winmag wrote:Since there was no known "cure" or solution, the state decided to err on the side of caution and close the caves so that if humans did spread it, we wouldn't open the door wide open to moving it around to uninfected caves. It seems quite plausible that something on the order of a fungus could be spread rather easily as is athletes foot and other such things. Now that it is here, it is basically a moot point.
Winmag - it is basically a moot point. The endless arguing is pointless - it's here. Whether it came here on a bat, on a shoe, was pooped out by seagull, or evolved from an indigenous species, it's here.
You're absolutely correct that there is no cure or solution at this time. The wildlife managers understand they can't control the bats from spreading it - which everyone understands is the primary method of the disease spreading. The only thing they can control - and only to a certain extent - is human movement. Unless physically closed/gated, it's questionable if even that is effective. Look only to the media accounts of the hikers in Ohio who wandered into the caves where WNS was found. Responsible cavers will honor the closures, but there are so many others out there who aren't even aware or don't care.
There are many other unintended consequences of the closure orders - vandalism, rescues, economic impact, and more, which is why they are ineffective and should be ended. Targeted closures for significant roosts have always been, and will continue to be useful management tools. They won't stop bats from spreading WNS it into those roosts, but it can help those populations potentially recover, if affected, and can certainly protect significant colonies from disturbance.
That said, epidemiologists and fungal specialists know that a variety of methods of transmission are common. As I wrote in last year's NSS News Conservation issue, that is a perfectly reasonable starting point for preventive response. However, as the years have gone on, it's clear that if humans are a vector here, our impact is insignificant compared to what the bats are doing. Within the WNS-affected area, closures and decon seem pointless. Certainly the cost and potential exposure of people, gear, and environment to chemicals needs to be considered along with any perceived additional benefit in these regions.
However, at the front lines of WNS, and in areas far from WNS, we can continue to take precautions. Certainly, not taking WNS-exposed gear into unaffected areas is simple to accomplish, and probably the single most important thing we can do to prevent inadvertent spread - if it's possible. We don't yet know, but research is being conducted. We can believe what we want, but this is a pretty simple precaution.
The cleaning and disinfecting protocols have evolved and continue to evolve. We've been waiting for the new version to come out for many months now, but even last year's version (Feb. 2011) included a boiling water option to chemicals (still not good for vertical gear), and a recognition that caves in very close proximity (i.e. 10 miles) don't necessitate decon between each one. We expect the new protocols to include a hot water option that would be kind to vertical gear, but await the final release.
Personally, I hope the saturated zones drop the closure and decon advisory. I also personally believe that it makes no sense for a caver or researcher far from WNS to do it either. Why should a California caver or bat researcher who goes caving or does bat research in California, for example, need to follow the elaborate decon protocols? There's no WNS there, and no way for either of them to be transmitting it. Why add the cost and potential hazards of decon?
On the other hand, there is an argument for each cave being a unique ecosystem. It would be a good conservation practice for all of us to thoroughly clean our gear after caving, whether WNS is here or not.