WILD CAVE MANAGEMENT IN THE SOUTH WEST OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA - OUR FUTURE TOURIST CAVES
INTRODUCTION
The caves of this region are divided geographically into four groups. The majority of the caves are in the Leeuwin- Naturaliste Ridge but reasonable numbers do occur at Yanchep, Nambung and Eneabba.
At present there are six tourist caves operating in this region. Four in the Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge and two at Yanchep. I would like to discuss here the possible tourist caves of the future, that are currently known in this region and the likelihood of them remaining in their current state of preservation, under various management policies.
ENEABBA
This is the remotest area at present, with access being limited to 4WD or tenacious 2WD. Hence the overall number of visitors to these caves is relatively low. However, visitors that do get there go caving.
The major cave in the area is Weelawadji Cave (E 24) with about 2.5km of mapped passages. At present the cave is in a beekeeper's reserve and its only form of management is a gate which is some 250m into the cave. A local farmer, Peter Summers, has taken great interest in the cave and hence his many visits must be classed as a form of management. He has placed a visitors book in the cave and gained some idea of visitation and he also ensures that the gate remains intact.
Since its installation this gate has suffered more break-ins than any other cave gate in Western Australia (Webb, 1979). The obvious problem is the lack of active management and protection for the cave. For example, the large stalagmites and columns in the entrance chamber have suffered at the hands of shooters with several bullet holes being found in them (P. Summers, pers. comm.).
The recent discovery that the bat population of the cave consists of two species, Chalinolobus morio and C. gouldii adds further uniqueness to this cave as C. gouldii has never been recorded in a cave before (Capon, 1981).
Gas strikes at Woodada Wells Nos. 1 and 2 will mean that this area will be receiving many more visitors and the visitation pressure on the cave is likely to rise fairly dramatically. Already access tracks in the area have altered to allow passage of the drilling rig, and hence easier access means more people.
The majority of the cave is not suited for tourist development due to some of the squeezes which would have to be negotiated. However the entrance chamber and passage to the gate are quite suited to a 'guided tour'. I would not envisage the cave being equipped with electric lighting but rather the 'tourist' carrying their own light and shown the many interesting aspects of the cave by a guide. Such a 'tour' may only occur once a week or by demand but I'm sure the management that a guide would bring could only benefit the cave.
The difficulties of cave management, in general, are amply illustrated by Weelawadji Cave. It desperately requires very active management but its isolation from major highways or present National Parks makes it impractical at the present time.
If active management cannot be achieved then what other forms of management can we use to ensure that this possible tourist cave is not destroyed, before it has a chance to come under an active management that will preserve it? I hope to answer this question later in this paper in a general sense for all the caves in this state.
At Stockyard Gully where the stream enters the limestone a cave has been formed called Stockyard Tunnel (E 1) and this cave offers the type of tourist attraction as does The Tunnel (KO 1-3,17) in the Kimberley Region.
This cave is easily negotiated but a sign would be necessary, warning visitors not to enter if the stream was flowing above a certain level. These caves are already visited regularly as is indicated by the many names in the visitors book in Stockyard Cave (E 3) which is only a short distance from Stockyard Tunnel.
Stockyard Cave is not as well suited to self guiding as Stockyard Tunnel due to two crawls and a great deal of mud.
NAMBUNG
The caves in this National Park are not well suited to tourist development and those that have some potential have already been gated. The only addition that I would make is that checks should be made at least annually by Rangers to ensure that gates can still be opened and that they are intact.
YANCHEP
The tourist caves at Yanchep are undoubtedly the "best" caves in the Park. Hence it is unlikely that any further caves will be developed as tourist caves. Consequently it should be stressed upon the Rangers who pass through the training course at Yanchep that the likelihood of any other caves being developed for tourism is remote and therefore great care must be taken to ensure that the caves are preserved in their present state, as these caves will be called upon to act as tourist caves for many years to come.
