YOURNAME:PHYSICAL DESCRIPTIONMINIMUMSIZEsqueeze_craw1 _stoop,_ wa1k, _FLOORbedrock_s.brkdown,_1.brkdown,_mud, :-_loosesoils,_falsef1oor_mudcracks_other_LEVELupper_u.midd1e,_midd1e_1.midd1e, lower_WATERseeping_dripping_pooled_none_other NOTESFIGURE1 The physical description form for Wind Cave. Each station number along the inventory appears once, and only once, in the "Minimum Size" and "Level" sections. Station Numbers must appearatleast once in the "Floor" and "Water" sectionsPage227

PAGE 233

NepstadAREA NAME ORSURVEY:DATEINVENTORIED:PARTICIPANTS:YOURNAME:SPELEOTHEMS CALCITEboxwork_popcorn_spar ...,----_calcitecoating__flowstone_stalactites_stalagmites_co1 urnns _draperies_he1ictites_rafts_"gonads"_zebrarock_other HYDROMAGNESITEonfloor/wall_onfrostwork_other ARAGONITEneedlelike bushtype_X-mastree_other_GYPSUMneedles_luster cotton flowers_starbursts spiders --.other NOTESFIGURE2Thespeleothem form for Wind Cave. Station numbers appear in each section only when a particular speleothemisseen. Like theotherforms, a "Notes" sectionisincluded for detailed descriptions and observations.Page 228

PAGE 234

AREANAMEORSURVEY:DATEINVENTORIED: PARTICIPANTS:YOURNAME:GEOLOGICALquartz_chert_fossils_manganese paleo-fi11_other_AIRFLOWdirectionatentrance-------Indicateallstationswhereair-flowisnoted,togetherwithdirectionandintensity.BIOLOGICAL VERTEBRATESbat batscratches scat nest bones_other_INVERTEBRATESspringtails_crickets spiders_other_ ORGANIC MATERIALmold_wood_needles_roots_other_HISTORICRECENTCULTURAL__________________signatures___________________graffiti____________________dates___________________ --zpaper ____________________wo0d ___________________candles ___________________glass____________________metal____________________string____________________other_HAZARDSchimneys. pits slippery_unstable_looserocks_tightcrawls_other_NOTESFIGURE3 The miscellaneous form for Wind Cave.Aswith the speleothems forms, station numbers are recorded only when a particular featureisnoted. For cultural items, station numbers are recorded under the "Recent" headingifthey are less than 50 years old.Page 229

PAGE 235

Nepstad CAVEItfVENIDRY DATA DiTRYINSTRUCT IONS:-toabortarecord,hit to save arecord,hitorhit Down> severaltimes to move cursorup, down, ortotheside,usecursor -toenter'ALL',hitSelectFile Number:I1.Historic2.ColoradoGrotto3.Club RoOII1. Lakes5.Half Mile HallIi. tlorth 7.Silent B.SouthernComfortSelect Mode Letter:IA.GroupofstationsB.IndividualstationC.Individualstationwith viewD.Printdata froll a ofstationsFIGURE4 The main menu screen for INVENT.PRG. Wind Caveisdivided into eight "Zones" for a numberofmanagement purposes. INVENTORY BYINDIVIDUALSTATION Station:.:Dateof Statusof Travel Corridor: Min irrllmSize'1squeeze CrdIJ Istoop lok'ik 2-incomplete3-from notesT-travelcorridor !4pe 'X'forappropriatelineLevel 1-upper2-u.middle3-lIiddle i-I.Middle5-lowerI"erro: hit Down>toenter rerro text One:General Information FIGURE5 Screen one from "Individual Station" mode (ModeB)ofINVENT.PRG. As this screen illustrates, station AT58isa walking size passageinthe lower middle levelofWind Cave. All memo field information must be entered using this mode.Page 230

PAGE 236

Nepstad INVENTORYBY GROUPor STATIONS -11,14-171,1,13,3,5-8,12 Date: for StdtllS:n forTravelCorridor:Ifor f1ininllm Size..1squeeze,. crawl stoop.. ..LeveI,'Iupper.uppermiddIe..middIe. middIe.. ..,.,.... Pdqe One: Description1-solidZ-incomplete3-sur.notesD-developedT-travel corridor l'ijpe IX'ifpresent l'ijpe IX'ifpresentFIGURE6 Screen one from "Group of Stations" mode (Mode A)ofINVENT.PRG. In this mode, informationisentered almost exactlyasit appears on the original forms. This makesit possible to enter entire inventories at once. Like the forms themselves, INVENT.PRG can be customized to suit anycave.Page231

PAGE 237

NepstadNWindCaveWindCave NalionedPark o 500 1000oHelictit.eBushArea FIGURE7A map highlighting helictitebushlocations in Wind Cave.Byinterfacing inventorydatawithcomputergenerated mapsofthecave, a nearly infinitenumberofnew maps canbegenerated.Page 232

PAGE 238

Nepstad ..c:Yl::iCJ.:u-'.--'0.-Q):r:: 00 0 8LD-'Q)Q):...::... Page233FIGURE8A profile of the narrow bandofWind Cave which contains the helictite bushes, viewed from the northeast. Maps suchasthis can reveal spacial relationships in the inventory data .

PAGE 239

Nepstadz,,1 1130------"____ \);'/III\\\\\\FIGURE9A magnetic contour map, together with a mapofWind cave. The western edgeofthe anomaly, the 1160 gamma contour, runs along the helictite bush areasofthe cave.Page234

PAGE 240

O'DellAPPLICATIONSOFA GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM TOTHEMANAGEMENTOFGREATSALTPETRE CAVE, ROCKCASTLE COUNTY, KENTUCKYGary A O'Dell DepartmentofGeography, UniversityofKentucky Department for Environmental Protection, StateofKentuckyABSTRACTThewriter has begun a project to incorporate spatial and descriptive data concerning Great Saltpetrecaveand the surrounding property into a Geographic Information System database.Theprojectisexpected to provideaninvaluable management resource needed to make inventories and assessments, and to allow planning to be basedonthe most complete information available. Geographic information systems (GIS's) are a relatively new computer technology that have found increasing acceptance in facilities and resource planning and management, and promise to be used increasingly in new applications. Among these new applicationsisto the fieldofspeleology, where computer technology has the potential to revolutionize the analysis and portrayalofcavern systems and their relationship to the surrounding karst landscape. Very early in the "computer revolution"ofrecent decades, the data generatedbymetes and bounds cavern surveys lent itself readily to data processing. Beginning in the 1960's, many computer programs were writtenbyvarious individuals in languages suchasFortan and Basic. Initially, these fairly simple programs were limited to tabularoutputofprocessed data that were then draftedbytraditional hand methods to produce a visual renditionofcave passages. With the adventofCADD technology, visual translationofcave survey data files as line plots to monitor screens and output to printers and plotters could be accomplished.Onefairly sophisticated software packageofthis type, SMAPS,ispopular with manyoftoday's cave mappers. Softwareofthis sort may be considered as a limited geographic information system. However, more sophisticated applications are available that allow integrationofa far broader rangeofspatial data, including not only passage surveys but also surface topography and subsurface geologyaswellasnumerousothercharacteristics, and allow manipulation and analysisofsuch data. GIS technologyispresently being used to build a spatial database for the Great SaltpetrecaveHistoric Preserve in Rockcastle County Kentucky. With this analytical toolbox, best management practices maybedeveloped and implemented for the cave and surrounding tract, consistent with budgetary constraints and conservation ideals.HISTORY AND SIGNIFICANCEOFTHECAVE PROPERTYPotassium nitrate, known also as saltpeterorniter,asthe major constituentofgunpowder has been an important itemofworld commerce for centuries. During the period just prior to American independence, the major sourceofsupply for this commodity was the Bengal regionofIndia, controlledbythe British. Though smugglingofmunitions and artificial methodsofsaltpeter production allowed the coloniestosuccessfullywage war against the British during the revolution,bythe adventofthe second war with England thirty years later, large naturally occurring depositsofsaltpeter had been discoveredincavesonthe American frontier. Lexington, Kentucky, became the central marketplace for wholesale tradeinsaltpeter, and received shipments from the numerous caves in the surrounding beltofMississippian limestone. Speculators and brokers established themselves in that community, and a flourishing local powdermill industry sprang up seemingly overnight in the Bluegrass region. However, mostofthe niter supply was shipped to large Eastern manufacturers,Page 235

PAGE 241

primarilytheDuPontcompany in Delaware. With war impending, saltpeter mining becameanimportantand lucrative sourceofemployment for many Kentuckians, who exploitedthecaves in their vicinity as, most commonly, small-scale, rural cottage industries,butalso occasionally as large miningandrefining operations utilizing dozensofworkmen.Thetwo largest known saltpeter mines in Kentucky wereMammothCave in the west-centralpartofthestate, andGreatSaltpetre Cave,fiftymilessouthofLexington. 1 Great Saltpeter Cave began production shortly after its reported discovery in 1798byJohnBaker. Within four years, a smalloperationfor extracting saltpeter from the cavern soils had been established. George MontgomeryandJames Kincaid used slave labor to mine approximately 1000 poundsofrefined saltpeter per week. In 1804, Kincaid defaultedona mortgage takenonthecave propertyandthrough a complex seriesoftransactionsthecave passed intothehandsofthe partnershipofDr. Samuel M. Brown and Thomas Hart, Jr.,bothofLexington. Dr. Brown was a scientist as well as physician, and devoted considerable energy to research intotheoccurrence and productionofsaltpeter.UnderBrown's management, followingthere-engineeringoftheproduction facilities byJohnJamesDuFour,niter production zoomed to over three tons per week in 1805.DuFourhad invented two typesofrectangular leaching hoppers, a pumping system to bring water up tothecave from Crooked Creek, and made a compassandchain surveyofthecave to produce the secondoldest known cave map intheUnited States. 2 Unfortunatelytherearefewrecords to indicate where the saltpeter manufacturedatthecave was destined. It seems likelythata greater partofthis may have been shipped totheLexington market.AtSouthElkhornin Fayette County,anentire communityofpowdermakers arose about 1806, representing a clusterofpowdermill facilities, andthepresent writer believes thatGreatSaltpetre Cave constituted a major sourceofsaltpeter for these mills.Ataboutthis same time, Charles Wilkins ofLexington began operating as a large-scale saltpeter broker. Wilkins purchased Mammoth Cave in 1810, anditisofinterest tonotethat niter manufacturing facilities subsequently constructedatO'DellMammoth duplicatedtheearlier engineeringatGreatSaltpetre. 3Thesaltpeterandgunpowder manufacturing industries collapsed in Kentucky followingtheendoftheWarof1812,andthereislittle to indicatethatsaltpeter refining continuedatGreatSaltpetre Caveinanyimportantquantity followingthattime. Although niter manufacture inthesouthernstates duringtheCivilWarfar exceededthatofthe1812 war, Kentucky was aborderstatenotfirmly committedtothesoutherncauseandapparently littleofthis manufacture was carriedoninthestate.Someminorproduction occurredGreatSaltpetre Cave under supervisionofFederal officers. 4 FollowingtheCivil War, little activityofany kind was seenatthecave, save for occasional local social functions.Anattemptto commercializethecave beganabout1941, whentheproperty was purchased byJohnLair. Lair had recently establishedtheRenfroValley Barn Dance, a country music enterprise,andheld occasional concerts inthecavethatwere enhanced bythesplendid acousticsofEcho Auditorium.Onopening night, CBS broadcasttheBarnDancefromthecave.Thecommercializationofthecave was short-lived, however,andby 1943 public tours were haIted. Overthenext two decades, only a few paid tours were conducted throughthecave. In 1966, a new periodofcommercial activity began, with some facility improvements madeandtours heldonmost weekends. Regular tours couldnotbesustained, however, and by 1976 visitation became solely self guided.In1985thecaveandproperty were soldandthecave was closed tothepublic. In 1986thecave was again placedonthereal estate market. 5GreatSaltpetre Cave wasoneofthemostimportantniter minesonthecontinent duringtheWarof1812, and as such contributed totheproductionofmunitionsbytheUnitedStatesinaneffort to holdtheirnewly established independence. It hasbeenestablishedthatgunpowder manufacture in Lexington was used in severalimportantengagementsofthewar, includingthebattleofThames River in CanadaandthebattleofNew Orleans. Although never a successful commercial tourist operation,duein largeparttothelackofPage236

PAGE 242

capital on partofthe owners and the remotenessofthe location, the cave became tied to the local country music industry.Thecaveisidentifiedonnumerous published mapsofthe state and region, and a state historical marker noting the significance of the cave has been placed in Rockcastle County at the intersectionof1-75and U.S. 25, several miles from the cave.Inaddition, the 309 acresofthe cave tract constitute a significant blockofrelatively undisturbed wilderness: the Crooked Creek drainage basin, an important areaofmajor karst development. There are several internationally significant caves near the property,. and a numberofsmall caves and promising new cave leadsonthe tractinaddition to Great Saltpetre cave. 6ESTABLISHMENTOF mE GREATSALTPETRE CAVE IllSTORIC PRESERVEDuring the summerof1989, a groupofcasual cave explorers from Kentucky and Ohio found themselves suddenly and unexpectedly charged with the managementofthis former commercial cave and significant historical site. These cavers were representativesofthe Cincinnati and Bluegrass local chaptersofthe National Speleological Society (NSS). The tracthad been purchasedbya private historic preservation foundation, which subsequently arranged the NSS for local volunteersofthatorganization 10"' manage the cave tractasa historic preserve. Thiswasaccomplished amid some debate and minor controversy, resUlting in the formationofanad hoc management committee comprisedoffour members from eachofthe two local chapters ("grottos"), and the chartering under Kentucky lawofa non-profit scientific and educational organization -the Great SaltpetrecaveHistoric Preserve. eight-member committee possessed enthusiasm for project but littleorno experienceinsite management; in fact, the two grottos had, in the past, only occasional and casual contact with one another although individuals from each group had shared an interest in explorations and research in the cave-rich regionofKentucky's Cumberland Region. The management committeewasandishandicappedbya lackofnecessary funds for maintenance and ofthe property and operates primarily onO'Dellsmall donations from interested individuals and organizations, and with labor donatedbymembers of the associated grottos.Aninitial management planwasdevelopedbythe committee, with stated goals being to manage the propertyasan "educational, scientific, and nature oriented preserve." However, itwassoon discoveredinthe formulationofthe plan that very littlewasknown concerning the assetsofthe property.Inorder to provide best management for the Great Saltpetre Cave property, preserving historic artifacts and wisely using the available resourcesofnearly one-half square mileofland, accurate maps would be required along with detailed inventoriesofthe surface and subterranean features and assets. 7BUILDING mE GEOGRAPillCINFORMATION SYSTEM As a memberofthe management committee, the writer set about to build a GIS database that would incorporate spatial and attribute data concerning the property. Advanced computer facilities were providedbythe DepartmentofGeography at the UniversityofKentucky in Lexington,aspartofa graduate research project conductedbythe writer.Ina limited sense, a GISisa tool for computerized cartography, but in a larger sense a Geographic Information System can realize the potential inherent in its name,asa spatial database in which geographic data for a specific areaiscaptured, stored, retrieved, analyzed and displayed to emphasize particular characteristics and allow bestmanagement practices basedoninformed decisions. Visual data from many sourcesmaybe integrated with alphanumeric attributes contained within traditional database formats. The geographic information system software chosen to develop the databasewasa commercial package knownasARC/INFO, marketed and supportedbyEnvironmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). Although a numberofcomparable alternate GIS packages exist, ARC/INFOwaschosen for a number of reasons. Primary among thesewaseaseofaccess to thispaCkage,asARC/INFOisthe instrument of choice for the DepartmentofGeographyininstruction andPage237

PAGE 243

applications, and also for the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet (KNREPC).Asthe writerisemployedbythe Groundwater Branch within the DivisionofWater, opportunity was providedtolearn the softwarebothon the job as wellaspartofa graduate education. Additionally, thePRIMEminicomputer facilities available to theDepartmentused theINFOlanguage for database programming, and thus the writer had gained familiarity with the foundationsofARC/INFO prior to learning GIS applications.Asthe geographic information system forKNREPC(Kentucky Natural Resources Information System,orKNRIS) was still in the processofdevelopment andnotyet readily availablebynetwork in the DivisionofWater, the facilitiesofthe UniversityofKentucky were chosen upon which to build the database.Theactual software used,PCARC/INFO, version 3.3, was run on microcomputers and had slightly less capability than ARC/INFO designed for minicomputers and mainframesbutstill provided sufficient ability.Thefirst step in building the database wastoacquire basic geographic information concerning the cave and property. A color aerial photographofthe vicinity was obtained from the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Phototechnic Services, enlarged to a scaleofapproximately 1:4800.Theactual distance between large visual Objectsonthe ground was measured and compared totheaerial photo, so that the actual scaleofthe photo was determined to be 1:4938.Theaerial photo, taken from a 1985 overflight, has servedasthe major data source for the project.Otherimportant sourcesofcartographic data have been the land surveyofthe property from the recent sale, obtained from courthouse records, and the original underground surveyofthe cavern passages, made in 1982bymembersofthe Cincinnati and Louisville Grottos. To a lesser extent, U.S.G.S. 7 l/2-minute topographic quadrangles have also been used, although reliabilitywasconsidered to be much less than the aerial photography.APPLICATIONSOFTHEGREAT SALTPETRE CA VB GISAt the present time, the full potentialofa GIS system has only been partially tapped,asthe projectisstill in initial stages. Spatial data thus far incorporated allowsO'Dellportrayalofthe surveyed property lines, major surface featuresofthe property such as streams and roads, and the survey plot and passage outlinesofGreatSaltpetre Cave (Fig. 1). Distinction can bemade among various feature typesofthe same class, for example roads, whicharedisplayedaspaved, gravel, and dirt by meansofdiffering line symbols. Additional differentiationismade among features by the useofcolor, so that line symbols may be graphically identical for a secondary road as for a secondary streambutare easily separated visually. Features maybeviewedatany desired scale, from an overviewoftheentire property to extreme magnifications revealing considerable detail. Maps may be displayed on-screen for manipulationormOdification,oroutputto an attached color pen plotter. In addition, automatic calculations are built into the database that determine areaorboundary measurements, andothercalculations may be specified. ARC/INFOisa vector-based GIS; informationiscaptured and manipulatedbyrepresenting spatial features as points, lines,orpolygons.Forexample, a karst springora utility pole location would represent point data; roads, streams, and cave survey plots are line data; and property boundariesorareasofdiffering vegetation are polygon data. A lineorpolygonisbuilt from a numberofconnected points, with locational andotherreference data attached. Each data item, point, line segment,orpolygon, may have additional attribute data. Examplesofattribute data would be station field ID numbersorpassage heights for points on the cave survey,orlithologic unit names for polygons representing underlying bedrock formations. At this stage in the creationoftheGreatSaltpetre Cave GIS, digitizingofthe cave map has provided sufficient accuracy for current needs. However, digitizing the survey line first places the points and subsequently calculates locational coordinates. However, itispossible to input numeric information directly, building a tableofactual survey data that creates the plot with greater accuracy. Data generatedbya conventional cave map program suchasSMAPS, when converted to an ASCII file, can be accepted and used to create an ARC/INFO data file. This will be accomplished during 1992 to replace the digitized survey, allowing additional passage surveys to be more Page 238

PAGE 244

readily incorporated. Other spatial data that will be addedinthe near future include surface geology (lithOlogic units), topography (contour lines), vegetation types (e.g., mixed deciduous hardwood, coniferous, pasture, wetlands), and structures suchassanitary facilities, campground pavilion, andRVhookups. Features thatwillrequire more effort to add to the database include the external plumbing and wiring systems that serve the campground, karst features suchassprings and sinkholes that are too small to be discernableontopographic mapsoreven on enlarged airphotos, and locations and surveys of other caves on the property.Oneofthe most challengingofthe surface tasks will be the creationofa networkofhiking trails that link the most aesthetic portionsofthis rugged woodland karst environment. Itisexpected that the GIS will be important. in evaluating alternate routes that connect pointsofinterest. When trails are finally constructed, following the evaluation process, they will be surveyed and the survey data incorporated into the database. Within Great Saltpetre Cave itself, there are numerous assets and features that need to be inventoried and built into the GIS for detailed displays. These include the various historic artifacts within the cave, particularly the remnantsofthe 1812 saltpeter works. Someofthe subterranean features to be built into the database are counterpartsoffeatures existing on the surface. The wiring and lighting system within the cave has deteriorated considerably and much needs replacement and upgrading. Here, too, the GIS will be able to help plan the most economical and efficient rewiringofthe most heavily traveled routes, and to aid in maintenance through constantly updated displays of junction boxes, lighting fixtures, and similar hardware that may need periodic servicing. In addition, the GIS will be able to display the various trails in the cave, showing different routes thatmaybe available. Great Saltpetre Cave isnot a large system, and so building these various features into a databaseisnotO'Dellthe overwhelming, years-long task that might be faced for some other caves that are measured in milesortensofmiles. The significant advantageofthe Great Saltpetre Cave geographiC information systemisthat itisable to incorporate not only the cave survey data that produces a conventional cave map, but to quickly allow the portrayalofany numberofrelationships between the cave and various featuresofthe surface and subterranean environments.NOTES1.GaryAO'Dell, "The Saltpeter Manufacturing Millennium in World History," JournalofSpelean History 24 (October-December 1990): 25,27-29;____, "Bluegrass Powdermen: A Sketchofthe Industry," Registerofthe Kentucky Historical Society 87(1989): 106-107.2.Angelo1.George, "John James DuFour and the Mammoth Cave Rectangular Saltpeter Hoppers," the writer's possession; "Interim ChronologyofHistoric EventsatGreat Saltpetre Cave, Rockcastle County, Kentucky," JournalofSpelean History 22 (April-June 1988):7-9.3.George, "DuFour and Mammoth Cave,"; Angelo I George and GaryAO'Dell, "Damage to the Saltpeter Works at Mammoth Cave Caused bythe New Madrid Earthquake, 1811-1812," Filson Club History Quarterly (in press).4.O'Dell, "Saltpeter in World History,"30;George, "Interim Chronology," 9-10.5.George, "Interim Chronology," 10-11.6.GaryAO'Dell, "The Trotter Family, Gunpowder, and Early Kentucky Entrepreneurship, 1784-1833," Registerofthe Kentucky Historical Society 88(1990): 406,408,416-418.7.Management Plan for Great Saltpetre Cave, 1990Page 239

PAGE 245

O'Dell zw w > u r W ::>Cex::rf-t-WZ :::)Gou f---.-J w -..Jt-(/) (f) ae: w if) w ae:. a.. uHae: o .if)H.Ii"':ju, w' ae:i"':'if)';;i,.!)! :J>m ,, ,,/ I /r' FIGURE 1PenplottermapofGreatSaltpeterCaveandvicinity,composedofvariousphysicalandpoliticalfeaturelayers.Originalincolor.Page240

PAGE 246

EstesIMAGEDATABASE ARESOURCEANDINFORMATIONMANAGEMENTTOOLFORTOMORROWSTECHNOLOGYW.Gerry Estes Image Database SoftwareABSTRACTAdvancements in computer software design led to the developmentofa visually oriented, hypertext,datamanagement system. This system links many dissimilar typesof specific information to high resolution, scanned imagesofmoregeneral figures.TheuseofWindows, multimedia, and hypertext has led to a system whichisintuitive, user friendly, easy to operate, and powerful.ThecomplexionofthePersonalComputerIndustry has changed significantly over the past two years.Theraw computing horsepower available in today'sPCrivalsthatofmany past generation mainframe systems, manyofwhicharestillinuse.Wehave entered an eraofPCprice wars. Prices on comparable, fast, powerful systems has dropped from over $8,000 in 1988 to under $1,700 in 1991.Youcan getmorehardware forthedollarthenever before.Whereisthe industry heading?Whatisthe directionofthenext step in innovation? Perhaps we shouldn't look at price-driven hardware; perhaps we should look at evolutionary steps being made in software development. Windows,theFutureofPCComputing When Microsoft introduced Windows 3.0 in Mayof1990,itwas a tremendous hit.Inoneyear, over 4 million copiesofWindows 3.0 were sold. Itisprojectedthatthe numberofunit Shipmentsofvarious Window applications will increase from 3.8 million in 1991 to 7.7 million in 1992. Dataquest, a leading market analysis company, estimates thatthesalesofWindows will equal salesofMacintoshes in 1991 and exceed them thereafter.TheGartnerGroup,anotherleading market analysis company, predicts that Windows will pace the entire microcomputer operating systems market, grabbing a 41% shareofnew installations by 1995, and salesofDOSsystems running Windows willoutnumbersalesofnon-WindowsDOSsystemsby1993. Whereisthis leading? Why should we design software for Windows? WhyisWindows becoming so popular? Perhaps the answeristhreefold. Firstofall,Applehadtheright idea when they designed the graphical user interface for Macintosh. People do indeed think visually and it makes sense to design systemsthatmakeiteasy for people to use computers. Second, the IBM world was slowoutofthe gate with a graphical user interface,butthe popularityofWindows provesthattheyarenotonly picking up momentum, but that they may soon surpass Apple intheimplementationofnew design technologies. Finally, the computer industryischanging so quickly that application software needs to be designed so thatitutilizes the rapid evolutionary changes in technology.Image Database TechnologyThefirst step in taking advantageofthese technology changes was to design a visually oriented information management system called Image Database. Image Databaseisa software tool for Windows 3.0 (and beyond) which utilizes leading edge technology to manage many different kindsofinformationvisuaUy.Nomatterwhether the applicationisa Resource Management System, a Geographical Information System (GIS), a multimedia educational program,ora medical reference system, Image Database links text, photographs, scanned images, and various elementsofthecomputersystem together in a easy, intuitive, and user-friendlyway.All information, nomatterhow complex it may seem,isimmediately available and no farther away than a clickofthe mouse.Youcan look at a mapofrecreational sites, welI locations, photographsofcore samples, schematicsofa electrical system, and immediately have availablealIinformationPage241

PAGE 247

concerning that item. The prototype design applicationwasa Cave Inventory GIS System for the more than200small caves in Mammoth Cave National Park, presented at this meeting for the first time.ScannedImages astheFocalPointforInformationRetrievalThe premiseofthis information system and what sets it apart from other GISorinformation management systemsisits useofscanned images and visual informationasthe focal pointofthe system rather than the conventional text viewpoint. The presumption made isthat the visual information suchasmaps, photographs, illustrations, etc., are works of art andassuch, already have been producedbysomeone. Why not scan that information and,aspartofthe program, link other sourcesofinformation to those imagesbyusing hypertext, hypermedia, and object orientated, event driven programming techniques?Hypertextisa system in which a wordorgraphic in a document linkstoinformation located elsewhere.Hypermedia,seen most frequently in museum kiosks, on-line databasesorencyclopedias with keyword search, and interactive educational systems,isa collectionofinformation you can navigate through in many differentways.The information can appearastext, hypertext, graphics, sound, orvideo.Objectoriented programmingisa technique in which each object seen on 'the screen has program code associatedaspart of that object., The program code defines not only the action that objectmaytake, but also action other related Objectsmaytake in response to action takenbythe original object. This technique can make the program not only appear to have a certain levelofartificial intelligence, but also to have a one-on-one interaction with the user. This one-on-one interaction, or event driven programming, makes the computer respond directly to user actions.LocatorSystem The prototype system for Mammoth Cave uses akeymap called the Locator. This locatorisa scanned imageofthe shaded relief mapofMammoth Cave National Park, computer enhanced to 256 shadesofgray.The map can be scrolled on the screen and when a regionofinterestisseen, clicking the mouse on thatEstespointwillzoom in to a topographic map showing the area selected. Then,byclicking the mouse on the magnified topographic map, the map zooms in again to still a higher magnification.Atthis highest levelofmagnification, objectsofinterest can be seen. In this case each small cave entrance.InformationBoxByclicking the mouse on a cave entrance, an information boxwillappear with a text descriptionofthat cave entrance. This text description, which can be scrolled through the information box, includes butisnot limited to such items as: what the entrance looks like, any special gearneeded for exploration, whether the entrance has a gateornot, a brief summaryofthe significanceofthe cave,orany other pertinent information. The Information Box also has four buttons which may be pressed with the mouse. The four buttons are: Notes, History, Map, and Photo. The Notes button displays text describing any additional notes concerning the cave such as a biologicalorgeological summary. The History button displays information concerning the historyofexploration and in some cases, past trip reports. The Map button displays a survey mapofthe cave at several magnifications.Insome cases, photographs are linked to cross-sectionsofthe cave passage, showing an actual photographofthe cross section. The Photo button displays a photographofthe entrance. Anyofthis information, including maps and photos, can be printed out.DropDownMenusThereisa drop-down menu system associated with the Locator map and with each topographic map section. The drop-dOwn menus for the topographic section have a1)Find Cave section (you can find the locationofa particular caveorlocate all caves in a particular region),2)a Geographical Information section (passages can be overlaid on the topographic map and geological mapsofthe area can be displayed showing the relationshipofthe entrance to the geology),3)a on-line training tutorial, and4)exit the program. The Locator drop-down menu system has such featuresas:1)TypeofResource (Archeology, Biology, Cultural and Historical, Geology, Hydrogeology, MammothPage242

PAGE 248

caveTourSystem, Smallcaveinventory, and SurfaceTrails), 2) Maintenance (both Surface Maintenance and Subsurface Maintenance), 3) an on-line training tutorial, and 4) quit the program.InformationExchangeImage Database has extensive data exchange capabilities and,assuch, canoperateasa front end tootherapplications.Datacan be exchanged with anyotherWindows program through the useofDOE(DynamicDataExchange),orthrough the useofOLE(Object Linking and Embedding).Datacan be exchanged with DOS-based programs such as dBase, dBase3, andSQLthrough the useofDLL(Dynamic Link Library). In addition, ASCII information (both fixed length fields and ASCII delimited fields) can be imported intotheprogram. Visual file formats suchasBMP, PCX, TIF, WMF, CGM, DIB, DRW, and EPS can be imported directly into the program.Othervisual file formats such asGEM,PICT,HPGL,DXF, andPICcan be imported through a conversion process.WhyisImageDatabaseDifferentMany popular GIS systems today require a digitizer tablettohand-input thex-ycoordinates from a map, use some sortoftext and numeric database for storageofthe data, and frequently use a separate vector graphics Computer Aided Design (CAD) program suchasAutocad for on-screen output. This typeofsystemislabor-intensive in data input and demands heavy requirements in termsofcomputer resources.Formany applications, this heavy computer resource demand requires the purchaseofa expensive workstation, RISC Processor,orminicomputer with many megabytesofstorage. Conversely, Image Database uses scanned imagesofpre-existing maps, drawings, and illustrations, andisdesigned for present generation PC's.Thedata linked to the visual images can reside either within Image Databaseorelsewhere and be brought into the program with dataeXChange,asmentioned previously. Vector graphics are available with a resolutionof1440 dots per inch, however, the power resides in its ability to manipulate graphic images, especially scanned images. The graphics resolutionisdependent upon the graphics adapter installed on the system. It can range anywhere fromEstesVGAat640 x 480 pixels with 16 colors to 32 bit Truecolorat1024 x 768 pixels with 16.8 million colors. Similar to Autocad, Image Database has a different layer for each objectorgroupofobjects, with a totalof65,535 layers available. To use an analogy, Image Databaseisa encyclopedia and each volumeisa different graphics view. Similarly, the Locatoristhe reference volume for the encyclopedia, a particular topographic regionisa book, and each magnificationofthe topographic regionisa page.TheInformation boxes resideona page but are hidden from view except when selected. Image Database hasthecapability of runningotherprograms from within itself, so it quite easily lends itself to a modular design. In essence, when you change views from the locator to a topographiC map, you are running another program. Because this modularity allows us to keep adding different modules without altering the main program, we can create templates for many different types of applications.ImageDatabaseforProductivityEnhancementImage Databaseisdesigned not to replace conventional GIS systems, but to enhancetheir productivity. Itistime consumingtoredraw all vector images in a CAD system every time you want to see a drawing.TheuseofScanned images allows us to display a drawinginjust afewmilliseconds. While GIS systems frequently have pagesofquestions for data input encompassing every possible descriptive scenario, perhaps a system which allows access to the most frequently used informationismore feasible for everyday use. Thatisthe purposeofImage Database to access the most frequently needed information easily and quickly.WhataretheComputerRequirementsforImageDatabaseImage Database will operate on anyPCcompatible computer with a 80286, 80386,or80486 processor, 2Mbofmemory, a hard disk, and a colorVGA(or better) graphics card. Just about any present tion PC will do, however, the optimum system would have 4-8Mbofmemory 100-200 Mb hard disk, and a superVGAgraphiCScard.Theentire prototype Image Database for MammothcaveSmall cavesisslightly less than 2.5Mb. Each moduleisless than3ooK.Page 243

PAGE 249

HowMuchDoesitCostandWhereCanIGetit As you can imagine, Image Databaseisa custom designed tool andismeant to provide easy access to your specific resource data. Since itiscustom designed, it is hard toputa price tagonit.Anaccurate price can onlybedeterminedbyyour specific resource needs. We can, however put together three possible scenarios for pricing: 1)AgenericToolShell which allows you to scan your own images and construct a program around them. This shell would consistofa seriesofprograms which write their own program code basedona fixed setofparameters. Perhaps a ball park figure for a shell would be $10,000. 2) A custom program would be designed especially for your needs. In this case, we would scan the images and provide the finished working program for you. We could even supply the computer hardwareatcost.Ofcourse, the cost would dependonthe complexityofyour resource needs, but lets say a ballpark figureof$7,000 for the finished program. 3) A genericToolShell with Training. This would consistofa generic Tool Shellasmentioned in number1,butwewould teach your staff how to make custom programs. In this case,wewould provide training at the startofthe project and could provide additional training on a cost basis. A ballpark figure for this scenario would be $13,500. Other pricing methods could be time and materials. In addition to the Image Database program, we also could not only provide continuing training on a cost basis, but also program maintenance in whichweupdate your custom program for you on afixedschedule. You can obtain additional information about Image Database from Gerry Estes, Image Database Software, 13509 Oakland Drive, Burnsville, MN 55337 (612-898-3426).EstesWhatOtherApplicationsAreThereforThisTechnology?In addition to the Image Databaseasa resource management tool, manyotherproducts can be designed using the featuresofthis typeofprogramming.Byutilizingtheinteractive aspectsofthis technology, we could design, for example, full multimedia kiosk systems for visitors centers and museums.Byfeaturing such items as animation, full motion video, sound (music and voice), hypertext, and graphics, a visitor center display could be a complete sight and sound experience. In the caseofMammoth cave, after taking a tour, let's say the Historic Tour, the visitor could explore thetourroutewith a computer in the visitors center and find out additional informationaboutplaces they saw alongtheroute.Ifthey wanted additional informationoutabout a place, lets say River Hall, they could access any information available describing that landmark including history, photos, exploration, etc. You could also access informationaboutscience inthe'cave. In this case, you could show photosofcave life, habitat, ecology, etc. With this application, Image Database becomes an interpretive tool.Otherapplications for this typeoftechnology could include a computerized card file system for museums which not only show each item's description and location, but also photographsofeach Object on display from paintings to artifacts. Also, computer-based educational training programs which include information testing and evaluation modes could be designed.WhatOtherProjectsareintheWorksIn addition to developing a generic program shell, we areinthe processofdesigning a cave survey/database/drawing tool. This program shows a pictureofa cave survey book onthescreen. You canenterdatabytypinginthe book justasyou would during the survey. You can edit the databyjust draggingthemouse over the old data and typinginthe replacement data. You could havetheprogram draw the passage on the screen as you typein the data in real time. Data could be storedinthe program, storedPage 244

PAGE 250

separately as ASCII data, stored in dBase,orstoredina spreadsheet like ExcelorLotus for Windows.Theadvantageofusing a spreadsheetisthe ability to do calculations based upon the data. Many different featuresofthe program would be available through drop-down menus. Since you wouldbeworking in Windows, allofWindows virtual memory would be available for the program.Forexample, a 4Mb computer system would haveasmuchas15Mbofvirtual memory available. This not only breaks the old DOS 640K barrier, it greatly expands the system resources available. Plans are in the works to continue developmentontothe next generationofoperating system, the 32 bit Windows NT. With this systemwehopeto be able to cross platforms into a hardware independent world.EstesThanksSpecial thanks gooutto the Cave Research Foundation: especially RichardZopfand Scott House, who have continued to supply reliable science and data; the administration at Mammoth Cave National Park, who have continued to support efforts at understandingtheresources. Roger Brucker; whose insights and kindly guidance have been helpful over the years; Zenith Data Systems who got me startedasa beta test site for Windows 3.0; and most important,mywife Beth, who has spent many long lonely nightsasa computer widow.Page245

