DROVERS CAVE, WESTERN
AUSTRALIA
Cave Destruction through Management
by
Rauleigh Webb
W. A. S. G.
Many factors led to the gross vandalism of
Drovers Cave. Several management strategies are proposed which may avoid or reduce
vandalism from these causes.
The managerial decisions, which probably
contributed to the vandalism of Drovers Cave, are discussed with respect to
other caves which may be befalling a similar fate.
Drovers
Cave (J2) is situated in the Drovers Cave National Park about 5km east of
Jurien Bay in Western Australia. The cave has suffered extensively at the hands
of vandals over a long period and the current management policies offer little
hope of this vandalism being curtailed.
I
wish to examine here a short history of the cave with respect to the cave's
management and then propose a management strategy that would have and hopefully
will reduce vandalism in the cave.
The
cave was well known to early explorers and stockmen. Its proximity to the
Canning Stock Route meant that it was visited by drovers and hence the name.
Several
old signatures on one of the cave walls may be genuine. For example, Figure
1 shows the signature of one J.W. Hacket with the date 1886. The
authenticity of the signature may be checked by consulting old records of that
period. The majority of visits by stockmen appear to have been in the 1930 ‑
1940 period if the dates associated with the graffiti in the cave are to be
believed.
The
ability of early explorers is clearly indicated by the signature of one M.
Brown ‑ Gingin 1/4/1939 at the end of the presently known cave (see Figure
1). Trips were made to the cave by members of the Western Australian
Speleological Group (W.A.S.G.) in the early 1960's. Bain (1960) gives a good
description of the cave including an extension that does not appear on the map
of the cave shown in Figure
1. He also mentions the existence of a small bat colony in the cave.
Another report by Cook (1962) describes the cave as having "two entrances ‑
a shaft in the roof of the first cavern and a walk‑in entrance". He
also mentions the sighting of a bat colony in the cave.
The
cave was surveyed by Bob Shoosmith and Stan Reading in June, 1973. Their plan view
of the cave was re‑detailed by the author in December, 1982 and this plan
appears in Figure
1.
The
National Parks Authority (N.P.A.) file on Drovers Cave records the following
major events in the caves recent history.
The
cave was broken into again in January, 1971. This was reported by the
then Ranger in charge of Nambung National Park, Alf Passfield. It was probably
locked in 1969 although this has not been ascertained with certainty. An area
of 2680 ha is reserved around Drovers Cave and the area was vested in the
N.P.A. as a Class C reserve in May, 1972. The name Drovers Cave National Park
was proposed in February, 1973 and gazetted in March, 1973 despite objections
by the W.A.S.G.
The
Conservation through Reserves Committee report of 1975 states "Drovers
Cave has potential for development as a tourist site, due largely to
spectacular stalactite formations." They recommended that the reserve
status should be altered from C Class to A Class. This recommendation was
adopted and in January 1978 the reserve was changed to A Class.
In
1976 mineral claims were sought in the National Park. The then Minister for
Conservation and Environment, Mr. P.V. Jones, stated "at this stage on all
the evidence available to the Department (Conservation and Environment), and to
myself, it would not be our intention to support any objection." The
Director of the N.P.A. objected to the mining claim in Drovers Cave National Park
and in the Wardens court in March, 1976 his appeal was upheld.
Later
that year the ranger R. Harris stated in a letter to head office that he had “a
major problem with vandals in the area, particularly with Drovers Cave
itself."
Attempts
by the Cave Working Group in W.A. to change the name of the Drovers Cave
National Park to Drovers National Park are thwarted by the Surveyor General who
says "the idea does not have merit".
In
September, 1982 the N.P.A. objected to exploration permits to search for coal
beneath Drovers Cave National Park. Finally, in December 1982 the N.P.A.
approved the conducting of educational tours in Drovers Cave by a local
resident of Jurien Bay. A series of conditions are placed upon these tours.