LEEUWIN-NATURALISTE
This small belt of limestone contains some of the most highly decorated caves in Australia and consequently the tourist caves of this area are well decorated. At Yallingup, by far the largest cave in the region, Yallingup Cave (YA 1), has been developed as a tourist cave. Northcote Grotto (YA 2) was also developed for tourism but the current vandalism in the cave will probably preclude it from re-opening to the general public.
Yallingup is in a similar situation to Yanchep in that no further caves are available for future tourist development and hence great care must be taken in the management of Yallingup Cave to ensure its preservation.
The Margaret River area has two beautiful tourist caves, Lake (WI 30) and Mammoth. This area also contains several other caves that were developed for tourism between 1901 and 1914. Several have been vandalised so badly that their only potential is to illustrate man's ability to destroy the natural beauty that exists about him.
On the positive side, when it becomes necessary, due to excessive pressures on the present tourist caves, to open another tourist cave in this area then I believe that Golgotha Cave (WI 13), with its many fine formations, is the best possibility. However, it must be stressed, that this cave is presently under very high pressure from the general public. Visitors books placed in the cave gave a good indication to the volume of traffic in 1978 but since that time the numbers appear to have increased to the point where visitors books don't survive long enough to produce visitation estimates before being destroyed.
Golgotha Cave has already suffered irreparable damage at the hands of vandals. Some of this damage may be "disguised" (see plate) but the damage that is likely to occur in the near future may render this cave unusable as a tourist cave in years to come.
Therefore now is the time to act - it is much easier to avoid damage rather than attempt to repair it once it has occurred.
It is time for all management authorities to get together and sort out minor difficulties, so that areas such as Reserve 8434 will not be in transit from one authority to another for years. For while the authorities haggle, the management of the caves in this block is effectively zero! Golgotha Cave is a prime example, and to get the effective management that this cave so desperately requires, a Cave Ranger with the National Parks Authority should be placed in this region as soon as possible.
Such a Caves Ranger has been mooted for years but a lack of funds has held this position in limbo. The longer this position remains unfilled the less the ranger will be required! Time is rapidly running out for the caves in this region and as the likelihood of active management in the form of a Cave Ranger is not imminent then I suggest that an interim measure would be to legislate strongly against persons found defacing caves.
At this point I would like to digress slightly to the Carlsbad Caverns National Park (CCNP) in the United States of America. Recent developments in the Guadalupes do indicate why such legislation is necessary.
The Guadalupe Mountains are along the New Mexico - Texas state line. The caves in this mountain range are probably the most highly decorated in the USA. However they are rapidly being destroyed and that destruction is being attributed to overuse and careless abuse by organised cavers.
The problem is complicated by three government agencies having responsibility for management. The results are that all but two caves in the CCNP are closed to the public, and the ranger's police powers over the park's caves. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) caves are readily accessible to the local communities and are heavily vandalised. The Lincoln National Forest (LNF) Department caves are less readily accessible to the general public and hence the LNF problems are due to thoughtless cavers; LNF employees believe that about 75% of the damage being done is due to the carelessness of organised cavers. The LNF finds that gates are regularly destroyed no matter how well they are constructed and once entry is gained gross vandalism has occurred (Hardcastle, 1981). For example, extraordinary measures were taken to protect Cottonwood Cave where gates were installed and concrete poured, but these were recently found to have been broken open and severe destruction had occurred in several chambers. In one, the removal of the central portion of a formation called the Chandelier was particularly gross. The LNF is investigating the case thoroughly and has offered a reward of up to $1,000 for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the perpetrators.
The result of these many gross vandalisms is that as of 19th June 1981, New Mexico has adopted a Cave Protection Law which makes it a misdemeanour to damage, remove or otherwise harm the contents of the cave (see Appendix for complete account of this law).
Figure 1. The Sentinel, Golgotha Cave, WA. Photo: R Webb.
I suggest to you all that we will never be able to educate every person that is likely to enter a cave to respect the many features they will find, for the remarkable, irreplaceable facets as they truly are.
Therefore I strongly believe that we must have an alternative method of inducing respect and unfortunately a monetary value must be placed on every facet of the cave environment. If people know that by removing or damaging something in a cave they may be prosecuted and receive a hefty fine (say a minimum of $1,000) or 6 months imprisonment then I'm certain that they would think very carefully before carrying out such an act.
