formation cleaning question

[Nico]

Yep, Bustamante is fairly dry. the cave is owned by the city and they dont care too much about what you do inside as long as you pay the entrance fee,
to the point that they rely on gringo cavers to come down here and clean/improve the cave.

Even if it may be ok to use cleaners I dont think I'll be taking'em a friend of mine who was there last year mentioned the idea to the trip cordinator and she freaked out, but thanks for the advice though
I might just try on one of my usual trips.

Here's the project's website with some pictures
http://home.austin.rr.com/ojknox/bustainfo.htm

[Lynn]

Thanks for posting the link- that's one heck of a project! Best of luck to you Nico!

[Nico]

the cleanup event was quite a success and I got to see a guy scrubbing graffitti with a power drill!

[Teresa]

I just don't get that philosophy... oh no don't take any chemicals in the cave you might injure the wildlife, but it's OK to grind the heck out of the wall....

After all the cave *is* the wall, not the wildlife.

[JD]

Teresa, I think "restorationists" attempting to improve the look (aesthetics) of a cave by removing the outer layer of limestone and its patina is a terribly misguided practice. It would never be accepted by restorationists anywhere outside of a cave (i.e. historic structures, etc.)

What they did when they removed all graffiti after 1900 without recording it at Palmito in Bustamante is equally appalling. Many of the wall markings were covered with flowstone and attempting to remove them would have been harmful folly. Despite what the owners said. Worst of all they call this "Conservation" and pat themselves on the back. Well, it sure isn't preservation, I know that.

Remember, there are three different types of preservation that are valid - historic, geologic, biological, and that in general we should concentrate on protecting processes not trying to restore cave to some mythical pre-human static point. Most importantly, do not harm, and yet many misguided "restorationists" do just that - harm historic, geologic, and biological resources in order to make the cave "look" better to them.

I always tell them to pick up the trash but to leave the danged walls alone. Instead they take grinders and sandblasting equipment in. This is still the dark ages for historic preservation in cave I'm afraid.

Joe Douglas

[Cap'n Spanky]

JD, that is an interesting position. I don't happen to agree that aesthetic concerns are misguided. I will say that we should not take a "sandblaster" approach to cleaning walls and formations. The appropriate method depends on each situation. And I also think it is important to know what is "historical" and what's just trash/damage. I'd like to know how many cavers share JD's opinion about aesthetic restorations being misguided. Also JD, what is your opinion on the reattachment of broken spelothems?

[Cheryl Jones]

Good thing paleo-conservationists didn't clean up cave walls 10-35,000 years ago!

Ancient Cave Art Full of Teenage Graffiti
Thursday, February 16, 2006
By Bjorn Carey

Many art historians and anthropologists believe Paleolithic cave wall art was done by accomplished shaman-artists. But mixed in with the finer paintings are graffiti-like scenes of sex and hunting.

An analysis of thousands of paintings from the late Pleistocene epoch suggests the graffiti artists back then were likely the same as today — teenage males.

Most cave art from 10,000 to 35,000 years ago was done by hand, quite literally. Artists would chew up a bit of red ocher, place their hand against a wall and spit over their hand.

"It was like kids taking a pencil and drawing an outline around their hand," said Dale Guthrie, a paleobiologist from the University of Alaska Fairbanks.

Men and women have different hand proportions — men have thicker thumbs and palms — so by analyzing the dimensions of the hands in European cave art, and comparing them to 1,000 photocopies of modern hands of men and women of different ages, Guthrie determined just who painted what.

Men and women and boys and girls of all ages left their marks, but statistically, teenage males dominated.

Most of the paintings are of large game, such as bison, horse, ibex and red deer. Cave bears and lions, which would have inspired fear, were also depicted.

Many of the hunting scenes, although sloppily done compared to the fine, finished work of an adult artist back then, are full of graphic detail.

"Lots of the wild animals in the caves have spears in them and blood coming out of their mouths and everything that a hunter would be familiar with," Guthrie told LiveScience. "These were the Ferraris and football games of their time. They painted what was on their minds."

And as with modern teenagers, the ancients had more on their minds than just cars and sports.