The vandalism in the cave falls into two
categories : graffiti on walls and speleothems; and speleothem breakage. The
graffiti has accumulated over a long time. The oldest dated signature known in
the cave is that of "Hacket, 1886” shown in Plate
1. Other signatures are dates 1896. Several early 1900's signatures occur
but then there appears to be a break until the late 1930's when a spate of
signatures appears. Also several of the "drawings" in the cave appear
to be from this period as indicated by the "drover" pictured in Plate
2.
A vast majority of the graffiti is undated and
hence when it occurred cannot be determined. However some of the recent
signatures are dated 1970 and 1971, an example is shown in Plate
3. These signatures occurred after the gate was placed on the cave. Some of
the worst graffiti, shown in Plate
4, is the use of red paint to write names on the cave wall. This gross act
is known to have occurred between 1965 and 1973 ‑ no more accurate timing
can be placed on the act due to the relatively low visitation rate of
speleologists to the cave.
The map of the cave, Figure
1, indicates the major areas of graffiti and also speleothem breakage.
Speleothem breakage and removal is prevalent in the main chamber prior to the
crawl. Plate
5 shows a particularly bad area of speleothem breakage. Within two metres
of the person in the photograph, over 50 major speleothem were found to
have been broken. The floor of the cave is relatively free of broken formation
and hence one assumes that the majority of breakages occurred for the
collection of a variety of speleothems. As indicated by Figure
1 the majority of the speleothem breakage occurs before the low crawl. This
obstacle has deterred the main would‑be vandals and as a result the
speleothem displays past the crawl contain few breakages. One column has been
badly defaced by graffiti but this is the only major damage in this area.
Drovers Cave is by far the most highly
decorated cave in this area. In fact speleothem development is almost totally
absent from other caves of the region with the exception of a small area of
recently discovered development in Old River Cave (J7). Hence the preservation
of the speleothems that are still intact in Drovers Cave is of high priority.
In 1969 the cave was gated by the N.P.A., which
was in itself a major act of vandalism. It not only defaced the cave entrances
by almost completely blocking the solution pipe entrance but also made the walk‑in
entrance unrecognisable. This left the entrance area and surrounds covered in cement
and devoid of foliage. Also the gate placed on the cave only had a hand hole in
it. As a result the bat population in the cave either died or escaped via this
hole ‑ never to return! The ecosystem built up around the bat population
was also devastated.
As indicated in the caves history the area was
made a National Park and named Drovers Cave National Park . This attracted
attention to the area in general and the cave in particular. Signs were erected
on the main road telling passers‑by that this area was Drovers Cave
National Park. Hence Drovers Cave must be in there somewhere! So quite a number
ventured in down the main 4WD track into the park. The first feature, 5 metres
off this track, that you notice is a barren area with exposed caprock and cement!
Consequently the number of times the lock has
been cut, blown or shot off cannot be estimated but it is well into double
figures. Although the N.P.A. have Drovers Cave National Park under their
control the active management that it receives is almost negligible. The ranger
in charge of the park is stationed at Nambung National Park 50 km to the south
and he visits the cave and/or the park infrequently.
For example the cave had no lock on the gate
for at least four months of 1982. When it was finally replaced it was
"removed" within two weeks. I wish to categorically state that I do
not believe that this lack of active management is a result of policy decisions
within the N.P.A. but rather the result of a lack of funding for the N.P.A.
which severely restricts its ability to deploy rangers within the National
Parks under its control. Consequently many National Parks in W.A. remain
unmanaged or severely undermanaged and unless the government changes its policy
with respect to the financing of the N.P.A. this situation is only likely to
worsen as more areas of the state are declared National Parks. However, the
managing authority has made some crucial
"mistakes" in its management of Drovers Cave to date. These have
been:
1. Locking the cave without thought to the bat
population.
2. Destruction of the natural entrances and
hence causing unknown alterations to the
cave meteorology.
3. Naming the National Park ‑ Drovers Cave National Park and hence attracting undue attention to a cave without active management or the likelihood of getting it.
4. Poor gate design to protect the lock and hence
reduce the number of break‑ins.
5. Destruction of the vegetation
surrounding the entrances.
6. Placement of the major access track to the
park within 5 metres of the cave entrance.
7. Placement of signs on the major access road
indicating this is Drovers Cave National Park.
The
effects of these managerial "mistakes" are fairly clear within the
cave today in the form of vandalism and graffiti. Fortunately several of these
"mistakes" are not irreversible but for the cave to have a secure
future they must be corrected.
At
this point I should remind readers of the Conservation through Reserves
Committee quote that "Drovers Cave has potential for development as a
tourist site, due largely to spectacular stalactite formations". In a paper
outlining the future tourist caves of the South West of W.A. (Webb, 1982) no
mention is made of Drovers Cave. The reason is that the vandalism of the
speleothems in the cave has completely removed the possibility of the cave ever
being developed for tourism. The future user group for the cave is initially
likely to remain speleologists but if the proposed plan outlined below is
carried out then the future may hold a more diverse outlook.
Several
of the "mistakes" noted above can be rectified by the adoption of a
plan which I call the "Big Re". This plan is in two parts ‑ the
immediate future and then the long term aims. This plan effectively reverses
several of the "mistakes" made by the N.P.A., and then allows for the
management of the cave as a wild cave.
THE "BIG RE"
Short Term
1. Redesign the gate
to protect the lock.
2. Revegetate the area
surrounding the cave entrances.
3. Relocate the access
track away from the cave entrance.
4. Replace the Drovers
Cave National Park signs with signs saying National Park.
Long Term
5. Restore the cave by
the Removal or coverage of as much graffiti as possible.
6. Rename the National
Park to Reduce public pressure on the cave.
7. Recommence
negotiations with the appropriate authorities to Remove the cave name
from maps available to the general public.
8. Re‑evaluate
the need to gate the cave and if appropriate ‑
REMOVE
THE GATE!
This
eight point plan has far reaching implications, not only for Drovers Cave but
also for other caves in a similar situation. I will consider the long term
aspects in some detail as the short term points are self explanatory.
Cave
restoration is not an easy process and one that requires considerable thought
and patience in its implementation. The speleothems in the cave have been
irrepairably damaged and no restorative efforts will improve their condition.
However a great deal of the graffiti in the cave can be removed or covered.
The
graffiti that is on the surface of the walls such as pencil or charcoal can be removed a wire brush without further significant defacing of the cave
walls. Graffiti that is carved into the walls can also be removed
depending on the depth of the engravings. Some of these engravings are
too deep to remove as they would result in unsightly "holes" in the
cave walls.
The
red paint that has been used in the cave (see Plate
4) can not be removed as it has been absorbed into the limestone during its
application and hence any attempt to remove it would result in severe defacing
of the cave wall. The alternative is to cover the red paint with a water based
white‑cream paint that matches as closely as possible the
"colour" of the cave wall. This you may claim is a further act of
vandalism but consider that we are trying to achieve, by any restorative work
in the cave, the reduction of the possibility of further gross acts of
vandalism. The disguising of the worst acts of vandalism in the cave can only
assist in reducing the probability of such an act occurring again by removing
the "….but the cave is already stuffed so what will some more matter ....”
syndrome.
This
is a difficult action as the Cave Working Group (W.A.) found when it
recommended to the Surveyor General that the name of Drovers Cave National Park
should be changed to reduce the pressure on the cave. This recommendation was
quashed by the Surveyor General who considered that the proposal "did not
have merit". Such a rejection is disconcerting considering the combined
expertise of the members of the Cave Working Group with respect to cave
management. However if public pressure is to be removed from Drovers Cave then
government authorities must be convinced that the naming of a National Park or
Conservation Reserve after any highly susceptible natural feature may be
aiding in the destruction of the very thing they are trying to preserve! This
is particularly pertinent if the National Park or Conservation Reserve is
vested with a managing authority who, for whatever reason, are unable to
actively manage the site in question.
