there are a few left if you look hard enough. it's pretty sad thoughOriginally Posted by FW
Welcome to the Cave Diver's Forum.
there are a few left if you look hard enough. it's pretty sad though
But they're the size of real corn flakes. They used to be the size of dinner plates.
Whoever said money can't buy love never bought a puppy.
there's a couple...
That's a very good point, I hadn't considered that.
_____________________________________________
Ryan Battles
If you don't fit, it's too tight.
But, that's why they invented things like hammers, drills, bang, pry bars etc...
So here is my question then. I am not a dry caver, but have read reports here and there about dry cavers "opening" up the cave. Is there a large backlash in that community for those that use these other tools to open up a cave?
Shawn
"Never Trade Luck for Skill"
Some people are anti-"opening" and others realize it is part of exploring.
"Most" people are judicious when they "open."
There's a spectrum of what "opening" is. It goes from pushing aside some sand to get through a crawlway to using bang. There's digging out fill washed in an entrance with shovels and buckets to having to gingerly peck away at a little secondary calcite to pass through a restriction where you can see big cave ahead and air blowing through.
There's a "digging" section of the NSS, so to that extent, it's well sanctioned.
Generally the backlash isn't too big, but folks don't generally make a big point of emphasizing it, either.
We have dug above and below water here(Canuckistan) to remove glacial debris blocking entrances and passages.The only reason we do it /feel it is justified is due to encroaching potential of total karst destruction.
Quite a few systems have been explored and mapped-this data allowed either complete preservation through designation of a conservation site (with management policy) or at the minimum an ANSI is created thus allowing more leverage to protect against construction over the karst.
The ONLY reason protection was afforded is due to the cave map accurately showing the tunnel locations.We have the good fortune to have cave science input and direction on the digs to afford protection for rare bio-dioversity and speleothems.In the end I feel altering a cave is justified when the benefits outweigh the negatives.Ultimately any cave traffic causes some degradation-if there is a purpose to the traffic -then I feel it is manageable.
What is worse-an altered cave entrance and perhaps minor passage work VS complete and utter destruction of the cave through grouting/collapse during excavation or post construction? We already have a few systems that are no longer due to ignorance or corruption in construction of sub divisions.
The added bonus is the we fully enjoy mapping and exploring but the focus is karst protection and identification.
Exploration(mapping) brings back data that is useful to many cave disciplines that ultimately might outweigh the alterations needed to enable it(if it is kept to the lowest change needed.).Each situation should be fully discussed and considered with a peer involvement IMHO
Even so called "sacrificial" training caves may end up being 'justifiable" in the end scope as this may prevent unnecessary damage in many other cave systems.
Everyone has an opinion..this is my stance and I feel no guilt for my actions.Others may feel differently.
Digging, both in and out of the water is nothing new. **Many** major caves have been opened by digging, taking them from the status of a damp hole on the hillside to a classic underground trip. The longest cave in Tennessee for example, was just a 300' long cave with a windy crawl at the back.
When the (unpassably small) crawl was enlarged, they dropped right into the middle of a major passage, and gained access to the other 35 miles of cave. We dug open a second entrance around the hillside later at the land owner's request to ensure easy access in the event of a rescue.
Lechugilla in NM was dug open. Kartchner caverns in AZ (now a state park) was dug open. The list goes on.
The British have a long history of major, long term excavations both above and below water.
You don't hear about it much because something worth digging on usually represents a good lead, and that's not often something that gets advertised. It's a lot of very hard, focused work, often not leading to any cave.
Some projects last years and never get anywhere, but sometimes... In those rare instances where you've been toiling for months, one more rock is pried free and suddenly there is an audible 'Whoosh!' as you feel the cool air wash over you. Those are the moments that make moving tons of material, the sore backs, busted hands, and hundreds of hours working all worthwhile.
And the irony is that those that complain and whine about digging, then usually have no problem taking advantage of the fruits of your labor.
A new cave diver's perspective ...
I like open spaces better than enclosed ones. Two days ago I dived Hole in the Wall for the first time. Holy mother of Jesus that's a beautiful cave. I could spend hours in there admiring the scenery ... it's like Arches National Park underwater.
Yesterday I dived Madison Blue. Couldn't be more different. I felt like I was in restrictions more than I was out of them. I found it constricting, and a bit mentally daunting whenever I started thinking about what I would do if I had to turn around or the guy behind me suddenly had a problem that needed my immediate assistance. In short, it stressed me out a bit and I didn't really enjoy it.
I'm told these restrictive passages get "bigger" as you gain more experience. Perhaps they do ... my dive buddies came out of there talking about what fun dives they were. I'm glad I did them, but they didn't feel like that much fun to me ... maybe it will after another 100 or so cave dives. I hope so ... but I think loving restrictions is an acquired taste ...
... Bob (Grateful Diver)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks