WNS Decontamination Procedures

[MUD]

The concentrations of bleach and ammonia recommended in the protocol kill almost everything.

Almost only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades!

[Carl Amundson]

This really needs to be stated again:
the current FWS protocols are someone's best guess that it will kill the fungus or spores.
and until there is some research to back them up, they will remain an educated guess.

But really Carl, is there anyone on Cavechat (or in the entire NSS for that matter) who isn't aware of that by now? I mean, it even says so, right on the FWS decon page. Why must we assume that the readers are unable to understand this without all this extra reinforcement?

Sorry about the bold, I should not post when I’m tired and cranky.

But the protocol is the best chance we have to kill whatever this bugger is and help prevent any possibility of people carrying it to other caves.

I just want to make sure that these protocols do not put my life (or the life of any other caver) in danger. Most folks are focusing on the use of bleach on rope. My concern is the harness that we use. The modern harness is made up of multiple components sewn together. The thought of bleach (or any other substance) compromising the integrity of this is horrifying.

I will be attending the NCRC Weeklong that starts next week. Most of my vertical “software” has been replaced for this event. My harness has not. It fits like a glove and I have grown quite fond of it. A decom protocol that can compromise the integrity of my harness will not only put my life in danger, but also the lifes of those I’m assisting/working with in a rescue environment.

[ek]

The FWS protocols certainly do kill spores, bacteria, and viruses. Since research is still ongoing and we don't even know exactly what the cause of WNS is, I think it's irresponsible to say you won't follow the protocol when this protocol may help slow the spread of the worst ecological disaster I can think of in this country.

What follows is just my personal opinion.

I think that it's irresponsible to do something that might cause equipment failure and injury in a cave. I think that's bad for conservations reasons too. Of the 50 rescuers who come in to get you out with your broken femur and pelvis after your rope or harness breaks, how many of them (and their equipment) do you think will be decontaminated according to the protocol?

Research is in progress to determine a procedure experimentally verified as effective and experimentally verified as safe. Until that happens, I am sticking with procedures, as in line with the FWS protocol as is possible, that my manufacturers (or at least some of them) have said are definitely safe.

I think that at this point, given what we know, it is also irresponsible to use the same equipment in multiple regions with different WNS statuses (e.g. northeast, southeast), regardless of what decontamination is performed on the equipment. This is not a particularly controversial claim I'm making, I don't think. We don't know that decontamination works, so let's not put ourselves in situations where its efficacy could be critical. If we get a decontamination procedure that is totally bomber, and are also able to address questions like decontamination of vehicles (and sure, for some cavers, taking an airplane to the other region is a viable way to address this), then maybe then it will be justifiable to cave in multiple regions with the same gear. Until then, totally separate gear, clothing, and other items (e.g. your glasses) should be used for caving in different regions. Or just confine your caving to one region, which is even better.

[Carl Amundson]

The USFW has come out with their "final" decontamination procedures:
http://www.fws.gov/northeast/whitenose/FINALContainmentandDecontaminationProceduresforCaversJune2009.pdf

I will be using 409 and/or Lysol Professional to decon all my stuff that I have not replaced prior to the NCRC Weeklong.

[Crockett]

Quickest method: flame sterilization in 15 to 20 seconds. Wonder what Petzel says about Croll Flambeau? Metal fatigue? A subject too hot to handle? Sign outside the cave: "Burn gear here.". Brings new use and meaning to the camp fire.

[MUD]

Quickest method: flame sterilization in 15 to 20 seconds. Wonder what Petzel says about Croll Flambeau? Metal fatigue? A subject too hot to handle? Sign outside the cave: "Burn gear here.". Brings new use and meaning to the camp fire.

I see a carbide revolution comin....

[ek]

The USFW has come out with their "final" decontamination procedures:
http://www.fws.gov/northeast/whitenose/FINALContainmentandDecontaminationProceduresforCaversJune2009.pdf

I will be using 409 and/or Lysol Professional to decon all my stuff that I have not replaced prior to the NCRC Weeklong.

That is also not yet known to be safe for use on load-bearing textiles.

[Carl Amundson]

The USFW has come out with their "final" decontamination procedures:
http://www.fws.gov/northeast/whitenose/FINALContainmentandDecontaminationProceduresforCaversJune2009.pdf

I will be using 409 and/or Lysol Professional to decon all my stuff that I have not replaced prior to the NCRC Weeklong.

That is also not yet known to be safe for use on load-bearing textiles.

Yeah I know, but I can't bring myself to use bleach and can't afford to replace all my gear for NCRC.
Having two boys in college at the same time is a quite a drain on my resources...

[ek]

Not going to the NCRC course, or borrowing gear from others that has not been used in an area known to be affected by WNS, would be sound choices.

Well, there's a good chance that the quaternary ammonium compounds you're exposing your harness to will eventually prove safe and effective...