You may think that a fine of $1,000 minimum is a bit exorbitant but when you consider that the destruction of cave formations is an act which destroys something which is unique and almost certainly will never be replaced then this fine is brought into perspective.
This type of general law governing the defacing or damaging of caves is the type of management that must be employed if caves are to survive into the '80s! Active management by the National Parks Authority will hopefully eventuate on the Leeuwin-Naturaliste Ridge in the form of a Cave Ranger. However such a ranger would be totally ineffective unless he was strongly backed up by severe penalties under a Cave Protection Law.
AUGUSTA
To complete the rundown of future possible tourist caves, I must include the Augusta area. The beautiful Jewel Cave (AU 13) has a very large carrying capacity and thus the need to develop a second tourist cave in this area appears well into the future. However when that time comes, nearby Moondyne Cave (AU11) is the obvious choice. This cave was used as a tourist cave prior to the opening of Jewel Cave. A clean-up of the cave by members of the Western Australian Speleological Group (WASG) in 1978 showed that some restoration is possible. Since that time the cave has suffered several breakins and a great deal of the cleaning and track-marking has been ruined.
Comparatively little work would be required to upgrade Moondyne to a fully operational cave but an upgrading of the gate will be necessary to dissuade unauthorised visitors.
CONCLUSION
Cave conservation is, in general, a very complex problem but one point which stands out is that by far the most effective management plans are those developed for tourist caves. Therefore by developing a cave for tourism, no matter to what level, with effective management plans, that cave is much less likely to suffer damage as may a similar wild cave.
In conclusion I hope that I have been able to illustrate that the future tourist potential of the caves in the South West of Western Australia lies entirely with the present management policies. If the caves suggested as possible tourist caves of the future are to survive the increase in usage that is certain to come then I believe that two managerial steps must be taken:
1. Effective cave protection laws must be enacted and
2. A Cave Ranger must be placed in the Leeuwin- Naturaliste Ridge.
REFERENCES
Capon, R. 1981. Trip Report. The Western Caver. 21(l):13
Hardcastle, R. 1981. Guadalupe Caves Need You. NSS News. 39(6) :127.
Webb, R. 1979. History of Gating of Weelawadji Cave. The Western Caver. 19(3)64.
APPENDIX
New Mexico Cave Protection Law.
Relating to the defacing or damaging of caves or caverns; providing a penalty. Be it enacted by the legislature of the state of New Mexico.
Section 1. Damaging caves or caverns unlawful.
- It shall be unlawful for any person, without prior permission of the federal, state or private land owner, to wilfully or knowingly break, break off, crack, carve upon, write or otherwise mark upon, or in any manner destroy, mutilate, injure, deface, remove, displace, mar or harm any natural material found in any cave or cavern, such as stalactites, stalagmites, helictites, anthodites gypsum flowers or needles, flowstone, draperies, columns, tufa dams, clay or mud formations or concretions, or other similar crystalline mineral formations or otherwise; to kill, harm or in any manner or degree disturb any plant or animal like found therein; to otherwise disturb or alter the natural conditions of such cave or cavern through the disposal therein of any solid or liquid materials such as refuse, food, and containers or fuel of any nature, whether or not malice is intended; to disturb, excavate, remove, displace, mar or harm any archaeological artefacts found within a cave or cavern including petroglyphs, projectile points, human remains, rock or wood carvings or otherwise, pottery, basketry or any handwoven articles of any nature, or any pieces, fragments or parts of any such articles; or to break, force, tamper with, remove or otherwise disturb a lock, gate, door or other structure or obstruction designed to prevent entrance to a cave or cavern, without the permission of the owner thereof, whether or not entrance is gained. For purposes of this section, "cave" means any natural geologically formed void or cavity beneath the surface of the earth, not including any mine, tunnel aqueduct or other manmade excavation, which is large enough to permit a person to enter.
Section 2.
- Anyone violating the provisions of Section 1 of this Act shall be guilty of a misdemeanour.