Strength in Numbers

[*Chris*]

Let me preface this little blurb by stating right away that I am not a caver. I've never been inside a cave. It sounds like a terrible way to spend a nice afternoon. No sun, no fresh air, cramped, damp, and dark. Bletch... no thanks!

That said... I came across this recent policy announcement and it has me somewhat concerned:

Click me to read why caving is being threatened... if you care

I believe it should have you a bit concerned too.

Here's my point: it's easy for the Government to shut down caving. Too easy.

Caving in NB appears to be a fringe pursuit followed by an extremely small number of people. A quick Google search offers little in the way of local organization, clubs, or access groups. Now whether or not that's true I don't actually know... but it's appearance is of a small group of ad-hoc cavers operating on their own. In general, Governments don't deal with individuals (at least not seriously). They'd far prefer to talk to an organization... and that organization better give the perception that it represents lots of people if it want's any clout.

The environmental cause given here is serious. I'm not arguing that. As the protector of the province's environment some type of Government action is required. Requiring cavers stay away from caves sounds like common sense to most people and it will be supported by the large, organized, environmental groups (who have some power). Politicians will look good, cavers will loose, and you'll never hear about it in the news.

However, I'd bet my last beer that: 1) Caving is not responsible for this disease in the first place, and 2) restricting caving activity will have an insignificant effect on it's rate of spread. It will penalize those who've done nothing wrong and it will do little to help the actual cause. But... it's easy... because caving is small... and seemingly unorganized. I'd be surprised if two cavers were consulted. I wonder if we'll see them learn from this?

How do you think this would play out if bats were replaced by a cliff-dwelling critter of some sort?

[david]

I have been following this case, as a biologist and definitely not as a caver. The currently supported idea for the introduction of the disease is that it was brought to North America from Europe on the gear of bat biologists. I think the potential for cavers to spread the spores is there... minimal compared to natural bat migrations though. I think a ban on caving is a bit much, but the gear decontamination (as they seem to be pushing for) is reasonable.

[Adam]

Your point is valid tho... they didn't ban fishing in rivers when it was realized it was a vector for species migration from one watershed to another.

[Nihoa]

im for it. the situation is desperate and any measure that could help should be used. the disease will spread with bat migration but that happens at a far slower pace than the potential for a single crew of cavers to visit all the major colonies in a single season. unlike new england and other places white nose is affecting, all the species here in nb are susceptible to the fungus and we are looking at 100% extinction of all our bats. scary flowers!

[*Chris*]

Sanitizing gear and/or restrictions to access may be well justified in this case. I personally don't know. I'm not a bat expert. I'll leave that to the two biologists who've replied already.

However... I do claim to know a fair deal on how public policy is developed on environmental issues in this province. Stakeholder groups can have a profound influence; sometimes greater than any amount of sound science. I also know that a group has zero ability to influence policy if they are absent from the discussion in the first place. Rather, they'll have policy dictated to them by those who may understand very little about the activity in question (caving in this case). If I were a caver today... I'd be pretty uncomfortable with that.

[Nihoa]

seems like you are more upset at the process than the action taken. given the impact a few individual cavers could have on entire bat populations i dont really care that they werent consulted. the peregrine issue at welsford had room for negotiating the size of the closure area etc based on peregrine biology but this seems a much more cut and dry problem. any use, at all, has the potential to carry huge consequences.

to me its no different than places that are banning shark fin soup. there is no middle ground between those that want to see decimated populations of an animal preserved and those that want to eat a bit of them. government is mandated to protect against environmental catastrophe and should do so.

[*Chris*]

I don't have a problem with the process.

The process is almost always to consult stakeholder groups prior to enforcing any type of ban. But in this case since no Access group appears to exist, the process finished successfully before it was even started. I'd say the cavers should think about getting organized, so they can at least give decision makers an appreciation of what it is exactly that they do.

You can bet that if this virus were transmitted by fishermen, hunters, ATV'ers, snowmobilers, etc. that their respective federations would have been asked for input prior to access restrictions. Their input is not insignificant.

Again, I'm not the expert on bat biology and let's say this issue is absolutely black and white. If that's true than it's an extremely rare case. The vast majority of environmental policy issues exist in shades of grey and there's room to negotiate. That said... you can't negotiate if you aren't at the table. My point is simply that climbers should take notice.