PAGE 251

WilsonUSING CAVE REGISTERSTOFURTHERTHEUNDERSTANDINGOFTHEHUMANEFFECTONCAVESJohnM. Wilson,ChairmanContemporaryCaveUseStudy(CCUS)oftheNationalSpeleological SocietyABSTRACTCCUSversions 5and6 cave registers have been in use (ormorethanthreeyears.Someresults havebeenreturnedtothestudygroup,and preliminary results showtheaverage caver isoldernowthanintheearlierphaseofthestudy.Therevised format cave registerisintendedtoprovidemoreinformationofvaluetocave managers, conservationists,andcaveorganizationleadership.Resultsindicatethatit willbemorebeneficialthantheold format cave registers.TheCCUSsoftware is facilitatingtheprocessingofcave register data. A "how to"outlineonoperatingaregisterprogramexplainsoperationandmaintenanceofregister books,containeranddataprocessing.Understandingcaves requiresanunderstandingoftheimpactpeoplehaveonthecave environment. This impact isoftenmoresignificantthananyotherfactor. Thus, gooddataontheeffectpeoplehaveoncavesisessential inthesamewaythatthetraditional cavemapsurvey helpstounderstandcaves. Cavingisa significantpartofMan'simpactoncaves, and cave registers providethemost cost effective meansofgettinginformationoncaving.Therefore,theContemporaryCaveUseStudy(CCUS)ofthe NSS has chosen to use cave registers asoneofits major meansofinvestigationofcontemporaryhumancave usc. Cave registersareoftenmisunderstoodbycavers assomethingtobe usedbysomeoneotherthanthemselves.Forthestudy to be most effective in building models to describe caving, it hastogatherdata from a significantsampleofall typesofcavers, including all NSS members.Asthedegreeofparticipation increases,theconclusions drawn fromthedata will increase in reliability, andtheprocedures necessary to insure generalize-ability will be less costly.Thepresent cave register programisinusethroughoutNorthAmerica aspartofthe25 yearCCUSproject. This researchisdesignedtoestablish astandardizednationaldatabaseofthepeoplewhoentercaves inorderto:1.Accurately describethesamplecaverpopulationandachievegreaterabilitytogeneralize totheentirecavepopulationin terms of:a.caver demographicsb.cave usec.caver impactonthecaveenvironmentd.speleological knowledgee.skill intheuseofenvironmentalethics systems.2.Facilitatecomparisonandcorrelationresearch.Thebasic registerprogrammaybeclassified as descriptive research.Latersupplementalstudies may useexperimental,quasi experimental,comparison,andex post facto research designs.Forexample, aresearchermayundertakea studyofvaluesandwanttoknow if his results maybe gener;:llized toanotherpopulation.MuchgreaterreliabilityPage 246

PAGE 252

maybeachieved, providedthattheresearcher gathersthesamebasicdataasisasked intheregister. Using analysisofcovariance,thetwo samples canbecomparedand initial differences adjustedtoallow for generaliza tion.WilsonA new version 7isbeing developedthatwill have twoquestionnairesperpage and larger type to make it easiertoread.Otherchangesthatwillbeincludedinthis versionareto:WIDESPREADCOOPERATIONISSOUGHTANDTIMESAVERSAREAVAILABLEVersion 6.0of registerquestionnaireisnowbeing used. This format hasthemostimportantquestionsmarkedwithan"*",sothatcaverswhomakerepeatedvisitstothesamecave may savetimebyresponding to onlythosequestions. Version 6.0 has a new layout,makingiteasiertoreadandanswer quickly.Nonaffiliated cavers will havetheconvenienceofreturnpostcardsthatmaybemailedtotheNSS formembershipinformation.Thecardsareself mailers,printed3toa sheet, perforated, withanaddress ontheothersideand a place for postage. Severalofthesesheetswillbeboundintothecave register book.caveregisters serve many different purposes. Besides facilitating scientific research, they provide aconservationmessage, a meansofcommunication, historicaldocumentation,and a wayofencouraging unaffiliated cavers to jointheNSS.1.2.3.Puttheword "optional" beside address to down play itsimportanceinordertogetmorepeopleto recordintotheregister, reducethetimeit takestocompleteit, reducethetimetoenterthedata inthecomputer,respondto concernsbysomecavers whodonotwanttheiraddress in a publicplace'likea cave, and relyontheNSSinformationreturncard formembershippromotion.Itis generally agreedthatthedelay in retrievingandprocessingthecave registers reducestheeffectivenessofgatheringtheaddressdatato use for NSSmembershippromotion,Include a section inthequestionnaireto provide fortimein andoutofthecave and areaofthecave visited. Thisdatawould be useful for searchandrescue and cave management.Havemorewhitespaceinthequestionnairefor improved readability,Theresearch interestsdonotrequirethatthecaver give hisnameandaddress. Actually,theresearchcomponentdoesnotrequireidentificationofindividuals at all. However,somevariables like lengthoftimeapersonhas been an NSSmembercan best bemeasuredbyNSSnumber.Thereasonthatnameandaddressareaskedisto providetheoptiontoNSSchaptersandothersinterestedinpromotingNSSorgrottomembershiptocontactpeoplewho have recorded in registers andwhomight bepotentialmembers. Inshort,cave registers serve not onlythegoalsofthecave researcher,butthecave manager,thecaveorganizationsupporter,thehistorian,theconservationistandmany others.Theformatisintendedtoprovide for the needsofmany different interests in acooperativeefforttobuild widespreadsupportfortheprogram.USED UP, DAMAGED,ORWETBEYOND USE?Ifyou find a cave register in which allofthe questionnairesintheregisterbookarefilled out,orif itiswetordamaged beyond use, please mailtheregister(s) to:JohnM. Wilson,ContemporarycaveUseStudy, c/o NSS,caveAvenue, Huntsville,AL35810.Ifthemanageroftheparticularcave has included his address intheregisterbookyou may wish send ittohim,Thestudygroupvery much appreciatesthehelpofanyonewhoreturnsan unusable cave register, since registers will not dryoutin most caves.Unusableregisters serve nopurposewhen leftirithe cave, NSS members can helpbygettingthemout and gelling them backtotheappropriateperson.Page 247

PAGE 253

WilsonCAVEREGISTERSUPPLIESMAYBEORDEREDAny NSS member mayordertheseregister suppliesbyfillingouttheCCUSorderform and agreeing totheprinciplesofparticipation listedonthe form.Theformisavailable fromJohnM.Wilson, 9504 Lakewater Ct., Richmond,VA23229.RegisterBooksAvailablecaveregister booksareavailable in six sizes: NSS standard (144 questionnaires), large (216 questionnaires), extra-large (288 questionnaires), colossal (360 questionnaires), small (96 questionnaires), and custom made. Register containers should be placed in the cave, with two to five register bookspercontainer.RegisterContainersAvailableTherearethreetypesofcontainers available from CCUS.1.Thestandard 4 inch diameter register container withorwithout [addition] built in pencil sharpener. This registerisconstructed with 4 inch diameter, whitePVCdrain pipe. Itisintended for use with inexpensive mechanical pencilsorconventional pencils.2.Thelightweight 4 inch diameter register containerisfor use in controlled accessormanaged caves in whichthecave userisnotlikely to abuse the container.Itisa simple, inexpensive to manufacture container with a slip-on cap and itisthe easiest to useofall containers.3.TheexIra large 6 inch diameter register containerisfor use in caves with extensive traffic. This registerisconstructedofheavy duty aluminum with wing nuts usedtoseal the lid.SoftwareAvailableThewidespread useofpersonal computers has made this project possible. New software, Version 1.0, designedbyTim Kilbyisavailable from CCUS for cave register data entry, editing, reporting, and statistical analysis. This software will runonIBMorcompatible PC, XT, andATcomputers. 384KRAMisrequired. 640KRAMisrecommended, as is 1harddiskand1 floppy. However,theprogram willrunona system with two floppy drives. Itisa compiled software programthatisvery easy to learn.Theuser doesnotneed any previous trainingorknowledge to use it.Theprogram provides basic statisticalreportsoncave use and mailing lists which may be limited by user defined conditions. This program providesthepreferred method for peopleorgroups whomaintaincave registers and wish to meet their contractual agreementofsharing data with the Contemporary CaveUseStUdyGroupofthe NSS. It includes a 24 page user's manual. Most cave register project participants processthedata that they get from cave registers, then forwardthedata on floppy disk to CCUS for centralized data analysis and interpretation and research byCCUSandotherresearchers.Moreadvanced statistical reports canbeeasily generated from the data base, since itisin the Dbase format and can be imported directly into manyothersoftware applications. Version 5.0ofthe cave register questionnaire represented a major change from the past register programs. Analysisofdata collected from earlier formats was limitedbythelack convenient access to computers. Thus,thenumberand typeofquestions were limited and data entry was centralized and expensive.Thecostofconducting this programisnow feasible to volunteer organizations, and cave clubs can conduct the entire program including statistical reports and mailing lists without any capital investment, providedsomeoneinthe group has an IBM compatible computer.Page 248

PAGE 254

PARTICIPATIONSixty-one individuals have requested and placed cave registers inthepast .three years, mostofthese represent active cave register programs. CCUS has shipped 530 register books and 130 register containers asofJanuary 1992.Someofthegroups usingtheregisters built their own containers. This research proposalisenvisioned to be a cooperative venture, with design and implementation coming from many different sources. Ideally,therewill be multiple authors, researchers, analysts, and others, allofwhom willberecognized aspartofthe study.Theofficers are:JohnM.Wilson, Chairman; Evelyn Bradshaw, Treasurer; Tim Kilby,DataManagement Designer.TheRegional Coordinators are: Mid Appalachian Region,JohnChenger; Mississippi Valley Ozark Regiop, Bob Springston; Northeastern Region, Emily Davis Mobiey; Northwest Caving Association, DavidM.Klinger; Southeastern Region, Jeff Harris; Southwestern Region, Bill Heath; Texas Speleological Association, Mike Walsh; Virginia Region,RobertM.Frostick; Western Region,Da.vidR.Squire.FIELD INTERVIEWS, DIRECT OBSERVATION, OTHER STUDIES, AND WRITTEN RECORDSCCUS will use cave registers, plus manyothertools, to gather data and improve the understandingofhuman interaction with caves.Onemethod that will be used to gather dataisdirect observation and interview. This method canbeusedtocompare cavers who do and donotcomplete the cave register. Thus, some cave researchers may observe cavers entering and recording in a register cave over a sufficient time period to get a representative sample and interview them after their cave tripatthecave entrance.Theinterview should include questions thatareinthecave register and others, inorderto assess the accuracyoftheir responses. Comparisons canbemade using measuresofcentral tendency, correlation, and analysisofcovariance. CCUS maybeable to reconstruct dataWilsonfrom caves where complete records have been kept for projectsthathad control over access.STATISTICAL VALIDATIONThefollowing validly proceduresareconsidered.Dothe respondents give the correct information? Doesthequestionnaire measure what itisintended to? Validity canbemeasured by the following survey design.Thereliabilityofthe questionnaire can be determined. External reliability canbedescribed as the degreethattheresults can accuratelybegeneralizedtoa larger population. Internal reliabilityisachieved ifthequestionnaire and validating test show equivalence and stability. This formofreliability verification shouldbedoneover an extended periodoftimeina representative sampleofcaves located in different partsofthe country. Minimally, it requires that register questions be asked in an interviewatthe register cave.Theresultsarecompared using analysisofcovariance.RESULTSFrom1976 to 1978thestudy group had accesstoa computer and information from versions2,3, and 4 was entered into a punch card data base.Thestudy was less active when access tothecomputer was lost in 1979 until 1988 when economical personal computers became widely available to membersofthe study. Although most recently produced cave registers are still in cavesorinformation hasnotbeen entered into the data base, some preliminary resultsarepresented in the tableonpage(?).Thetable depicts the dramatic increase intheaverage ageofcavers and severalothervariables.Moredetailed analysis will be published as data becomes available andisanalyzed.SUMMARYThegoalofCCUSisto provide the NSS leadership and cave managers with information that improves their abilitytomake good decisions, and a data.base forothercave related research.Page249

PAGE 255

WilsonPROCEDURESFORCONDUCTING A CAVE USE STUDYI.DETERMINETHEPURPOSEFORTHEPLACEMENTOFA CAVE REGISTER (SAMPLE PURPOSES)ADiscovering information aboutcaveuseforlearning's sakeB.Getting information to assistinthe management ofthecaveC.Learning more about caversD.Learning more aboutcaveuseE.Using the registerasaneducational toolF.Using the registerasa conservation toolG.Using the register to promoteNSSor other group membershipH.Using the registertopromote grotto membershipI.Col1ecting humorous or interesting statementsfromcaversII. MANAGEMENTAEstablish the appropriate organizational structureB.Appoint a personinchargeC.Ifnotanorganization,anyindividualmaytake responsibility and conducthisownregister programD.Communicate the results of these decisionstothe ContemporaryCaveUse Study GroupIII. CAVE MANAGEMENTAEstablish criteriaforselecting thecaveorcavesfromwhich to gather dataB.Select the specificcaveorcavestouseIV. CAVE OWNER PERMISSIONAThe owner of thecaveorhisagent should grant permissiontoplace the register. Itisusual1ybest to confirmhisgranting of permissioninwriting, or at least write a letter stating your intent to place the register and again acknowledgehispermission.B.The ContemporaryCaveUse Studyisstructuredtoaccepttwotypes of limitations placed on the use of databythe owner or managing group. See the code at the bottom of the register.1.Thatnomembership or other appealbemade of the people recordingfromthe registers2.That the owner or managing group retain the right to control the release of specific dataV.ORDERSUPPLIESFROMTHECONTEMPORARY CAVE USE STUDYGROUPAType of register books available.Allbooks with one or more sheets ofNSSinformation request return cards.1.NSSstandard register book2.Large register book3.Extra-large register book4.Colossal register book5.Small register book6.Custom made register bookB.Type of register container1.Standard 4 inch diameter register containers with built-in pencil sharpener. This registerisconstructed with 4 inch diameter, white PVC drain pipe and incorporates changes that have reduced the cost of materialsandthe amount or labor requiredinassembly.Page 250

PAGE 256

Wilson2.Standard 4 inch diameter register containers without pencil sharpener. This registerisconstructed with 4 inch diameter, whitePVCdrain pipe and incorporates changes that have reduced the costofmaterials and theamountoflabor required in assembly. 3. Extra large 6 inch diameter register containers for use in caves with extensive traffic. This registerisconstructedofheavy duty aluminum with wing nuts used to sealthelid.4.Lightweight 4 inch diameter register containers. It is designed for use in controlIed accessormanaged caves inwhich cave userisnotlikely to abusethecontainer. Itisa simple, inexpensive to manufacture, container with a slip-on cap and itisthe easiest to useofall containers.5.Othercave registers that may be in use at some locations: a. Old4"PVCStyle recycled, no longer in productionb.Sub standard3"diameterPVCorS&D, usedbysome register maintenance groups under severe financial constraintsc.Offtheshelf containers, suchasjars, cans, buckets, and boxes6.All cave registers, regardlessoftype, should be labeled with the "Please Complete"Sign.c.Rationale for. container design1. Sewer and drain pipe register construction as opposedtoPVCisusedto:a.Reduce costb.Reduce its value and thus, the likelihoodoftheftc.Reduce shipping weight2.TheStandard NSS registerisused, in most cases, insteadofrecycled containers because: a.Noothercontainer has worked as welI over alIb.Itisnotused as a carbide dumportrash receptacleasaresomejarsc.It tends toappearmore important andistaken more seriously than some recycled containersd.Truly adequate recycled containers (jars, cans, buckets, and boxes)aredifficult to find and to maintain as a regular resupply source3.Register containersofless than4"diameter tend to:a.Contributetomore rapid deteriorationofthe register bookb.causemore curl in the paper, making them more difficult to usec.Limit the useofmulti-book and extra large books4.Attachmentofregister to the cavea.Discourages theftb.Discourages "helpful relocation"ofthe register5.Cap attachment a.Thecap to the registerisattachedbycable to discourage theftormisplacement6.Holes in the register a.Areused to attach the wire cablesb.Destroy someofthe valueofthe register parts to discourage theft forotheruses 7. Register signsa.Let the cavers know the purposeofthe deviceb.Provides basic instructions for register usec.Conveys an additional degreeofimportance8.Pencilsharpenera.Some cavers may not have writing implementsora pencilsharpenerwith them andalIthe pencils in the register maybedefectivePage251

PAGE 257

WilsonVI.DETERMINETHEPROCEDURES FOR MAINTENANCEADeterminelocation for-register1.Formost.purposes, it should be neartheentranceonthemost heavily traveledpath into thecaveata convenient placetostop. Usually, itisplaced beyond daylight so as not to measure casual visitors without their own light source.2.Tomeasuretheamountofvertical caving,theregisterisplacedatthebottomofthedrop, intheareaofthecaveoneisstudying. 3.Morethanoneregister maybeused when doing comparison studies.Forexample,thepercentageofcavers using apartofthecave versusthetotalnumberofcaves as measuredbyanentranceregister may be studied.B.TypeofcontainerTheNSSstandardregister4"diameter should be used in all situations exceptthefollowing:1.Theregisterisina cave wherethereisa very high chancethattheregister will be stolenorvandalized, in which casetherearetwo options:a.Use a very cheap container and bepreparedto replace it frequently asthecontainersarestolenorvandalized.b.Usethelarge container and secure it tothecave with extra ordinary means.2.Wheretherecording rateishigh enough to justifythelarger register. A high recording rateisdefined asonethat requiresmorethan 75 sheetsor900 questionnaires in the register atonetime. 3.Wherethereisa need for an aluminum register.4.Whereexpedience and availabilityofofftheshelf containers dictatetheuseofmass produced cans, jars, boxes,orbuckets.C.Typeofregister book Generally,themoreheavily traveled caves require the useoflarger register books.Thetypical sizeofthe caving groupisalso a factor in that larger groups needmorebooks for simultaneous recording. Itisusuallybetterto placemoreregisters than larger ones. D.Numberofregister books1.If a caveisvisitedbysomegroupsofmore than five people, useatleast two books to allow simultaneous recording.2.Ifa caveisvisitedbysome groupsofmorethan10people, useatleastthreeregister books.E.Frequencyofmaintenance1.Atleast annually.2.Thegreaterthe cave usc,themore frequenttheregister maintenance.3.Thewetterthecave, themorefrequentthemaintenance should be.4.Popularcaves, those withmorethan200 recordings amonth,should not have maintenance schedules longer than 4 months.F.Numberand typeofpencils1..Use#2type pencils in most situations,#1or1.5 lead pencils maybehelpful in wet caveswherethepapertends to become damp.2.Placeatleast three pencilsineach register.3.Add an additional pencil for each additional 20 sheetsofregisters placed inthecontainer.4. MechaniCal pencils may be used insteadofconventional pencils.Page 252

PAGE 258

WilsonG. Equipment to take with you when maintaining registers1.Spareregister container2.Extra cable, plastic coated 3.Appropriatenumberofregister books 4. Vice grips5.Screw driver6.Pencils, sufficient in number to replace allthatthe register would normally have7..Container for pencil shavings andothertrash H. Items to checkonregister maintenance trip1.Replace all register books thataredamagedorwet.2.Replace booksthataremorethanthreefourths full. 3. Sharpenorreplace pencils as needed.4.Cleanoutpencilsharpenershavings.5.Check cable and reattach containerifnecessary.6.Check cap for easeofoperation.7.Check signonregister container, replace register if necessary.8.Clean trash from register area.9.Observe any damage tothecave and biota resulting from impactofcavers stopping at the register.Ifexcessive, select new register location.VIT.DATA PROCESSINGALimitations that may be placedonthedistributionofthedata collected with the cave registerbythe cave ownerorbythegroup maintaining the register. See previous sectiononpermission.1.No member solicitation2.Noreleaseofspecific dataB.Dataanalysis1.Determinethe typeofdata analysisthatwouldbemost helpful to your project2.Communicate these needs with theStUdyGroup3.Assist in the developmentofdata processingC.Requirements1.TheContemporary Cave Use StudyoftheNSS has developed this program over approximately 18 years.Thesupplies and concept were developedbythe Contemporary Cave Use Committeeofthe NSS.2.Theideasofregister development represent a major investmentofresearch time, and all participants in the programareexpected to share the findings with the NSS through the Contemporary Cave Use Study Group.3.Aspartofthe study, each participant should do three things:a.Let the study group knowthenamesand general locationsofthe caves where the registers were placed and maintained.b.Evaluateorprovide feedbackofyour register program.c.Sharethedata collected with the StudyGroupoftheNSS.4.This sharingofdata can bedonein anyofthe following ways:a.Send the StudyGrouptheprocessed dataona floppy disk. A software programisavailable for this purpose. Thisisthepreferred method.b.Copy the completed pages and send them to the Study Group.Page253

PAGE 259

Wilsonc.Send the StudyGroupthe completed registers.Datacanbereturnedtothepersonorgroup maintaining the register, dependingonthe specific arrangementsthatarenegotiated.d.Sharedata in someothermutually agreed manner.5.Regardlessofthe methodofsharing data,theregister data should be sent to:JohnM.Wilson, Chairman Contemporary Cave Use StudyGroupNational Speleological Society 9504 LakewaterCourtRichmondVA23229.VIII.PUBLISHINGAAssist in the distributionofcave management informationB.Publish in cooperation with the StudyGroup1.Jointauthorarrangementsareencouraged.2.Joint research effortsareencouraged.C.Publish specific results independentlyIX. METHODS SUMMARYTherearemany constraints upon cave researchofthis type.Themost significantisfinancial. With only minimalfunding available, the data systemisdependentuponcavers willing to place and maintain cave registers. Usually, this means that register maintenanceisincidental toothercave projects.Thevoluntary natureofthe data collection also imposes constraintsontheregister program.Theresultoftheconstraints has been to design brief, easy to answer questions, limitthenumberofquestionsperpage, andattemptto buildmoredurable registers.Themorequestionnairesperpage,themoreresponses before a new register bookisneeded. A four inch diameterorlarger container allows several registers tobeplaced in each container, resulting in less frequent maintenance and simultaneous entry. Whenoneconsidersthecostofservicing registers in termsoftravel and man hours, the economicsofregister programs require designsthatminimize maintenance.Page 254

PAGE 260

WilsonCOMPARISON OF CAVER DATA From Cave Registers Variable19751989 1991Number Average or Number***Average or Respondents Percentage Respondents percentage Age Mean212721114728Mode212718114721Sex Male1755 80% 91980%Female45220%22320%Number of Cave Trips Mean177836791Mode3681 1NSSMember46421%45739%Experience5Years10Years Ught source*1935Carbide1403 720k 29425% Helmet Electric3817%61653%Flashlight14220%44238%Candle3 0Other6 0 146 120k Group Size**6People Hours in Cave**5Hours Purpose of Cave Trip**Exploration31627% E9ucation 146 120k Conservation585%Mapping39 3%Photography12510%Recreation765 66% Science19 1% Other76 6% *****Thesequestions werenotaskedinthesamefonnatInthe different versions of the questionnaire; thus, comparisons mustbemade with caution.ThisInformationwasnotaskedInthe earlier versionsofthe questionnaire. Many more cave registershavebeenreturnedbutthe Infonnationonthemhasnotbeenentered Into thedatabasedue to a shortage of volunteers to enter the data and/or money to pay for dataentry.ThisInformationwasobtainedusingthestandard statistical printout avslable fromCUSS. Much more extensive analysis canbemadeby any Interested researcheras the data Isstored on floppy disk.Page255

PAGE 261

WilsonUSINGTHENSSREWARDTODETERCA VB VANDALISMJohnM.Wilson. Chairman Cave Vandalism CommitteeoftheNational Speleological SocietyABSTRACTTheNSS has changedtheCave Vandalism Deterrence Reward to a flexible reward with a minimumof$250 and a maximumof$1000.Thereward will be given tothepersonorpersons providing information leading to a conviction for cave vandalism. This reward replaced the $500 reward that has been in effect since 1982.Thechangeover date was 1June1990.TheCommissionisrecalling allofits previous posters, replacing them withthenew version. Sponsorsarebeing soughtandencouraged by listing their namesontheposter. A one-time contributionof$250 will list youoryour organizationonthevandalism deterrence poster for as long astheNSS offersthereward. These notices will be postedatshow caves, managed caves, andotherplaces in cave areas.1.DETERMINETHEPURPOSEFORPARTICIPATION INTHECAVEVANDALISMDETERRENCEPROGRAMTherewardisintended to be used as an educational, conservation, and a cave management tool. It can also be used as a tool for restitution andasa deterrent to cave vandalism. Itisnot intended tobeused for retribution.n.THENEWREWARDPROCEDURESANDTHEPURPOSESAThereward has a minimumof$250 for all qualifying recipients, thislowers liability.B.Thereward maximum has been increasedto$1000. It now has greater impact as an educational tool.Thereisa greater incentive for the recipienttodo specific things.C.Therewardisnow more Ilexible. Larger awards are paidtopeople whose efforts have contributed to deterring cave vandalism.D.Thedetermination that a reward applicant has met the reward criteria andtheamountto be paidareto be at the sole discretionofthe Commission,arenow clearly statedonthereward poster. This reduces liability and improves management efficiency. E.Thenew procedures require that the applicant provide informationthattheconviction occurred. It recommends thatotherinformation helpful to the Commissionbeprovidedbythereward applicant. All reward applicants will be sent a questionnaire on the conviction and related matters. These procedures:1.Reduce liability2.Reduce chanceoffraud3.Reduce work for the Commissionmembers4.Help create more usable results to improve the effectivenessoftheCommission in carryingoutit's mission5.Require a publication dateonthe poster6.Reduce liability in the event the offeriswithdrawn.F.Thereward poster states that the poster remains the propertyoftheNational Speleological Society. This reduces liability and eases recovery if the rewardiswithdrawn.
PAGE 262

WilsonG.Thenewposterhas an invalidation statement about the previous poster. All previous rewards offeredbythe National Speleological Society andtheconditions for compliancearehereby revoked. This policy reduces liability and reduces administrative costs. H.Thenew procedures require that the reward requestbemade within three monthsofthe conviction. Thisisnota change in policy but was not stated on the old poster. This policy reduces liability and administrative and verification III.THENEWPROCEDURESALLOWMOREFLEXIBILITY INDISTRIBUTIONTherequirementthatthelocationofall postersornotices be recorded has been deleted. This change has resulted in a substantial increase intheuseofthereward notice.TheCommission can now encourage unlimited distributionofthe reward notice. IV.MANAGEMENTOFTHEREWARDBYNSSCHAPTERSANDOTHERGROUPSAAny group thatisplanning to establish a reward program in cooperation with the Commission should establishthe-appropriate organizationalstructureto distributethereward notices andother cave vandalism activities. This activity couldbeassigned to committees already established.B.Thegroup should appOint a person in charge, if this hasnotalready been done.e.Ifnotan organization, any individual may take responsibility and post reward noticesonhis own. D.Theindividualorgroup should communicatetheresultsofthese decisions totheCommission.V.GENERALREWARDACTIVITIESOTHERTHANPOSTINGTHENOTICEAPrint advertisements in newspapersorotherpublications, as wasdonebyseveral NSS chapters in California, specifically intended for the protectionofcaves inTuolumneand Calaveras Counties.B.Suggest inclusionofthe reward concept in cave related feature articles in print and broadcast media.e.Use wordofmouthtoinform othersofthe reward at meetings, informal gatherings, andonetooneexchanges. D. Makethereward concept an integral partofthe cave conservation and management programofeach cave organization. E. Usethereward as an exampleofa responsible environmental activityintalks, speeches, papers, and news releases. VI.REWARDNOTICEWHENLOCATEDINWILD CAVESAEstablish criteria for selecting the caveorcaves from which to post the reward notice.B.Select the specific cave or caves in which to post the notice. VII.REWARDNOTICEWHENLOCATEDINSHOWCAVES, BUILDINGS,ANDUNDEVELOPEDPROPERTYA.Selectotherlocations for reward notices. Locations could be any place in which someofthe people who would see the sign might:1.Entera cave2.InOuencesomeonewho mightentera cave3.Provide informationaboutsomeone who could potentially vandalize a cave.B.Example locations are: show caves, public institutions, schools, parks, andotherbuildings.e.Theagentorownerofthe cave, show cave, undeveloped property,orbuilding should grant permission to place the sign. Itisusually best to confirm his grantingofpermission in writing,orat least write a letter stating the intent to place the register and again acknowledge his permission.Page 257

PAGE 263

WilsonVIII.ORDERPOSTERSFROMTHECAVEVANDALISMDETERRENCEREWARDCOMMISSIONThereare two sizesofposters available fromtheCommission.Thereare8.5"x11"and11"x17"thatareprintedonpaper.TheCommission recommends that the user laminate and/or encasethereward notice in acrylic.IX.DETERMINETHEPROCEDURESFORMAINTENANCEADetermine location for reward notice in the cave.Formost purposes, it shouldbenearthe entranceonthemost heavily traveled path into the caveata convenient place to stop.Morethanonenotice may be used in some caves.B.Determinethelocationofthe reward notice in a building, show cave,orundeveloped property.C.Ifthenoticesareplaced in caves where thereisa very high chancethattheregisters willbestolenorvandalized, therearetwo options:1.Usevery cheap signs such as treated card-stock andbeprepared to replace them frequently as theyarestoienorvandalized. Placing themoutofnormal reach may help some.2.Use strong frames and secure them to the cave with extra ordinary means. Also place them in locations that are difficult to reach.3.Thecave environment may require that the noticesbelaminated as a minimal standard. In this event, a brief analysisofmaintenance versus replacement costs shouldbedoneto determine the best compromise. D. Frequencyofmaintenance1.Oneshould check the conditionofthe notice occasionally, at least annually.X.SUMMARYOFTHEREWARDANDITSSIGNIFICANCETheconvictionofafewoffendersbyitselfisofrelatively small importance compared totheneed for a change in values throughout society.Therewardisa tool to help change the values and get cavers and otherstotake a more positive role in promoting and enforcing needed values.Theneed forthereward wasnotseen and should not be seen as a systemofvengeance but as a tool fortheimprovementofsociety's values towardtheenvironment, specifically the cave environment. Since 1981, approximately 47 people have been charged with cave offenses basedoninformation supplied to the Commission. Almost all have had their cases resolved in awaythat has contributed to cave conservation. Itislikely that the establishmentofthe reward contributed to this dramatic change in challenging and confronting cave vandals. It may not be the fact thatthe$250 to $1000 rewardisoffered so much asthatthe valueoftaking positive action was sanctioned not onlybytheNSS BoardofGovernorsbutby manyothercavers. This concept has been acceptedbycavers who disagreeonothercave conservation strategiesbutgenerally agree that active measures shouldbetaken to stop cave vandals, andatthevery least, vandals should be forced to reconsider their actions.Thetablesonpages 260-262 provide a summaryofthe casesofcave vandalism known tothecommission. Muchofthe information has been providedbythe reward recipients. The offendersaretypically young people with noorlittle caving experience. Most are teenagers,feware olderthan25.Theoffendersaremostly white,41males and six females. Flashlights are the exclusive light sources, if they have a lightatall.Noneoftheoffenders have backup light sources.Thepurposeoftheir trips are usually recreational, and included two trips for the purposeofalcohol consumption. Trip sizes vary from 2 to15members. Noneoftheoffendersareorwere affiliated with any organized caving group, and three offenders,atthemost, have developed any interest in cavingorspeleology. Someofthe peripheral offenders may have retained some caving activity.Page 258

PAGE 264

WilsonTheoffenders have a relatively low understandingofcave conservation, caving, and caves in general.Therecipientsreportthatprior to conviction, the offenders do not have even a layman's understandingofthevalueofcaves as a biological habitat, their aesthetic value,orscientific value.Mostbelieve that itisacceptabletowriteoncave walls, collect formations, and kill bats,althoughmost didnotdo these acts. Many offendersarehigh school students, and afewmay have graduated from high school.Itappears that the offenders hadnotdoriemuchthinkingaboutcaves andtheappropriatenessoftheir behavior.Theoffenders apparently had very limited knowledgeofthe law. Allofthe recipientsreportthattheoffenders, prior to their arrest, werenotawareofthe laws against trespassingorvandalizing a cave.Noneknew thattherewas a rewardofup to $1000 offered for information leadingtoconviction for cave vandalism.Theoffendersareperceivedbytherecipients as generally helpedbytheexperience andaremuchbetterinfprmedabouttheimportanceofcaves than before.Thereisonereportedexceptionofbeing helpedbythe experience.OneoftheMissouri offenders has been previously arrestedandisgenerally unresponSive to the criminal justice process.Ofthe47 offenders, five have hadotherconvictionsthatareknown to the reporting sources available totheauthor. Itisremarkable thattheoffenders have so lillIe knowledgeofcaves, even lessthantheaverage non-caver. Itisspeculationbutplausiblethatpartofthereason thesepeoplewere caught was that they had so little knowledgeaboutwhere and how to cave.Itdoesnotnecessarily followthatas a person gains more cave experience,hewillbeamoreresponsible caver. However, experience does seem toreduceone's chancesofgetting caught for cave offenses.Bythetime a person starts using a hardhat while caving,heprobable knowsenoughabouthowandwhere to go cavingorspelunking without getting caught for trespassingorcave vandalism.ThegoaloftheCave VandalismDeterrenceCommissionisto reduce cave vandalism, primarily through improved education andpromotionofa greater understandingofthevalue and roleofcaves in theenvironmentamongthepublic,thecave vandal, andthepotential cave vandal.TheCommission has nomandateto punish, inflict pain,orin anyotherway harmorrecommend harm toanyonefortheirwrongorinappropriatebehaviorina cave.TheCommission has hadnodirectinputin anycourtdecisions to date.TheCommission's roleisto decide on the meritsofpayingtherewardtotheperson who provides informationthatleads to conviction, court mandated restitution,orrestitutioninkind, andtodeterminethe amountofthatreward between $250 and S1000. So far, onthefive casesinwhich rewards have been paid, the information that we haveisthatthe judgments have been legally sound,appropriate,and fair. This information comes from prosecutors, judges, victims, and concerned cavers.Page 259

PAGE 265

3/30/92SummaryofAwards Paidbythe Cave Vandalism Deterrence Commission of the NSS Type ofCon ... lctfon: Adnintstrathe Raceof Offenders:'tI Age Range ofOffenders: 1]-t4 C .... e: A8LMacinlnfsteredCneOHeNier'S:UnknownHl.II'ber ofOffenders: Mo. of Offenders: Mo. of FSTIIle Ofenders: State:1tM Reportor:Noble StidnaAIrount ofReward: DateofOffense:DateofConYlction:DateofReward:150.0010/01/9011103190H55 Reward:Other Organization Reward: Finesand tees: Total amount of Fine,:Apparl!!nt PurposeofTrip:SIOOCitationea Recreatfonal H5S RewardApplied for: Y Ught Sourse: Fluh1ightlight Sourse: Flasnlght H5S RewardApplied for:1 year suspendedsentance0.00 Recreational HS5 Renrd:Other Organization Re-ard:Finesand Fees:Total amount of Fines;Apparent Purposeof Trip: 500.001/18/86 5111186 10/0/186 .AIrount ofReward: DateofOffense:DateofConviction:DaleofReward:8riscoState: MO Reportor: l.R.Roger Brewer.BobbyCante,K.athyWeek.le)' Type ofConyiction: HisoemeanorR.ace ofOffenders: WAgeRange ofOffenders: DougKoenig, 5 I Cave: Beran!Moore Ca .... e Offerders: Jeff NicclJ'W,Hl.II'Oer ofOffenders:Ho.of teale Offenders:No.of Fl!!IMle Ofenders:HS5 Reward:YOtherOrganizationReward:Fines andFees:$50eachone$100 Totalclmount of Fines:tOO.OOAoparent PurposeofTr;p: Recreationalc.",: Conand Bear CavesState: PA Reportor: Killl Opatka Almunt of Reward: Offerders: Keith O .... id McDowell DateofOffense:3109/91 Hl.I'tlberofOffenders:1 Type ofConyiction:Misdemeanor DateofConviction:10/03/90No.of Kdle Offenders:1 Race ofOffenders: 'tI Dateof Reward: 3/05191Ho.of F8'I\51e Ofenders: AgeRange ofOffenders:19 ;;pCaye: FortStantonCave State:HM Reportor: StevePeenna Arrount of Qe.... ard:350.00Offerders: Unli:nown DateofOffense:12/13/90 Nt..mber of Offenders: 3TypeofCon .... ;ction: Aaninistratlve Dateof ConYlction: Il119/90 N No.ofHaleOffenders:3RaceofOffenders:H Oa teofRe ....a rd:5/11191 0. No.of FeMleOfendl!!rs:A.geRange ofOffenders:15 Cave: Goodwins CaveState: VA Reportor: I44r)' Sue Sac Amount ofRe .... ard:500.00 Offerders:Kenneth Fisher,ScottSissonDateofOffense:4/13189 Hl.ITlber of Offenders: 2 ofConviction: M:::demeanor DateofConyiction:5118189No.of MaleOffenders: 2 Qace ofOffenders: \I:)ate of Reward: 1/17190No.of Ofenders:Age Range ofOffenders:18-19"5S Reward: OtherOrganization Reward: Finesand Fees: Total amount ofFines: Apparent PurposeofTrip: /'ISS Reward: Other OrganizationRewa.. d:Finesand Fees:Total alTClunt ofFines: Aoparent ?urposeofTrip:FIneof S1I9179.00Recreational each 180.00RecreationalNSS Reward Appliedfor: Light Sourse:HSS Reward Appl ted for: Li ght r1ash 1 ight NSSReward Appl led for: llgl1t 50urse:flashlIght e;-OCa....e:KingstonSaltpeterCaveState::(iA Repor:or:Jerry .6M)s. Offerders: Fred8earden.James Guidettl ofOffenders:3 Type of :::onVlctl::lO; Mlsaeneanor 1'10.of Male Offenders:3 Race ofOffenders; W No.of Female Ofenders: AgeRange of Offende!'s:lSArrount of Reward: Date ofOffense: vate of COl'wict10n: Oate of Reward: 500.004/0/184 H55 Reward:O::herOrgan;zatlonReward:tinesand Fees:Total arrount of Fines:Aoparent PurposeofTrip:HSSRewardApplIedfor:YS3B5fine.$19.80Restitut;on809.60Recreational Ught Scurse: Flashl ightHSS Re"'ard Aopl ied for:Y Fi ne andres i tution960.00RecreationalLIghtSourse: rlashllghtHSS Reward: O:herOrganizationReward: Finesand Fees: Total arrount ofFines: Purpose ofTrip:500.00 11111184 5/0//8/ Amount of Re.... ard: Cate ofOffense: :>tte of Conviction:Qate of Reward:Sta::e:UAReoor':or: Lisa .AnDs, J Lyons.Pierotti.Gt::ler.jarrlson.'art1!1qton.TurnerType of Conviction; OutofCourt Race ofOffenders: \IRange ofOffenoers; ;]-15Cave:KingstonSaltoeterCave Offerder,:Tabb. Shatto, Robertson, ofOffenders: It:io. of Male Offenders:91'10.of remaleOfer.oers; 3

PAGE 266

3/30/92 SlI'I'NIry of AwHdsPa,d by theCaveVandalismDeter,nc!Ccmnisslon of the"55,"S5 Reward: T"55 Rew',,"dApplied for: Y Other Org05nllatlonReward: F,nesand Fees; S200fine probatd:\On feeS120lotal asrount oftInes: &40.00Pu:-pose of Tnp: Re:reatlonal Light Sourse: Fluhlight 500.009/0718810/31/851/09/89 .Airount of Dateof Offense:Dcne of ConV1c:iOI"\: Dateof Kew4rd: Reportor:Betty State' CiA TypeofConvlction: M;sdemeanorRace ofOffenders: W Age Range of Offenders:25K.lngstor,S...C"veOfferaers: Scott Hudg1rls. Cliff WoodsNumber ofOffenders:2 No. of ".!IleOffeMe;s'2No of FemdleType of Conviction:Misdemeanor RaceofOffenders: \r' Age Range ofOffenders:20 Cave:Perk1 ns C<'lve Offe"den: MullinsNL.mber ofOffenders:No.of Offenders: No. of Femaleorenders; State: VA Reportor:CharlesRIce Arrount of Date of Offense: Dateof Convlct10'n:Date of Reward:SOc 00 6/01/8,"55Re'IoIdrd: Y O':.he"OrganIzationReward; FinesandFees:Total AtrlJunt ofFInes:0.00AcparentPurposeof Trip: Recreational/liS,SRewa ..:jApplied for:Y light Sourse:FlachllghtSummary of Offenses with NSS Awards ;0NC,......,TotalM'ount ofAll filS,)Re-ards: Total Nl,Inber ofN5S A.e.,...!Irds PaId: A"er4geSIZe of lreSS RewardsPaid: ToUlIh.mber ofOffenders:Total of Hale Offenders: TotalNl.ITIber of Females Offenders:Total Fines For"11 '.000.009 U4.A4 3319 4 3.568.60 ToulMLmbereave Offenseswith Judtcial TotalofOther OrganizationRewuds:Average DateofAlloffenses: Ml.I'It>er ofAppl\cationsfor HSSReward:Mumer of H5SRewards Pending: Proceedtngs ReportedtotheCam'llssion:0.009/10/879o e;O Summary of All Cave Offenses TotalMount of"11 HSSTotalMLlT\ber of "5SRewardsPaid:AverageSile of "55RewardsPaid: Total Jh.lTlber ofOffenders: Total m.mberof Kale Offenders: Tote 1 MlIIlber of 1esOffenders:Total t1nes For All Offenses:4.000.009 .44.44'741 611.818.60 TotalCave Offenseswith Judlc141 Totalof OtherOrg",n1zat ion Rewards;Ave"age OateofAlloffenses: of Appl icattonsfor MS5RNard:Ml.I'It>er of M55Rewards PendIng:ProceedingsReportedto theC(l1TTllsslon: 1.000.004/l6/879o13

PAGE 267

Summary of Other Cave Related Offenses with No NSS Reward Request3/30/92 Ceve::founta in CaveState:VAReportor:John Wll sonOfferders: IiILmber ofOffenders:4TypeofConviction: JUdicelAcinlnlst No.of Hale Offenders.4 Rdce ofOffenders: Wfilo. of Fema1l!: Ofenders; AgeRange ofOffenders:18-20 Cave: Lewis andClark Cave State: "T Reportor; LeeFlathOH.rders: El ....... O."Ills. "'thyWelchJh.lmer ofOffenders:3 Type ofConvictton:Felony! MisdemeaMo. of Male Offenders:2Raceof Offenders:WMo. of female Ofenders:1AgeRangeofOffenders: ,Atrount of Re...trd:H55Rewarc: HS5 Re"6rdApplledto,.06te ofOffense: 4/20/8,O:herOrganizatlonRewaro, 500.00DateofConvietlon:7/11/85 rinesandFees: $150 Date of Reward:9/10/8' Total arrount of Fines: 150.00 Appuent Purposeof Tripllgh:SourseAtrol,;:"It of Re.ard:HS5Re....ard:HSS Re.... ard App1 fed for.DateofOffense:10110/82OtherOrganization Revard: 0.00DateofCOnylctl0n:Fines and Fees:Ho I;On\(lct10n afterpaper writ Dateof ofFInes.0.00 ApP6rent PurposeofTrip: Re:reation41l1ght Sourse: Fl6Sh11gr.tAin::lunt of rd:"55 Rtwud: N5S Reward Appliedfor:DateofOffense:3110/90OtherOrganization Rrw4rd: 0.00DateofConviction:6115/91Finesand Fees: SSSOO fines& re6yrsupjailDateof ReW!id: Total 41T'Ount of Fines:_pparent Purposeof Trip:Rt:reat lonal light Sourse: nash 1 igl".:ArYDunt of Reward:HS5Reward:HSSRewll:-d Appl ied for: IiDate ofOffense:1110/87Other Organizat ion Reward: 500,DODateofConviction:8/20/87 Fines andFees: fi neeach hoursrest it Dateof Rew4rd: 9/21/87Total amount ofFines:1.600.00 Apparer.t PurpaseofTrip: &tldlling lightSourse:Reportor: JoeHu:nnel State: HI-,Bruce HolthouseType ofConviction: Ad'I'llnViola! Jon Relce ofOffenders: WAgeRang!!! ofOffenders: State:K,Y Reportor:Unknown Jitmly Brown. KennyStl'lith. TllmlyHarperType ofConYictlon: Misdemeanor Race of Offenders:WAgeRange of Offenders:Cave: FortStanton CaveOfferders: Bob Pierce.Betsy Pierce. MLll'lber ofOffenders:3No.of KaleOffenders: 2 Mo. of FI5l'\l!!1e 1 Cave::Tl'Klrnhi 11 CaveOfferders:RonnieBrOWTl..LRber of Offenders:Mo. of Kale Offenders: No. of FBMle Ofenders: tvSlJtWlVTotal1IrIJunt of All.55Rewards:TotllNl.IIlber of .55Rewards Paid: Average Sizeof RewardsPaid: Total N...tor of Offender"Total nl.Jlber of Offenders: TotalNl.Inber of feM1es Offenders: Tohl FinesFor All Offenses:0.00 14 12218.250.00 Total of OtherOrganizationRewartls: 1.000.00 AverageDate of All offenses:4/28/86 ...tor ofApplicationsforN55 Row.rd: 0 IIl.IIt>er of .. 55 Rewards Pend; ng: 0 TotalN\lrberCaveOffenseswithJudicialProceedingsReported tothe Carmisslon:

PAGE 268

HuppertUNDERGROUND WILDERNESS: mE TIME IS RIGHTGeorgeN.Huppert, Professor DepartmentofGeography and Earth Science UniversityofWisconsin,LaCrosse, Wisconsin 54601ABSTRACTThe Wilderness Act (P.L.88-577,78Stat. 890) has been in force for twenty-seven years. Efforts to create a legal cave wilderness have been pursued forasmany years. Yet, to date, no cave has been designated as a wilderness on its own merits even though many federally managed caves are acceptable under the constraintsofthelaw.It should be noted that some significant caves do occur in designated surface wilderness areas. Mostofthese caves are managedaswilderness. Unfortu.nately, many are ignored. A numberoffactors have hindered the designationofcave wilderness. These factors include federal agency inaction and reluctance to set precedent, oppositionbylocal business interests, a diversityofopinion among cave scientists and recreational cavers, and a lackofmotivationbymainline conservation groups. Perhaps, most significantly,ispublic apathy, due to the lackofawareness,ofthe many valuesofcaves. Many caves on federal land qualifyaslegal wilderness, someofthem are already within designated surface wilderness areas, some are already being managedaswilderness, and some havefewcompeting interests. The timeisright, especially during this 50th anniversaryofMammoth Cave National-Park and the 75th anniversaryofthe National Park Service to recognize the significanceofcavesbyestablishing the nation's first cave wilderness.IN1RODUCfIONSince the passageofthe Wilderness Act in 1964 nearly 500 separate wilderness areas have been establishedbyCongress and remanded to the controloffour different government agencies. The sizeofthese areas are fromtwoacres up to 9 million acres. The hundredsofenvironments represented range from alpine tundra to tropical marine. While numerous caves have been incorporated within the boundariesofwilderness areas, not a single wilderness area has been designated for the preservationofspelean resources. A numberoffederal employees have worked hard to establish such a wilderness, however their pleas have been largely ignored to date. The cave ecosystem, with allofits uniqueness, deserves the recognition with the mantle of our government's highest environmental protection.FORCES OPERATING AGAINST CA VB WILDERNESSOne can find a numberofarticles relating to the value and significanceofwilderness. Holmes Rolston (1985) has done a thorough job in presenting these values in an article in Environmental Ethics. Huppert and Wheeler (1986) relate these values to thecaveenvironment. This article will take a brief look at reasons that a cave has not been designatedasa wilderness area on its own merit. The author admits that someofthe information in this paperisanecdotal in natureasthe literature on cave wildernessisquite limited. A bibliographyofcave wilderness isonly now being compiled. The forces working counter to the establishmentofcave wilderness areasfollows:Page263

PAGE 269

HuppertFirst,asmay be expected,theprimary force working against cave wildernessisusually the local business community. Wildernessisgenerally perceived as a threat to the economic interestsofthese establishments. In the caseoftheproposedMammothCave Wilderness, there would have been little changeinthe visitation levels inthecommercialized portionofthe caVe system from what it was when first proposedinthe 1960s. Indeed growth would have continued until a conflict with wilderness values finally occurred. Although visitor levels with wilderness designation may have been capped below current levels,thetourist oriented claptrap that surroundsthepark would still exist. In the caseofLechuguilla Cave, little can be said about the proposed Lechuguilla Cave Wilderness as it did not really get far enough for serious review. However, the same greed raised its ugly head there as well. This wasanotherfine exampleofa community resisting a sound environmental action so astoavoid tht: possible lossoffuture gain. In this case local business leaders hope thattheU.S.taxpayers will fully subsidize a gift worth millionsofdollarstodevelop a show cave at Lechuguilla. Thisisin an area where the valueofthe existing show cave, Carlsbad Caverns, had not been fully capitalizedonbythat same community. Fortunately, Lechuguilla Cave still remains under an existing wilderness area. Inorderto develop a show tour at Lechuguilla Cave, it would require significant boundary changes andtheredesignationofportionsofthat wilderness area. Thisisan action that would probably stir much resistance from mainline conservation groups. This issueiscovered in greater detailbyKerbo andRoth(1989) andRhinehart(1989). Second,anothersourceofresistance to a cave wilderness has come from within the various land managing federal agencies themselves. This resistance has had several facets. Earlyonintheprocessofconsiderationofa cave wilderness a significant numberofagency personnel have felt that caves were not environmentally significant enough to deserve such legal standing. This argument has largely been subdued through an extensive education program, the National Cave Management Training Seminars, arrangedbythe American Cave Conservation Association and often sponsoredbythe National Speleological Society and the various federal and state agencies involved. In addition,theefforts made through the mid-1980s to get the Federal Cave Resources Protection Actof1988 (P.L.100-691, 102 Stat. 4546) played an immense educational role in changing the mindsofmany people. A third problem frequently presented totheauthorcan be stated as followed,'Ifyou have a cave wilderness, you will have to be gated inordertobe protected and a gate,being an artificial structure,cannotbeallowed in a wilderness area.' This argumentisfalseona numberofaccounts. First,notall wilderness caves may require a gate. Remoteness, sizeofentrance,orperhaps a numberofotherfactors may reduceorprecludethenecessityofgating.Otherprotective measures maybemore effective and less costly. Second, if keeping the wilderness'pure'isa great concernthewilderness area boundary canbedrawn to excludetheentrance area so a gate canbeconstructed without compromising the'pure'wilderness. However, this alternativeisnot ideal and could lead toothermanagement problems. Third, in legal terms this debateisunnecessary asthelaw does allow for a numberofartificial structures in wilderness areas. Section4.(c)oftheWilderness Act (1964) states: c) Except as specifically provided for in this Act, and subject to existing private rights, there shall be no commercial enterprise and no permanent road within any wilderness area designatedbythis Act and, except as necessary to meet minimum requirements fortheadministrationofthearea forthepurposeofthis Act (including measures required in emergencies involvingthehealth and safetyofpersons within the area),thereshallbeno temporary road, no useofmotorvehicles, motorized equipmentormotorboats, no landingofaircraft, nootherformofmechanical transport, and no structureorinstallation within any such area. It would seem that the above clause would allowtheconstructionofa gate for'thepurposeofthis Act' (protecting the cave ecosystem)orfor safetyofpersons within the area.ThegateinplaceatLechuguilla Cave in Carlsbad Caverns WildernessAreashowsthelegalityofsuch a gate and renderstheargument moot.Theproblem lies inthefact that many individuals, including agency personnel, have difficulty separating their idealized perceptionofwilderness fromthatallowed byPage 264

PAGE 270

Huppertthe Act. (The Carlsbad Caverns Wilderness Areaisan interesting name as noneofthe known passagesofCarlsbad Cavernsisenclosedbythe wilderness.) Fourth, many individuals have stated that wilderness designationisnot necessaryasthere are other, more efficientwaystoprotect caves. This approach has been stressed in the literaturebyHummel (1982). This viewpoint asserts that caves can be protectedbyvarious agency withdrawalsofland from potentially damaging uses. This can be done on the local levelbythe unit land manager quicker and for much less cost than wilderness designationbyCongress. Where this has been done there has been mixed success. It must be realized that these protective withdrawals can be reversedaseasily as enacted. (Itisparticularly important that in some agencies, for example the National Park Service, thereisa standard practice to shift superintendents and other personnel every 3or4 years.) Wilderness designation can only be removedbyanActofCongress. While such withdrawals may be useful as a temporary action to protect a cave,itshouldnotbe consideredasa long term solution. A fifth argument against designating a cave wildernessisthat mostofthe caves which might be considered for such designation are actively being explored. Becauseof that fact the wilderness boundaries would have to be flexible in order to take into consideration any new discoveries outsideofexisting wilderness boundaries. Hereisoneexampleofwhere the often rigid mind-setofmany federal agencies clash with innovative ideas. The conceptofan expanding wilderness can work in many circumstances if carefully written into the enabling legislation.Ifa caveofwilderness qualityislocated well within an existing wilderness areathere should be no problem if thereisno real chanceofthe cave's passages crossing the boundariesofthe surface wilderness.Ofcourse, existing conflicting land use rights (mineral, etc.) must be considered and resolved. There are many suitable cavesonfederal lands that fall into this category.Ifthe cave extends onto other federal lands, often land exchanges and other compromises can be negotiated. Real problems can occur when a proposed wilderness cave encroaches onto stateorprivate land (or federal land under private lease). Proper selectionofthe cave for wilderness can avoid this and if encountered itmaystill be possible to effect a compromise.Anextreme move would be to exclude the portionofthe cave off federal land from wilderness designation.Ithas also been arguedinthe caseofLechuguilla Cave that the cave passagesmaysomeday intercept thoseofthe nearby tour cave Carlsbad Caverns. Itiscontended that allofCarlsbad Caverns would then become wilderness and tours would have to cease. It should be noted that the non-tour partofCarlsbad Caverns are now treatedaswilderness. Also the enabling legislation could specifically be written to keep this from happeningifthe connection did indeed occur. Cave wilderness can be and ideally should be more than a wild cave that contains wildernessqualities. The best situation would be to have wilderness quality land above the cave and all watersheds feeding intoit.Thiswould allow for maximum protectionofthe cave butisnot entirely necessary. Land overlying a cave thatisnot up to wilderness standards but where significant recovery has occurred andisexpected to continue should be seriously considered. Many miles of the Mammoth Cave System would fall into this category. A sixth concern expressed to the author comes from a small numberofscientists and cavers. They fear being cut off from their research areasorexploration activitiesiftheir favorite cave becomes a wilderness. This seems unlikely in the caseofareas where groupsorindividuals have already established a record of having a responsible programofresearch or exploration. Indeed some levelofrestrictionisplaced on most federally managed caves. This varies from simple verbal permissionora permit to control access to almost complete closure in rare cases. The large federally managed systems (Jewel Cave, Wind Cave, Mammoth/Flint Ridge System, Carlsbad Caverns, Lechuguilla Cave, etc.) are open to both exploration and research through a varietyofagreements between the concerned federal agency and the groupofcavers and/or scientists. While somewhat restrictive, these agreements provide a filtering system with the ultimate purposeofprotecting the resource. These agreements generally remove the direct responsibilityofdeCidingwho goes into the cave from already overworked on-site agency personnel. Although theremaycertainly have been abusesofthistypeofaccess control they have worked more often than not. Refer to Estes and Alexander (in press) for a fascinating history ofPage265

PAGE 271

Huppertresearch at Mammoth Cave National Park and the profound lackofunderstanding and hinderanceofresearchbysome, butnotall, park personnel. However, it seems that most competent cavers and scientists who will submit to the permitoragreement requirements will be allowed to pursue their projects. A last problem with having a cave designated as a wilderness areaisthatofpublic apathy as the resultofa general ignorance and perhaps fearofcaves. Cavesdonot have a pristine, wilderness-likeorromanticized image in the mindsofmostofthe public. Thisisreflected in the lackofreal motivationbymostofthe mainline conservation associations to put cave wilderness as a significant priority.Onenotable exception has been The Nature Conservancy which has long recognized the importanceofcaves (especially as habitat for unique biota) and has actedonthis convictionbypurchasing many caves for preservation. This public ignoranceisslowly, perhaps too slowly, being changed as more visitors are being educatedbybetter, more conservation-oriented programs at federal, state,and some privately owned show caves.Onegood exampleofthe latterisFantastic Caverns in Missouri. In addition, through the effortsofthe American Cave Conservation Association, the National Speleological Society, Bat Conservation International, and many individuals, caves are getting betterand much more positive coverage in the media through the pastfewyears.Anexampleofthis was the rescueatLechuguilla Cave in April 1991. While various reporters presented some bizarre ideas about caves (an4 cavers), the park personnel and cavers interviewed generally expressed much concern about protecting the cave resource during the rescue.Themessage to the public that came across was thatthecave was worth preserving as well as the victim. This short paper summarizes a numberofthe most frequently heard arguments against the designationofcave wilderness. Allofthe arguments can be countered from a legal standpoint.Thebarrierisbuiltofignorance, greed, politics, and lackofmotivationbyCongress. Thereisa cave wildernessoutthere (in fact, many caves; see Huppert, 1986) waiting for designation. The timeisnow before itistoo late.REFERENCES CITEDEstes,E.KandAlexander,E.c.,(inpress),Karsthydrogeologic research at Mammoth Cave National Park, Submitted to Science in the National Parks. Hummel,J.B., 1982,Isthe underground wilderness concept practical?, 1980 National CaveManagementSymposiumProceedings,Mammoth Cave National Park,KY,Pygmy Dwarf Press, Oregon City, OR, pp. 199-200. Huppert, G. N., 1986, Potential sites for underground wildernessinthe United States, Proceedingsofthe 9th International CongressofSpeleology, Barcelona, Spain, pp. 236-238. Huppert, G.N.and Wheeler,B.J.,1986, Underground wilderness: can the concept work?, Proceedings-National Wilderness Research Conference: Current Research, General Technical Report INT-212,Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, Utah, U.S.DepartmentofAgriculture, 516-522. Kerbo,R.and Roth,J.,1989, Lechuguilla, Cave:onthe edgeofwilderness, 1987 National Cave Management Symposium Proceedings, Rapid City, SO, National Speleological Society, Huntsville, AL, pp. 56-62.Rhinehart,R.,1989,Thepaperdragon:commercialization and Lechuguilla Cave, Rocky Mountain Caving, vol. 6, no.2,pp. 11-13. Rolston, H. III, 1985, Valuing wildlands, Environmental Ethics, vol.7,no.1,pp. 23-28.Page266

PAGE 272

MullinsCA VB MANAGEMENT BY PRESCRIPTION AN ALTERNATIVETOCLASSIFICATION SYSTEMSL.H. Mullins USDA, Forest Service811Constitution Avenue Bedford, Indiana 47421ABSTRACTThe Federal cave Resources Protection Actof1988isa mandate for cave management in cooperation with "those who utilizecaves."Historically the USDA Forest Service has tended to view cavesasrecreational curiosities except when responding to legal requirements for the protectionof"threatened and endangered species,"or"cultural resources." Consequently, the focus has been on protecting cave resources from cave visitors, rather than protecting caves from potential impacts resulting from other resource activities. This paper presents a procedure that integrates cave resource management into land management planningatthe same levelofconsiderationasother resources. Classification systems have been avoided in deference to a case-by-case analysisofeach cave in relation to its karst environment. Under the Hoosier National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, approved in April1991,each cave and karst area will befullyinventoried to identify values to be protectedormanaged. Based upon analysisofthe data, a management planiswritten for each cave. Resource values are identified and examined in detail to determine potential impacts. Prescriptions are written to protect those values. Criteria and monitoring procedures (LimitsofAcceptable Change) are developed to assure the protectionofidentified values. Several unique cave management principles are employed to guide this process, including the provision for caver volunteers to participateaspartners in the inventory, planning and monitoringofcaves.HOOSIERNATIONALFORESTCA VB MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLESThere are a numberofprinciples that are basic to cave management on the Hoosier National Forest: Provide information for project planning regarding caves and karst resources, and in particular to identify critical habitat for Federally listed Threatened and Endangered species *** Locate and protect karst and cave resources while minimizing impacts on other Forest uses Assume minimum dollars available Work with cavers and establish trust Meet the intentofthe Federal cave Resources Protection Actof1988 ** SinceHNFcaves are not well known, useislight so the focusofpreservationison avoiding impacts resulting from management activities We manage the entire karst environment including caves All caves will be managedassignificantPage 267

PAGE 273

The following cave inventory and management processisa common sense approach that conforms to many existing Forest planning processes already in use in the Forest Service. Contrastingly, itisunique in its simplicity and holistic approach; it includes caver partners while at same time protecting cave location confidentiality. Itissite (cave) specific and cave resource specific. It avoids the useofa classification system. Itisdesigned to be functional, simple and comprehensive. MullinsThe confidentialityofcave locationsisthe first lineofdefense for protectionofsensitive cave resources. Maintaining this confidentiality serves to distribute use and will allow for more caves to remain open. All caves are open to the public for recreation use, provided sensitive cave resources are not seriously threatened. The thrillofdiscoveryisprotectedbynot giving out cave locations. As in wilderness, riskispartofthe challengeofexploration. Caves will be treatedaspartofthe general Forest environment,asare streams, cliffs, and other unique features. Caves will not be closed for the purposeofshielding cavers from risk. The water, sediment, nutrient and temperature regimesofcaves and karst features are sensitivetothe activitiesofman. These features will be protected so that these envi ronments can function naturally. There will be no "sacrifice" caves on the Forest, all caves will be protected to established LimitsofAcceptable Change. Cave and karst resource managementwillbe given consideration equivalent to that receivedbyother Forest sensitive resource values.* *Develop partnerships formalized through MemorandumsofUnderstanding with local grottos and cavers. Cavers and speleologists will form the coreofthe inventory and management program and should participate at every stageofthe process. Using your identified Issues and Concerns, write Forest-wide Standards and Guidelines and a Cave Management Implementation Plan to be included in your Forest Planbyamendment. Thisisdone in full cooperation with your cave management "partners" after a long seriesofcaver and Forest planning team meetings and consultations. Develop support for the Forest cave management program both within your Forest staff and among local caver users groups through joint training sessions and field trips.THECAVE INVENTORY AND MANAGEMENT PROCESS STEP 1 EXISTING DATA COLLECTIONThis process assumes several that basic steps have been completed on a Forest-wide scale, they areasfollows: This objectiveisto collect all existing information about the specific caves and karst areas to be managed, including cave locations. In most areas, cavers have been systematically exploring and documenting information about local caves for40yearsormore. In addition, other sources, suchasland surveys, can provide valuable documentation.*Identify specific Forest-wide general issues and concerns from, "Those who utilizecaves"(see Federal Cave Resources Protection Actof1988); contacts should include local Grottos and cave clubs,aswellasresearchers from local colleges and universities. These issues and concerns will evolve into basic cave management principles thatwillform the foundation for the cave management program.* Develop agreements with local grottos and cave surveys to provide cave location data bases, and research grotto libraries. Check local college libraries.Page268

PAGE 274

MullinsArea experts, land surveys, etc.Identify research questions .Published cave surveys STEP 4 ANSWER RESEARCH QUESTIONS In order to identify inventory needs and support proposed cave and karst resource conservation measures a good libraryofcave resource literature must be accumulated. Cave springs, swallow holes, rises, sinkholes, karst windows, blind karst valleys, and cave entrance locations are all partofthe total cave environment. Itisimportant to locate as many caves and karst features as possible, and determine their spatial and hydrologic relationships to approach a full understandingofthese unique ecosystems. The mysteriesofthe subterranean world are elusive. A total pictureisnotpractical, but as much information as possible should be accumulated for each enterable cave. Each cave will have a site specific management plan written that includes a description of cave resource values, prescription for management, and a monitoring plan (with identified limitsofacceptable change). The plan should be writtenbya team that includes cave inventory volunteers andotherknowledgeable specialists with personal knowledgeofthe cave's resources. These documents arenotformalNEPA(National Environmental Policy Act) documents, but are management agreements that support later NEP A documentationasneeded. They are signed jointlybythe respective Ranger, the Forest Supervisor, and a represen ta tiveofthe Indiana Karst Conservancy. Since the NEPA processisa public involvement process, this stepisnecessary to protect cave location confidentiality. Any management project that could modify the cave, including gating, will require a NEP A document. INDIVIDUAL CAVE MANAGEMENT PLANS Enlist researchers, agency specialists, and speleologists in resolving these questions.Itisjust as important to identify "questions to be answered"asitisto identify obvious resource values.Theinventory will identify questions that can only be answeredbyan expert,ormay require a dedicated research project to resolve. Thisiswhere, with further scrutiny, a hidden cave resource value might become identified as significant.Forexample, the field inventory in Zillion Cave (see chart) located an unusually large numberofbear wallows. A follow up studybya well known Paleontologist established that thereisa substantial collectionofbear wallows, a significant cave resource. STEP 5 CAVELITERATURELIBRARY ANDLITERATURESEARCHRidgewalk and map all karst features, including caves. CAVE AND KARST INVENTORY (FIELDDATAACCUMULATION) Local college and university libraries. Acquire relevantNSSBulletins, and Newsletters. Contact NSS, Grotto,CRFand other organizations for research literature on the cave resource. Science Journals provide useful research documentation. Map each cave to a standard suitable for cave studies.* STEP 3 STEP 2Inventory each cave for resource values, i.e.: Biologic, Cultural, Geologic/mineralogic/pale ontologic, Hydrologic, Recreation, and educa tion/scientific. The plan development process and resulting documentisdivided into the following segmentsorstages; each stageisderived from analysis information developed at the preceding level(s):Page 269

PAGE 275

MullinsManagement actions involving the cave itself, suchasa requirement to obtain a permit for entry, are also developed and should relate to specific threat to an identified resource. The description of the cave's resource values containedinthe management plan along with the cave map can now be combined to serve as the nomination documentation for cave significance determination under Federal cave Resource Protection Act tions. Each ICC would be addressedbyoneormore prescriptive standardsormanagement actions. These site specific stipulations must be respectedormitigated in order to assure no harm to cave resources would occur. Any projects planned within the karst area in which the caveislocated should respect the standards developed, and avoid harm to the cave resources. E. MONITORING Monitoringisessential to follow-up on Limits of Acceptable Change standards and implementationofprescription guidelines.Asmuch as possible, the caver volunteers involvedinthe inventory of the cave will be utilized to conduct periodic monitoring inspections, according to the monitoring plan whichisan integral partofthe cave's management plan. NOMINATION PROCESS UNDER FCRP STEP 6 The entire management plan for each cave should not require more than afewpages for the averagecave.For very small and simple caves with like resources, these could be combined under one plan to reduce paperwork, but only after site specific individual analysisforeachcave.Newdiscoveries could result in the modification and amendmentofindividual cave management plans, or monitoring could trigger changes. Generally however, the cave environmentisquite static and the plan should be good for many years without change. MANAGEMENT PRESCRIPTION Describe standardsofmanagement actions to protect identified resource values. There should be a supportable need which requires no moreorless restriction than necessary to provide protection to the target cave resource value. For example, a map might clearly define the surface drainage area where use of pesticides would not be allowed to avoid hazard to the blindfishpopulation. For example, water quality, temperature, and a sourceoffoodiscritical for blind cave fish. These three items should be identified as being important constraints to maintain a healthy blind fish population. LIMITSOFACCEPTABLE CHANGE Identify indicators of response for selected cave resource environmental elements (cave temperature for example), and specify standards, or limits of acceptable change.Ifthe limitisalready exceeded in its current state, prescribe management actions (see"0"below), if not, prescribe actions to be taken if the standardisexceeded. Itisimportant at this stage to have interested cavers involved so if management does become necessary you have thesupportofthe affected public. LISTOFISSUES, CONCERNS,ANDCONSTRAINTS BY RESOURCE VALVE ELEMENTInthis stage, list the environmental attributes that must be preserved to protect each resource value element identified. CA VB RESOURCE VALVES For eachofthe FederalcaveResource Protection Act significance criteria categories (Biologic, Cultural,Geologic/Mineralogic/ Paleontologic, Hydrologic, Recreation, Education/Scientific), describe all thatisknown about each resource value contained within the cave. This segment later becomes the supporting document for nomination for significance.D.c.B.APage270

PAGE 276

MullinsWHY A CAVE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMWASNOT USED(1) All cavesonthe Forest are either significantorpotentially significant (pending further discoveries). Management procedures for subterranean useofcave will normallybeto maintain confidentialityoflocations. Visitation impacts are minimal for most cavesonthe Forest and location secrecyissufficient protection. Individual cave management plans that call for management actions such as a gate (only as a last resort), a permit system,orotherprotective measure within the caveareputonthe District action plan andaretreated like a project. Monitoringofthe caveisthe joint responsibilityoftheForest cave resource specialist and the District Ranger, dependingonthe typeofmonitoring action required.Thedecisionnotto use a cave classification systemonthe Hoosier National Forest was intentional. Classification systems are designed to simplifybylumping similar items into groupings so that individual distinctions, and consequently details, are reduced. Thisisfine for management efficiency, but the concept requires that either, (1) a complete knowledgeofthe items being classedisavailable or, (2) many details can be ignored,orsafely set aside for later consideration or, (3) the detailsnotbeing considered arenotimportant.Weare not comfortable with this concept when applied to the caves on the Hoosier National Forest because:cavemanagement and protectionofcave and karst valuesis(should be) site specific. We protect and manage values; we must identify what, and where, those values are tobeable to design site specific protective measures. This also assumes we willnottake land away fromotherresource uses for cave protection if thereisno justification. Inourreviewofsomeofthe cave classification schemes now in use, we observed thattheytend to focusonsubterranean impacts (cave visitation) exclusively. This does not account for impacts from the surface. We feel a holistic analysis, with all the values and potential impacts considered together at one timeisthe best way to develop a total pictureofthe management needs for a particular cave system.Notto do this overall approach runs the riskofoverlooking a critical interrelated factor. Existing classification schemes for caves tend to focusondangerous generalizations using a black box approach where a numberofratings shakeoutto an oversimplified management categoryatthe bottom. Ratingsonsuch things as risk and safety (thiS alone can increase potential for suit) can be very arbitrary and result in caves being closed unnecessarily.(Onthe Hoosier National Forest we treat caves aspartofthe general Forest environment, and recognize that riskisa legitimate element in the pursuitofthis sport). Management access categories such as, "Directed Access caves" (if not managed properly these are also knownas"Sacrifice caves"), and "Scientific Study only" (whosaysscientists don't damage caves) are very general and run the riskofnot meeting the true management needsofthe cave. Just like a kid with a setofcans and some marbles thereisa natural tendency to want toputsome caves in each category. Under a correct management scheme possibly all the caves in an area belong inonecategory;orbetteryet,whynot manage each cave on a site specific basis, with specific values identified (4) (3) (5) (2)PROJECfIMPLEMENTATIONSTEP?Thecave management plan for each caveiscontainedina folder along with supporting documentation ready for use as needed. The karst area location maps are made freely available to local unit managers. When a projectorarea analysisisproposed withinoradjacent to a karst area, the file thethatarea and the files for eachofthepotentially affected cavesarepulled and provided to the planning team along with cave resource specialist inputaboutthe potential conflictofotherresource activitiesoncave resources.Thecave management prescriptions are reviewed for cave protection provisions relevant to the proposed project. Project plans shouldbeadjusted accordingly.Page 271

PAGE 277

Mullins(6)(7)andappropriatemanagement measures fitted totheneed. Since classification schemes lend themselvestoquick decisions basedonpotentially incomplete information,thereis a dangerofplacing a caveintoa marginally inappropriate slot.cavesdonottend to fit inneatlittle categories easily,butas with most things innatureareapartofa continuum, sothereis the dangeroftryingtoforce a square peg into aroundholejustbecausethemathematical ranking system,oranarbitrary decision madebya teamofpeople somewhat familiar withthecavesathand, allocated ittoa particular category. Once done, such a thingisoften difficult to changeandbiases future decisions involving managementofthecave when additional data is acquired. Inotherwords, I believe,theclassification systems tendtosetupself-fulfilling prophecies.Thereisnoassurancethata classification system resultsinbetterprotectionofthecave, and may likely resultinunnecessary cave closuresandarbitrary decisions. Thisisanapparently easy to useadministrative tool; however, ifthecaveisinventoried and managed properly, it simply results in extra work becausethecave inventory and manage ment process as I have described above mustbedoneanyway inoneformoranother. Itisjust extra work,ora quick, and arbitraryfIXdependingonthelevelofemphasistheForestiswilling to placeonits particular cave and karst resources. resourcesontheForest; for these reasons,andthose listed above, we have rejectedtheuseofa cave classification system.CA VB MANAGEMENT BY PRESCRIPTION A SUMMARYcavemanagement by prescription provides for a holistic pictureoftheentirecaveandkarst environment.Theentireecosystem is considered.Itenables managerstointegrate cave management intotheForestService management program in a waythatinvolvesthecavers whoaretheprimary special interest group, recreational users,andsubjectmatterexpertsonthis segmentoftheForest.Itis sometimes difficult for thoseofus who went to Forestry School, Wildlife Management School,orotherland management specialtiestoadmittoourselvesthatthereisoneareaoftheenvironment over which wearecharged to managethatwe know very little about. In fact, it has beenmyexperiencethatmost land managers would only go into a cave in their worst nightmare.Mostofus were simplynottrained inthecave ecosystem. Management by prescription combinesthethingsthatwe have a comfortable knowledge about, withtheexpertiseofthepeople whodoknowandlovethecave environment. Itisthis working togethertoa common synergistiC endthatisthebiggest pay-off with this system.cavemanagement by prescription is site specific, it generally doesnottake much land away fromotherresources, yet provides foradequateand informed decisions about land use practices required for protecting cave resources. We believe that thoughtful analysis, with allthefacts that canbereasonably discoveredathand,issuperior to any classificationorranking system for cave management planning; "Classification systemsarereally a cookbook solution that relieves managersoftheresponsibility for critical thinking and creative problem solving" (ROS--BoonorBoondoggleByAlan Jubville). We have determinedontheHoosierNational Forest that theForestcave and karst featuresareunique and special resources and deserve the same qualityofanalysisandtreatment astheothersignificant Since cave managementbyprescriptionissitespecific and identified cave resource value specific, cave resourcesareprotected, regardlessofsignificance designations.Itavoidsthegeneralization pitfallsofmany classification systems.cavemanagement by prescription, combined withthetotal ecologic consideration provided by including karst as well as caves (provided a fairly complete inventoryisconducted), will providethebest vehicle to-insure that we do not inadvertently damage sensitive cave resources.Page272

PAGE 278

N EXAMPLE CAVE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR ZILLION CAVEIdentified Resource Values Issues, Concerns,&Limits of Change Management Prescription Monitoring and Constraints Action Plan BIOLOGIC: ACTIONPLAN:A balanced ecosystem includes some Maintain current air temp, Hold population of bats Allow no vegetative Install signs and 50 little brown bats, caveflies,isopods, water temp, air humidity, to 45 min, Maintain manipulationinthe recharge Forest Order prior to blind crayfish, leopard frogs (few), and sediment load minimal, crawfish population at area or visual seen areaasJune1,1992 cave beetles(2species) existing level of detritius25min. shown on the attached map GEOLOGIC/ MINERALOGIC/ Remove graffiti and PALEONTOLOGIC: mark trails using Dillion is in a thick bed of Beech Creek Protect bear wallows from Tolerate no more Allow no trails, roads, or earth caver volunteers prior Limestone.Itisanexceptionally large vandalism than10%damage to disturbing activities within the to May1,1992. cave for this rock layer, with considerabear wallows recharge area illustrated on the ble walking passage along its one half attached map. MONITORING: mile length. Paleontologicallyithas Forest more bear wallows(32)thaninany Speleobiologist to do other cave in Indiana. Well over 100 bat count and years old, the wallows are well preserved crawfish count and still exhibit claw marksinthe clay. annually HYDROLOGIC: This cave is unusual since the stream See Biological. Protect Hold stream flow, Forest Hydrologist to stays about the same size and does overflow spring fluctuation, and quality sample water not flood.Ithas been dye traced onanto current levels. annually."L"shaped line from a sinkhole with a spring notfaraway. Apparently the District Para spring servesasanoverflow thereby -Archaeologist to holding the water level constant and inspect bear wallows providing good habitat for the bears. twice annually. This feature is keytothe popularityofthis cave for bear use. CULTURAL: Caver Volunteer to Smoke on the ceiling dates back to Remove all graffiti except the Remove all graffiti inspect annually: 1836 which means the cave has been 1836 dateatthe end of the except the 1936 date Remove register visited for over 150 years. cave.atthe end of the cave. forms RECREATIONAL: Log Graffiti (remove Caveisnot heavily used butisvery Retain visual qualities at New graffiti to a max Mark a travel trail within the immediately) interesting. Recreational valueisvery entrance. Clean up old 3 occassions/yr. cave to avoid the bear wallows. Remove trash high. graffiti. Try to retain free Installthreelexansignsincave Reset trail markers access. explaining why travelislimited. EDUCATION/SCIENTIFIC:Dr.Richardsisconducting a studyofPreserve bear wallows. Establish Forest the bear wallows. Subpart B order to stay within marked trail. -If exceeded, close cave: gotopermit system.

PAGE 279

Mullins Page 274

PAGE 280

StittLegal BriefLawandSound Policy RequiretheNationalParkServiceandtheSecretaryoftheInteriorto Review theUnderground PortionsofMammoth Cave NationalParkastotheirSuitabilityfor WIlderness undertheWilderness Act of1964.RobertR.Stitt Conservation Chairman! National Speleological Society, Inc. 1417 Ninth Ave. W., Seattle,WA98119 (on adviceofcounsel)June25, 19742SUMMARYI. Land, as defined intheWilderness Act, includes the surface and subsurface portionsofthe earth. Just as land can be divided into various divisions in a horizontal plane, thereisalso ample legal precedent to establishthatland maybedividedbyboundaries between various layersofthe earth's crust. II. Congress recognized the existenceofcaves andtheapplicabilityoftheWilderness Act to cave protection. III.MammothCave National Park was established to protect caves.Thecaves, along withotherfeaturesoftheparklands, must be reviewed for their wilderness suitability. IV. Substantial portionsofthe cave systems in Mammoth Cave NationalParkmeet requirementsofthe Wilderness Act andareeligible for immediate recommendation for inclusion intheNational Wilderness Preservation System.V.Thedesignationofunderground wildernessisacceptable upon scientific and environmental grounds. VI. Failure to conduct aproperreview, accompaniedbya legally acceptable Environmental Impact Statementofalloftheroadles"sParklandsisa violationofthe Wilderness Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.TheWilderness Actof1964, 78 Stat. 890 (1964), 16 U.S.c. 1131etseq. (1965),inSection 1131 (c), [references belowtotheWilderness Act are to the U.S. Code sections) defines wilderness as follows: A wilderness ...ishereby recognized as an area wheretheearthand its communityoflifeareuntrammeledbyman, where man himselfisa visitor who doesnotremain.Anareaofwildernessisfurther defined to mean in this Actanareaofundeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence,Page275without permanent improvementsorhuman habitation,...and which (1) generally appears to have been affected primarilybythe forcesofnature, with the imprintofman's work substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitudeofa primitive and unconfined typeofrecreation; (3) hasatleast five thousand acresoflandorisofsufficient size astomake practicable its preservation and use inanunimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geological,orother

PAGE 281

featuresofscientific, educational scenic,orhistorical value. Conservationists, scientists, and speleologists have advocated for many years that the caves andotherspeleological featuresofMammoth Cave National Park should be afforded the protectionofthe Wilderness Act. The National Park Service, on theotherhand, has consistently taken the position that these features are not eligible for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System because the Wilderness Act does not specifically mention "caves." Their most recent statement in this regardisfound onp.48ofthe "Draft Environmental Statement fortheMasterPlan and Wilderness Study for Mammoth Cave National Park,w released on 24 April 1974: Muchofthe discussion about "underground wilderness" has focused on the Flint Ridge Cave System which has been studied and mappedbyscientists since 1947. The proponentsofunderground wilderness feel that the languageofthe Wilderness Actisbroad enough to cover this concept except for the "semantic problemsofsubsurface acreage." Surely, caves are places where "man himselfisa visitorwho'does not remain," and they provide truly "outstanding opportunities for solitude."Ontheotherhand, the words "landscape," "area," and "land" all appear in the definitionofwilderness in the Act and each refers specifically to the surfaceofthe earth, according to the dictionary. Clearly, when passageofthe Wilderness Act, Congress did not extend the conceptofwilderness to cavesorcave systems. In viewof.'the fact that underground wilderness was not identified in the Wilderness Act, nor have underground wildernesses been established subsequently, the National Park Service neither endorsesnorproposesunderground wilderness for Mammoth Cave National Park. We conter:td, on the contrary, that the language of the Wilderness Act specifically includes the subsurface as wellasthe surfaceofthe earth, and that the National Park Serviceisrequiredbylaw to review those areas as to their wilderness suitability.StittI. Land, as definedintheWilderness Act, includesthesurfaceandsubsurface portionsofthe earth. Justas land canbedivided into various divisions ina horizontal plane,thereis alsoamplelegal precedent toestablishthatlandmaybedividedbyboundaries between various layersoftheearth's crust. Examinationofthe legislative historyofthe Wilderness Act reveals no evidence to suggest that Congress intended that any but the usual definitionofthe word "land" apply to the useofthat word in the Act. Black's Law Dictionary defines land as follows: LAND, in the most general sense, comprehends any ground, soil,orearth whatsoever..."Land" includesnotonly the soilorearth, but also thingsofa permanent nature affixed theretoorfound therein, whetherbynature, mineral under the surface,orbythe handofman... It embracesnotonly the surfaceofthe earth,buteverything underorover it...Ithas in its legal signification an indefinite extent upward and downward...Landisorincludes the solid materialofthe earth, whatever may be the ingredientsofwhich itiscomposed, whether soil, rock,orothersubstance (p. 1019). There are numerous cases in the United States supporting this definition, whichisbased upon the commonlaw.In HigginsOiland FuelOilCo.v.Snow,113F,433, 438,51C.C.A 267 (1902), the Fifth Circuit CourtofAppeals in pointingoutthat "itiselementary that "land" itself, in legal contemplation, extends from the sky to the depths," quotes extensively from prior legal authorities, including Coke, Blackstone, and Washburn.In Edwards v.Sims,232Ky.791,24S.W. 2nd 619, 620 (1929), specifically involving cave ownership in Kentucky (actually within what later became partofMammoth Cave National Park) the CourtofAppealsofKentucky reiterated this ancient doctrine. See also Marengo CaveCo.v. Ross, 212 Ind. 624,10N.E. 2nd 917, 7 N.E. 2nd 56 (1937) and Wyattv.Mammoth Cave DevelopmentCo.,26 F. 2nd 332 (1928).Page 276

PAGE 282

Thusit isquiteclearthatintheUnitedStates as awholeandin Kentucky in particular, land, in a legal sense, comprisesthesubsurface as well asthesurfaceoftheearth.InBidartBros. v. U.S., 157 F. Supp. 373, (1957),theU.S. DistrictCourtfortheS.D. California foundthat"intheabsenceofa definitionofaword...resort maybehadtothedefinition contained inthelawoftheStatein whichtheproblem arises forthepurposeofascertainingthemeaningofsuch word,"andquotedBlack's definition for "land." See also U.S. v. Pollman, 364F.Supp.995 (1973), which again appliestheBlack's definitionof"land"tointerprettheU.S. Code.Arecentlegal opInIOnoftheInteriorDepartmentconcurs in this definitionofland:WithrespecttolandsandmineralsunderthejurisdictionoftheUnitedStates,andinconnectionwiththeuseoftheterm"lands"intheunitsegregation provisionofsection 17 G) oftheMineralLeasing Act, as amended,thefactthata lesser estate, e.g.,thesurface, hasbeencarvedoutofthelandanddisposedofdoesnotmakethatwhichisleft,themineral estate, anytheless "lands," and, it followsthatifthemineralestateis further divided horizontallyintotwoormoreparts, eachpartis nevertheless "lands."TheSegregative EffectUponaFederalOiland Gas LeaseofaPartialUnitizationEmbracing Less thanAllFormations,Horizons,orStrata,or limited toaParticularDepth, Interval, orZonewithinthe Enerior Boundariesofthe Lease, InteriorDepartmentLegalOpinionM-36776 (May7,1969).Thereis additional evidence intheWildernessActitself to indicatethatCongress intendedtheusual meaningoftheword"land"toapply.Thecomprehensive definitionofthelandtoincludethesubsurface as well asthesurface issupportedbythewordingofsection 1133 (d) (3)oftheWilderness Act, which extends existing mining laws to "national forest lands" until 1983,butrequires "restoration asnearas practicableofthesurfaceoftheland disturbed,..."andreservestotheUnitedStates "all title inortothesurfaceofall lands ... (emphasis supplied). Obviously, if land didnotincludethesubsurface as well astheStittsurface, such distinction wouldnotonlybeunnecessary,butsuperfluous.Anexaminationofotherstatues referringtoMammothCaveNationalParkmakes it clearthatthecavesareincluded aspartoftheland.Thelegislation establishingMammothCaveNationalParkonboththefederalandstatelevel refers onlytothelandsorinterests in landstobeacquiredorceded. ThustheActofMay 25, 1926 (44 Stat.635) authorizingtheestablishmentoftheparkrefersto"titlestolands"thataretobesecured.TheKentucky legislature in 1930 (Actsof1930, ch. 132, p. 405,Carroll's Kentucky Statutes, sec. 3766e-17) ceded totheUnitedStates "exclusive jurisdiction...over, within, andunderalltheterritory"ofthepark. Congress acceptedthatcessiononJune5, 1942 (56 Stat. 317, 16U.S.c.sec. 404c-l) usingthesamelanguage.TheUnitedStates,byits management and administrationofthepark, has clearly demonstratedthatit has jurisdictionandauthority overthesubsurface as well asthesurfaceportionsoftheparklands.Inprocuring lands forparkpurposes, "cave rights" as well as surface rightswereobtained.Thelawisenforced belowthesurfaceoftheland, withinthecaves,justas itisabovethesurface.TheMasterPlan and itsEnvironmentalImpactStatementrefer to activitiesandactionsproposedfor institution below the surfaceoftheearthas well as abovethesurface and onthesurface.ParkService management activities regulatethesubsurface as well as surfaceenvironments. Clearly, Congress intendedthattheterm"lands" should includeboththesurfaceandsubsurfaceofthepark,justas it intendedthat"lands" intheWilderness Act should includethesubsurface as well asthesurface. Such intent, when considered together withtheprecedentsetbytheParkService administrationofboththesubsurfaceandsurface lands, dictates that futuremanagementactivities, including review for wilderness suitability, should include alloftheland.Thereisalsoamplelegal precedent to establish thatjustas land canbedividedbyboundaries in a horizontal plane, it may alsobedivided by boundaries between various layersoftheearth'scrust. "For purposesofseparateownership, land maybedivided horizontally as well as superficially and vertically" 62Page277

PAGE 283

Am.Jur. 2nd 301. "It has been saidthatwhile formerly a man who owned the "surface" owned ittothecenterofthe earth, nowthe"surface"oftheland maybeseparated from the strata beneath it, and there may beasmany separate owners astherearestrata"31AL.R.1533. "We have felt constrainedtorecognize the susceptibilityoflandtodivision into as many estates fee simple astherearestrata that make uptheearth's "crust" Leweyv. RC. Frick: CokeCo.,66Pa. St. 536,31A 263 (1895). "That an estate in lands maybedividedbythe owner, and separate estates carvedoutofdifferent elements which go to make up the lands, thereisno doubt.Onemay be the ownerofthe surfaceoftheland,anotherthetrees standing uponit,and another the minerals under the surface, and allofthem be the ownersoflands" Gabbardv.Sheffield, 179Ky.412, 200 S.W. 943 (1918). In Cox v. Colossal Caverns Co., 219Ky612, 276 S.W. 540 (1925),theprincipleofland divisionbyvertical boundaries was extended to caves.TheKentucky Court ofAppeals citedBallv.Clark,150Ky.383, 150 S.W. 359 (1912); Kincaid v. McGowan, 8Ky.91, 4S.W.629 (1909) insupportofits decision that the surface could be ownedbyoneperson whilethecaves, together with"somuchofthe material above, about, and below the cavity asisnecessary to preserve and maintain the cave" couldbeownedbyanother.Theseparationofthe "cave rights" from the "surface rights" has become quite common in cave areas, and in fact the United States owns onlythe"cave rights"onatleast one tractofland near Mammoth Cave National Park. "The United States owns the cave rights only beneath a 2.99 acre tract along theparkboundary southeastofLittleHopeChurch" (Master Plan, p. 64). Thereisample precedent to establish that land may be dividedbyvertical as wellashorizontal boundaries. Thus itislegally permissible to establish an "underground wilderness area" which includes only that portionofland below the surface. It would also be permissible to designate as wilderness a particular stratumofland, such as the Girkin limestone andtheSte. Genevieve limestone.Itmakes no difference that the United Statesisthe owner of allofthe land, surface and subsurface. Wilderness areas are usually designated adjacent toStittothernon-wilderness lands owned bytheFederal Government. Roadless areas intheNational Parks are usually nexttoroadsordeveloped areas, yet this doesnotprecludetheirdesignation as wilderness.Theonly differenceinthis caseisthattheboundaries between wildernessandnon-wilderness areasarein a vertical insteadofa horizontal plane. Land, then, comprisesboththesubsurface and surface areasofthepark, and may for management purposes be divided horizontally and vertically. II. Congress reoognized the existence of caves andtheapplicabilityoftheWilderness Act to caveprotection. In 1957 Congress established theOutdoorRecreation Resources Review Commission(ORRRC),which studiedoutdoorrecreation resources.Throughoutthe hearingsonthe Wilderness Act held from 1958 onwards, there was continued referencebywitnesses to that study commission, and final actionona wilderness bill was delayed pendingthereceiptofits reports.Thefinal report, as well as StudyReportNo. 3oftheORRRC,entitled WildernessAndRecreation-AReportonResources, Values,andProblems, were mentioned inboththeHouseand Senate reportsonthe Wilderness Act as having guided the final preparationoftheAct, and were quoted extensively in the Reports. In the "SummaryoftheMajor Findings and Recommendations"ofthe StudyReportNo.3,section1,entitled"WhatisWilderness?" partc,reads as follows:c.Wilderness Rivers and Caves. Rivers and caves are considered in thereportasimportant potential wilderness resources, and we have attempted a limitedinventoryofwilderness rivers and discussionofcave preservation in appendixes to the full report. Itisapparent that special studyisneeded to develop suitable definitionofthese recreation resources, which can be applied in survey and management effortsatthe hearings before the House Interior and Insular Affairs committee on H.R. 9070, held in May1963,Victor A Schmidt, conservation Chairmanofthe National Speleological Society, testifiedasto the valueofwilderness designation for cave protection, and presented a resolutionPage 278

PAGE 284

supporting the Wilderness Bill passedbythe BoardofGovernorsofthe National Speleological Society. Upon questioningbyCongressman Aspinall, Dr. Schmidt agreed to provide additional information on wilderness cave resources to the Committee, and that information was printed in the hearing record following his testimony.Otherspeleologists, including Dr. WilliamR.Halliday, also testifiedathearingsonthe wilderness bills. Thus itisobvious that Congresswascertainly awareofthe need and suitability for protectionofcavesbythe Wilderness Act. No special provisionwasplacedinthe Act to exclude the cave resources. Therefore Congress must have assumed that such resources were coveredbythe Actaspassed. The special studies referred to in theORRRCreport have been done in the intervening ten years since the passageofthe Wilderness Act. The firstofthesewasthe National Speleological Society study which culminated in A Wilderness Proposal for Mammoth Cave National Part, a report published in1967.Because the surfaceofFlint Ridge in the parkisnot presently eligible for wilderness designation, this report concludes that "it is feasible to have an area declaredasunderground wilderness where surface wilderness statusisnot possibleordesirable....Surface uses suchasroads and other visitor facilities that existorare planned in these areas need not be affectedbysuch a designation, so longasthey do not interfere with the cave ecosystems below. The advantageofsuch a designationofunderground wilderness status without a corresponding surface wilderness over the same areaisthat it establishes a priorityofadministrative importance in favorofcaves and underground features"(p.7).The most comprehensive study yet completedisthatbythe Cave Research Foundation, entitled Wilderness Resources in Mammoth Cave NationalPark:A Regional Approach. This report pointedoutthat"asignificant featureofMammoth Cave National Parkisthe large areaofunderground wilderness that it contains. Thisisan underground landofsubstantial acreage in its own right, and although itisgeologically and biologically linked to the surface, its wilderness characteristics are largely independentofsurface conditions .... Mammoth Cave National Park simplyStittcontains the largest areaofunderground wildernessinthe world. Thus itisboth necessary and useful to employ the conceptofthe underground wilderness when evaluating the natural environmentofparkcaves"(p. 23). The report goesonto extensively define the wilderness resourcesofMammoth Cave National Park, and discusses underground wilderness management and administration. A third study, Underground Wildernessinthe Guadalupe Escarpment: A Concept Applied,byStitt and Bishop, although primarily dealing with the underground wilderness resourcesinCarlsbad Caverns National Park, also contains extensive discussion of underground wilderness concepts and their definition.Thisstudy pointsoutthat "the management for a karst area...would provide "multi-level" management guidelines to assure that the surface and underground environments were managed in total harmony with one another. Justasthe conceptofsurface wildernessisan important management tool for surface resources, so emphaticallyisthe conceptofunderground wilderness important for managementofthe underground resources" (p. 79). Ailofthese studies have recommended the establishmentofunderground wilderness areasaspartofthe National Wilderness Preservation System, and have concluded that such designationisacceptable within the scopeofthe current legislation. Copies of these studies are attached to this statement for inclusion in the hearing record. Section 1132 (c)ofthe Wilderness Act states that "within ten years after the effective dateofthis Act the Secretaryofthe Interior shall review every roadlessareaoffivethousand contiguous acresormoreinthe national parks...and shall report to the Presidenthisrecommendationsasthe suitabilityornonsuitability of each such area for preservationaswilderness." The wilderness regulationsofthe Department of the Interior define a "road less area"asa "reasonably compact areaofundeveloped Federal land which possesses the general characteristicsofa wilderness and within which thereisno improved road thatissuitable for public travelbymeansoffour-wheeled, motorized vehicles intended primarily for highwayuse"43c.F.R.Sec.19.2(e).2Page279

PAGE 285

Bythis definition, itisclear that the entire underground sectionofMammoth Cave National Park with the exceptionofthe electrically lighted tourist trails in Mammoth Cave Ridge,isa "roadless area" and thus must be reviewed. In conducting a reviewofa "roadless area," the Secretary ofthe Interiorisdirected to determine the "suitabilityornonsuitability"ofthe area for "preservationaswilderness."Itisnot the placeofthe Secretary to arbitrarily limit the applicabilityofthe Act to certain lands on any grounds other than thatofwhetherornot they constitute a "roadlessarea."3In Parker V. United States, D.C. Colorado, 309F.Supp.993(1970), the court noted that "oneofthe major purposesofthe Wilderness Actwasto remove a great deal[of]discretion from the [agencies]byplacing the ultimate responsibility for wilderness classification in Congress." The court quoted the House Report on the Wilderness Act: A statutory framework for the preservationofwilderness would permit long range planning and assure that no future administrator could arbitrarilyorcapriciously either abolish wilderness areas that should be retainedormake wholesale designationofadditional areas in which use would be limited. The committee accordingly endorses the conceptofa legislatively authorized wilderness preservation system. Furthermore,byestablishing explicit legislative authority for wilderness preservation, Congressisfulfilling its responsibility under the U.S. Constitution to exercise jurisdiction over the public lands, H.R. Rep. No. 1538 on the WildernessAct, 2 U.S. Code Cong.&Adm. News at, pp. 3616-17(1964).The court held that "the Act quite clearly reserves the decision to classifyaswilderness to the President and ultimately Congress. The dutyof[the Secretary]isto study and recommend, and this dutyismandatory" 309 F. Supp. 598. The court further pointedoutthat the agency "does not have uncontrolled discretion where [the mandatory review requirementsofthe Act apply and the 'area]isshown to be primitive in character;Stittthat the determination must be preserved for the President and Congress; that itisnot to be preempted" 309F.Supp. 600.Onthe basisofthis decision, which was affirmed upon appeal, 448 F. 2nd 793 (1971), cert. den., 405 U.S. 989, the Park Service and the Secretary must review the park lands solelyonthe basisofwhether they meet the definitive criteria and the Wilderness Act and must make recommendations to the President and ultimately Congress upon these grounds. The agency review should not be based upon arbitrary decision that such lands are not subject to review. Since the ultimate decisionasto the designationofthe wildernessisup to Congress, that body should be provided with such information necessary to its making the decision. There are no exceptions, restrictions,orother provisions in the Wilderness Act which might allow the interpretation that either the surfaceorsubsurfaceofMammoth Cave National Park were to be excluded from the review process requiredbySection 1132 (c). The only clause in the Act which might possibly modify the review requirementisSection 1133 (a) (3): "Nothing in this chapter shall modify the statutory authority under which unitsofthe national park system are created... ." A reviewofthat statutory authority for Mammoth Cave National Park reveals nothing which might exclude the subsurface landsofthe park from the review process. A wordisnecessary at this pOint regarding the applicabilityofthe review process to the subsurface areasofall national parks--indeed, all federal lands. Clearly itwasnot Congress' intent to require such a review for those lands where the subsurfaceisnot accessiblebynatural means. Thus mandatory reviewofsubsurface areas only applies to those parks which contain knownorsuspected cave resourcesofoutstanding wilderness quality. Mammothisofcourse the most importantofthese parks; this list includes Carlsbad Caverns National Park, Wind Cave National Park, Jewel Cave National Monument, Cratersofthe Moon National Park, and Lava Beds National Monument, among others. The National Spelelogical Society has participated in the wilderness review process for manyofthese parks, and, where applicable, has asked for underground wilderness protection forPage280

PAGE 286

the cave systems included in them. In some cases the wilderness recommendations madebythe Park Service provide satisfactory protection for the wilderness cave resources; in others Congressmayhave to exercise its ultimate authority and modify the agency recommendationsifadequate protectionisto be provided.Inthose parks where the subsurface resources were not reviewed, further reviewbythe agency might be appropriate. The Park Service has argued that thereisno precedent for the establishmentofunderground wilderness under the WildernessActSuch lackofprecedentis,of course, no excuse for failing to review the cave resources. But itisperhaps explainedbypointing out that lackofprecedent is entirely the responsibilityofthe Park Service, which has failed not only in its responsibility to recommend cave resources to the Congress for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System, but has failed to review them for their suitability in the first place. We find, then, that Congresswascertainly awareofthe applicabilityofthe Wilderness Act to the protectionofcave resources whenitpassed the Wilderness Act, and that since cave resources were not specifically excluded, they are eligible for protection. Since 1964 management concepts for wilderness cave resources have evolved to the point where itisclearly possible to provide protection within the frameworkofexisting legislation, the Wilderness Actof1964. The mandatory review process requires the reviewofcave resources of Mammoth Cave National Park, and a recommendation to Congressbythe Presidentasto their suitabilityornonsuitability for inclusioninthe National Wilderness Preservation System. III. Mammoth Cave National Park was establishedtoprotectthecaves.Thecaves, along withotherfeaturesofthe park lands, mustbereviewed for their wilderness suitability. A studyofthe legislation establishing Mammoth Cave National Park reveals that the parkwasestablished uponthe recommendationofthe Southern Appalachian National Park Commission.Itwasfrom the very beginning quite clear that the parkwasto be established primarily for the preservati(m ofthe caverns and other karst phenomenaofthe area. In itsStittreportofApril 18, 1926, the commission recommended national park status for the Mammoth Cave Region of Kentucky becauseof"the limestone caverns which contain 'beautiful and wonderful formations,' the 'great underground labyrinth'ofpassageways 'of remarkable geological and recreational interest perhaps unparalleled elsewhere,' and the "thousand of curious sinkholesofvarying sizes through which much of the drainageiscarried to underground streams, there beingfewsurface brooksorcreeks"(Master Plan,p.612). The caves are the major and prime features of the park, and are so recognizedbymostofthe visitors who penetrate the parks' interior. The nameofthe parkis"Mammoth Cave National Park," further recognizing the importanceofthe cave systemasthe major attraction of the park. References to the cave and their contents are made at several places in the legislation.Inthe ActofJune5,1942 (56 Stat. 317) the Secretaryofthe Interiorisempowered to make and publish rules for the "preservation from injuryorspoilation of all...mineral deposits, natural curiosities,orwonderful objects." The ActofMay 14,1934 (38 Stat. 775) amending the original Act establishing the park precludes developmentofthe area until "allofthe caves thereof..." have been acceptedbythe Secretary. Viewed in lightoftheir importanceasprime featuresofthe park, failure to review the cave systems for their wilderness suitabilityisa blatant disregard of the intentofCongress "to secure for the American peopleofpresent and future generations the benefitsofan enduring resource of wilderness," the main purpose of the Wilderness Act expressedinSection1131.Obviously wilderness protection wouldnotbe desirable for all the cavesofthe park,asthat would deny muchofthe public the opportunity to visit any of thecaves.Furthermore, the already developed portions of the cave systems are clearly not eligible at present for wilderness. But allofthe cave resourcesofthe park should be reviewed, and those which are not presently developed, and that areofobvious wilderness quality, should be recommended for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. IV. Substantial portionsofthe cave systemsinMammoth Cave National Park meet the requirementsofthe Wilderness Act and arePage 281

PAGE 287

eligible for immediate recommendation for inclusion intheNational Preservation System. This point has been discussed extensively in other documents, allofwhich have been submitted to the Park Service in the past, and manyofwhich have been referenced in the Master Plan, the Wilderness Study, and the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Two of them are attached to this brief.4In addition to its own staff, the Park Service has available the expertiseofthecaveResearch Foundation and other scientists working within the park whose knowledgeofthe cave systemsisquite adequate for carryingouta complete studyofcave systems. It would not be appropriate to include here a passagebypassage analysisofthe cave systems, for thatisthe jobofthe Park Service Wilderness Study Team and its hired consultants. In this discussion we will analyze the definitionofwilderness found in the Wilderness Act and applyitgenerally to cave systems in the park.-Awilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his own 'WOrks dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized asanarea where theearthand its community oflifeareuntrammeledbyman, where manhimself is a visitor who doesnotremain.--Certainly a cave system, apart from those area where human artifacts may intrude upon the natural scene,isa prime and outstanding exampleofan area where the worksofman are dwarfedbythe massive presenceofnature upon all sides. With the exceptionoftheTBHuts (and even there the inhabitants did not remain long), the saltpetre mining relics, and the electric lighting systems installed in MammothcaveRidge, there are no permanent habitationsordevelopments in the cave system. In those partsofthe cave systems which have not yet been discoveredbyhumans, thereisno better example on this planetofan "area where the earth and its community are untrammeledbyman." Even the bottomsofthe oceans are more affectedbypollution that are the utmost reachesofthe Flint-MammothcaveSystem. -An areaofwilderness is further defined to mean inthischapteranareaofundeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without improvementsorhuman habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural condition. ---There could be no better description thanStittthe aboveofmuchoftheFlint-MammothcaveSystem. The Systemisclearly undeveloped federal land. It retains its primeval character and influence. There are no human habitations. The only permanent improvements are on MammothcaveRidge, where trails have been developed and lighting installed to allow large numbersofvisitors to view the natural wonders without damaging them. Even the present managementofthe system is aimedatpreserving its natural condition, although there have been some notable failures in this regard in the past, probably because a lackofstatutory wilderness designation allowed a lapseofnormally high management standards. -And which (1) generally appearstohave been affected primarilybythe forces ofnature, with the imprintofman's 'WOrk substantially unnoticeable. -Except in the developed sectionsofthis cave, the presenceofNatureisoverwhelmingly evident. Even in those portions where developments existed before the parkwasestablished, these developments which are no longer in useare "substantially unnoticeable" in many cases, and inothers could easily be made sobythe removalofcivil defense supplies and lighting equipment and the natural deteriorationoftrails. -(2) Has outstanding opportunities for solitudeora primitive and unconfinedtypeof recreation. ---Certainly there exists no other place on earth where one may be so cut off from other humans than in the depthsofa cave, where even the soundsofairplanes passing overheadorautomobiles on a nearby road are absorbedbythe overlying rock layers. Cut off from hisorher fellow humans, the underground wilderness visitor relies upon primitive senses in travelling through a labyrinthofpassages exceeding165miles in length. s There are sectionsofthe Flint-Mammoth Systems where noonehas ever set foot, and in most places the numberofvisitorsislimited to afewscore. Even the well travelled sections have been viewed at mostbyonly afewhundred persons. Only afewfeet off the tourist trailsinMammothcaveRidge,onemaybe truly alone. The opportunity for solitudeisindeed outstanding. -(3)hasatleastfivethousand acresoflandor is ofsufficient size as to make practicable its preservation and useinanunimpaired condition.---Clearly, if thePage 282

PAGE 288

boundariesofanunderground wilderness areaaredefined by establishing boundariesuponthesurfaceandprojectingthemunderground,thereisnoquestionbutthattheunderground areasoftheparkexceed 5,000 acres,andthus qualify. However, Congress specifically includedthewordorto differentiatethesecond categoryofqualification as being equal in acceptabilitytothefirst. (Thispointwas discussed in length intheConferenceReportontheWilderness Act). A cave system hastheinherentpropertyofbeing naturally protected,ifgatesareinstalledandmaintainedatentrancesandvisitation is regulated to within environmentally acceptable limits. (Methodsofcontrollinganddistributing visitor impactarediscussed inOutdoorRecreation--A Legacy for America, BureauofOutdoorRecreation, 1973, p. 49).-And (4) may also mntain ecological, geologicalorother features of scientific. educational, scenic. or utorical value.---There isnoquestionbutthatthis section appliestoMammothParkCaves. They have forthepastoneandone-half centuries been famousthroughouttheworld for their featuresofscientific, educational, scenic,andhistorical value, andthatisin factthereason whythearea was designated a national park.6Thereis, then,noquestionbutwhat muchofthepark's cave systemsarewilderness bytheabove definitions,andqualify for inclusion intheNational Wilderness Preservation System.Theonly question remaining isoneofspecifics. Certain sectionsofthecaves show substantialhumaninfluences, and thus mightnotbeeligible for wilderness protection.Thepurposeofa wilderness review is to determine which,ifany, portionsofanareaoffederal land do qualify bytheabove definition, and whichdonot. Therefore such a review shouldbecarried out,andrecommendations made, baseduponthedefinitionofwilderness provided bytheWilderness Act. V.1bedesignationofunderground wildernessisacceptableuponscientificandenvironmental grounds.Amplediscussionofthis point exists inthepublications already submittedtotheParkService,andStittmentioned above. Obviouslytherewouldbesome restraints necessaryuponsurface uses overlyingandsurroundinganunderground wilderness areatoassurethatthewilderness wasnotpollutedordestroyed through careless acts. Normally these precautions are included withinthemanagement procedures necessary tomeetthestatutory requirements established bytheNational Parks Act(16U.S.C.1)andotherlegislation affectingthenational parks.Iftheproposed Master Plan is carried out,thesurface willbemanaged in such a way compatible withthemaintenanceofunderground wilderness.Themajor effectthatunderground wilderness designation would have istoassure that surface management was carriedoutin ways compatible withpreservationoftheundergroundwilderness environment. When surface developmentsareinstalled overanunderground wilderness area, it maybenecessary totakeextra precautions to assure that pollutionorotheradverse environmental effects donotoccur.Ifthese precautionsaretaken, there would be no objectiontothedesignationofunderground wilderness below surface developments.VI. Failuretomnductaproperreview,aa:ompaniedbya legally acceptable Environmental Impact Statement,ofalloftheroadlessParklandsisa violationoftheWildernessActandtheNationalEnvironmental PolicyAct.TheWilderness Actof1964 clearly requiresthereview bytheSecretaryoftheInteriorofall "roadless areas"ofmorethanfive thousand acres withintheNational ParksandareporttothePresident as to the suitabilityornonsuitabilityofeach area for preservation as wilderness.Wehave shownthat"land" withinthemeaningoftheWilderness Act includesboththesubsurface and surface,andthatland maybedividedbyvertical as well as horizontal boundaries. Since the Congress recognizedtheexistenceofcaves and the applicabilityoftheWilderness Act to their protection theyareindeed includedundertheAct. Mammoth Cave NationalParkwas establishedtoprotect cave systems, and since substantial portionsofthose cave systemsareeligible for inclusion intheNationalPage283

