Moderator: Moderators
wyandottecaver wrote:The only logical application (and one I actually kinda like) is if they wanted to permanently install barriers before the arrival of WNS on "non significant bat caves" with high recreational value
wyandottecaver wrote:The only logical application (and one I actually kinda like) is if they wanted to permanently install barriers before the arrival of WNS on "non significant bat caves" with high recreational value
wyandottecaver wrote:As I understood it, WI wanted to exclude BOTH bats and people....and dictate access policies on private property at the owners involuntary expense. They also apparently wanted to use it on caves that were actually significant for bats. I could of course be wrong.
wyandottecaver wrote:1) Most everywhere else (with few exceptions) the default has been that all publicly owned caves of any type (excepting commercial) are closed. supposedly to both keep people from bringing in or taking out GD contamination, and to give bats some extra peace and quiet. That means no caving in public caves...period. Bats or not.
wyandottecaver wrote:2) if we assume that the most likely method of WNS transmission is in fact bats, then excluding them from a given cave would give a high liklihood of excluding GD. Obviously, if the cave was important to bats this would adversely affect bats and the cave ecology depending on them. But if the cave was not an important bat cave, then excluding bats would have a negligible impact both on bat populations and on the cave ecology.
wyandottecaver wrote:3) If a cave was both not significant to bats, AND highly significant for recreation, then excluding bats would have a good chance of creating a desirable caving environment with a high chance of being free of GD. This in turn would allow managers an option for recreational caving that would have little chance of spreading GD and little impact on bat and cave ecology.
wyandottecaver wrote:If the cavers in the upper midwest really did spend $20,000 not to stop government ursurpment of private property rights including commercial cave owners,(which was my take) but they were trying instead to stop WI from excluding small numbers of bats on public property from low population bat caves with high recreational value in order to make them open for recreational caving.......You might want to join the CBD not NSS.
wyandottecaver wrote:1) Most everywhere else (with few exceptions) the default has been that all publicly owned caves of any type (excepting commercial) are closed. supposedly to both keep people from bringing in or taking out GD contamination, and to give bats some extra peace and quiet. That means no caving in public caves...period. Bats or not.
2) if we assume that the most likely method of WNS transmission is in fact bats, then excluding them from a given cave would give a high liklihood of excluding GD. Obviously, if the cave was important to bats this would adversely affect bats and the cave ecology depending on them. But if the cave was not an important bat cave, then excluding bats would have a negligible impact both on bat populations and on the cave ecology.
3) If a cave was both not significant to bats, AND highly significant for recreation, then excluding bats would have a good chance of creating a desirable caving environment with a high chance of being free of GD. This in turn would allow managers an option for recreational caving that would have little chance of spreading GD and little impact on bat and cave ecology.
4) You might not be successful at exclusion, but if the site was favorable you'd have a good chance. As long as you were only mostly successful youd still greatly lower the risk of GD. You might also kill small numbers of bats either by trapping them inside or preventing entry at a critical time. GD is killing bats by the millions and hawks, owls, snakes, cars, and wind turbines each kill way more than sealing most caves would.
wyandottecaver wrote:So do you accept zero public caving or do you try to get access to a few of the best caves.
Does the tooth fairy still visit you?
sorry....happens every day when we build highways, turn limestone caves in quarries into driveway gravel, or even pick and choose which caves are "bat" caves for winter closure reasons. We can either pick and choose or let someone else pick for us.
wyandottecaver wrote:As for the removing native fish example, we arent saving the bats from a disease, we are creating recreational use areas.
wyandottecaver wrote:Yes, you would be excluding larger animals like raccoons as well....from a few caves. However, most caves are getting inputs from detritus and debris, not scat, and those caves where scat is a big component aren't generally preferred as recreational caves!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users