[Nihoa]

helm, set rant to level 9 ... and ... engage!

you hit the nail on the head in mentioning how things would be different if it were affecting atvers or hunters which is what irks me most about consultation. i cant help but feel that gov decisions that involve consultation seem to always end in half measures where no one ends up happy. management of fish stocks are ripe with with this sort of thing where quotas are set somewhere between the high level fishermen want and a low level where biologists trying to preserve the population recommend. you are left with fishermen without as many fish as they would like and a quota higher than is sustainable. i believe in the idea of consultation but if the result of the process means compromise to the point where that particular action no longer becomes effective, then i say eff it. the focus of the decision making should be on whether shutting down access to the caves will help curb spread of white nose or it will not. it matters very little imo that someone brings an argument to the table 'but i like crawling through caves.'

which is my second point. people have decided that they somehow have the right to do whatever they want wherever they want on public lands regardless of the impact. in the states the case for individual rights to all sorts of retarded activities reaches seriously mental levels. on kaui, in the hawaiian islands, the fish and wildlife service has been trying to have feral goats and pigs eliminated so they can maintain and restore native flora and fauna. there are a couple dozen paramilitary crazies on kaui who feel its their god given right to get camo-ed up to bowhunt these pig and goats. one of them lives right next to the most popular beach on the island and has nailed the bottom jaw of all the pigs hes killed onto the side of his house, jill was super impressed! the gov hasnt had the balls to tell them to go eff themselves over concerns of lawsuits over civil rights and despite the having mandate to protect endangered and migratory species theyve done very little. the best places on kaui to see feral goat and pig are on the public lands set aside as conservation areas and, ironically, the best place to see nesting albatross is in a ritzy gated community that have built pig and goat fences. they also keep rats out of the community and seabirds nest in peoples flowerbeds and lawns.

ideally consultation should to be done to make decisions more informed but i think more often than not its castrating. i see where you are coming from especially where here in nb we have a system that promotes multiple uses/values on crown lands. i keep coming back to that nagging feeling that the result is doing a bunch of things ok instead of any one thing proper or well. i am not a man of half measures!

[john]

There is one cave I went in that had potential for some cool bouldering inside the cave. problem was getting a pad inot the small entrance to the cavern with the bouldering potential. I should look at it again.

I suspect all the rats, small animals and bears move in and out of the cave far more then people. I saw that white flowers on bats in greenhead caves years ago. The article said it came hear recently, but from what I saw it has been here a lot longer than that.

Chris thanks for bringing it up we should be aware of it. Lots of climbers I know send time caving as well, or have at some point. I agree recreational users should have a voice even if small in numbers.

[Andrew]

I read 3/4 of the posts here and not the article yet... however, I have caved in NB in the past. It's a fun thing to take new people into (safely) because it's so unique.

Individual cavers would likely have very little impact compared to other users of the caves. If organized caving groups spent all season taking groups in, then, yes, that could have an impact.


I hate loosing the freedom to do things. I don't do too many different activities and this would be one more thing I can't do.

Next it will be that people can't mountain bike in the trails at rockwood park because it could spread spruce bud worm or west nile/bird flu, etc.

[Nihoa]

it isnt the fault of conservation biologists that you have low diversity in your hobbies.

the attitude towards things like this annoys me to no end. if you head to a place like sweden, where the people are sickingly law abiding, you could simply tell folks to please avoid the caves cus it could have a really really bad affect on the bats and the swedes would all "omg" and stay out. i 100% guarantee you wouldnt need any sort of enforcement cus to their supremely vulcan logical minds they see that the consequences of their actions could be quite grave so of course they do what they can to help out. here in north america everything is about how important an individuals feelings are and people cant see past 'but i like caving.' or whatever the activity.

[*Chris*]

Seriously Mark... 2 Star Trek references in a single thread. Nice.

p.s. Swedes are super funny!

[Leehammer]

how bout we trade the peregrines for the bats. One or the other, you can't have both.

[Nihoa]

[david]

Sorry to revive an old not-climbing-related thread... but your captain had a point.

http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/928387/emergency-assessment-concludes-that-three-bat-species-are-endangered-in-canada

[Greg]

I think the seriousness of the problem justifies a quick and effective response. There is no disputing the fact that bats are in big trouble. Giving up a couple of seasons of caving is a small sacrifice. Even if there is just a remote possibility that humans are magnifying the problem by venturing into caves is reason enough to put a ban on caving. I have already seen two bats flying around this winter. This thing is real, it is happening in our back yard and we have a responsibility to help find a solution - not be part of the problem. Let's give the little buggers some quarter before they are all gone.