PAGE 289

Wilderness Preservation System,the Secretary should reviewthemandsorecommendthem.Thecruxofthematteriswhetherornotaproperreviewoftheundergroundportionsoftheparkland hasbeenmade.Theevidence suggeststhatit has not.The"Wilderness Study" presentedtothepublic hearings in May 1974madenomentionoftheundergroundportionsofthepark.TheParkService indicated in itsDraftEnvironmentalStatementthatithad chosennottorecommendinclusionofthecaves in anundergroundwilderness. However,thatrecommendation was clearly basednotupona review,butuponanarbitraryinterpretationbytheParkServiceofdepartmentalregulationsandtheintentoftheWilderness Act. Section 102 (2) (C)oftheNationalEnvironmentalPolicyActof1969 (42U.S.c.4321 et. seq., 83 Stat. 852,Pub.L.91-190) requiresthat"a detailedstatementbytheresponsible official"ontheenvironmental impactsof"everyrecommendationorreportonproposalsoflegislation" "shall accompanytheproposalthroughtheexisting agency review processes."Withrespect tothewilderness recommendationspresentedatthehearings in May 1974theEnvironmentalImpactStatementpresented was hopelessly inadequate, since it didnotinclude a discussionofseveralofthepoints requiredbySection 102 (2) (C), specificallythesectionsonadverse environmental impacts which cannotbeavoided,therelationship betweenshorttermusesandthelong-term productivity,andirreversible .andirretrievablecommitmentsofresources.Itcontainsanarbitrary analysisofthedataanda misrepresentationofthelegal definitionofwilderness; it completely ignoresdepartmentalwilderness guidelines; it proposes overdevelopmentofwilderness without justification; it contains a completely inadequate discussionofwilderness and non-wilderness impacts; and its discussionofalternatives consistently misinterpretstheconservationist's wilderness proposals and argues against "straw men." Because citizen wilderness proposals have all included recommendations forundergroundwilderness inthepark, a discussionofthevarious wilderness alternatives intheDraftEnvironmentalImpactStatementincludes a cursory analysisoftheenvironmental impactsofStittundergroundwilderness. However, as wepointedoutinourcommentsonthatDraftEnvironmentalImpactStatement(acopyofwhich hasbeensubmittedfor inclusion intheWildernessHearingRecord),theentirediscussionofwilderness fails woefullyshortofmeeting eventheminimumrequirementsofNEPA,andthediscussionofundergroundwilderness is for all practical purposes non-existent sinceitfailstopresenta balancedandfair assessmentoftheimpacts. Instead it seems tobeaimedatjustifyingtheParkServices' choicetorecommendnoundergroundwilderness. Thus we findthattheParkServiceandtheDepartmentoftheInteriorhave clearly complied withneithertheWildernessActnortheNationalEnvironmentalPolicy Act. They have failedtoadequately review allofthewilderness resourcesoftheroadless areasofMammothCaveNationalPark,andtheDraftEnvironmentalImpactStatementpresentedattheWilderness Hearings in May 1974 wasnotadequatetomeettherequirementsofthelaw. Therefore,werecommendthattheNationalParkService,andtheDepartmentoftheInterior,should"go backtothedrawing boards"andperformanadequatereviewoftheparklandsandpresenttheresultsofthatreview,togetherwithanadequateEnvironmentalImpactStatement,tothePresident forrecommendationto Congress.WerealizethatthetimeremainingbeforetheSeptember3, 1974 deadlinesetby Section 1132 (c)oftheWildernessActisshort;buttheDepartmenthasbeenawareofthatdeadline,andcould have proceededmorerapidlythroughthereview process. Conservationists havebeenasking for a reviewoftheundergroundwilderness resources since 1967,andtheagencies shouldbewell awareoftheirresponsibilitiesunderthelaw.Thefailuretoact can onlybeascribedtoanovertintenttothwartthewillofCongress.TheinterestsofthePark,thewilderness cave resourcesandthepeopleoftheUnitedStates wouldbestbeservedbyimmediate reviewofthesubsurface resourcesofMammothCave National Park,anda recommendationbytheSecretaryoftheInteriorandthePresidenttoCongress for designationofsubstantial portionsoftheundergroundareasofMammothCave NationalParkasundergroundwilderness.Page 284

PAGE 290

StittReferences Cited(1) National Speleological Society. A Wilderness Proposal for MammothCaveNational Park, Kentucky. Vienna, Va.: National Spelelogical Society,1967.(2) Davidson, JosephK.and WilliamP.Bishop. Wilderness Resources inMammoth Cave National Part: A Regional Approach. Columbus, Ohio: cave Research Foundation,1971.(3) Stitt, RobertR.and WilliamP.Bishop. "Underground Wilderness in the Guadalupe Escarpment: A Concept Applied." BulletinoftheNational Speleological Society, 34(3):77-88,1972.Author's Note: The following pieces demonstrate the response to the above legal brief from the Interior Department and the President:United States DepartmentoftheInterior Officeofthe SecretaIy Washington, D.C. 20240May12,1975Mr. RobertR.Stitt Conservation Chairman National Speleological Society Conservation Committee Dear Mr. Stitt: This responds to your letterofMarch6,1975,concerning the Department's wilderness reviewofMammothCaveNational Park.7Let me commend you and your organization for your interest in and efforts on behalfofwildernessinMammoth cave National Park. In our letter to the President dated August 23, 1974 (enclosed),westated: "Thereisno legal barrier to the designationofsubterranean landsaswilderness." Moreover, in that letter the Department committed itselftocarryingoutexplorationsofthe subterranean lands in Mammoth cave National Park and making additional recommendations to the Congress. This,ofcourse, constitutes a change from the earlier positionofthe National Park Service that underground wilderness areas were not within the scopeofthe Wilderness Act. This changewasoccasioned in no small measurebythe cogent analysis of the issue in your organization's legal brief submitted June 25,1974.Certain points raised in your letter center on issuesasto which reasonable menmaydiffer. For example, you are apparently convinced that muchofthe park's surface land has been restored to a natural state, whereas itisour judgment that virtually allofthe surface land in the park still displays marked signsofman's presence. I standbythe Department's recommendation and see little to be gainedbya lengthy discussionofthe issue. The Congress,ofcourse,willultimately decide the matter. Similarly, your contentions that the Hearing Officer's conclusions are notsUPI>ortedbythe recordisa subject whichwecould debate at length to little purpose: I believe that the Hearing Examiner acted properly. Again, your assertion that, contrary to the statement in the Department's to the President, moreisknown about the park'S cave than its surface lands can be left to Congress for further consideration. (I would point out, however, that it does not matter whether,asyou state, more has been written about the caves than about the surface; our pointisthat many of the caves contain large unexplored segments, whereas the surface lands have been thoroughly assessed.)Page 285

PAGE 291

StittMany of your arguments concern legal issues and the interpretationofthe Department's recommendation to the President. These I would like to discuss in some detail. [paragraph responding to allegation that the recommendation for no wilderness lacked an adequate environmental statementasrequiredbyNEPA]Your letter also contends that "therewasno review of the underground wilderness resources of the park." I cannot agree. I can assure you that the subjectofwilderness designation for subterranean lands in MammothcaveNational Parkwasdiscussed at length in the Department prior to the final recommendation to the President. Evidently yourviewthat therewasno reviewispredicated upon the fact that the Department did not conduct exhaustive explorations of the subterranean lands prior to making its recommendation.8The Wilderness Act does not specify the kind ofreviewcalled for in section 3 (c). I am convinced that a serious considerationofall known facets of an area suffices a review within the meaning of that section. The subterranean lands of MammothcaveNational Park were given such a consideration, and itwasthe Department's determination that the imminent to-year deadline of the Wilderness Act and the enormous expense involved rendered a crash program to explore the subterranean lands infeasible. Using the best available data,weconcluded that too large a portion of the subterranean landsinthe parkwasterra incognita forusto be able to recommend them as wilderness at that time.9[paragraph discussing the Green River impoundment and its status under the Wilderness Act.] Finally, I cannot accede to your request that an"immediate wilderness reevaluation be conducted" in MammothcaveNational Park. certainly thereisno intention to procrastinate in making the reassessment promised in our recommendation letter. On the other hand, thereisno threat to the underground resourcesofthe park; our commitment to reassess these lands entails thatwetakenoactioninthe meantime which would be incompatible with their designation as wilderness. Accordingly,weshall adhere to an exploration and reassessment schedule thatisinkeeping with fiscal and manpower restraintsaswellasoverall requirements for proper administrationofthe park.tOWedonot contemplate any material difference in the criteria used to evaluate the wilderness potentialofsubterranean landsinMammothcaveNational Park from those criteria employed elsewhereinthe National Park System. Sincerely yours,lsiNathaniel Reed Assistant Secretaryofthe InteriorUnited States Departmentofthe Interior Officeofthe SecretaryWashington, D.C. 20240August 23,1974 The President The White House Washington,D.C.20500 Dear Mr.President: The Wilderness Act (78 Stat. 890) directs the Secretary of the Interior to recommend to the President area within its jurisdiction which are suitable for designationaswilderness. Having reviewed Mammoth cave National Park,weconclude that none of the park area should be designated wilderness at this time.Page 286

PAGE 292

StittMammoth Cave National Park, a 51,354 acre area in south-central Kentucky,wasestablishedbyan ActofCongress in 1926. Its focusisthe world's most extensive lineal cave system, whichistouredbymore than 600,000 persons per year. The park also offers someofthe finest riverscapes in the state, along the Green and Nolin rivers. The park harbors abundant wildlife, particularly Virginia white-tailed deer. Prior to the establishmentofthe park, the surface landsofthe Mammoth Cave area were settled and farmed.Atpresent virtually allofthe surface landsofthe park still display marked signsofman's presence there. We believe that several more decades will be required before these lands can return to their natural condition. The subterranean portionsofthe park contain extensive undeveloped caverns. Thereisno legal barrier to the designationofsubterranean landsaswilderness. However, manyofthe caverns are unexplored and largely unknown.Newknowledge gleaned from exploration may entail changes in management and useofthe cavesasa whole. To recommend anyofthese areas for wilderness designation prior to their explorationand prior to an assessmentasto how they fit into the park as a whole,webelieve, subordinate the values for which the parkwasestablished to wilderness concerns.llFor these reasonswerecommend that no partofMammoth Cave National Park be designated wilderness at this time. We shall reassess the situation as exploration progresses and report back to Congress at a later date. In accordance with the termsofthe Wilderness Act, a public hearing on the recommendationwasheld at Bowling Green, Kentucky, onMay29,1974.A summary of the hearing record and written expressions received concerning itiscontained in the enclosed brochure. Complete records have been compiled and are available for inspectionbythe public. Sincerely yours,lsi??Wheeler Acting Secretaryofthe InteriorPresidential Wilderness MessageExcerpt from the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. December 4,1974.p.S20450ff. To the Congressofthe United States: [proposes37new additions to the National Wilderness Preservation System] Three other areas...contain surface lands suitable for wilderness designation...After [review] the Secretaryofthe Interior has concluded that four areas are not suitable for preservationaspart of the National Wilderness Preservation System. These [include]:...Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky...Asto [this park], however, I am directing that a wilderness reevaluation be conducted at such timeasmanagement perogatives and other prospective usesofthe areas are better defined...GeraldR.Ford The White House, December4,1974Page287

PAGE 293

StittNotes:1. As of1974.The authoriscurrently (1991) Chairman of the Cave Conservation and Management Section of theNSS,and has variously servedasDirector, Executive Vice President, and President of the NSS since1974.2. This paperwasoriginally preparedin1975to be presentedaspartofthe Master Plan and Wilderness Hearings for the Mammoth Cave National Park in1974.Itwasresponsible for the acceptance of the legalityofunderground wildernessbythe Department of the Interior. However, to date there have been no designations of underground wilderness; agencies seem reluctant to set a precedent. Note that the original paperwasnot footnoted. Footnotes that appear here have been added to present some historical perspective looking back from1991,without distracting from the original paper. To experience the paperasitwasoriginally presented, the reader should ignore the footnotes.3.The "RARE" road less area reviews performed in the late 1970's and early 1980'sbyFederal agencies in general 'neglected underground wilderness. The U.S. Forest Service did study one area, the Cave Creek area in Kentucky, butinthe end decided that itwasnot suitable for wilderness recommendation.4.These referenced materials, of course, are not included here. They are listed at the end of the paper.5.By itisover 300 miles in length and still growing.6.Andwhythe Cave Systemwasdesignated a "World Heritage Site" in the 1980'sbythe United Nations.7.The letter to which this letter respondswaswritten to feel out the Department's positions on these issues in preparation for a lawsuit to force the issue. The issuewasnot pursued due to changing priorities in the conservation movement and a general feeling that therewaslittle further to be gainedbypressing the issue at that time. In 'hindsight, thatmayhave been a mistake. However, itwasclear that the Department would toss the ball to Congress, and at that timewedid notfeelwehad the political clout to succeed.8.That wasn't exactly it.Myconclusionwasreached because they did not publicly discuss the subject of underground wilderness inanyof the documentation presented. I would argue to the contraryoftheir pointofviewthat exploration of the undergroundisnot a prerequisite to wilderness designation. In fact, there would be no finer wilderness than that whichisbeing explored for the very first time. And underground wildernessisprobably the sole remaining opportunity for this type of wilderness experience on earth.9.Consid'er the irony of this.Wecan't designate itaswilderness because itistoo wild(I.e., 10.Insidersinthe Interior Department suggested thatfiveyears would be the normal reevaluation interval. However, ,to the best ofmyknowledge, no reevaluation has taken place--at least not publicly.11.Well, this makes a little more sense than Reed's comments about not designating wilderness until itisknown. But notmUCh.certainly any designation of wilderness subordinates other values. The real questionis,whatisthe best management of the total resource to preserve all the values?Page288

PAGE 294

HallidayCAVE WILDERNESS DESIGNAnONINAMERICA: A NEW ACTION PROPOSALWilliamR.Halliday, M.D., Chairman Wilderness Subcommitteeofthe Conservation Committeeofthe National Speleological SocietyABSTRACfDespite 25 years' efforts, not a single designated cave wilderness exists in the United States. Promulgation of new USDI-USDAjoint regulations implementing the FederalcaveResources Protection Act offers a new opportunity to obtain statutory protection for all major federally owned wild caves in a single package,atleast for caves protectedbythe FCRPAThiswould avoid piecemeal approaches to individual wild caves which might threaten protectionofsimilar cave wilderness resources and values elsewhere.Asin the caseofwilderness proponents in general, at least two major schoolsofthough exist among proponentsofcave wilderness.Oneofthese recently was expressed admirably in a letter to mebya well-known cave conservationist: We have set aside the "best" ofournatural areas as wilderness. The NSS should propose only the "best"ofourcaves as wilderness...!would...say that most significant caves do not deserve that status .... Some wilderness proponents with this mindset have toldofundergoing a transcendental, almost orgasmic experience from wilderness, aboveorbelow ground, and see little importance in wilderness resources and valuesoflower caliber. I have had such an experience, when twoofustopped up over the col from the Columbia Ice Field and first looked into the awesome castleguard Basin. Yetmyown mindsetisin the other schoolofthought, expressed well in 1972byRed Watson and Phil Smith.Atthat time they defined cave wilderness as:...cave (areas) that generally appear to have been affected primarilybythe forcesofnature, with the imprintofman's work substantially unnoticeable. Acceptanceofthis 1972 definition would include major partsorallofthe majorityofcaves in lands managedbythe National Park Service, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management. Itisfully in accord with the wordingofthe Wilderness Act and all subsequent modifications thereof andisalso fullyinaccord with the intentofthat milestone Act. I assert this as one who worked sidebyside with Howardzahniserin the final daysofenactmentofthe Wilderness Act, and I am prepared to support this assertion at any time. Further, maintenance of the wilderness resources and values of the caves coveredbythis definition would have the effectofkeepingwildtoday's wild caves protectedbythe FCRP A, a goal whichisoverwhelmingly supportedbytoday's organized American cavers and speleologists. I do not quarrel withothersupporters of cave wilderness with higher standards. In the best of all worlds, our best and most threatened caves would receive the best protection, soonest. But 30-odd yearsofexhausting effort toward designationofindividual cave wildernesses have leftuswith no designated cave wildernessesatall. Nor even an N.S.S. policy on cave wilderness. It seems to me that a new approachisneeded. And it also seems to me that enactment of the FederalcaveResources Protection Act and the forthcoming implementation regulations offer anew,timely vehicle for a new approach. After reviewing the filesofthe last resurrection of the N.S.S. Wilderness Subcommittee, I bounced some ideas off N.S.S. Conservation Chairman Mark Laing, then asked some noted cave conservationists to serve withPage 289

PAGE 295

Hallidaymeonthe subcommittee--Dave Foster, George Huppert, Ron Kerbo, Rob Stitt, Red Watson, and Sarah Bishop. And I asked eachofthem to write down their initial thoughtsonthe contentofa cave wilderness policy for the N.S.S. This itselfwasa new approach.Inthe past this has traditionally been a one-person subcommittee, acting with no policy guidance. Sarah has not yet said whether she will acceptormerely advise from outside the subcommittee. The others all accepted, and most have sent useful input on the proposed N.S.S. policy. Further, in response to a note in the N.S.S. News, looking toward additional new blood for the subcommittee, Mike Katz and Dr. JerryLewisexpressed interest and have been appointed. At the1991N.S.S. convention, I further bounced some ideas off a groupofmore than a dozen "old heads" and interested newcomers. Discussionwasvigorous and forthright and modified someofmyown personal ideas. But basically I am continuing to propose formal designationofcave wilderness for all "federal" cavesorparts,ofcaves that would qualify under the 1972 definition I quoted above.Forthis I propose to utilize a mechanism arising outofthe implementationofFCRPA,whetherornot specifically addressed in the implementing regulations we continue to await. Regardlessofthe regulations, to implement the FCRPA properly, cave managersofthe National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, and BureauofLand Management must prepare Cave Management Plans for areas containingoneormore "significant" caves. I suspect that we will be arguing over the definitionof"significantcave"for some time to come. But I expect this to be only a peripheral issue in the struggle for designationofcave wilderness. Much more relevant will be the identificationofcave wilderness resources and values of each "federal" cave, and their quantification. Such identification and quantificationwillbe requiredbyCave Management Plans whereverdulypromulgated. In many, perhaps most, cases, this identification and quantificationofcave wilderness resources and values will be an entirely new concept. The process alreadyisbeginning.Forexample, Hawaii Volcanoes National Parkisusing a modificationofthe Nieland semiquantitative system, categorizing cave wilderness resources and valuesasfollows: (1) A cave within which itisdifficultorimpossible to avoid intrusive worksofmodern humans, and whose entranceislocated in a developed area and accessedbypaved roads and trails. (2) A cave within which,atordinary ratesoftravel, less than 30 minutes can be spent without encountering intrusive worksofmodern humans, regardlessofwhere the entranceislocated. (3) A cave within which,atordinary ratesoftravel, less than 60 minutes can be spent without encountering intrusive worksofmodern humans, and whose entranceislocated at least 1,4 mile from any developed area. (4) A cave within which,atordinary ratesoftravel, less than 4 hours can be spent without encountering intrusive worksofmodern humans, and whose entranceislocated more than JA mile from any developed area. (5) A cave within which,atordinary ratesoftravel, more than 4 hours can be spent without encountering intrusive worksofmodern humans, and whose entranceislocated within a designated Wilderness Area. Whetherweagree with the specific criteria for each category and for each area, throughout America responsible cavers and speleologists need to be alert to ensure that other "federal" cave managers use some kindofrelevant system to similarly identify and quantify cave wilderness resources and values. Such a process inevitably will bring the existenceofimportant cave wilderness resources and values to the attentionofmany cave managers who previously have beenunawareofthem. Further, each Cave Management Plan will have to deal specifically with preservationofthese resources and values. Even for those unitsofthe National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, and BureauofLand Management, whiCh have not written policy on cave wilderness, such CavePage 290

PAGE 296

HallidayManagement Plans will be at least the administrative equivalentofan unwritten policy, and carty more weight. I suspect that the process will lead to the developmentofmany written policies without much prodding. But,asa government administrator with almost17years' experience, I have seen so many policies changed overnight, and so many written and unwritten "exceptions to policy" that I have little faith in agency policies over the long run. I believe that congressional actionisnecessary to protect "federal" cave wilderness resources and values beyond the near future. And I believe that the forthcoming assemblageofquantified data can speak compellingly to congressional supportersofcave conservation. An enormous effort will be needed to enact such legislation, eitherasan amendment to presentlaworasa new bill, But muchofthis effort will consistofcaver education, and the Wilderness Subcommittee expects to undertake thisanyway,whetherweevergoto Congress. Oneofthe first steps will be a proposal for a source book on cave wilderness, compiled and publishedbythe subcommittee.Mygreatest fear in this campaignisnot the necessary effort. Instead, itisthe specterofa bitter schisminthe ranksofthe strongest supportersofcave wilderness. I hope, but have no assurance, that those who fear dilutionofwilderness quality can come to believe that itisbetter to save too much rather than too little. To avoid schism, perhaps we can make constructive useofthe term wild cave in place of cave wilderness,aswasproposed at the1991N.S.S.convention for other reasons. And certainlywecan count on enormous caver support for keeping wild caves wild. Further, there are other strong wilderness proponents who feared past single-purpose cave wilderness effortsasthreats to broader protection of cave wilderness and thus are more likely to favor a broader proposal. Neither I nor the Wilderness Subcommittee have afixedposition at this time. The subcommittee and I personally welcome your suggestions and assistance. Probably I will appoint twoorthree more membersinthe near future.Aswedevelop an educational program for theN.S.S.membership and work toward anN.S.S.policy on cave wilderness and whatever lies beyond, letushear from you.Page291

PAGE 297

AleyCAVBRADIATIONTom Aley Ozark Underground LaboratoryRoute1,Box 62 Protem, MO 65733DiscussionLeader:BillAustin(Thefollowingisthetranscriptof ataperecordeddiscussionsessionbasedonaninitialconceptpaperbyTomAley.)Bill Austin: When you all join in this panel discussion speak up and maybe we can get it on this recorder. Thisisa poor substitute for the real thing, but maybe you can hear it.MynameisBill Austin and I have on this suit and tie so maybe you won't confuse me with Tom Aley. And to further differentiateit I'm going to tell youoneofTom Aley's jokes. You've heard this story, haven't you, that if you play rock music backwards you get Satanic messages?Youall heard Tom's joke? You know what happens when you play country music backwards? You getoutofjail, you get your car back, you get your job back, you get your wife back. Incidentally, I saw a thingoneducational television last night on the Nova program.Ifit ever comes around again I recommend that you watch it very closely. Thisisdead serious. Thisisoneofthe most incredible caving experiences I have ever seen, anditwasdone in the foundation works and sub-basements of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor and it was donebya team of Soviet scientists trying to assess the damage, and more importantly, trying to find out where was thefuel.They didn't know, and I won't spoil the story, but I will tell you that they did some incredible caving under some highly radioactive conditions and they found the fuel.Ifit ever comes up on Nova be sure and watch it. Well to startoutagain and talk about radon, there really has to be something to this radon thing because itisobvious that monkeys went into caves and mutated and they cameoutand they were resource managers and cave operators, so...(laughter). Rangers have now become resource managers I understand. The next thing onmynotes hereisTom thought I might remindyouthat government can profit from radon and radon monitoring. For instance, very soon after it became an"in"thing downatMammoth, theyputfivepeopleonthe staff including the daughterofan ex-superintendent and they have a lotofpeople employed throughout the National Park Service utilizing these random numbers so itisa very big program and it makes your desk a little larger because you've got more people to supervise. And I'm sorry thatRonleft because I wanted to address something else about National Parks.Hewasworried about this boundary thing. It has beenmyexperience that National Park boundaries keep leapingoutwhere ever they think there's a cave. And that's not a problem because if you find a cave pretty soon you will find the boundarynotfar behind. So, thatisthe worry about it. It isn't the boundary thatisgoing to cause you the problem, itisthe management that comes with it. And that brings me to the historyofthe discoveryofradon and the early managementofthe program. There was an academic type. They letoneinto Carlsbadbymistake in about 1976or1977 and he discovered radon gas in Carlsbad and the managers jumped on this problem and they didonething thatwasremarkablygOOd.They got in the folks from the Denver Technical Support Center whichwasan organization set up under the BureauofMines that provided technical support and advice to the uranium mining industry. And this was a really good organization. They did research, worked on equipment, ventilation techniques,waysof getting radon outofthe air, and were available to the uranium mining industry as a technical support service and you could call these people in if you had a problem at your uranium mine you could call these people in and they would help you reconfigure your ventilation or do whatever you needed to do to get your mine back into compliance. bythe genesisoftheir act they were not allowed to report you to the BureauofMines enforcement people.Page 292

PAGE 298

enforcement people. So there was nowaythat you could get in troublebycalling them in. They were a very good group, very professional, and if I had a radon problem they are the people I would call on. However, they foundoutthe radon levels weren't very high in Carlsbad and the managers said well we'll solve this we'll just accept for Carlsbad the standards that are set up for the mining industry and they actually published those standards in the Federal Register as the standards that would apply for Carlsbad. Now there are several things that are wrong with this. They hadn't checked any of the other caves and they had afewcaves that werehotenough that if they were a uranium mine they would close them. Mammoth was oneofthe caves. And in fact, not only did they have that problematMammoth, but they put a ventilation shaft in for their administrative buildings over there and were using the cave air to air condition the buildings and the secretaries were getting more exposure than the guides. Anyway, the National Caves Association became interested in this problem. They hired Tom Aleyasa consultant and I worked with Tom. We bought radiation equipment and went around and measured quite afewofthe show caves in the East and took radiation measurements to sortofget an idea of the magnitudeofthe problem in these various caves. Working with this information and trying to work with the National Park Service we came up with some overall industry standards. We found it necessary to adopt a setofprecautionary standards that apply only to the National Caves Association. The National Park Service said they would abidebythose standards, however, to this date we haven't seen much progress on their part. They have kept on with the random number programs monitoring their people very closely, not informing the public about radon, and so on and so on. In the courseofall these negotiationswesuggested several things that they might do to alter the tours through National Park caves that would make the problem less. In other words, decrease the exposureofpeople, rather than as with the monitoring program where you are putting more people into monitoring and you are actually increasing total exposure. They didn't like someofthese suggestions. We suggested that perhaps they should shorten cave tours, that they should not have souvenir shopsincaves,orthey shouldAleynot have dining rooms in caves because allofthose things unnpA:eSsarily prolong people's stay times in caves and they have certainotherundesirable effects. Anyway, in all this negotiating back and forthwefinally wound up with the National Caves Association standards and the National Park Service doing their own thing. More recent, and I am just about to shut up andwecan get into the discussion stage,ourcontention from the very firstwasthat conditions in caves were quite different from conditions in mines. There are a lot of carcinogens that you find in mines that you don't have in caves. A lotofdust, some with metals in it, some with asbestos fibers in it. We have diesel fumes, particulate matter in a lotofmines, and in essence you are carrying on an industrial, heavy industrial type process in there where you are dealing with rocks, and beating them up.Oneofthe unfortunate thingswethink that has happenedisthat caves were early on connected with mines and now theEPAhas connected, extrapolated, this uranium miner data to cover households. Thereissome hope in recent years. There has been a lotofresearch carriedoutthat seems to indicate that radonisnot going to be much of a health hazard at normal caveorhousehold levels. Now I'll cite from a recent paper writtenbyBlot, William J. etal.All the other names are Chinese. The title of itis"Indoor Radiation and Lung Cancer in China". Itwaspublishedinthe Journalofthe National Cancer Institute, Volume 82, Number12,June 20, 1990, pages1025through 1030. Thiswasa study thatwasdone in a Chinese city that had fairly high radiation levelsinthe houses. In this study they split it betweentwogroups.Onegroupofwomen, 308ofwhom were diagnosedashaving lung cancer. 356 women in the other group were just random samples. The houses they had lived in were measuredbyoneyear alpha track recording so it was accurate. The median time of residence in these housesbythese women was24years, so they had a long term study. The median levels of radiation they found in the houses was 2.3 picoCuries per liter. 20%ofthe houses had levels greater than 4 picoCuries per liter. Now to put this into perspective, the average household would give you the exposure you would get on a normal 1 hour cave tour. This would be a daily one hour cave tourasagainst one dayinthe house. So you can seeweare talking about fairly good relationship with cave levels. The results they foundPage293

PAGE 299

were very interesting.Thelung cancer levels were not higher in homes that developed lung cancers than in control homes. They found no correlation. They found that lung cancer risk did not increase with increasing radon levels.Thisisin a household situation. Remember manyofthese people smoked and they had open fireplaces. Therewasno association between radon and lung cancer observed regardlessofcigarette smoking statusofthe people in the study except for a non-significant trend among heavy smokers. And therewasno positive associationoflung cancer cell type with radon levels observed except again for a non-significant riskofsmall cell cancer among the most heavily exposed. The conclusions includes this statement: "Our data suggest that projections from miners exposed to high radon levels may have over-estimated the overall riskoflung cancer associated with levels typically seen associated with homes in this Chinese city. Iwasvery pleasedto see that another public agency, the StateofArizona, recently bought a cave in an areaofpotentially high radiation levels. Obviously they made a decision to develop this property into a show cave even though it has high levels. I think thisisa very important stepbythis agency because Kartchneristhe first cave development I knowofthat has come along, significant cave development, that has come along and been undertaken since radon became an issue. Obviously they think itisnot a very big issue. That's all folks. Anybody want to speak up. Unknown Person: Whatisthe overall rateoflung cancerinChina verses the United States? Have there been any studiesofradon affecting miners in their own uranium mines? I assume they must have some. Bill Austin: I don't know, I had a copyofthis paper, but I couldn't find it so I had to call Tom and get this reference. But, you can look it up. Same Unknown Person: Iwascurious if the overall rate of lung cancer in China verses the United States might overwhelm the effectofradon. Bill Austin: I don't know. Dr. WilliamR.Halliday: Having beeninChina I don't think you can rely upon that typeofstatisticatall.ItAleysounds like they were doing good science in this paper. I'd like to say a little bit on this general topic. I've been quite concerned about this whole approachbytheEPAand other agencies for some time. A groupofus were talking to NickCrawfordatthe mouthofLost River Cave the otherdayon the field trip and hewastalking about their radiation monitoring, and he said rather plaintively, "Where are all the bodies from all these radon daughtersorwhatever term you use for that"? Bill Austin: Where are all the dead bats? Dr. WilliamR.Halliday: And this struck a note with me, forassomeofyou know,myfieldofspecialization in medicine originally was chest surgery, and oneofthe reasons that I changedmyspecialization in medicinewasthat I became so depressed from working with people who were dyingoflung cancer. I sought a happier branchofmedicine. And I got to know these folks real well. I took good histories from them. And every oneofmypatients, without exceptions, had their40pack yearsofcigarettes.Oneofthembythe ageof29,and his cancer was too far gone for me to even take it out. Later on I worked in administrative positions where for a very small group the impactofoverwhelming exposure to asbestos and the asbestos trade the epidemiologywasvery clear. The effectofasbestoswasthe causationoflung cancer. But I never saw any evidence whatever, and talking to other lung surgeonsatmeetings around the country, noneofus ever talked in termsofany causeoflung cancer except asbestos and cigarettes. That doesn't meanweweren't thinking properly along those lines, but 100%ofmypatients with lung cancer were cigarette victims. There are various epidemiological studiesofthe effectofpitchblende mining in central Europe and the rate of cancer among pitchblende miners. Excellent epidemiological studies; that's what started allofthis. But I haven't done a computer searchofthe literature and I've lost trackofit a bit in the lastfewyears, but I have been unable to find any citationofany epidemiological study verifying that we do in fact have a large numberofpeople dyingofcausesoflung cancer other than cigarettes and asbestos.Ifthere were this, there should be an easy epidemiological studyofthese people who pay good money to_go and sit in uranium mines supposedly to improve their health.Page294

PAGE 300

Bill Austin: I had a call several years ago from a young lady downattheCDC[Center for Disease Control]andthey wanted to initiate a study and they were having alotoftrouble finding a base. Theythoughtperhapstherecouldbea base amongtheprivate cave operators, and I explainedthetransientnatureofmostofouremployees and sent them overtotalk tothefolksatMammoth Cave where they tend to have long term employees and keep these random numbers.I'mafraid they would have foundthateventherethestatistical base was too small;thenumbers weretoosmall foranaccurate statistical base. Dr. WilliamR.Halliday: AllthatI have found in the literaturethatI have lookedatand allthatI baveheardcitedareestimates that go clear back tothepitchblende miners a hundred years ago. A totally different situation. Have yougotsomething to the contrary? Unknown person: Having no knowledgeofthis all, I gatherwhatyouarereally sayingisthat the threshold is probably much higher than what was originally set.Itwould seem to methatyou could get enough radiationatsome level to cause you some harm. Dr. William R. Halliday: That's what happens tothepitchblende miners.Butbeyond that what we haveisextrapolationsandestimates from that to very low doses comparedtothepitchblende minersthatshould serve asanexcellent working hypothesis that thereisa need, tomywayofthinking, in scientific medicineofa detailed epidemiological studies to provethehypothesis. I can't find that this has ever been done. Unknown person:Myunderstandingisthattherearesome thingsthatif theydon'treach a threshold, sortoflike a light valuethatdoesn't mess with your filmatall,andif youdon'tget above that light value youdon'tgetanythingatall. So it may be that thereisa threshold and belowthatpoint itisirrelevant.Itseems to me that this maybewhatishappening. Idon'tknow,butI gather thisissortofwhat youaresaying? Dr. William R. Halliday: I'm asking if anybodyhas any data tothecontrary.AleyBill Austin: Well thereissome datatbatwas putoutbythefolksatDenverCenterandothersthatindicatesthatlow levelsofexposurearebeneficial. Bob Buecher: I'm Bob Buecher, I'vebeenworkingatKartchner Caverns, and despite what Bill has been saying, radon and its effectonthemanagementofKartchner Cavernsisa very real problem.Thestate is very concernedaboutit,andit could radically alter the way thatthecaveisdeveloped. I wishthatwasn'tthecase.Asa result I havedonea considerableamountofresearch into radon, someofthemorecurrent studiesonradon. I think we all have to realize that thereisno doubt that radon is ahealthproblem.Itis a questionofhow muchofa health problem is it atthelevelstobeencountered in a cave.Andalso...Dr. William R. Halliday:Onwhat basis is it a health problem? Bob BueGher: Well, you know, you just heard the resultsofonestudy sayingthatit isn't.Foreveryonestudythatsays it isn't,thereare nine studiesthatsay itis.Theoverwhelming scientific conclusionisthat this is, you know, thisisa definite effect. I'll also pointoutthat I can supplysomeofthereferences. A numberofanimal modelsofradon exposure. So itisvery valid to saythatwhat happens in a uranium minenthere are so manyotherconfounding factors that itisprobablynotas valid.Buttherehave been animal studies lookingatthose effects.Whathappensifwe exposeanimals to radon,andthen what happensifwe exposetheanimals to radon plus diesel fumesorhigh dust concentratiOlls. Thisisfairly well worked out, and I think that we are vastlyonthewrong track to sit here and buryourheads in the sand and say: "this isn't a health problem, thisisnot a health problem," when everything else pointsoutthat itisa health problem. There are agencies setting policiesonthat basis.Andwe are just trying to denythebasic fact that what we should really be facingisradiationofany formissomething that the publicisvery scaredofand whetherornotyouknow it, the greatest sourceofradiation exposure that anyofus has, anyofthepopulation,isfrom radon. Itisa problem in any radiation exposure regulation that thePage 295

PAGE 301

naturally occurring radon thatweare all exposed toisthe greatest source. Dr. WilliamR.Halliday: At what altitude?BobBuecher: At any altitude. Dr. WilliamR.Halliday: Cosmic radiation?BobBuecher: Itisvastly more greater. Alpha radiationweare exposed toissomething like30to 40% of the total exposure. Commentsbyunidentified people: Hard to make it out on the tape. Muchofthe discussion deals with the absence of studies from situations other than mines. One person notes that itisnot just the radon thatisinvolved, like Bob Buecher suggested, butisalso cigarette smoke, etc. Bob Buecher: There are these correlations, and some of them do project down tofairlylowlevels. Itisjust that if you get the lower levelsyouneed larger and larger numbers [of personsinthe samples]. On the uranium miners, if you get aAleycoupleofhundred uranium miners who are getting exposures...What they useisworking levels,say,basically100picoCuries might be equivalent to a working level.Ifyou work in that forsay170hours you have a working level month. Uranium miner are exposed to levels of thousands to ten thousandsofworking level months.Ifthose exposures, a hundred totwohundred miners, you can get very conclusive results. When you are' down around a household level, a couple of picoCuries, to do a definitive study you need something like a hundred thousand people. Unknown person: But those studies exist? Yousay?BobBuecher:No.Those studies have never been done. You have little studies like this Chinese study, anditsort ofsaysnowedidn't see a result, but that's not really abigenough sample. What you end up doingishaving20studies like that, you start seeing thatyes,some of them show something, and some don't. More discussionfollows.Page 296

PAGE 302

DiazPElROGLYFHS AND PICfOGRAPHSIN CA YES AND ROCK SHELTERS: A MISSOURI PERSPECTIVECarol Diaz-Granados Archaeologist DepartmentofAnthropology Washington University St. Louis, Missouri 63130ABSlRACfApproximately 30 percentofthe petroglyph and pictograph sites in Missouri occur in caves and rock shelters. With over 5,000 caves reported in Missouri, more rock art sites are expected to be discovered in archaeological surveys, andbycavers who have been alerted to these cultural resources endangeredbyweathering, biological encroachment, and increasing vandalism. Information gathered during the fieldworkofthis NSF research project has magnified the need for awareness, management, and preservationofthese fragile and irreplaceable recordsofthe past. The importanceofcavesasan endangered natural resourcewasnot recognized until fairly recently. Thus itisunderstandable that the endangered cultural resources they contain have also been neglected. Becauseofthe fragile natureofthese cultural resources and their informational potential for studies in the prehistoryofNative American groups, I decided to make the inventory and analysisofthe state's rockartmydoctoral dissertation project. In1989,I received a 2-year National Science Foundation grant and this summer (1991) completed the fieldwork. Iwasimpressed with the percentage of ancient rock carvings and pai'ntings that occur in caves and rock shelters. Humans began making images and keeping symbolic records more than 25,000 years before the inventionofwriting. The oldest such records now known date to not long after Homo sapiens appeared in Europe. While no one knows the precise time for the first appearanceofpetro glyphs and pictographs, commonly referred toas"rock art," on the North American continent,wecan be fairly certain thatbyAD.900 graphic communications painted onorcarved into rock were in wide use with the highest densities appearing in partsofCanada, the Southwest, and the Eastern Woodlands. According to Campbell Grant (1981), the Southwestisheavily dotted with rock art sites but the only large concentration in the Eastern WoodlandsisinMissouri near the confluenceofthe Mississippi and Missouri Rivers. There are between 50 and60in this area and more than100in the entire state. Approximately30percentofthese are in caves and rock shelters. About20percentofthe total have been completely destroyed through construction and wanton destruction, and the remainder are in serious dangerofobliteration through weathering, biological encroachment, and vandalism. Missouriis"The Cave State" with over 5,000caves Hence itislikely that many morecaves,often used in prehistoric times for shelter or ceremonies, with rock art are awaiting discovery. I have spoken on afewoccasions at the meetingsofthe Missouri Speleological Survey about this situation. Although I received oneortwo leads, the majority of cavers honestly told me that they had little interestinthat aspectofcaving. While some were wiling to note artifacts on a cave floor, veryfewhad even thought to inspect thewaIlsfor graphics. Most prefer to explore and map the caves, andofcourse, to discovernewones. In fact, Missouri cavers report an averageof140new caves yearly and have been doing so since1956when theMSSwasestablished. In any case, oneofmyPage 297

PAGE 303

goalsisto persuadeasmany caversaspossible to check the wallsofcaves carefully, particularly near the entrances, for prehistoric rock art.Thisisthe first step in preservation: identifying and recording these cultural features. Missouri rock artisvery special in that most sites contain distinct motifs.In1913,David Bushnell investigate
PAGE 304

Asopposed to petroglyphs (rock carvings), pictographs (rock paintings) occur more frequently incaves,although thetwoare equally presentinrock shelters. In fact, itisnot unusual to see both on the same wall, or to find petroglyphs that have been painted with red, blackorwhite pigment. However, itisonly in the cave environment, andin some shelters, thatwefind these prehistoric paintings well-preserved. While the enclosed environmentisordinarily beneficial for preservation, sometimes the most profound deterioration occurs in these areas not exposed to air and sunlight, that is, where moistureisretained. The undersides of shelter overhangs, where rock art frequently appears, are most severely affectedbythis problem(fig.2). Itwasthe consensusofthe stone conservationists whom I consultedatthe Smithsonian, Columbia University inNewYork, and at the Canadian Conservation Institute, that the one natural agent most responsible for deterioration of rock artiswater. Itisimportant to note the climate factor hereasthe exfoliation of the sandstone sheltersisbelieved to be causedbythermal expansion and contraction after moisture enters minute fissures parallel to the rock surface. I do not believe that this process affectscaveswhere a constant temperatureismaintained. Another problem at these sites, somewhat related to the heavy moisture retention problem,isbiological encroachment, primarily in the form of lichens. A lichen needs water to grow, and absorbs it rapidly. Itisthis water retention behavior of the lichen thatismuch to blame for the escalating deterioration of the stone, and Missourihasaveryhigh yearly rainfall. In addition, itisreported that rock from which lichens have been removedisoften pittedasa result of rhizome penetration. One of the benefits of lichens in the ecological pictureisthat some of them produce acids that breach down rocks in simple soilsinwhich other plants can take root.Ofcourse, when the acids are breaking down 1,000 year old rock carvings, itisa matterofconcern for archaeologists and conservationists alike. The third cause for concern, vandalism,isextremely diverseinits effects on rock art. At one end of the spectrumisthe wanton destruction of sites through scratching, chipping, initial carving, and the removal ofDiazentire carved boulders. At the other end of the spectrum are the well-meaning but damaging rubbings, castings, and repeated chalkings. At the Washington State Park Petroglyphs, Missouri's largest rock art site, park conservationists in the60sfelt it imperative to scrub the prehistoric carvings with a wire brush to"clean"them and in thefallwould frequently be seen sweeping leaves from these vertical outcrops of friable sandstone. Both actions have rendered these rock carvings very faint and most assuredly destroyed all delicate details.RECOGNIZING AND RECORDINGBecause the continued existenceofrock art whetherincaves,rock shelters, on outcrops or on bluff facadesisdependent on weather, plants and people, itisthe consensusofmost conservationists that the highest priority in preserving these sitesisto record them thoroughly.Ofcourse, one must be oriented to recognizing rock art and itisdifficult to transmit that knowledge on paper. Nevertheless, I encourage all cavers to become familiar with the motifs and execution styles in their area through documents orbyconsulting the local experts, be they academic or avocational. Recording can be donebya number of effective methods which, when usedinconjunction with eachother,captureall.thevisual detailsofthree-dimensional rock art. These include: mapping, drawing, photography, and photogrammetry. Color photography, preferably slides,isideal for pictographs.However,becauserockcarvingsarea three-dimensional phenomenon, two-dimensional photography in color or black and white cannot totally or accurately record the texture or surfaces nor the depth of the carvings. For this further step, one might look to the method of depth photography called photogrammetry. Photogrammetryisa method of recording thathasbeen used extensivelyinaerial reconnaissance mapping.Th.eprocess employstwocameras (stereometric cameras) on a rigid bar with parallelaxes.These cameras are triggered simultaneously and the result, whenviewedwith a photo gram metrical plottingmachine,isa three-dimensional image. Measurements taken from this "stereo model" can be used toPage299

PAGE 305

DiazFig.2.Exfoliating sandstonefrominside and underside of shelter at Rocky Hollow SitePage300

PAGE 306

reconstruct any numerical dataorgraphic reproductionoftheoriginal. A setofsuch photographs would insure an accurate data base for future reconstructions should anything happen to the original petro glyphs. Unfortunately, the scarcityofequipment coupled with the added expense usually leaves this ideal methodofrecording to research institutes.Formost situations, cavers shouldatleast photograph the designs in the contextoftheir surroundings and with a scale.PRESERV AnON AND SITE MANAGEMENTWhile photography remains the most reliable methodoflong-term preservationofrock art, preservationofthe actual sitesisstill a concern as natural forces are controllable to some extent. In regard to natural weathering and biological encroachment, a numberofmethods have been tried. It has been determined through observation that the exfoliation formofweatheringisa direct result of water run-off, whichisextremely difficult, if not impossible, to control.Onesolutionisto divert the water away from the rock art. This can often be done with carefully' engineered shelters, gutters, and/or drip flashings. The effect of such a structure detracts from the natural setting to a certain extent,butin the nameofpreservation this could be tolerated. Some research regarding the protectionofrock art from the damaging effectsofwater run-offfo'cusesupon the coatingofthe rock surface with a synthetic high polymer substance. This procedure, however, has often proven to accelerate deterioration and exfoliationbypreventing natural evaporation of subsurface moisture. Research continues on the potentialofcoating rock for protection.Onemethodisto try to improve the structural integrityofsandstonebypromoting the polymerizationoflow molecular weight monomers within the stone structure itself. This process leads to a degreeofpreservation with little or no change in outward appearance. Effective biocides for lichens, algae, moss, and other micro-organisms have been extensively investigatedinconnection with historic buildings and monuments although not much research has been applied to petroglyph sites. The Canadian Conservation InstituteDiazreports that a solutionofortho-phenylphenol in dehydrated ethanolisan effective biocide for both crustose and foliose lichens.Otheralgicides under study include chelatesofcopper citrate and copper gluconate, quaternary ammonium compounds, and combinations of substituted phenyl ureas and triazine derivatives. Although natural weathering forces are controllable to some extent, vandalism poses a more serious problem. Aside from closing a site, asissometimes done with cavesbygating, itisfeltbyconservationists that the only possible deterrent to vandalsatrock art sitesisto build a fenceorappropriate protective enclosure. One consideration whenplanning an enclosureisthe degree to which it will interfere with the integrityofthe site in its natural setting. Thisisa difficult decision to make, especially if management wishes the rock art to continue tobevisible. But when the costofthe natural setting means the loss of the rock art, conservationists agree that protection comes first. The determinationofthe size and extentofsuch protectionisthe taskofthe cultural resource manager, if the site has one.Ifthe siteisprivately owned, then the landowner should be encouraged to protect it. When sites are located in Federalorstate parks, an effective addition to enclosures has been the "interpretive center." Explaining the possible origins of the rock art, its informational potential, and the protection laws,isfelt to be a management tactic that deters at least some would-be vandals. Interpretive messages may be in the formofsingular or multi-paneled boards with photos and/or drawings coveredbya protective plexiglas front. Such interpretive boards cannot usually be used, however, when sites are on private land orinremote wilderness areas.CONCLUSIONThe prognosis for rock art sitesinMissouriaswellasother statesinthe Eastern Woodlandsisunfortunately negative. Conditions for survival are far from favorable in view of the long-term effects of weathering, acid rain, biological encroachment, and the various forms of vandalism. Thereisincreasing awareness and interest on the partofconservationists, however, and some slow progressisbeing made towards preservation, atPage 301

PAGE 307

least for the visual information contained within the remaining sites. Noneofthe methods listed aboveaspossible avenues of preservationisadequate individually, but in combination they can serve to help save whatisleftofthis irreplaceable cultural resource. The products resulting from these recording methods have the additional advantageofoutlasting the original. The cultural resource manager for the site, the caver,orresearcher should discuss with the landowner, management bureau, and/or local professional archaeologist, further steps to preserve each cave and shelter's prehistoric rock art resources.DiazAtpresent a double-edged swordisdestroying these irreplaceable treasuresofthe past through both human and natural forces.Itis important that all who work with caves -cavers, geologists, biologists, hydrologists, archaeologists, engineers -be alerted to cultural remains not just on the floorsofcavesbutonthe wallsofcaves and shelters, and at least report them to their state's historic preservation officerorto the anthropology departmentofthe nearest university. The first and most important step toward preservationofcave and rock shelter petroglyphs and pictographsisto find them. Then they can be recorded, and plans can be formulated to protect them for future generations to enjoy and to study.REFERENCES CITEDGrant, Campbell.1981(1967). Rock Art of the American Indian. Outbooks Publishing and Distributing Co., Golden, Colorado.Page302

PAGE 308

BassTHELOO'I1NGOFA CHEROKEE BURIAL CAVE:THELAKE HOLE ARPA CASE CHEROKEE NATIONAL FORESTQuentin Bass with Norman Jefferson and Christine Bassett Forest Archaeologists, Cherokee National ForestABSTRACTThe Lake HoleARPAcase began on March26,1990 when the Forest Archaeologist was informedbyforest personnel on the Wataiga R.D.ofthe Cherokee National Forest that an unrecorded cave containing human remains, and apparently in the processofbeing looted, had been discoveredbyRoby Phillippi, a Forest Service technician in that district. Quentin Bass and Norman Jefferson met Forest Service Special Agent Jerry Wilson andotherForest Service law enforcement officers at the cave that afternoon. Preliminary investigation indicated that the cave was a burial tomb for multiple Indian burials, that itwasin the processofbeing lootedbygraverobbers, and that the perpetrators wouldbeback to continue their activities. It was decided to place the cave under 24-hour surveillance in an effort to apprehend those responsible for the vandalism.Onthe eveningofMarch 29 Forest Service LEO's and Special Agents arrested three individuals inside the cave with digging equipment. They were: Robert Mains, 36,ofMountain City, Tennessee; AllenLeeHuddler, 27,ofAbingdon, Virginia; and Freddie Caudill, 36,ofAbingdon, Virginia. All individuals subsequently gave the Forest Service permission to search their houses for evidence. This resulted in the seizureofextensive collectionsofNative American burial artifacts, numerous partsofprotected and threatened and endangered species (American Bald Eagle, GreatHomedOwl, Red-Shouldered Hawk, Bengal Tiger/African Lion parts) and partsofnumerous Black Bears, as well as drug (marijuana) paraphernalia. Additionally, a bag containing approximately 1/4 poundofmarijuanawasretrieved fromthecave. Mains, Huddler and Caudill were arraignedatFederal District Court in Greeneville, TennesseeonMarch 30 and released on $5000 bond. It took the Forest Archaeologists in excessoftwoweekstonumber, catalogue and photograph the exhibits seized from their houses. During the interim, Mains, Huddler and Caudill plea bargained with Guy Blackwell and Sara Shults, Assistant United States Attorneys for the Eastern District of Tennessee who were handling the case. Mains plead guilty to felony violationofARPA(Archaeological Resource Protection Act) and Huddler and Caudill plead guilty to misdemeanor violationofARPABoth their pleas and sentences were to be contingent on their future helpinapprehending other perpetrators, for itwasbecoming evident at that point, with further investigationsbySpecial Agents Wilson and Jowers, thatotherindividuals were involved in looting thecave.Simultaneous with this, further investigations were carried out at .the cave to gather additional evidence, determine the cultural affiliationofthe burials, and formulate a damage assessment estimate for purposes of prosecution and resource management/restoration. First, a steel gatewasinstalled over the mouth of the cave to secure it. The cave was then formally mapped in detail and a final damage assessmentwasmade. A final minimal damage assessmentof$91,000wassubmitted to the United States Attorneys. Further investigationofthe cave resulted in the recovery of partsofa minimumof13individuals, primarily adult males, but also inclUding at least one child and probably one female. Recovered artifactPage303

PAGE 309

remains indicated at least one child and probably one female. Recovered artifact remains indicated the individuals were adorned with elaborate grave paraphernalia which included: marine shell ornaments, pottery, stone tools and copper and iron trade artifacts. These artifacts allowed the Forest Service to determine with confidence that the burials were Cherokeeofthe protohistoric period(AD.1550-1650).ThisCherokee affiliation made the cave a cultural resourceofextraordinary significance because, up to this point, there has been no evidence, either archaeologicalorin the written literature, that the Cherokee ever buried their dead in caves; burial in and around the village being' the common known formofinhumation. The cave therefore preservedanaspectofCherokeelifewaysabout which we were heretofore totally ignorant. As a consequence, its destructionwasnot simply a caseofgraverobbing and an offense to all human sensibilities, which it indeedwas,but also a clear-cut caseofthe destruction and theftofpartofthe cultural heritageofthe peopleofthe United States; a partofourcultural heritage whichis,asis the case with all archaeological sites, not only non renewable, but one for the lossofwhich, and the crime committed,waseven greater since this typeofsite had been previously unrecorded. Concomitant with these investigationsatthe cave, Forest Service Special Agent Jerry Wilson continued to follow leads and interview concerned parties. During this period, Robert Mainswascontactedbya Newall CharltonofElizabethton, TN, who wanted to sell Indian artifacts to Mains. Mains contacted Jerry Wilson about this and Wilson convinced Mains to wear a hidden recording device in order to tape any artifact purchase and any other conversation relevant to the Lake Hole ARPA case. Although no artifacts were purchased, tape recordings were made ontwooccasions. These not only provided evidence which implicated Charlton, but also a numberofother individuals in the vandalismofthe cave. Concurrent with this, Special Agents Wilson and Malcolm Jowers, following information suppliedbyinformants, interviewed Eddy Ray Perry, 41,ofButler, TN, about his participation in the lootingofthe cave. After intense questioningbyWilson and Jowers, Perry confessed that he and histwocousins, Montie Pierce,Bass42, and Johnny Pierce, 38, alsoofButler, had par ticipated in looting the cave along with Newall Charlton, 62, Mike Honeycutt, 47, Hampton, TN and Ralph Potter, 43, Roan Mtn., TN. This combined evidencewasgiven to Guy Blackwell and Sarah Shults who took it before the Federal Grand Jury in Greeneville. The Grand Jury returned a sealed true billofindictment charging all six individuals with felony violationofARPA, felony theftofFederal property and felony depredationofFederal property.On6 June, 1990, all six individuals were arrested and arraigned before Federal Judge Thomas HullatFederal Court in Greeneville, Tennessee and released on $5,000 bond. Soon after this, Eddy Perry and the Pierce brothers plea bargained and plead guilty to felonyARPA As with Mains, Huddler and Caudill, the severityoftheir sentenceswascontingent upon their cooperation in the prosecutionofHoneycutt, Potter and Charlton.Atthe timeofhis arrest, Forest Service Special Agents and LEO's requested permission from Potter to search his house for Indian artifacts which could be related to the case. Potter gave his permission for the search, but no artifactsofconsequence were recovered. However, a totalof18firearms were recovered from the residence. Since Potter had prior felony convictions (attempted murder, felony assault and battery ontwoCarter County, Tennessee deputies, etc.) itwasa felony for him to possess firearms. Consequently, Potterwasalso charged on the weapons violation. The ensuing period before trialwastaken up with managementofthe cave site and the case with other agencies and institutions. This included a seriesofmeetings, communications and reports within the Forest Service, especially with the Regional Office in Atlanta which supplied funding to support the handlingofthe case on the forest level, regional levellawenforcement and cultural resource personnel support, and even support from the geometronics sectionofthe Regional Office whose personnel produced detailed 3 D mappingofthe cave. Additionally, the Tennessee State Historic Preservation Officerwasapprisedofthe progressofthe case,asrequiredbyFederallawsand regulations. As isthe policyofRegion 8 (Southeastern U.S.), every forest has an Advisory Committee for thePage304

PAGE 310

TreatmentofHuman Remains. The committeewasconsulted to determine the dispositionofthe human remains and future managementofthe site. In line with Federal regulations, the committee recommended the damaged areasofthe site should be scientifically excavated, the recovered materials analyzed and the human remains reinterred; the modeofreinterment to be decided uponthebythe Tennessee CommissionofIndian Affairs and the Tribal Council of the Eastern BandofCherokee,Cherokee, North Carolina. Since the burials were determined to be Cherokee, Harley Grantofthe Tennessee CommissionofIndian Affairs deferred to the wishesofthe Cherokee. So, future dispositionofthe human remains from the cave will be determinedbythe Cherokee in conjunction with the Forest Service. Between June and September trialwaspostponed twice. During this period, considerable further effortwasspent in preparationofthe case for the government. This included the additional compilationofevidence, further investigationofinformants, additional investigationofthe cave, finalizationofthe damage assessment and evidence charts and maps and a continuous, close coordination with the Assistant United States Attorney and the Eastern BandofCherokee Indians. Finally, Guy Blackwell severed for trial Charlton, Honeycutt and Potter for separate trials, starting with Charlton on October9,1990. The entire case became even more complexatthe outset of the Charlton trial. First,assoonasthe jurywasseated, Mike Honeycutt's father, Paul Honeycutt, 67,ofElizabethton, Tennessee, approached oneofthe jurors and attempted to persuade him not to find Charlton guilty; his reasoning being thatifCharltonwasfound innocent thenhisson stood lessofa chanceofbeing convicted when he went to trial the following week. Thejuror, frightenedbyPaul Honeycutt's action, reported the contact to Judge Hull. As a consequence, both Mike Honeycutt and Paul Honeycutt were arraigned before Judge Hull who ordered both detained until after the conclusionofthe Charlton trial. Paul Honeycuttwassubsequently charged with felony jury tampering and felony obstructionofjustice.BassSimultaneous with allofthis, Ralph Potter failed to appear for a hearing on the felony weapons charge. A warrantwasissued for his arrest, but he could not be located. In subsequent contacts with reliable sources, Forest Service Special Agents learned Potter had threatened Perry and oneormoreofthe Pierce brothers. Potter then appeared at the courthouse the following morning in the companyofPerry and the Pierces who were going to testify for the prosecution. His supposed intentwasto intimidate all three witnesses from the gallery. Potterwasimmediately arrested and detainedbyU.S. Marshals. In a detention hearing the following morning, testimonyofPotter's putative threats and coercive behavior were submitted to Judge Tilson. Other supporting evidencewasalso submitted, including: testimony from a Tennessee Drug Enforcement Task Force agent who stated that Potter had publicly said he intended to kill him (the agent); Potter's previous convictions for violent felonies; and Potter's positionasa primary suspectinatleast one unsolved murder. After reviewing this evidence, Judge Tilson ordered Potter detainedinjail until after the conclusionofthe Charlton trial. The Charlton trial continued well into the next week, being postponed from the previous week due to the lackofpreparation on the partofthe defense attorney. When the trial did resume, testimony against Charlton included readingofthe two damaging secret tape recordings; the testimonyofRobert Mains, Eddy Perry and Montie Pierce; and the testimonyofmanyofthe Forest Service employees involvedinthe case. Testimony for the defensewaslimited to Dr. William Bass, Forensic Anthropologist and Head of the Anthropology Department at the University of Tennessee, whowasemployedinan unsuccessful effortbythe defense to diminish both tbe archaeological significanceofthe site and government's damage assessment. Charlton did not take the standinhisdefense. The trialwasconcluded on the afternoonofOctober18and the jury returned a verdict withintwohours. Charltonwasfound guilty on all three felony counts. Sentencingwasset for December18.Over the following weekend, Guy Blackwell corresponded with the Justice Department andPage305

PAGE 311

obtained immunity from prosecution for Charlton from any other chargesinthe case and associated crimes from which he had not yet been tried(it being known that he had a long historyofvandalizing archaeological sites and looting graves, especially onu.s.TVA property). The grantofimmunity, coupled with his recent convictions, which lost Charlton his 5th Amendment right not to testify in the future trials, maqe Charlton a potentially powerful witness for the prosecution for the upcoming Honeycutt and Potter trials. Iq effect, hewasnow required to testifyasto the involvementofHoneycutt and Potter, for any reluctance to cooperate would resultincontemptofcourt charges, while any prevarications could result in perjury charges. The following week, preliminary to the Honeycutt trial, Charltons conditionofimmunitywas fIled in court before Judge Hull. The lawyers for Honeycutt and Potter were present, and minutes after Charlton's immunity statuswasregistered with the court, they requested a plea bargain Honeycutt wishing to plead guilty to misdemeanor violationofARPAand Potter wishing to plead guilty to misdemeanor violationofARPA and the felony weapons charge. Guy Blackwell and Sarah Shults discussed the offer withus(Special Agents Malcolm Jowers and Jerry Wilson and myself) and suggestedweaccept the pleas. AlthoughweallknewHoneycutt could be convicted on at least two felony counts (felony violationofARPAand felony destructionofgovernment property)weall agreed the pleas should be accepted. Thiswasbecause subsequent to the Charlton conviction, investigationbySpecial Agent Wilson had unearthed hard evidence that Perry and the Pierce brothers had lied to the governmentasto their involvement in looting the cave their actual involvement being much more than they were willing to admit. We had known this all along, but now thatwehad hard evidenceoftheir deceitwehad to transmit this evidence to the defense attorneys. Perry and the Pierces lyinginnowayreduced the culpabilityofCharltonorthe remaining defendants, but proof that they were liars damaged the credibilityaswitnesses and the government's case against Honeycutt and Potter.Asa consequenceofthis, the defendants' pleas were accepted and sentencingwasset for December18along with thatofCharlton.BassOnNovember 1I went before the Tribal Councilofthe Eastern BandofCherokee Indians in Cherokee, North Carolina. I apprised the Councilofthe history and courseofthe LakeHoeARPAcase, and asked for their input in managementofthe site and reburialofthe remains. Additionally, I requested their presence and inputatthe upcoming sentencing hearings. The Council expressed their appreciation for the government's efforts and agreed to attend the sentencings and testify if called upon. The Council also passed a resolution which expressed the Cherokee feelings regarding the Lake HoleARPAcase. On November 7 Mains, Caudill and Huddler were sentenced. Mains (felony ARPA) was put on supervised probation for two years and banned from the forest for the same period.Hewas also fined $795.62 (the average costofscientifically excavating and analyzing a cubic yardoffillin an archaeological site. Huddler and Caudill (misdemeanor ARPA) were given three and two years probation, respectively, also banned from the forest during this period and fined $499. No restitution costs were placed on anyofthe three. On November28Perry and the two Pierce brothers were sentenced (all felony ARPA). All were givensixmonths imprisonment, three years supervised probation, banned from the forest for that period, required to perform 300 hoursofcommunity service and required to pay $3000 each in restitution. No fines were levied since all defendants declared themselves in pauperis. On December18Charlton, Honeycutt and Potter were sentenced. All were ordered to pay a fineof$499 and restitutionof$2500. Honeycutt was placed on supervised probation forfiveyears and banned from the forest for that period. Potterwasgiven 6 months imprisonment for the misdemeanorARPAviolation and16months imprisonment for the felony weapons violation, both sentences to run concurrently. His probationary periodwillbe determined after his release from prison. Charltonwasgiven 22 months imprisonment and a probationary period to be determined upon his release.Page306

PAGE 312

InFebruary1991Paul Honeycuttwassentenced to two years supervised probation and fined $5319.84 for jury tampering and felony obstructionofjustice. Since heisinillhealth, the U.S. Attorneys asked for a downward departure in his sentencing. The Lake HoleARPAcaseisremarkable for several reasons. Itisimportant because itisthe first trial felony conviction for anARPAviolation outside the Southwest U.S.Itisalso noteworthy because of the numberofconvictions and the numberofdefendants 10 felony and 4 misdemeanor criminal convictions and all ten defendants were found guilty. The casewasan education for all parties concerned and clear evidenceBassthat the Forest Service, the Justice Department, the Cherokee and the greater American public wish to preserve and protect their cultural resources. The entire process also made it abundantly clear to all ofusthat anARPAcase cannot be successfully prosecuted without the close cooperationofthe United States Attorney and Forest Service personnel. Excavationofthe damaged areasofthe cave are planned for the SpringlSummer of1991.After analysis, the human remainswillbe reburied in the cavebya traditional Cherokee medicine man. I asked the Cherokee Tribal CouncilifI could attend the ceremony and they have given their permission.Page307

PAGE 313

CarstensTIlEPROBLEMSOFOWNING AN ARCHEOLOGICAL SITE:ANEXAMPLEFROMSAVAGE CAVE KennethC.Carstens, Ph.D. Professor and Director Anthropology Program and Archeology Service CenterMurray State UniversityABSTRACfIn the early 1980s, Murray State University obtained the Genevieve Savage Cave from the Archeological Conservancy. The cave, located in Logan county, Kentucky, had been knownbycavers and archaeologists for several decades. Murray State's purposes for acquiring the cave were primarily preservation and study. This paper reviews the historyofSavage Cave, its scientific significance, and what has happened to the site since becoming a partofMurray State University.INTRODucrrONSavage Cave, 15Loll, formerly called Cook's Cave,islocated in Logan county, Kentucky, about 11/2miles eastofAdairville. Total mapped cave passage measures approximately 3 and1/2milesinlength. Murray State University acquired Savage Cave from the Archeological ConservancyofSante Fe, New Mexico in1982.The Conservancy had previously purchasedfiveacresofland containing the cave from the late Mrs. Genevieve Savage. Murray State University's purpose for obtaining the cave from the Conservancywasthreefold:Murray State University's newly formed archeological programwaslooking for a long-term archeological project. Savage Cavewasa nationally-significant and somewhat controversial archeological site that seemedtofit the bill nicely and held promise for quickly developing the archeological program at MSU. Secondly, the MSU administrationwasinterested in acquiring Savage Cave because of its location. The sitewasin the backyardofour sister institution, Western Kentucky University, and a recruiting war existed between the two schools.Anactive archeological program at Savage Cave could prove very beneficial to Murray State University's recruiting future,orso felt Dr. Constantine Curris, then President of Murray State University. Lastly, Murray State University wished to partially maintain the siteasan archeological preserve. Mrs. Savagewasofill-health, and itwasconceivable that the site might fall into unscrupulous hands after Mrs. Savage's death. MSU, wishing to acquire the site but not wishing to spend any moneyindoing so, contacted the Archeo logical Conservancy, a newly formed organization that purchased nationally-significant archeological sites and turned them over to universities for curation and preservation. Suchwasthe case with Savage Cave. Upon approval of Murray State University's Savage Cave Management Planbythe Conservancy, and the transferof$2,000 from MSU's Foundation to the Conservancy--(the money had been donatedbythe Russellville, Kentucky, Rockwell International plant)--, the Archeological Conservancy deededfiveacresofland including the cave entrance to Murray State University in 1982. The Savage Cave sitewasthe first prehistoric site to be purposefully purchasedbya universityinKentucky. Itwasalso the first and only archeological cave site to be purchasedbythe conservancy. Becauseofthe apparent scientific significanceofSavage Cave's archeological deposits (feltbysome to be the oldest and most complete in the New World), itwasbelieved that the Savage Cave site should serveasa model for site preservation and management. Showing all the promiseofbest laid plans, Murray State University embarked on its programofresearch and preservation.Page 308

PAGE 314

CarstensMSU'S HISTORY WITH SAVAGE CAVEThe initial thrustofMurray State University's archeo logical activityatSavage Cave, beginning in 1982, included obtaining copiesofall published and unpublished reports pertaining to the site, obtaining a surface study collection from the site, reexamining the stratigraphic wall profiles in James Cambron's excavation units from the late 1960s (Cambron 1974), collecting an oral historyofthe site from Mrs. Savage, enacting the Savage Cave Management Plan which included pulling together a boardofdirectors for the Savage Cave Management committee, and obtaining a seriesofradiocarbon assays from materials excavated during the mid-1960sbyDon Dragooofthe Carnegie Institute. This workwasboth preliminary and necessary. The administrationofowning an archeological site and administering who couldorcould not make useofthis research resource were instrumental to the successofa long term study program. Selecting just the right members for the Savage Cave Management boardofdirectors included individual'i who were believed to be both influential and interested, including a local manufacturing president, Mrs. Savage, a university vice president and dean, a state archeologist, and an archeologist from Murray State. These individuals would guide and direct the useofSavage Cave in accordance with the Savage Cave Management Plan approvedbythe Archeological Conservancy. Chairmanofthe Savage Cave Management BoardofDirectorswasthe deanofthe College of Humanistic Studies at Murray State University. Inaccordance with the Savage Cave Management Plan, no new archeological field work could be conducted at the site until the immensely large backlogofunpublished Carnegie field notes and artifacts had been studied and published (Carstens 1982). After all, the Savage Cave archeological sitewasconsidered to be oneofthe most significant sites in North America. Itwasdeemed better to 'clean the closets' in order to understand that which had already been done, before adding to the accumulation of unpublished data. Furthermore, understanding what had been previously accomplished would further guide future work at this extremely important site. Therefore, the amountofactual archeological work that could be accomplished during the initial years at the site would be limited to studying wall profiles--whichwasdone in the fallof1981(Carstens 1981), submitting a seriessixradiocarbon samples from contexts excavatedbythe Carnegie Museum (Lawrence 1985:3135), collecting a representative artifact collection from the site's surface, and mapping the sink/Vestibule areaofthe site. Lastly, the initial study also called for obtaining an oral historyofthe site from Mrs. Savage based upon her knowledgeofpast archeological projects at the site (Carstens 1980: 25). Unfortunately, Mrs. Savage died in Marchof1983 before the oral history part of the project could be completed. Following Mrs. Savage's death, Murray State University attempted to secure funds to purchase Mrs. Savage's house, which would be usedasa housing-research facility similar to the Austin HouseatFlint RidgeinMammoth Cave National Park. Unfortunately, funds were not secured with which to buy the house, and Murray State would be faced with an unforeseeable problem: who would watch the site in Murray State's absence now that Genevieve Savagewasno longer living.Fora short periodoftime, the problem was solvedbyMrs. Savage's daughter who moved into Genevieve's house. Following a small fireinthe home's miniature museum, Genevieve's daughter moved back to Russellville, Kentucky, leaving the house vacant and again for sale. Eventually,JimWilkerson from Odum Sausage in Adairville stepped forward and purchased the house. Wilkerson, who sat on the Savage Cave Management board of directors, allowed Murray State University to find a tenant who would take careofthe property and also watch the cave. Unfortunately, the tenant did neither. Indeed, for more than a year, the university had great difficulty collecting monthly rent, and itwasalso at this time that the first of many break-ins at Savage Cave began to occur. Eventually, the tenant family would be evicted, but it would be another seven years before someone would move into Genevieve's log cabin home. Unforseen changes were beginning tooccur and the one-time rosy outlook for Savage Cavewasbeginning tofade.Allwasnot well at Murray State University either. The presidentofthe university, Constantine Curris, had been fired and the new administration did not maintain the same enthusiasm for the Savage CavePage309

