Cavechat.org

Posted: **Feb 7, 2012 8:37 pm**

wyandottecaver wrote:speculation didnt seem to stop you in your post above

I'm sorry I don't follow you this time, Todd. I only quoted your post and asked for the facts. If you don't know the facts then I understand
because a lot of us don't. The facts seem to be concealed quite often these days. Oh, well.

Posted: **Feb 7, 2012 9:57 pm**

tncaver wrote:Once again these caves are closed to the public yet WNS was discovered by USFWS and all were within a 20 mile radius of each other. What does that tell us? If you can't figure it out, it seems that bats must have brought the disease there since the public isn't allowed in. Of course the USFWS won't admit that will they? What is wrong with those people?

The caves in question are privately owned, and while not "open to the public"(generally meaning commercial) are not necessarily closed to cavers or anyone else the owner allows. Yet your *speculation* is that bats alone can be responsible for WNS here if the "public" isnt there, and that the USFWS believes bats alone are responsible but wont admit it. I tend to think that is possible, just as I believe it probable that these caves are open to cavers who in fact likely alerted biologists in the first place. But as you say....ALL of that is speculation

Posted: **Feb 7, 2012 10:13 pm**

Judging by the wording of the article I would say wyandottecaver is correct in assuming cavers were there and reported the findings. The article specifically mentions the Kentucky Dept. of Fish and Wildlife had been working with local grottos to find new sites which leads me to believe a local grotto found the infected bats either during a recreational trip or a trip specifically to check on the bats.

Like many people I do not really believe there is any case that suggests a human has ever spread WNS but I don't think this is a clear cut case where there was no human visitation.

Posted: **Feb 8, 2012 10:07 am**

Glenn Driskell, a caver with the Fort Knox Grotto.

Maybe Glenn or some of his friends could shed some light on this find. There are some White Nose Syndrome research programs close by this area. It is somewhat ironic that this information comes right from the top through the FWS rather than seeing it through the news media as many new cases have been learned. Probably because it is close to the studies. In any case, it has certainly taken its time getting to this area, and was very much expected with the findings having been so close. Also, two questions I would like to ask, were these caves checked last year? and, Where would we be without cavers?
:cavingrocks:

Posted: **Feb 8, 2012 10:13 am**

David Grimes wrote:
Like many people I do not really believe there is any case that suggests a human has ever spread WNS but I don't think this is a clear cut case where there was no human visitation.

I think that if "no human visitation" is the case,

then it is a clear cut case,

in that case anyway.

Or it could be in a suitcase! :rofl:

What a case that would be,

if that were the case,

but in any case we are getting :off topic:

Posted: **Feb 8, 2012 10:45 am**

Maybe the caves found with WNS can make some of the decontamination studies easier than the current labs have.
Just a thought.

The$Propagation$and$Decontamination$of$WNS$in$the$Environment

We(are(currently(trying(a(new(chemical(that(was(identified(in(the(pelage(of(bats,(which(appears(to(be(an(
effective( antifungal( against( G.( pannorum.( ( It( is( unclear( as( to( whether( this( represents( an( effective(
treatment(for(bats(in(situ(as(its(found(in(low(doses(on(bats,(but(is(quite(toxic(at(high(levels.((We(continue(
to(work(with(Agent(C,(which(was(tested(in(artificial(hibernacula(experiments(by(DeeAnn(Reeder.((Among(
all(the(compounds(tested,(Agent(C(was(the(only(compound(that(allowed(bat(survival,(although(the(lone
survivor( did( not( provide( strong( statistical( support( for( the( effectiveness( of( this( compound.( ( This(
experiment(will(be(repeated(next(hibernation(season,(as(will(the in(situ(treatments.((We(are(also(in(the(
process(of(determining(the(effective(concentration(of(Agent(C(when(it(is(aerosolized(in(the environment(
using(a(portable(GC/MS

Posted: **Feb 8, 2012 11:11 am**

My point in asking the question was to determine how many bats were actually found infected in each cave? Over the last couple of years, the number of bats found to be "infected" or "that were sampled" was usually just one or two at the max. But when its reported, its reported as mass movement of the disease.

Hasn't the number of infections actually decreased over the last year or two compared to previous years? This could be a lull in the spread, but it could also mean that the disease has reached its pinnacle and is now succumbing to natural barriers. Don't know the answers, just asking the questions.

Posted: **Feb 8, 2012 11:45 am**

Batgirl wrote:My point in asking the question was to determine how many bats were actually found infected in each cave? Over the last couple of years, the number of bats found to be "infected" or "that were sampled" was usually just one or two at the max. But when its reported, its reported as mass movement of the disease.

Hasn't the number of infections actually decreased over the last year or two compared to previous years? This could be a lull in the spread, but it could also mean that the disease has reached its pinnacle and is now succumbing to natural barriers. Don't know the answers, just asking the questions.

The new findings, being just down the road from wns findings last year, would be likely that the bats infected either recently invaded these three caves, or they were there last year and were not detected. In either case, your thought does actually look correct, that we may be near the end of major spreading.

Cavechat.org

WNS Spreads in Kentucky

Re: WNS Spreads in Kentucky

Re: WNS Spreads in Kentucky

Re: WNS Spreads in Kentucky

Re: WNS Spreads in Kentucky

Re: WNS Spreads in Kentucky

Re: WNS Spreads in Kentucky

Re: WNS Spreads in Kentucky

Re: WNS Spreads in Kentucky