"In the graffiti, there is a lot of below-the-belt-art," Guthrie said. "The people in the art are predominantly women, and not a single one has any clothes on."

But these weren't just any women, they were Pleistocene Pamela Andersons adorned with ludicrously huge breasts and hips. The walls were also decorated with graphic depictions of genitalia.

"These were not the type of paintings that make it into the coffee-table art books," Guthrie said.

While female artists accounted for less than 20 percent of the cave art, they were being creative in other ways, researchers say.

"What we find in the fossil record doesn't always represent what was going on," Guthrie said. "Prior to the pottery age, women in all societies are working in things that don't preserve very well, such as skins and braiding fiber."

Guthrie presents his findings and more than 3,000 images in his new book, "The Nature of Paleolithic Art" (University of Chicago Press, 2006).

Copyright © 2006 Imaginova Corp.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184938,00.html

[JD]

Cheryl is sort of kidding, I think, about the prehistoric grafitti, but as you may know, we have over 50 caves in the US with prehistoric art now.

Do we really want to grind the cave walls?

Cap.n Spanky, my position is neither new nor unknown in the caving community. I want folks to think hard about what exactly they are trying to restore and if their tactics are appropriate for the environment. There is also an inevitable tension between restoration and preservation (as I've written about elsewhere). Yet most cavers aren't aware of this and its important implications.

I don't mean aesthetics should not be a factor, as I like "clean' lanscapes too, but I find that that is what drives many restorationists, to the exclusion of other concerns and (sometimes) to the detriment of the cave. I certainly give priority to the other preservation areas I mentioned before - geologic, biological, and historic, again emphasizing preserving those entire systems as processes. As to something like gluing a broken formation together, I don't see how that threatens other resources (as long as no toxic material was introduced into the environment.) So go for it. If it is an active cave it might work well.

But don't take a sand blaster into the cave and call it conservation. Please!

Remember, in much of America most caves were explored before the current generation. Many of them have historic signatures and other walls markings, as well as other evidence of a wide range of historic uses (saltpeter mining, moonshine proidction, food storage, hidden spaces, social spaces, etc.) Even a smudge of carbon on the walls in a particular pattern is an important clue into the history (or prehistory) of the cave. not to mention the prehistoric glyphs you might not see, or the saltpetre tally marks, next to miner's "art."

Generally speaking, there are important historical (and biological) things on the ceilings, walls, and floors of American caves which are hard to see or to assess as to their significance. And yet folks are "cleaning" cave walls all over the place, destroying who knows what?

We don't allow cavers to decide which biological species the cave should contain and then remove the rest, yet we do just that with cultural resources. It reflects poorly on the NSS that it condones such activity, although the Big Name Conservationists have gotten somewhat better over the last few years. They at least recommend someone look at the site first, and that cultural resources be recorded before being obliterated. Even NPS/USFS are starting (ok, a few of them) to realize that the caves might have something significant on the walls

Obviously though, the education of well-meaning cave restorationists has not kept up with the need. The fact that I even had to write this makes that clear. Sigh.

Lynn, the long struggle continues...

Good Caving and Good Research
Joe Douglas

[Cap'n Spanky]

JD, thanks for elaborating. My perception of your first post was that any attempt to remove graffiti was bad. I still sense that you may not trust any caver who has the idea to do some restoration work but again, it's only my perception. I agree that any effort should be thoughful and planned. There is no sense in having a "cave softly" ethic then go in to clean a cave with guns a'blazin'. Restoration should be treated the same as any other caving activity. I can't imagine actually using a sand blaster in a cave. But then again I try never to adopt too extreme a position on most topics. To discourage any effort or to haphazardly purify are both views that I think do a disservice to caves and the caving community.

I feel that spray paint, obscenities carved in mud, muddy handprints on formations etc, are all damage. The issue then becomes can we restore the area to an acceptable degree without causing more damage in the process? For any cave there may be differing situations right next to each other. I would hope that as an organized caving community, we take time to help educate each other so that good decisions can be made. This discussion board is an excellent example. I learn a lot about my own philosophy from posts that I don't necessarily agree with (at least at first). I try not to think that there are zealots out there who just blindly go in to situations with good intentions. But I often find the need to delude myself. Aren't good intentions good for paving something?