PAGE 315

Carstensproperty as had Curris. Indeed, theirwasa general movement afoot to divorce one's self from anything which had taken place during the previous administration. To make matters worse, the chairman of the Savage Cave Management boardofdirectorswasnot pleased with his new role as rent collector. Allofa sudden, it seemed as though the positive thrust that initially pushedtheSavage Cave project to the forefrontwasnow changing gears and priorities. To the new administration (and to those that survived the oustingofthe Old), Savage Cave was no longer an important project, and promisesofmonetary support for long distance research projects were no longer made available. Meanwhile, sheltered in the cornersofthe archeology lab, the Savage Cave archeological project pushed forward as planned. Joining the small program was Pam Schenian, an ABD-Ievel archeologist from Northwestern University looking for a Ph.D. disserta tion topic. Savage Cave, she felt, was ideally suited for her work and research interests. Schenian embarked on an impressive campaign to locate and obtain all prehistoric cultural materials previously excavated at SavageCave, as wellasall published and unpublished field notes, reports and photographic records from the site (Schenian 1984, 1985a, b, 1986). Schenian's research soon revealed that people from California to Pennsylvania and from New York to Florida had worked at Savage Cave,butfewhad left written documentation of their work. Through her efforts, however, Schenianwasable to piece together a rather thorough site history that had not been previously known.Herwork with the site collections, now numbering well past 25,000 artifacts, also began to take meaningful shape, and it appeared that the Savage Cave projectwasabout to be reborn. Unfortunately, Schenian's thesis advisor advised against using the Savage Cave data base for her dissertation as it was becoming evident that the context for manyofthe artifacts was questionable and problematic. Site vandalismwasalso increasing. Concerned reports about site looting from caving friends, Preston and Sherry Forsythe, prompted Murray State to design an environmentally-sound cave gate that would permit cave animals to enter and exit the cave system freely, allow the cave to breath, and attempt to keep vandals out of Murray State's cave entrance. The gatewasconstructed, and a large sign detailing pertinent laws was posted immediately above the cave gate entrance. To no avail, however. Vandalismatthe site seemed to increase. Each biannual visittothe site demonstrated that someotherapproach for protecting the site had to be found. During the summerof1987, Carstens gave a seriesofpublic lectures to the Russellville and Adairville communities, and several articles were run inlocal newspapers as an attempt to educate the public andtoinvoke the public's assistanceathelping preserve the site. Daytime and night-time watchmen from Odum Sausage were supposedtocheck Savage Cave on their daily rounds. Unfortunately, no looters were ever caught, and itisdoubtful that the watchman ever made the mile trip to the cave site. Carstens also met with several detectives from the Bowling Green State Police post, the Logan County sheriffs office, and the local county coroner in an attempt to educate the law enforcement agencies about antiquity laws, and to invoke their powers to control vandalism occurringatthe site. Noneofthe law enforcement agencies were familiar with the antiquity or. coroner,s laws, so copiesofeach were provided to the state police, sheriff, and coroner. Again, however, to no avail. Site looting and vandalism continued to occur. And little to no assistance came from the law enforcement agencies. On January 22, 1988, Pam Schenian and I met at the site with Philip Di Blasi, then presidentofthe Kentucky OrganizationofProfessional Archaeologists, Dr.R.Berle Clay, the State ArcheologistofKentucky, two Kentucky State Police Officers, and the Logan County Coroner to again assess the amountofrecent vandalism at the site, collect physical evidence from the vandalism, re-educate the law enforcement officers about various antiquity and coroner laws, and devise a plan of protection for the site.Aswewill hearinJan Hemberger's paper, there are many different laws that protect archeological sites, andlawsthat also prohibit vandalizing caves and graves. But,lawsare onlyasgood as are the enforcement systems. Both the Bowling Green State Police Post and the Logan County Sheriffs office know that Murray State University will prosecute any vandal caught looting the Savage Cave site. Unfortunately, at any given time, there are only two state troopers assigned to Logan County. The State Police have flatlyPage 310

PAGE 316

Carstensstated that they cannotprotect the site. The Logan County Sheriffs office has similar logistical concerns.Asa result, the two chief offices capableofcatching site vandals are simply, too busy, and Savage Caveisnot a high priority to them.Itisunderstandable that thereisan obvious logistical problem. But alsoatworkisan unwilling effort by the law enforcement agencies in Kentucky to make a commitment to catching antiquity and cave violators. Breaking antiquity and cave laws are simply not considered to be serious crimes in Kentucky, despite the passageofnew antiquity and cave laws that carry felony and misdemeanor charges, respectively (KR.S. 164.990, 1988;KR.S.433.885, 1988). And, unfortunately, the courts in Kentucky have agreed with that sentiment.Asan example, note the vandalismatSinking Springs Cave in Simpson County where the jUdge simply made the vandal promisenotto dig in that county,orthe more famous Slack Farm case in Union county, Kentucky, where10men paid $10,000 to a farmer to mine a prehistoric siteonthe farmer's property; the vandals were caught and charged, but the casewasdismissed despite public outcries and extensive press and media coverage. This past summer, I received a phone call from a concerned citizen who had heard that Savage Cave was about to be visitedbyvandals again. Permission was sought from the Officeofthe PresidentatMSU to proceed with a plan to catch the looters. Following the newly prescribed echelon of command at MSU, I informed the directorofcampus security with respect to the situation, the university's willingness to prosecute, and ",!,hich lawsmight possibly be violated (including felony charges now associated with the new State antiquity laws). The director thanked me, and promised he would contact the State Police post at Bowling Green so that the vandals would be apprehended in the actofthe felony. Unfortunately, the relay between the desk sergeant and the new rookie trooper in Bowling Green left much to be desired. Insteadofwaiting at the cave for the vandals to arrive, the trooper drove to Genevieve's house and informed the new home owners to call the police if they saw anyone in the cave that weekend (I might add, you cannotsee the cave entrance from Genevieve's house).Asa result, and not surprisingly, no vandals were reported and none were caught. This was the first time a tip foreshadowing site vandalism was made known, but nothing came to fruition because the casewasnot handled seriouslyorprofessionally. In a subsequent conversation with the citizen who reported the intended vandalism, I was informed that the vandals were probably coming from Tennessee, and that they parked their cars in backofan old church about one-half mile from the site (he had observed their cars parked there previously).Ifthe vandals were indeed coming from Tennessee, then the FederalARPAlaws (Archeological Resource Protection Act), would apply. Until recently,ARPAlaws had much greater strength than did various state laws; more importantly, the federal courts have upheldARPAconvictions and have levied prison time, fines, and lossofequipment judgements against convicted vandals.Asa result, an FBI agent from the Bowling Green postwascontacted and federal investigations are currently underway at Savage Cave.CONCLUSIONIt would appear that the best solution to catching the Savage Cave vandals, and therefore protecting the significant archeological deposits at the site, will include some formofneighborhood watch program,inconjunction with both federal and statelawenforcement officers. Also important will be increased visibility at the sitebyMurray State and other university research teams.Ithas been said that archeology exists for the public good.If,however, that prehistoryisgoing to be studiedbythe professional archeologist for the good of the public, then the public must be involved to help protect these very fragile, and non-renewable cultural resources. Site protection programs, similar to neighborhood watches, must be utilized to help protect sites that are in out-of-the-way locations, like Savage Cave.Page311

PAGE 317

CarstensREFERENCES CITEDCambron, James 1974 Savage Cave Site. JournalofAlabama Archeology,20(2): 204-216. Carstens, KennethC.1981Field Notes, Wall ProfilesofJames Cambron's Excavation Units. Square sheets on file, Archeology Laboratory, Murray State University, Murray, Kentucky. 1980 Savage Cave: The FutureofIts Prehistory. Western Kentucky Speleological Survey Annual Report 1980, editedbyJohn E. Mylroie, pp. 17-28. Murray State University Printing Services, Murray, Kentucky. Kentucky Revised Statutes 1988 Sections 164.705-164.735, 164.990 (1), Archeology. Sections 433.970-433.885, Cave Protection. Kentucky Revised Statutes. Frankfort. Lawrence, WilliamL.1985Radiocarbon Age Determinations from Prehistoric Occupations Levels within Savage Cave. Western Kentucky Speleological Survey Annual Report1984.editedbyJohn E., Mylroie, pp. 31-35. Murray State University Printing Services, Murray, Kentucky. Schenian, PamelaA1988 An Overviewofthe Paleo-Indian and Archaic Period Occupationsofthe Savage Cave Site.InPaleo-Indian and Archaic Period Research in Kentucky. editedbyCharles D. Hockensmith, David Pollack, and ThomasN.Sanders, pp. 67-83. Kentucky Heritage Council, Frankfort. 1985a A Preliminary Analysisofthe Cultural Features Identified During the 1966 and 1967 Carnegie Museum Excavations at Savage Cave. In Western Kentucky Speleological Survey Annual Report 1984, editedbyJohnE.Mylroie, pp. 11-30. Murray State University Printing Services, Murray. 1985b The Savage Cave Progress Report. Paper presented at the annual National Speleological Society Conference, Frankfort, Kentucky. 1984 The StatusofArchaeological Research at Savage Cave (15Loll). Paper presented at the annual Midwest Archaeological Conference, Evanston,II.Page 312

PAGE 318

DiBlasiPREHISTORIC GRAFFITI AND SELF-EXPRESSION: EXAMPLES FROMTHECENTRAL KENTUCKY KARSTPhilipJ.DiBlasi ProgramofArchaeology UniversityofLouisvilleABSTRACTSeveral examplesofsupposed aboriginalartfound deep within cavesarediscussed. These include newly discovered examplesofdrawings in mud as well as drawings made with cane torches.Adrawing discovered inthemid-1970sisreexamined in lightoftherecent discoveries. Argumentsarepresented insupportoftheaboriginal sourceofthis art.INTRODUCTIONIn 1979 a recreational caver exploring a cave in east Tennessee found a seriesofdrawings which were immediately recognized as prehistoric mud art. This discovery eventually ledtothesite's examination by a teamofinvestigators fromtheUniversityofTennesseeatKnoxville and tothedescriptionofa previously unknown Mississippian bodyofart(Faulkner, Deane,andEarnest1984:350-361). Eight radiocarbon determinations from insidethepassage date from 465AD.until 1605AD.However, "itisbelieved thattheintensive utilizationofMudGlyph Cave occurred duringtheMississippian Period, especially aroundthethirteenthtofourteenth centuriesAD."(Faulkner, Deane,andEarnest1984:358). Severalothercaves and rockshelters containingpetroglyphs have been described byFaulknerand others which have been ascribed to the Mississippian period (Faulkner 1986). A traditionofMississippianartand motifs hasbeenidentified. However, it has been known thattheprehistoric useofcaves in Tennessee and Kentucky dates totheTerminal ArchaiclEarly Woodland period. Until recently, there has been noartfound within caves which clearlydateto this early useofcaves. Two discoveries have locatedbothmud and cane torch drawings whichappeartodateto this earlier period.Thefirst discovery occurred in May 1986, while UniversityofLouisville students were participating in a recreational caving event known as Speleofest in central Kentucky. Duringoneofthe cave trips theyhappeneduponanupper-level passage measuring approximately 150 m long and 4m wide, with a mud-covered floor. Theyreportedthefloor as covered with incised geometric drawings.In1987, as a Western Kentucky University class was being shown Salts Cave inMammothCave National Park,anothersetofdrawings was discovered. This example was drawn with cane torchesona large slabofceiling breakdown. Examinationofthese two examplesofprehistoric art showsthatthey have several motifs in common, yet they differ significantly fromtheMississippian motifs describedbyFaulkner and others. This paper argues foranearlier traditionofartin caves, dating to the Terminal ArchaiclEarly Woodland useofcaves.THEMISSISSIPPIAN MOTIFSMud Glyph Cave in Tennessee presents a situation in which numerous Mississippian motifs canbeidentified. These motifs include anthropomorphic, herptomorphic, geometric, "Southern Cult," and animals (primarily birds) (Muller 1986:36-80). Anthropomorphic examples include representationsofthehuman form which range from complete individuals to recognizable body parts. Most frequently, the bodypartrepresentedisthefaceandhead. Manyofthefaces incluge the Eastern Woodlands "Weeping Eye" motif.Oneindividual appears to represent a "bird man" (Muller 1984:51-56).Theherptomorphic representations cover several metersandhave circlesordiamonds for eyes. Severaloftheserpents have possible wings andPage 313

PAGE 319

DiBlasiapparent bird heads (Muller 1984:56-59). Oneofthe drawings consists of a "horned serpent" whichisrepresentedbya zig-zag line, with a circle for a head and upturned horns (Muller 1986:50, Plate VII b). Yet another represents a turtle drawnbyaltering a bare human footprint. The posterior portionofthe footprint (depression formedbythe heel)wasaltered b adding several incised lines--one encircling the depression (forming the carapace) and others which make up the extremities, tail, and head. The anterior portion of the footprint (ballofthe foot and toes)wasalteredbythe addition of incised lines to form an anthropomorphic face or "humanmask"(Faulkner 1984:354, 355, Figure 4). Geometric motifs include circle, inverted"V,"diamondorrhomboid, and ogee. Also noted are simple arcsofcurved lines and cross-circles. The "Southern Cult" motifs present include the weeping eye, the bilobed arrow, and maces (Muller 1984:60-62). The animal motifs include theowl,hawk, woodpecker, and a possible opossum (Muller 1984:62-64). Several herptomorphic motifs appear in Mud Glyph Cave. Abs.tract designs were also foundinMud Glyph CaveinTennessee. One such design consisted of "meanders and macaroni drawn with the fingers" (Faulkner, Deane, and Earnest 1984:353). CroSS-hatching and latticework designs found were usually componentsoflarger units such as animal or human figures (Faulkner, Deane, and Earnest 1984:353).B.Bart Henson (Henson 1986:81-108) describes three sites in the Eastern United States where herptomorphicglyphsare associated with Mississippian motifs. Site11,Jackson County, Alabama, has a horned snakeaswellasa spiral and rectangle (Henson 1986:98). Site16,Franklin County, Alabama, has a turtle, anthropomorphic, and other zoomorphic designs "paintedinblack" (Henson 1986:101). Site 30, Washington County, Missouri, has a snake, other zoomorphic designs,aswellasspirals, a mace, and bilobed arrows (Henson 1986:106). All of these sites are either rock outcrops or rockshelters, and there arenoradiometric determinations. Officer Cave and Devil Step Hollow Cave, bothinTennessee, contain anthropomorphic petro glyphs which are similar to the glyphsofMud Glyph CaveinTennessee (Willey, Crothers, and Faulkner 1988:55). Notable details are the weeping-eye motif and the "toothedmask"(Willey, Crothers, and Faulkner 1988:55). Radiometric determinations for Devil Step Hollow Cave of 920 and the contention that these petroglyphs are Mississippian. One of the most distinguishing characteristics of the Mississippian Period art describedbyFaulkner and othersisthe naturalistic and realistically drawn figures, particularly when compared to theglyphSfound in central Kentucky. Additionally, manyofthe motifs can be found on Mississippian ceramic, copper, and shell art.THETERMINAL ARCHAIC/EARL Y WOODLAND MOTIFSPresently, three caves are known in the central Kentucky karst which contain glyphs--Adair Glyph Cave, Mammoth Cave, and Salts Cave. The lattertwocontain glyphs drawn in charcoal from burnt cane torches, and the former glyphs are incised on the mud floor of a passage.Asinthe glyphs describedbyFaulkner, there are distinct stylistic similarities among the three sets of drawings; however, these differ from those described from Tennessee. The glyphs found in Adair Glyph Cave consistofgeometric patterns, primarily zig-zags, chevrons, and cross-hatching, and are over 1kmfrom the entrance. These drawings are incised, at a large scale,inthe damp mud of the floor. Preliminary examination of the passage indicates that the drawings do not overlap. Close visual examination indicates that the incisingwascarried out with a pointed or sharp-edged object, suchasa stick, small fragment of breakdown,orthe edge of a freshwater mussel. In fact, a freshwater musselwasfound near the entrance to the passage. The beak of this mussel appears worn,asthough it had been used to drawinthe stiff mud. The glyphs appear to be executed with some care, they do not overlap, and the individual elements are fairly symmetrical. Since onlytwotrips have been made into the passage, to examine the photograph and glyphsaswellasgather charcoal for radiometric determinations, itisunclear if thereisan overall pattern to the drawings. Plans are presently being made for complete photodocumen tation of the floor and the productionofa cave map.Page314

PAGE 320

DiBlasiThe zig-zags appear to be oneofthe more common motifs present. Each zig-zagiscomposedofparallel lines, which are usually spaced 2or3 cm apart. The zig-zags occur in single and paired examples. The paired examples are very symmetrical, appearingasmirror images. Another form of zig-zag appearsasa seriesofsingle lines which overlap each other, forming a seriesofdiamonds. Severalofthe zig-zags are connectedatthe top, forming a pattern very similar to a Simple "Christmas tree-like" design. The sizes range from approximatelyIhm to well over 1m in length and 20 to 30emin width. Frequently, the zig-zags are found in rows paralleling one another. The second most common motifiscross-hatching. TIle cross-hatchingorgrids are typically large and usually square,ornearly so, in the area they cover. These grids do not appear to beascarefully drawnasthe zig-zags. The spacingofthe individual linesissomewhat uniform, but the lines end in a rather ragged fashion. Areasofcross-hatching observed range from circa 50 em to over 1m2 Two chevronswere observed. These are in close association tooneanother and are approximately1.5m long and 50 to70cmwide. They taper abruptly from one end to the other. Allofthe glyphs incisedinthe mudofthe floor of Adair Glyph Cave are patinated. The modern traffic through the passage has broken the patination and can be readily differentiated from the drawings. A single charcoal sample has been dated from the passage. The samplewascollected from a small area andiscomposedofash from the cane torches used to illuminate the passage aboriginally. The extended count date obtained on 0.45gmof carbonwas3560 B.P.+110 years (Beta--16932)or1610 B.C.+110 years. A second sample has been collected but has not been analyzed. Several setsofglyphs have been identifiedinSalts Cave, Kentucky. The firstisa seriesofcross-hatching situated near survey station P63,485m from the entrance. The secondis841m from the entrance, situated approximately halfwaybetween stations P50 and P53 (Watson 1969:Figure 3).Inthe areaofP63 on the sideofa ledgeisa carbide sootedOf_sOor"x-s"with an arrow pointing downslope. To the leftofthe modem notationisan area of cross-hatching drawn with a cane torch. The cross-hatching covers an area 20emhigh and 70emwide.Itappears to represent three different events, due to the different styles and sizesofcross-hatching. The glyphs halfway between P50 and P53 are drawn with charcoal from torches and are situated on the edgeofa slab whichisapproximately 50emthick and 3m wide. There are three central zoomorphic figures.Inaddition to the central figures, there are numerous charcoaled "random lines" and stoke marks present. There are also several incised random lines and cross-hatched areas. The upper figure represents a turtle, approximately 10cmtall and10cmwide. The carapace is round, and all four legs are extended,asare the tail and head. The upper left portionofthisfigureissmUdged.The upper extremities are poorly executed, being irregular in size and disproportionately large, especially the right. The lower extremities arebetterexecuted, being well proportioned and including the detailofthree digitsorclaws on the right foot and four on the left foot. The tailisrepresentedbyan elongated triangle. The figure on the lower leftisthe most distinctofthe three. Itisuncertain if itisactually zoomorphic or possibly anthropomorphic. Itisapproximately 10cmtall and 4cmwide. The bodyisshort and stocky, with what appears to be a "head" situated at the top. Four short (less than1.5cmlong) stocky (ca. 1cmwide) appendages extend from the body. The upper left extremity has three digits or claws. A short(1cmlong) stocky (less than 1 em wide) "tail" can be observed at the bottomofthe body. Several incised curved random lines transect the "torso" of this figure, and several incised straight random lines transect the lower body, ext'remities, and tail. A curved charcoal line transects the headofthis figure. It cannot be determined if thisisa random lineoran intentional partofthe figure.Ifpart of the figure, it ,could represent downward-curved "horns."Page 315

PAGE 321

DiBlasiThelower right figureisherptomorphic, possibly representing a salamanderorlizard with a setof"horns."Thebody is longandthin (ca. 10 em long, includingthe"tail," and 1 em wide).Thethoracic region appearsbroaderthantheabdominal area.Thefour extremities are proportionally drawn (ca. 1 em long and 0.5 em wide) withnodetail such as digitsorclaws.Thehead is drawn as a roundshapejust above the upper extremities.Fromthehead, in a crescent shape,.aretwo disproportionately large "horns."Anincised areaofcross-hatching covers this figureandextends approximately 10 em downward and to the right. This cross-hatching has removed the charcoal, indicatingitwas drawn afterthesalamander. Thereareadditional "drawings" foundonthefaceoftheslab. Approximately 25 to 30 cm leftofthethreecentral figuresisanareaofincised cross-hatching. This cross-hatching coversanarea ca.15cmona side. This cross-hatchingisnothorizontal in orientation. Rather,thelinesareatapproximate 45 angles to horizontal and vertical.Aswiththecross-hatching, which occludes portionsofthelower right figure,themarginsofthecross-hatchingappear"frayed." Inotherwords, the cross-hatchingisnotcontained within a boundary; rather,thecross linesendatdifferent distances past the last intersection. Additionally,thelines making up cross-hatchingarenot quite parallel.Thesurface contoursoftherockortheangleofthe "artist's" stroke may account for these irregularities. This incised cross-hatching has been drawn over several large, roughly horizontal, charcoal lines. Between the lower left figure andtheincised cross-hatchingisanarea covered with broad, widely separated, charcoal lines.Therearefour lines from upper left to lower right and three lines from upper right to lower left. These linesareca. 20 cm long and are irregularly spaced from ca. 1.5 to 2.0 cm apart. Above and to the rightofthelower right figureisa fourth cross-hatched area whichisincised. This cross hatched areais10cmby10 cmandoriented moreorless vertically. Twenty centimeters totherightofthelower right figure'isa fifth cross-hatched area.Itis incised andisthe most irregularofthecross-hatched areas.Itispossiblethatit is actually a seriesofoverlapping zig-zags.Itis15em tall by15to 20 em wide.Totheleftofthecentral figuresisa clusterof"random lines." In this clusterofrandom lines,threeareoriented fromupperleft to lower right. Additionally,therearefiveorsix lines which originate fromupperright and extendtolower left. Recently, several cross-hatched areas have been discoveredinSalts Cave, andseveral others have been noted by cave surveyors inthepast. All have been found in areasofextensiveLateArchaic/Early Woodland traffic. These cross-hatched areasappeartobenear intersectionsofcave passages. Materials dated in Salts Cave demonstratethatthemajorityofprehistoric activity occurred duringtheTerminal ArchaicandEarly Woodland periods (Beningtonetal. 1962, Watson 1969, Watson 1971:25, Watson 1972:50, and Watson 1972). A single date from 15Ad70 suggests a similar temporal association (DiBlasi 1986a, DiBlasi 1986b).PatWatson (Watson, personalcommunication) indicates cross-hatching hasbeenfound in association with bare. human footprints in Fisher Ridge Cave. Radiocarbon determinations revealthatprehistoric peoples were in this cave circa 800B.c.+85 and 1225 B.C.+80 (Kennedyetal. 1983:22). In Mammoth Cave, again in areas known to have been visited duringtheLateArchaic/Early Woodland period, several charcoal drawings have been noted.Anareaofcross-hatching nearthe"Consumptive Huts" is unusual inthesense that a historic signature was writtenonthewall and was spaced in such a way as to avoid it. Twoothercharcoal drawingsareknown in historic Mammoth Cave. One, known since the 1830s, has been referred to as "The Devil's Looking Glass" (Lee 1835). Unfortunately,noneofthedescriptions specifically describes this feature,andit is extensively damaged by historic signatures.Theonly recognizable element present appears to be a broad Zig-zag inthelower right corner.Duetotheextensive historic damage, itisvirtually impossible to discern anyotherdetail, anditisunclear fromthe ifthefeature known astheDevil's Looking Glass refers toPage316

PAGE 322

DiBlasithe charcoal drawingsorthe unusual vertical slab of ceiling breakdown. Within 50 mf this featureisa drawing discoveredbyCarstens and Watson during their examinationofhistoric Mammoth Cave. The drawing locatedbyCarstens and Watsonisdissimilar from the other drawings described above.Itappears to havetwoprinciple elements present. The firstisa rectilinear drawing composed of three uprights which are transversely sectionedbylines. The otherisspiral-like, with several circles at the ends. Several people have suggested the spiral could represent a cave map, with the terminal circles representing deep pits. However, comparing modern maps with the area has yet to resolve this question.CONCLUSIONSA numberofmotifs have been described that have been found deep within caves which were known to have been used during the Terminal Archaic/Early Woodland period, particularly Salts and historic Mammoth Caves, Kentucky. In Adair County, Kentucky, thereisa single contemporary date from the passage covered with drawings. Similar motifs are found carved on Late Archaic bone objects. However, a surveyofincised bone objects has yet to be accomplished.Ifsuch an examination should indicate that these items are ornamental rather than functional, itispossible that these motifsmaybe symbolsofauthority or for protection. Adair Glyph Cave could be a place where members of society were taught those symbols of where the act of drawing the symbolswasperformed in secret. Those locations in Mammoth, Salts, and other deepcaveswhere drawings are found could represent localities where protectionwassought from the darkness. REFERENCES CITEDFaulkner, Charles H. (editor).1986.The Prehistoric Native American ArtofMud Glyph Cave. UniversityofTennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee. Faulkner, Charles H.,BillDeane, and Howard H. Earnest, Jr. 1984. A Mississippian Period Ritual CaveinTennessee. American Antiquity 49(2):350-361. DiBlasi, Philip J. 1986a. Kentucky Site Survey form, 15Ad70. Manuscript onfile:Kentucky OfficeofState Archaeologist, Lexington, Kentucky. Benington, Frederick, Carl Melton, and Patty Jo Watson. 1962. Carbon Dating Prehistoric Soot from Salts Cave, Kentucky. American Antiquity 28(2):238-241. 1971. Excavations and AnalysisinSalts Cave. IN: Cave Research Foundation Thirteenth Annual Report, pp. 21-25. Cave Research Foundation, Columbus, Ohio. 1972. Archaeological ActivitiesinMammoth Cave and Vicinity. IN: Cave Research Foundation, Report14.Cave Research Foundation, Columbus, Ohio. Watson, Patty Jo. 1969.ThePrehistory of Salts Cave, Kentucky. Illinois State Museum, Reports of Investigations No.16.Watson, Patty Jo (editor). 1974. Archaeologyofthe Mammoth Cave Area. Academic Press, New York,NewYork. Kennedy, MaryC.,Christine Hensley-Martin, and Patty Jo Watson. 1983.CRFArchaeological Project -1983.IN: Cave Research Foundation1983Annual Report, pp. 22-23. Cave Research Foundation, WaShington, DC. Muller, Jon. 1986. Serpents and Dancers: ArtofMud Glyph Cave. IN:ThePrehistoric Native American Mud Glyph Cave (Charles H. Faulkner, editor). University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee.--'--'1986b. National RegisterofHistoric Places form, 15Ad70. Manuscript onfile:Kentucky Heritage Council, Frankfort, Kentucky. Henson,B.Bart. 1986. ArtinMud and Stone: MudGlyphSand Petroglyphsinthe Southeast. IN: The Prehistoric Native American Art of Mud Glyph Cave (Charles H. Faulkner, editor). UniversityofTennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee.--'Page317

PAGE 323

HembergerMANAGING KENTUCKY'S CA YES: A CULTURALRESOURCEPERSPECTIVEJan Marie Hemberger U.S. Army CorpsofEngineers, Louisville DistrictABSTRACTThree caves are discussed which exemplify different cave types and management problems. Eachwasan"accidental discovery" in the sense that they were brought to the attentionofarchaeologistsbyrecreational cavers. Archaeologists generally have to rely on caversassourcesofinformation. These accidental discoveries demonstrate the need to be better prepared to record these unique sourcesofdata. Knowledgeofspecialized recovery techniques and protection options are necessary management tools. Quick action can mean the difference between protecting a site for the future and scavenging through looter's backdirt.INTRODUCTIONCaves have long been an Objectofman's cunoslty, drawing him inexplicably into their dark recesses. There, man has found shelter (for both the living and the dead), important natural resources, satisfaction for an innate need to explore, secluded and mystical placesofritual, and literary settings. In pursuitofthe first four, man has left behind numerous and varied evidenceofhis presence, and through the last, has fostered man's fascination with caves. Evidence left in cavesbyman provides information about man's adaptation to his environment. Through environmental factorsofconstant temperature and humidity, caves are capableofpreserving mummies, woven materials, and paleofecesnot found at open sites. Cultural information availableisnot restricted to items broughtinbyman but includes activities suchasmining. Caves, while capableofpreserving fragile resources, are themselves fragile resources. Irreparable damage can easily be caused to caves and the cultural resources they contain.Itisthe purposeofthis paper to discuss the importanceofcavesasa cultural resource repository and to suggest ideas for their conservation. Three prehistoric cave sites, representing three different cave types and management problems, are presented. The three sites are: Adair Glyph Cave, 15Ad70, a rather typical multilevel cave containing mud glyphs drawn on the floorofa passage; Pitofthe Skulls, 15Bn51, a pit cave containing human remains; and Sinking Creek Cave, 15Si9, a sectionoftrunk passage containing stratified cultural deposits. Management approaches, either proposedorattempted, are presented.ADAIR GLYPH CAVEAdair Glyph Cave, a multilevel cave situated in Adair County, Kentucky, has been noted in caving literature since 1%5 (Wainscott 1%5:7-8, Nantz 1972:53-54, George 1986:14). The first mapping surveywascompleted in 1975, resulting in 1,623 mofmapped passage and an additional 914 mofexplored passage. No evidenceofprehistoric activitywasnoted during the mapping and exploration. In 1986, what appeared to be prehistoric mud drawings were discoveredbya groupofrecreational cavers on the floorofan upper level passage which had not been surveyed and mapped. Realizing the importanceofthe find, the cavers retraced their steps to avoid further damage and report the find. Fortunately,twoofthe party members on this trip had been involvedinan archaeological surveyorsmallcaves and were able to provide valuable preliminaryPage 318

PAGE 324

Hembergerinformation. The drawings were describedasbeing incised in mud and covered with manganese deposits and fungi. Motifs described included chevrons, zig-zags, cross-hatching, snakes, sunbursts, and trailing lines. A tripwasmade to assess the drawings, photograph them, collect radiocarbon samples, and look for other evidenceofaboriginal activity. To access the glyph passage on the third levelofthe cave required traversing several areas which present logistical problems. The entrance level contained a 30-m-Iong stoop, a plunge pool, and 1,000 mofstream passage. Reaching the second level required climbing a steep muddy bank. Once there, 16O-by-60-cmcrawl had to be negotiated, and a pit with rapidly flowing water in the bottom had to be traversed. Reaching the third level required scaling a 2.5to 3-m wall. Once there, the researchers had to traverse a soft mud floor where they found and flaggedtwoaboriginal footprints. They also had to negotiate a 30-cm-high crawl just before the glyphs. Once in the glyph passage, the party immediately determined that almost the entire floorwascovered with drawings and that some had already been destroyedby"modem traffic." An observable "path" madebyrecent caverswasfollowed to the endofthe passage, which measured 100 m longby4m wide. A technique for recording the drawingswasestablished. Two people recorded descriptionsofthe glyphsasthe party moved forward.Twophotographers worked on the taskofphotodocumentation. Allofthis had to be accomplished from a narrow path. Upon completionofthe examination and while exiting the passage, ashwascollected from the floor for radiometric determination. Itwastentatively decided that the drawings were aboriginal, based upon the motifs, the presenceofbare and/or moccasined footprints, and stoke marks found throughout the passage.Asthe cavewasheavily traveled and the landowner was known to allow anyone into the cave, they were informedofthe extremely fragile natureofthe find. The landowner agreed to limit access and allow continued archaeological investigations. The sitewasdetermined eligible for inclusion in the National RegisterofHistoric Places (DiBlasi 1986b), thus affording the site protection under Section106.Itwasdetermined, during the nomination process, that the entire cavewasnot "owned"bythe owner. Actually, two other individuals own portionsofthe cave. A19205decision of the Kentucky Supreme Court considers caves similar to mineral rights. Since the discovery and preliminary description of Adair Glyph Cave, a new "Cave ProtectionLaw"[Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 433.871-885] has been passed in Kentucky.Ineffect, the new law makes it a class AorB misdemeanor to "knowingly or willfully deface" archaeological materials. However, just walking in this passage could "deface" the drawings. The only legalwayto protect Adair Glyph Cave would be to have the ownerofthe entrance post the caveasper the cave law and have the ownerofthe passage post the interiorofthe cave.Thiswould meet all the legal requirementsofthe law, but in actual practiceitwould be virtually impossible to enforce.Atpresent, the most feasible option for the preservationofthe mud glyphsisto accomplish state-of-the-art photodocumentation and possibly castingofthe drawings and then pursue enforcement of the cave protectionlawas rigorouslyaspossible. Additionally, useofvarious cave-gating techniques, both at the entrance and at the passage,mayprovide protection.PITOFSKULLSPitofthe Skullsissituated in Barren County, Kentucky.Asits name implies, itisa pit cave containing human remains. Itwasfirst discovered and explored in June 1981bymembersofthe Cave Research Foundation. Survey disclosed the pit to have four distinct levels, a depthof30m,and a surveyed lengthof82m.Scattered human remains, representing a minimumoffiveindividuals, were recovered, including two exhibiting occipital deformation and one showing evidenceofdismembermentofbutchering. Noneofthe individuals was complete due to the methodofcollection, rodent gnawing, and methodofdisposal. Another trip made to collect animal bones recovered17species.Page319

PAGE 325

HembergerA thorough examinationofmaterial from the Pitofthe Skulls resulted in two conclusions. First, the animal bones recovered occurred in the pit naturally. No butchering marks were noted, norwasthere any evidenceofburning, indicating that live animals fell into the pit. The depthofthe pit (30 m) prohibited its USe asan animal trapbyprehistoric hunters. Secondly, the pit servedasa specialized disposal area for human remains. Itishighly unlikely that so many people fell accidentally into the pit. Evidence for the dismembermentofoneindividual indicates that some formofprocessingwastaking place prior to final deposition in the pit. Technical abilities required to gain access make this a "self-protecting" cave.Thenatureofthe cave, while self-protecting, does pose a data recovery dilemma. To safely access the cave takes vertical ropework. "Surface" COllectionsofeasily recognizable items were madebythe cavers mapping the cave. Thiswasalso the technique used on the second trip, specifically made tocollect animal bones. These small samples produced valuable information, demonstrating the needforsafe and efficient data recovery methods.SINKINGCREEKCAVEThe Sinking Creek Cave System, located in Simpson County, Kentucky, has a sectionoftrunk passage containfng stratified cultural deposits.Itwasbeing explored and mappedaspartofa Master's Thesis on karst hydrologybya Western Kentucky University student, with supportofthe Green River Grotto. Survey members found a projectile point in a stream siluated within the cave but became awareofmore significant cultural deposits when vandals started looting a portionofthe cave knownasthe "loft." The cave system's amphitheater entrancewasexaminedbyarchaeologists and a vertebrate paleontologist calledbymembersofthe Green River Grotto. The investigators determined that significant cultural deposits, both prehistoric and historic, were confinedtothe main trunk passage (Wilson 1984:27-28). Human remains, coll.ectedbythe landowners after the looting activity, included elementsoftwoadults and one infant. In addition, the remainsofwhite-tailed deer were identified (Wilson 1984:30).In1984, Sinking Creek Cave became the focusofa court case. While archaeologists from the UniversityofLouisville and Washington University were trying to gather scientific information from already disturbed cultural deposits, further extensive damagewasdonebylooters. Criminal charges were eventually pressed against oneofthe looters. The Coroners Law (KRS 525:110--Desecrationofa venerated object) and the state Antiquities Act(KRS 164.730--Failure to report an archaeological siteorobjectofantiquity) were the only twolawsthe landowners could usetoprotect the site. Donationofan archaeological easement had been discussed, but it could not be pursued since the landwasin receivership with the Federal Land Bank AssociationofElkton, Kentucky. Had this been an actual Federal Land Bank, vandals might have been charged with violationofthe Archaeological Resources Protection Actof1979 (ARPA), since the site would have been temporarily ownedbythe federal government and thereby afforded protection underARPAPhilip DiBlasi, Staff Archaeologist, UniversityofLouisville, had to convince the Simpson County prosecutor to prosecute the vandal for violating the Antiquities Act and "desecrating a sacred place" (i.e., a burial). The county prosecutor wouldn't press charges until a complaint had been signed (Simpson County District Court Case Number 84-M-126). The outcome of the trialwasless than encouraging. The chargeofdesecrationwasdropped because the judge felt that the looting of prehistoric burials had not caused a public outragedbyKRS 75;525.110). The defendantwasfound guiltyofnot reporting a site under the Kentucky Antiquities Act (KRS 164); however, this carried no penalty.Hehad to sign a bond indicating he would not digorpromote the digging for prehistoric materials in caves within Simpson County, Kentucky, for a periodof1 year. Recently, promptedbythe wholesale lootingofprehistoric burials at 15Un28--the Slack Farm Site, penalties for both charges have been upgraded to feloniesbyan emergency actofthe Kentucky Legislature. Itisprobable thatifthe Sinking Creek Cave case were tried today, the defendant might bePage 320