With regard to the liking you've taken to your harness, I'd refer you to Bruce Smith's article in the June 2009 NSS News...

[Carl Amundson]

With regard to the liking you've taken to your harness, I'd refer you to Bruce Smith's article in the June 2009 NSS News...

Thanks but my harness is in great shape and inspected after every use.
I have no problems retiring worn gear, I can't afford to retire gear that is in proper working order.

[ek]

I didn't assume that your harness was in degraded condition. Rather, I am referring to the principle that you should not be willing to continue to use equipment after it has undergone any process potentially dangerous to it. Since the decontamination procedure you intend to use has not yet been shown to be safe, I would suggest that it is one such process, and that your insistence on using your harness for the NCRC weeklong, even though that means it will undergo a potentially dangerous process and then continue to be used, is potentially dangerous.

I understand that you cannot afford to buy a new harness. But you could borrow one from someone else...

[Carl Amundson]

It is my understanding that no current decontamination process has been determined to be safe for load-bearing textiles.
Everyone is in the same boat here, using unproven process to decon their gear.
These processes may be proven to kill the fungus/spores, but may also damage our gear.

I would rather use gear that I know it's history.

[ek]

Once you expose your gear to someone with unknown effects, the history of your own gear is also essentially unknown...

In any case, I'm not trying to stop you, but only to get counterpoints out there to your rationale, with which I disagree.

[kmstill]

After following these threads quietly, guess I'll jump into the fray. Disclaimer - I'm no authority on WNS, bats, cave microflora, balloon animals, or most any subject of interest. I also realize that I'm not currently in a hot-spot of caving and WNS and am much less affected by this right now than most of you, but I am prepared to "walk my talk".

I've been observing two basic sides to this debate. One advocating a proactive stance to decon (focusing on the potential "benefit") and the other expressing concern of safety failures following an unproven decon methodology (focusing on the potential "cost"), all compounded by a variety of offical contradictions, reader misinterpretation, misunderstanding, occasional forays into minutia, and sweeping generalizations, some of which are starting to lose touch with biological reality (and look - I'm really not picking on anyone here, so if your dander's getting up, it's all in your head, have two beers and call me in the morning).

Although I'm a huge advocate of "evidence based medicine (EBM)" (policy, whatever....), when we're lacking compelling data we still have to make a decision. One example for all the proof purists would be this: that, due to lack of sufficent randomized clinical trials, we (based on EBM) cannot prove that jumping out of a plane without a parachute is adverse to one's health. If we're going to apply the same hard-line to this example that several on this board have been applying to decon, then none of us are positioned to advise against unprotected plane jumps. Obviously this is absurd, but it highlights the real-world need for data extrapolation, educated guesses, and common sense.

I realize that the current best-advice decon procedures are still a guess, but guys, it's an educated guess... this isn't pseudo-science generated by billy bob down the street but biologically plausible hypotheses generated by experts in the relevent fields. In short, the best conclusion that can be drawn at this time, with the information available, by the people best suited to extrapolate from other data.

As for decon (bleach) safety, again, common sense. Would I want to bleach my gear daily for the next 10 years - no. Am I worried about just a few potential bleachings (e.g. beginning and end of NCRC) - no. And if I were facing "regular" transitions between affected and non-affected caving areas, let's face it, I'd work up two sets of "soft" items, using my A-game gear where I caved most. I think a fair number of people that have been caving for a while probably have redundent equipment already - I know my "upgrades" have already resulted in two full systems. Since the hardware is really a non-issues here (and that's really the expensive part of a system) it's not actually that costly to generate a second set of texas or frog system soft components - cowstails and footloops can be tied, chest harnesses can be as simple as a webbing loop, and bare-bones harnesses (like the GGG ultralight, which is currently my PRIMARY caving harness, really not bad for comfort) are available pretty cheap (or heck, properly fitted, tied harness still work). I know rope's a different story, but we all cave with others, right? I'd bet a lot of us could work out an agreement among our regular group of caving buddies.

I know none of this is perfect, but I think we can find a working compromise for now while we wait for the researchers to generate compelling data and definitive conclusions. And yes, I'll be more selective than usual this year with the gear I bring to IN - or at least, where that gear is later used.

OK, time to break out the bludgens

Kelly

[ek]

ince the hardware is really a non-issues here (and that's really the expensive part of a system) it's not actually that costly to generate a second set of texas or frog system soft components - cowstails and footloops can be tied, chest harnesses can be as simple as a webbing loop, and bare-bones harnesses (like the GGG ultralight, which is currently my PRIMARY caving harness, really not bad for comfort) are available pretty cheap (or heck, properly fitted, tied harness still work).

Well, hardware's not quite a non-issue.

There's not a great concern over safety of decontaminating hardware, with any of the procedures that anybody has suggested for it.

Effectiveness is another matter. Given what we know, taking hardware from an affected area to an area believed to be unaffected--even if you've decontaminated it--is probably not a good idea.