This
may well be the case with proposed National Parks in the Nullarbor region of
W.A. The N.P.A. has no possibility, under their present funding
arrangements, of establishing a ranger in this area and so the declaration of
National Parks in this region will only draw undue attention to sensitive caves
with little or no management. Hence the action of naming a National Park after
a particular cave is one which must be given exceptional consideration
before it is undertaken.
The
job of ‑convincing government authorities is unlikely to be a sinecure
but one which must be tackled immediately.
The
placement of a cave's name and a symbol indicating its location on a map
available to the general public may play a significant role in the visitation
rate to that cave. Any reduction in the visitation rate to caves of a fragile
nature can only reduce the probability of cave vandalism. A
complete outline of the intricacies of this problem are given by Webb (1983)
for the W.A. situation and so will not be discussed at length here. However it
must be said that the removal of a cave's name from a public map will
definitely assist the conservation of that cave. This is certainly the case
with Drovers Cave due to its proximity to major access roads. As with the
previous point convincing the appropriate authorities, that removing the cave
names from public maps will greatly assist in the conservation of the cave
resource, will be an onerous task but one that is vital for cave conservation
in future years.
This
step should be taken only after the other seven proposals have been
accomplished. At present the only managerial tool that is being used to
protect Drovers Cave is the "locked" gate. This is proving to be a
costly and time consuming method as the lock is continually being removed.
After
the implementation of the first seven points of the plan then the need to
maintain the gate on the cave should be reassessed. With the proposed passive
management plan in effect the need to gate the cave may no longer be a
necessary managerial tool. Given responsibility the general public may be able
to visit the cave as a wild cave. Hamilton‑Smith (1977) expresses the
opinion that ‑ "If we treat people as hooligans, it merely increases
the likelihood that they will behave as hooligans. If we treat people as
responsible individuals it increases the likelihood that they will behave
responsibly."
If
this philosophy is accepted then the removal of the gate may be the best long
term strategy. However this must be assessed once the remainder of the
management plan is in effect.
Given
that a great deal of the proposed management plan for Drovers Cave is a general
strategy then the possibility of extending the ideas expressed within the plan
to assist other caves in the same or a similar situation is highly feasible. As
a general factor affecting all caves whose names appear on a public map, it is
desirable that, on an Australian wide basis these names are removed. This
policy must be conveyed to the National Mapping authority as well as the
various State authorities.
In general I would ask all speleologists to consider my general points seriously and if they consider that these or other factors are adversely affecting caves within their State that they strongly convey their ideas to the appropriate managing authority or government department.
I
must finish by saying that I'm not one for excluding people from National
Parks, on the contrary. However I hope that I have illustrated here
that unless special management considerations are given to caves they can
certainly suffer due to poor management practices.
Hence
if a manager's presence is not felt within a park then, 1 believe, that the
general public will not respect the cave environment for what it truly is ‑
a sometimes fragile, always non-renewable resource.
The
assistance in the field of Chris Goodsell and Rinaldo Cassol is greatly
acknowledged, as well as the assistance of Wayne Taylor of the National Parks
Authority. I would also like to thank Bob Shoosmith for consenting to the
reproduction of his survey of Drovers Cave. I must also thank the National
Parks Authority for providing information regarding Drovers Cave.
Bain,
T. (1960) 'Jurien Bay Caves', The
Western Caver 12(6) 193‑195
Cook,
D.L. (1962) 'Jurien Bay Caves', The Western
Caver 2(2) 14‑15
Hamilton‑Smith, E. (1977)
'Is vandalism really necessary', in Cave Management in Australia II, G.J.
Middleton (ed.) A.S.F. Hobart, Tasmania.
Webb, R, (1982) 'Wild Cave
Management in the South West of Western Australia ‑ Our Future Tourist
Caves', in Cave Management in Australia IV. J.R. Watson (Ed.) N.P.A. and A.S.F., Yallingup, Western
Australia.
Webb, R. (1983) 'The Removal of
Cave Names from Public Maps ‑ A Sound Management Practice’, to be
presented to the Fifth Australian Conference on Cave Tourism and Management,
Buchan, Victoria.
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}