PAGE 326

Hembergerconvictedoftwo felonies. Sinking Creekcavehas been irreparably damaged, but upgrading the violationofthe Coroners Law (dealing with human remains and burial objects) and the state Antiquities Act to felonies will serve to protect other sites.DISCUSSIONAsdemonstratedbythe diverse natureofthe cultural material and the cave environments described in the three examples above, itisclear that there should be careful considerationofdata recovery, documentation, and protection methods when dealing with cave sites. Methodspresented below range from low-impact recording methods to means for site protection using recently passed legislation. Photodocumentationofarchaeological sites and materialsisimportant, and in a cave it can prove to be extremely difficult.cavephotographyisa very specialized process due to the total lackoflight, and information should be sought from publications suchasthe NSS News. Itisimportant to be aware of the extremeconditions the photographic equipment will have to pass through to get to the subjects. Special consideration should be given to the possibility the equipment would have to be totally submergedordragged through passages containing extremely abrasive gypsum sand. Successful cave photography requires that the equipment (particularly the flash system) be in working order when itisneeded. Itisimportant to consider the recovery and curatingofmaterials from caves. Either working survey station to survey stationordividing a large passage into units can be usedaslocational control for the recoveryofmaterials. Materials should be well documented before being moved, and all materials should be well packed for transport.Asdiscussed above for photographic equipment, materialsmayhave to be transported through extreme conditions. Determining sample size must be decided on a case-by-case basis. Should a cave be relatively well protected, either physicallyorlegally, removing only a small sampleofmaterials would be adequate.Ifthe materials are not in imminent dangerofvandalism, the best preservation optionisto leave them in the cave environment. Often, caves are brought to the attentionofarchaeologists becauseofactive looting. A large sampleofmaterials should be taken in these cases. Additionally, stringent protection measures should be sought and implementedatsuch a cave. Materials, if removed from a cave, should be curated in a facility thatiscapableofreplicating these conditions. Protecting the archaeological, biological, and geological resourcesofcavesisimportant. Legal and physical meansofprotecting caves must be actively implemented and enforced. Kentucky'scaveProtection Act, enacted in1988,provides caves, including those privately owned, with legal protection. Penalties are class A and B misdemeanors. The landowner lease/easement agreement, an important pieceofinterim legislation, provides for privately held properties to be leasedorfor easements to be donated to the state in order that they be provided the same levelofprotectionassites on state-held lands. The State Antiquities Act (KRS 164) and the Coroners Acts have been upgraded from misdemeanors to felonies. Clearly, even the best legislation will not protect all archaeological sites. Physical means are also needed to protect sensitive cave resources. Currently, the most commonly protected cave resources are bats, with the most widely used method being the constructionofan entrance gate. Gates allow bats and authorized individuals to pass. Several cave-gating methods are describedina publication providedbytheNational Speleological Society entitledcaveGating (Hunt and Stiu 1981). The constructionofa cave gate must take into account environmental impacts prior to construction. Another cave protection processisthe natureofthe cave itself. caves which are extremely complex or require specialized equipmentorknowledge to enter are reasonably "self-protecting." However, pressures from uninformedoruntrained individuals growasthe recreational natureofcaving grows. Even the most untrained can "accidentally" find theirwayintoanarchaeologically sensitive passage and cause damage. Public education has great potential in the long-term preservationofarchaeological materials incaves.Ifthe publicismade awareofthe natural and scientificPage321

PAGE 327

Hembergervalue of these materials, then the chancesofinadvertent damagewillbe reduced.Itisnot the only answer. The answerisinthe effective useofboth public education and the legal and physical protectionofcaves.Byusing every means possible,wecan preserve these incredible resources for the future.REFERENCES CITEDDiBlasi, PhilipJ.19800.Kentucky Site Survey form, 15Ad70. Manuscript on file, Kentucky OfficeofState Archaeologist, Lexington, Kentucky. -' 1986b. NationalRegister of Historic Places form, 15Ad70. Manuscript on file, Kentucky Heritage Council, Frankfort, Kentucky. George, AngeloI.1986.Guide Book for the Kentucky Speleofest. Volume15.Louisville Speleopress, Louisville, Kentucky. Hunt, Geoffrey, and RobertR.Stitt.1981.Cave Gating. National Speleological Society, Huntsville, Alabama. Nantz, Robert.1972.Rogers Cave.IN:Kentucky Underground 1(4), Central Kentucky Grotto, National Speleological Society. Wainscott, Bob.1965.Exploration into Rogers Cave.IN:The Everlasting Darkness. Central Kentucky Grotto, National Speleological Society. Wilson, Ronald-C.1984.Archaeological Description of the Sinking Creek System.IN:Central Kentucky Cave Survey, Bulletin I, editedbyGeary Schindel, Sue Schindel, and Mary Tinker, pp. 27-23. The Center for Cave and Karst Studies, Dep;lrtment ofGeography and Geology, Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, Kentucky.Page322

PAGE 328

ElliottCA VB FAUNA CONSERVATION IN TEXASWilliamR.Elliott, Ph.D. Research Associate, Texas Memorial Museum and Consulting Biologist 12102 Grimsley Drive Austin, Texas 78759 phone (512) 835-2213ABSTRACTA reviewispresentedofcave fauna conservation in Texas, including controlling biologic, geologic; historic, and economic factors. Texas has many caves and a high species diversity, owing to its geologic complexity and location. New cavernicole species are still being discovered at the same time that caves are being degradedorfound. The major threats to cave fauna are land development, ground water overpumping, fire ants, human disturbance, and pollution. The special problems associated with the conservationofbats, salamanders, invertebrates, and ground water are discussed. Cave preserves are being created under the auspicesofatleasttwohabitat conservation plans, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Texas Nature Conservancy, Texas Cave Management Association, and other organizations. INTRODUCTIONTheaimofthis paperisto discuss the numerous threats, past and present, to the cave and ground water fauna of Texas. Fewofthese threats have been satisfactorily resolved, although a numberofpartial solutions seem to be at hand. The Texas Speleological Survey (headedbyJamesR.Reddell and the writer) has recorded data on about 2,500 caves and more than 500otherkarst features. Over 1,100 caves have been mapped.InTexas, about 80%ofthe caves are privately owned, whichisboth an advantage and a disadvantage for conservation. The advantageisthat many caves are isolated on ranches and are protectedbymost owners. The disadvantageisthat some owners feel free to dump trashina caveorallow anyone to damage a caveorits fauna. Developers in urban areas have almost no incentive to conserve karst features, except avoidance of engineering problems, enforcementofthe Endangered Species Act,orvague and poorly enforced state ground water regulations. Caves continue to be discoveredinareas under investigation, especiallyinthe Austin area where consulting speleologists are excavating filled sinks. Although the average Texas cave barely exceeds100m in length, there are33caves longer than 1krnand 9 caves deeperthan 100m.Significant caves need not belarge-mostofthe rich biological caves incentralTexas are less than 100 m long. Afewcave systems, such as Honey Creek Cave and Powell's Cave System, are large, integrated, drainage networks with long geologic histories. Most caves are formed in Cretaceous limestones, suchasthe Edwards Group (and its equivalents) and Glen Rose formation in the Edwards Plateau and the Balcones Escarpment(fig.1).Significant karstisalso formed in Paleozoic limestonesinthe Llano Uplift and in Permian gypsum bedsinNorthwest andFarWest Texas. The Capitan Limestone (Permian) contains some significant caves in the Guadalupe Mountains andothermountainsofFar West Texas and adjacent New Mexico (Smith,1971;Fieseler et aI.,1978;Kastning, 1978; Elliott, 1987a). Texas has a high species diversity owing to its co'mplex geology, physiography, and climatic history. The stateisa biogeographic crossroads to the tropics, the desert Southwest, the Great Plains, and the eastern forests. The cave faunaofTexas reflects this diversity, with elements originating from many geographic sources.Page 323

PAGE 329

Elliott050kmII III050miII II Fig.1.Texas karst regions, caves, and places discussedintext.Karst regions: BE Balcones Escarpment7Bee Creek Cave25Kickapoo Caverns State Park BB Big Bend Area8Big Bend National Park (Kickapoo Caverns and CU Culberson County9Bracken Bat Cave Green Cave) Gypsum Plain 10Camp Bullis26Lake AmistadEPEdwards Plateau11China berry Cave27Lake BeltonELEllenburger Area12Colorado Bend State Park28Lake Georgetown GB Guadalupe/Blanco Area (Gorman Cave)29LakeLine Cave LC Lampasas Cut Plains13Comfort bat tower30Living Waters artesianwellLL LlanoArea14Davis Blowout Cave31Longhorn CavernNW NWTexas Gypsum Plain15Devil's River State Park32Mural Cave PM Permian Mountains (Fawcett's Cave)33Ney Cave SP Stockton Plateau16Devil's Sinkhole34Old Tunnel Wildlife17Dunbar Cave Management Area Caves and places:18Fern Cave35Powell'sCave19Fort Hood36Punkin Cave1Artesian well, San Marcos20Frio Bat Cave37Rucker Bat Cave2Balcones Canyonlands GMNP Guadalupe Mountains38San Antonio Bay National Wildlife Refuge National Park39TemplesofThorCave3Barton Springs21Honey Creek Cave40TestudoTube4Bear Cave22HuberLimestone Mine41Valdina Farms Sinkhole5Beaver Creek Bat Cave23James River Bat Cave42Walkup Cave (Beasley Cave)6Beck Horse Cave24Jollyville Plateau (Tooth43Whirlpool Cave&Kretsehmarr Caves)Page324

PAGE 330

About 900 animal species are recorded from Texas caves, about 210ofwhich are troglobites (obligate cave-dwellers). Only about 102ofthe troglobitic species have been described (Elliott, 1990). Taxonomic studiesofthe Texas cave fauna began in 1896 with Stejneger's descriptionofthe Texas blind salamanderTyphlomolge rathbuni,after a new artesian wellatSan Marcos, Hays County, disgorged blind salamanders and crustaceans. Some papers describing this ground water fauna were published about1900.Deep artesian wells near San Antonio produced two speciesofblind catfish:Trogloglanis pattersoni,describedbyEigenmann in 1919, andSatan eurystomus,describedbyHubbs and Bailey in 1947. Neither fish has been found in accessible caves. Little morewasdone until the19405and19505,when several articles on bats and their parasites appeared. True biospeleological studies began in the late19505with a visitbyThomasC.Barr, Jr. to Texas, which soon produced a numberoftaxonomic studiesonbeetles and millipedesbyseveral workers (Reddell, 1965). In 1962 Reddell and associates of the Texas Speleological Survey began a systematic surveyofthe Texas cave fauna, which continues to thisday.The survey resulted in many taxonomic descriptionsbynumerous workers. Ecological and behavioral studiesofTexas cavernicoles commenced with Robert W: Mitchell's work on the troglobitic carabid beetleRhadine subte"anea,which preys on the eggsofcave crickets (l968a,b,c). Mitchell (1970) also conducted an important studyofFern Cave (1970) and numerous studiesofthe Mexican cave fauna. Mitchell's students studied temperature and relative humidity responsesoftroglobitic millipedes (Bull and Mitchell, 1972), temperature responsesofcrustaceans (Elliott and Mitchell, 1973), and other ecophysiological modalities. Barr's revisionofRhadine(1974) and Elliott's morphometric studyofSpeodesmusmillipedes (1976) revealed much more endemism in Texas caves than had been assumed. A seriesofdescriptionsofground water invertebrates appeared in the19705and 1980sasa resultofthe workofGlenn Longley and his associates. The Edwards Aquiferwasfound to contain an almost incredible arrayofblind snails andcrustaceans-evenElliotta blind diving beetle. A forthcoming volumeof Speleological Monographs,to be publishedbythe Texas Memorial Museum, will contain numerous new species descriptions of invertebrates. Reviewsofthe Texas cave faunamaybefound in Reddell, 1965,1966,1967,1970a, 1970b,197Oc,1991; Mitchell and Reddell,1971;several authors in Lundelius and Slaughter,1971;Elliott, 1978, 1990; and Elliott and Reddell,1989.BAT CONSERVATIONMining in bat cavesisan old practiceinTexas, probably dating to before the Civil War. Beaver Creek Bat Cave and Longhorn Cavern, Burnet County; Davis Blowout Cave, Blanco County; andNeyCave, Medina County; were sourcesofsaltpeter for making black powder (Phillips, 1901; Poole,1980;Elliott, 1987b, 1987c, 1987d). Gunpowderwasmanufactured in Longhorn Cavern for the Confederate Army (Craun, 1948). In the early 20th Century several caves were mined for guano, mostofwhichwasshippedbyrail to South Carolina and the eastern United States, some eventually to Europe, and some to California to be usedasfertilizer. Phillips (1901) estimated that up to 10,000 tonsofguano had been shipped over three railways during25years. The price at the railheadwasusually$11to$13per ton. Ney Cavewasmined almost continuously until the19705.The guano alsowasused on truck farms near Castroville and Hondo. The Marbach familyofNew Braunfels probably owned Bracken Bat Cave, Comal County, before1901and Frio Bat Cave, Uvalde County, since 1909. Before then an English company, the Texas Guano Company, mined Frio and shipped guano to England. The Marbach's guano mining operations probably helped to protect the Mexican freetail bat,Tadarida brasiliensis mexicana.Mining generallywaslimited to the winter, when the bats are largely gone to Mexico. Traditionally guanowassackedbyhand and Brackenwascompletely cleanedofguano each year. In about 1987 a vacuum system with a 4-inch PVC pipewasused to remove the guano from Bracken to a large box outside (Men king, 1990). Becauseofrenewed interestinbat guanofororganic gardening, 80 to85tonsofguano(4to 6 tractor-trailer loads) reportedly have been mined annually from Bracken Bat Caveinrecent years (Peterson, 1990). Other freetail caves that have beenPage 325

PAGE 331

mined for guano include Beaver Creek Bat Cave; Davis Blowout Cave; Ney Cave; Devil's Sinkhole, Green Cave, and Rucker Bat Cave, Edwards County; and Fern Cave, Val Verde County. Smaller mining operations occurred inMyotisvelifercaves such as Dunbar Cave, Edwards County, and many others. Guano fires have been reported from Beaver CreekBat Cave, Davis Blowout Cave, Frio Bat Cave, and PunkinCave.Davis reportedly had a great explosion and then burned for two years after a hunter set a fire to smoke out a bear (Roessler, 1871; Phillips, 1901). Phillips saw pilesofashes 2 to 3 ft deep in the northwestern partofBeaver Creek Bat Cave and reported that the bats had deSerted that partofthe cave for the eastern part.In1977and1987most bats still roosted in the more spacious eastern chambersofthe cave, but ashes were no longer visible (Elliott, 1987c). Campbell (1925) reported ashes15feet deep and guano fires without identifying the exact caves, and he said that ranchers called the caves "smoke holes". Punkin Cavemayhave had a guano fire lasting for months (Reddell and Smith, 1965). A smoldering guano fire persisted for several months in Frio Bat Cave in about1977.A bat flight still occurred even though smokewasobserved from at least oneofseveral entrances (D. Craig RUdolph, pers. comm.). Itisnot known how the fires started, but Campbell claimed that the heatofdecomposing guano started fires and that it only occurred in bat caves that were not mined. Thereislittle doubt that freetail bat guano can sustain combustion. Other mining operations probably adversely affected bats. Green Cave probablywasaffectedbytoo much ventilation causedbyan artificial shaft near the endofthe cave (Rex Wahl, pers. comm.). Since acquiring the cave in 1986, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department closed the shaft and the bat popUlation has increased. Bracken Bat Cave also has a shaft at its end, but this seems not to have affected the bat colony, whichisstill the largest known(20-40 million). Beaver CreekBat Cave and Davis Blowout Cave were guano minesasrecentlyasthe19405.They have been protectedbyranchers. The removalofguano from some cavesmayhave benefitted the batsbypreventing some chambers from filling with deposits. One major freetail cave, Valdina778 Farms Sinkhole, Medina County,wasruinedbya recharge dam, constructedbythe EdwardsElliottUnderground Water District. The cave formerly housed up to 4 million bats, but had none after serving as a recharge structure (Veni, 1987). There are only about16major Mexican freetail roosts in Texas,13ofthem caverns (Davis et al.1962;Wahl, 1989.) In the19105and19205Dr. CharlesAR.CampbellofSan Antonio promoted the constructionofnumerous bat towers, structures that looked like church belfries on stilts.Asthe chief public health physician for the CityofSan Antonio, oneofCampbell's jobs was to maintain quarantine camps.Hetheorized that bats would control mosquitoes, which would reduce malaria, still an important disease in Texasatthat time.Healso promoted guanoasfertilizer; in one year (1917) he recovered 2,996 poundsofguano from a tower at Mitchell's Lake, a sewage lake near San Antonio. Campbell influenced the State BoardofHealth, and the state legislature (1917) passed a bill, "Protecting bats". Bats were declared to be beneficial to public health, and itwasa misdemeanor to kill them, punishablebya$5to$15fine. Campbell's theory, which he insistedwasa proven fact, interested even the Italian and Austrian governments. In 1919 the state legislature passed a resolution nominating Campbell for the Nobel Prize.Inhis book,Bats, Mosquitoes, andDollars(1925) Campbell claimed that the bat guano from his towers contained mosquito fragments and he had many people attest in writing to a dramatic reduction in mosquitoes at Mitchell's Lake after installing a bat tower in1911.Healso claimed to have eliminated malaria in that area. The benefitofthe towerswasquestioned after Storer (1926) demonstrated that the Mitchell's Lake tower, which contained Mexican freetails, contained no mosquito fragments in the guano. Freetails generally feed on moths, flying ants, beetles, leafhoppers, and true bugs (Schmidly, 1991). There is no doubt that bats are economically beneficial to humans. Davis et al. (1962) estimated that the summer populationsoffreetails in Texas caves reach 95.8 to 103.8 million, and that these bats eat from 6,000 to 18,000 metric tonsofinsects annually in Texas. Only one Texas bat tower remains; it is on private land near Comfort andismarked with a state historical plaque. The benign attitude toward batswasreversedbya rabies scare in 1956, when GeOrge Menzies, 'a Texas DepartmentofHealth rabies researcher, diedofrabies.Page326

PAGE 332

In 1959 a mInIng engineer diedofrabies; he, like Menzies, insisted he had not been bittenbya batorany animal and had simply gone into Frio Bat Cave (Constantine, 1967). In the two cases, however, there was a skin lesionora bleeding scratch that could have been infected. Later studiesbyConstantine on animals cagedinFrio Cave demonstrated that rabies could be contractedbythe"aerosol route", thatisbyinhalationofthe virus contained in bat saliva and urine aerosols. The transmission was more effective when ventilationofthe cave was the lowest and many bats were present, as shownbycarbon dioxide and ammonia measure ments. Ever since those studies many public health people have assumed that humans are at a high riskofcontracting rabiesbymerely entering a bat cave. As a resultofthe rabies scare, the legislature unanimously rescinded the bat protection law (1957), and the public attitude toward bats hardened. Campbell's bat towers were even torn down. However,atleast two considerations seemed to have been overlooked. First, the caged animals probably were exposed to ammonia vapors for up to 30 days. The writer has measured ammonia in Bracken Bat Cave at 53 ppm, whichishazardous to humans, and195ppm was detected in FriobyConstantine. Such ammonia concentrations should cause severe lung tissue erosion, transforming the alveoli into open sores. The ammonia exposure also should have severely weakened some of the animals, making them more susceptible to infections. Second, other possible routesofexposure were not eliminated in the caseofMenzies. As a bat rabies researcher, he handled rabid animals and virus in the field and in the laboratory.Onesourceofvirus was an experimental, live rabies vaccine thatwasadministered to Menziesbyhis own physician when Menzies reported that he thought he had rabies (Bobby Davis, pers. comm.). Thus, Menziesmayhave contracted rabiesbyanyofthree routes: inhalationinthe cave, skin lesioninthe fieldorlaboratory, or treatment. Certainly, many cavers and biologists have visited bat caves over many years, and none has diedofrabies, to the writer'S knowledge. However, exposure timeisbrief in most cases. Fewofthese people had received rabies vaccine until recent years. In actual practice the risk to humansofcontracting rabiesbythe "aerosol route"islow rather than high. However, the risk of ammonia-Elliottrelated illnessorhistoplasmosis may be rather highinsomeofthecaves. Properly fit-tested air-purifying respirators with ammonia cartridges and perhapsHEPA filters are needed for entering bat caves with large colonies. Unfortunately, imagined public health concerns overshadowed the ecological benefitsofbats, even though scientists like Constantine pointed out the benefits. However, itisfortunate that one of Constantine's recommendations (1967)wasnot followed: to ventilate freetail bat cavesinorder to reduce airborne virus concentrations and the incidenceofrabiesinthe bats. Itisknown that pregnant freetails prefer the warm temperaturesofthe nursery colonies, created partlybyan incubator effect and partlybythe structureofthe caves they inhabit (Herreid, 1963, 1967). Itisnow known that bat rabiesisbut one (or more) strainofrabies, as determinedbymonoclonal antibody studies, and that itisrarely transmitted to other species (Keith Clark, Texas Department of Health, pers. comm.). Bat rabies has little public health significance. In 1932 the Texas State Park Board acquired Longhorn Cavern. The Civilian Conservation Corps(Ccqworked for several years to excavate 20,000 cubic yardsofclayfillfrom the cave and develop trails for the public. The scientific and natural valuesofthe cave were not adequately preserved, but itwasThe Depression and people needed work. A survey party, ledbyH.M Law of Southern Methodist University, mapped the cave. Law reported, "Bats are so numerous in some partsasto necessitate their removal before the rooms can be opened to the public." (Craun,1948;R.Burnett, pers. comm.). Bats no longer inhabit the cave, and the caveisnearly biologically sterile exceptinafewareas. A new attitude toward cave lifewasevident in the19805when the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) began a programofacquiring ecological preserves, many containing significant caves. Intwopurchases (1984 and 1987) TPWD acquired Colorado Bend State Park, San Saba County. The park contains numerous caves, oneofwhich, Gorman Cave,isa large and importantMyotisvelifer(cave myotis) cave. In1985TPWD purchased the Devil's Sinkhole, Edwards County, a major freetail cave and historic site that alsoPage327

PAGE 333

contains significant crustacean species in its lakes.In1986 TPWD acquired the Seargeant Ranch, Kinney County, now knownasKickapoo Caverns State Park. It also contains Green Cave,animportant freetail bat and cave swallow cave, and numerous smaller caves.In1988 TPWD purchased Devil's River State Park, Val Verde County, which contains Fawcett's Cave, an important M velifercave. In1991TPWD purchased Kenda,ll Tunnel, an abandoned railroad tunnel in Kendall County, now called "Old Tunnel Wildlife Management Area." The tunnel houses thousandsoffreetail bats (Bigony, 1991). Other properties contain numerous small caves, and TPWD sponsors volunteer projectsbythe Texas Speleological Association and Texas Cave Management Association to study the caves (Elliott and Reddell, 1987; Fralia, 1989). Scientific studies sometimes are supported through contracts. Altogether, TPWD owns at least 288 caves in19parks, about 12%ofthe state's caves. The U.S. Government owns about 90 caves, mostly in the following areas: Guadalupe Mountains National Park,BigBend National Park, Camp Bullis, Fort Hood, Lake Amistad, Lake Georgetown, Lake Belton, and several minor areas. None are important bat caves but some contain interesting invertebrates. Fort Hoodiscurrently supporting a cave faunal studybyJames Reddell (pers. comm.)In1986 the Texas Cave Management Association (TCMA)wasfounded and began several projects, including a revisionofthe Texas Caverns Protection Act. The statute originally had been passed in the1960sat the requestofcommercial cave owners, butwaspartly rescinded later when the Texas Penal Codewasrevised. A section relating to pollutionwasremoved (Carolyn Siegert, pers. comm.). The statutewasreauthorized (1977) but retained its original weakness in permitting destructionofcaves if the owner gave written permission. A bill draftedbyTCMAwassponsored in 1987 to strengthen the statutebyadding protections for ground water, bats, and cave fauna and to increase the penalties for vandalism. The billwasrejected in committee even after receiving favorable support qom all who testified. The bill's chances may have been damagedbyits ownsponsorwhen questionedbythe committee about bat pr9tection, she speculated that bats probably could be written outofthe bill since they probably were notElliottnatural inhabitantsofcavesanyway.Subsequent testimonybya biologist correcting several misconceptions about bats did not sufficiently persuade the committee. To further its conservation goals, TCMA acquired a recharge cave (Whirlpool Cave, Travis County) in 1990 andmayacquireormanage other caves. TCMA also managestwocaves in West Texas for the UniversityofTexas System. To date noneofits caves are especially managed for biological purposes.In1989 TCMA succeeded in having a bill passed to add cave owners to an existing statute that protects landowners from liability for injuries sustained in outdoor activities, suchashiking and boating (Texas Legislature, 1989) However, many landowners still believe that owning a caveisa legal liability, despite the statutory protection and the fact that no one has yet been sued in Texas, to the writer's knowledge, for a cave-related injuryordeath. In 1986 Bat Conservation International's founder, Merlin Tuttle, movedhisorganization from Milwaukee to Austin. Tuttle'S public lectures and publicity about the ecological benefitsofbats created high interestinbat conservation. A local chapterofBCI was formedinAustin, which began sponsoring bat census studies and educational trips to Bracken Bat Cave to observe the evening flight. A large colonyofMexican freetail bats living underthe Congress Avenue bridge in Austin began to receive positive publicity, whereas previousnewsreports on the colony were very negative.By1991several hotels and restaurants near the bridge claimed that the bridge colony actually attracted tourists to watch the evening flight. PartofBCI's program includes controlling access to Bracken Bat Cave and gathering information on threatened bat caves (Elliott, 1987d). In 1990 the Texas Nature Conservancy (TNC) bought James River Bat Cave, Mason County, and renamed thenewpreserve Eckert James River Bat Cave. The cave has been a popular study site for biologists for many years andisnow available for groups to view the evening flightoffreetails. In1991TNC announced its plans for a "Texas Hill Country Bioreserve" system, which will involve purchasesofcritical habitats and watershedsinthe Edwards Plateau and Balcones Escarpment (Collier, 1991a). TNC has stated that itPage328

PAGE 334

recognizes that private landownership still provides the best meansofprotection, but that it will raise a large fund over three years to purchase and protect bat cavesifthey become threatened through property sales (Jim Fries, pers. comm.). Many significant bat caves and tunnels remain in private ownership. A significant new freetail colony took up residence in an abandoned sectionofthe Huber Limestone Mine near Marble Falls, Burnet County. The population, estimated in 1989 at about 4 million (Wahl, 1989)isprotectedbythe mine owners. The writer videotaped the impressive bat flight in1989.Although the large freetail colonies in Texas arefewand vulnerable to destruction, the smaller bat caves harboringMyotis velifer, Plecotus townsendii,and other species, have already suffered from human pressure. Mostofthe large freetail caves are relatively inaccessible to the public and have such oppressive atmospheres thatfewpeople venture inside.Mvelifercaves are smaller, more numerous, and more inviting. Several examples illustrate the vulnerabilityofsmall bat caves: 1) In 1961anentire colony ofM.veliferwaskilledordriven off from China berry Cave (Bat Cave), Williamson County,byan unidentified intruder using a .22 caliber rifle with rat-shot. The dead bats were foundbyJames Pope (pers. comm.) and his father; the latter had visited the cave before andwasfamiliar with the bat colony.2)In1973the San Antonio River Authority built an aquifer recharge dam 60 m downstream from Bear Cave, Bexar County, whichwasa bat roost (probably forMvelifer).The cave soonwascompletely flooded and washed out.In1984 an overweight individual became stuckinthe smaller pit entrance and had to be rescued. A local developer then filled the cave with large boulders, sand, and gravel, outoffearof.liability. About 20,000-100,000 bats were roosting in the cave when itwasfilled.In1985floodwaters reopened the cave. Since the caveisa planned recharge feature, the situation continues to endanger bats that repopUlate it (Veni1988,pers. comm.; K Menking, pers. comm.). 3) Numerous bats have been killed in Walkup Cave (Beasley Cave), Hardeman County. Brown (1987) reported that locals have shotgunned the bats. In1983he caught a groupofa dozen high school students spraying the roosting bats with gasoline and setting them on fire. The bat colonymayhave mov d to a nearby cave, Lady'sElliottDescent, becauseofsuch harassment (Butch Fralia, pers. comm.) Walkup Cavewasanimportant hibernaculum forMvelifer, Eptesicus fuscus pal/Mus,andPlecotus townsendii pal/escens.4) In the late1980sthe writer, Merlin Tuttle, and membersofthe Austin ChapterofBat Conservation International noted several small caves in the Austin area that probably were formerly inhabitedbyMveliferbut which now lack bats. Ceiling stains and guano deposits often indicated sizeable former colonies.Mvelifermaybe less loyal to its cave roosts than freetails and seems to move from site to site readily. Whether this behavioriscaused morebynatural ecological factorsorbyhuman disturbanceisunclear.M.velifercan tolerate humans in larger caves where it can flee to alternate roosts. Suchisthe caseinFawcett'S Cave, Gorman Cave, and Powell's Cave. Sometimes a bat cave can be recolonized.In1970Mveliferspecimens were transplanted from a New Braunfels cave to Ezell's Cave, Hays County, because human disturbances had driven off the Ezell's colony. The transplant failed, but guanowasoccasionally brought in to try and restore the energy cycleofthe cave (Davis, 1971).M.veliferreturned totwoWilliamson County caves: Mural Cave in 1987 and Beck Horse Cave in1991.All thatwasdonewastoclear vegetationawayfrom the entrances, which were partially blocked (writer's data and Mike Warton, pers. comm.). Powell's CavewasrecolonizedbyMveliferin1989 after a mapping projectbythe Texas Speleological Association excavated the entrance, which had slumped (Veni, 1989). No bats had inhabited the cave before itwasopenedbycavers in the19508(Pete Lindsely, pers. comm.).CONSERVATIONOFOTHER VERTEBRATESIn 1967 the Texas Nature Conservancy acquired Ezell's Cave to protect the Texas blind SalamanderTyphlomolge rathbuni(Davis, 1971). ThiswasTNC's first preserve in Texas and the first preserve for a Texas cavespeCies.TNC still maintains the cave, although for several years therewasa major problem with intruders. Local college students traditionally used the cave for parties or rites, and they repeatedly broke through the gate. Finally, brushwascleared from the entrance area so that trespassers could be seen, and a maximumPage 329

PAGE 335

security gatewasbuilt, which has not been penetrated. The students' tradition eventually diedaway,and no break-ins have been attempted recently (John Cradit, pers. comm.). Studiesofthe base-levellake are in progress in which water levels, water chemistry, and temperature are recorded electronically. Salamanders have been seen in the lake within the lasttwoyears (Cradit, pers. comm.)Typhlomolgerathbuniwasfirst seen in 1895 when an artesian wellwasdrilled close to the San Marcos River. Itisconsidered oneofthe most cave-adapted vertebrates in the world. The specieswaslater found in Ezell'sCave.For a long time Ezell'swasthought to be the only locality in which the species could still be found, hence the interestinpreserving the cave and listing the species. The salamanderwasthe first species listedin1967under the Endangered Species Conservation Act andwasautomatically included under the Endangered Species Actof1973.Inthe early19705Glenn LongleyofSouthwest Texas State University, fitted a net onto the discharge pipe of the artesian well and began to recover the salamander and a host of other ground water fauna, much of it undescribed. About40rare species occur in the San Marcos Poolofthe Edwards Aquifer.T.rathbuniisnow known fromsixlocalities in San Marcos butisstill considered endangered becauseofvarious threats to ground water (Longley, 1978,1981,pers. comm.). Another salamanderTyphlomolge robustaisknownfroma single specimen collected from a spring outletinthe bed of the Blanco River. Its statusisunknownasit has not been seen since itwascollected in1948but itisonthe state endangered species list. Eurycea nana,the San Marcos salamander,wasplaced on the federal endangered species list in1980.Itisaneyedbut neotenic form known only from the San Marcos River, whichisfedentirelybythe large San Marcos Springs. The San Marcos River also contains the endangered Texas wild-rice Zizania texanaand the endangered fountain darterEtheostoma [onticolawhichisnowextinctinComal Springs, Comal County. Other spring and cave ofthe genusEuryceaare limitedindistribution andmaybe listed eventually. One undescribed speciesisthe Barton Springs from Austin, Travis County, whichisElliottendangeredbypollution and lossofrecharge to the aquifer.InJanuary,1992,the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) received a petition to list the Barton Springs salamanderasendangered (Collier, 1992). AnothernewcaveEuryceaoccurs on the opposite side of the Colorado River to the north (Paul Chippindale, pers. comm.).CONSERVATIONOFINVERTEBRATESIn 1984 land development began to encroach on the rural Jollyville Plateau west of Austin, particularly the Kretschmarr Ranch, which contains someofthe state's more important biological caves, suchasTooth Cave. These caves had been protected since about 1970 under an arrangement between the owners and the Texas SystemofNatural Laboratories (TSNL). Further studies of the caves were conducted to document the rare species and numerous caves in the area (Reddell, 1984). Itwashoped at that time that the developers would voluntarily set aside some of the land to preserve the more significant caves. Although the CityofAustin had adopted a Comprehensive Watershed Ordinance,itwastoo weak and too late in comingtoprotect the caves. The landwasconsidered valuable andwasto be developed into "The Parke", a mixed residential-light industrial area. For a while one developer offered to donate cave land to the University of Texas at Austin, but the University turned it down. Therewasno definite commitmentbythe developers but The Parke developmentwasscaled back somewhat. Part of the northern halfwasdeveloped, but the cave areas were mostly left alone. In1986the Travis Audubon Society petitioned USFWS to listsixspecies of cave arthropods, mostly located on the Jollyville Plateau,asendangered under the federal Endangered Species Act (Chambers and Jahrsdoerfer, 1988). The USFWS studied the petition and sought information from cave biologists. A long period passed withnoreal progress madebythe developers or USFWS. Meanwhile, the land development boominthe Austin areawassubsiding, and the pressurewasoff for awhile. While local biologists were concerned, most local cavers remained unfamiliar with or uninterestedintbe caves at The Parke. Bill Russell and others worked quietly with the City of Austin to help protectmanycaves and sinkholesinthe city's jurisdiction. Parle 330

PAGE 336

Meanwhile, other conservation issues began to heat up in Austin. People became interestedinthe endangered birds, suchasthe golden cheek warbler and the black capped vireo, and rare plants, suchasthe bracted twistflower. Thenewsmedia frequently mentioned these species and the relentless trend of land development in the hill country west of town. These became popular causes, along with concern about water-quality degradationinthe Barton Creek-Barton Springs watershed and the Colorado River, Austin's water supply. In 1988 someofthese issues came to a head. Private negotiations with the developers seemed stalled, so a group called Earth First! began to openly trespass at The Parke to draw attention to the destruction of potential bird habitat. They then occupied somecavesas a political stunt and obtained news media coverage. This action got much attention, but Earth First! did not endear itself to the caver community although both wanted the caves protected. Meanwhile, the USFWS listedfiveof thesixproposed cave speciesasendangered:TexellareddelliGoodnight and Goodnight, the Bee Creek Cave harvestman;MicrocreagristexanaMuchmore, the Tooth Cave pseudoscorpion;Neofeptoneta myopica(Gertsch), the Tooth Cave spider;Rhadine persephoneBarr, the Tooth Cave ground beetle; andTexamauropsreddelliBarr and Steeves, the Kretschmarr Cave mold beetle. Thefivespecies actually are seven due to a taxonomic split that will occur whentwonewspecies are described. In addition, Ubick and Briggs (in press) will soon describe manynewspecies ofTexe/faand Chandler (in press) will be describing severalnewpselaphid beetles, one of whichisanewBatrisodesfrom the area.Twoof thenewspecies are legally protected because most of their populations are endangered and some were includedinthe previous definitions ofTexellareddelliandTexamauropsreddelli.However, when the new species are described a legal loopholemayopen and theymaybe unprotected. Other taxonomic papers in press will describe spiders (Gertsch), pseudoscorpions (Muchmore), schizomids (Cokendolpher and Reddell), amphipods (Holsinger), and isopods (Bowman).Asa resultofthe listings, a series of reconnaissance biology studies on the seven speciesinthe Austin areaElliottwere conducted, supportedbyUSFWS, TPWD, TNC, the City of Georgetown, numerous developers and banks, and Melvin Simon&Associates,Inc.(Elliott and Reddell,