Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /home/isthin5/public_html/addon-domains/speleogenesis.info/template/toolbar_right.php on line 7
Search KARSTBASE:
Search in KarstBase
|
|
Protection and management of natural heritage features such as karst landforms requires considered evaluation of the relative significance of individual features. The grounds for significance depend on the perspective taken. Aesthetic, educational, scientific and recreational values are all relevant and must each be given explicit recognition. Karst landforms are often considered primarily from a scientific perspective. The criteria used for evaluation of such natural heritage features for conservation and management purposes need to reflect this full range of values. This means that karst sites may have significance from one or more of these perspectives, as examples of natural features or landscapes, as examples of cultural features or landscapes or as the site of recreation opportunities. Some such sites will be identified as significant because they are representative of their class (irrespective of the relative importance of classes); others will be judged as significant because they are outstanding places of general interest.
This paper traces the evolution of organised caving as a post World War 2 phenomenon, and the changes in practice and attitude that have occurred. These practices are contrasted against stated behavioural codes. Parallel to this, the development of caving as a scouting activity is discussed, with reference to the general principles and practices of scouting. The author has been working toward evolving policies and practices within scouting which are consistent with the needs of conservation and the underlying philosophies of scouting. Implementation of these attitudes in one area is fully detailed, with some comment on the success and acceptability of the program. This training program is contrasted against the foreshadowed N.S.W. Branch Policy on Rock-Related Activities. The sequential discussion highlights some weaknesses within clubs and A.S.F., particularly in our methods of communication. There are no firm proposals, but possible directions for future discussions are indicated. It is the intention of this paper to give a historical perspective to some of the present perceived conflicts; in reality, the only conflict is between our oft-expressed aim of conservation of caves (i.e. safeguard the karst heritage of Australia), and our visible activity - use of caves for recreational activity. Both the intensity of expression of our concern, and lessening of self-constraint on recreational activity have greatly magnified with time; we are fast approaching a 'crossroads' scenario where our credibility is at great risk.
This treatise is a record of the dates and events, heavily condensed, of the history of Mount Etna since The Caves area was first settled. I hope to show that since the fight to save Mount Etna was first joined, seriously, in 1964 or there about, that the Central Queensland Company and the Queensland Government has had no intention to voluntarily release Mount Etna from limestone mining. Even in the event that conservationists took the Queensland Government to court, the Government had plans prepared to counter such. That was clearly shown when the government rescinded the Recreation Reserve, R444, on Mount Etna and refused to give a fiat to prosecute the Government. The next event, the passing of a law stating that any mining lease inadvertently granted illegally will now stand and be legal, was aimed at the mining lease granted illegally including Mount Etna. At this point in time there is very little that is being done to save Mount Etna. I hope that this paper will create new interest and revive the flagging "Fight to Save Mount Etna", with input from ASF member societies and individuals. If the treatise does not have the desired effect of renewing interest in the fight, and if the Central Queensland Cement Co. Pty. Ltd. Starts mining the main cavernous northern face of Mount Etna, the next ASF conference, or possibly the following, will have a "Letter of Requiem" read to them. If the Australian Public can save the "Gordon-below-Franklin" area and the "Lindeman Island National Park", surely something can be done for Mount Etna.
In Moss Palace, the presence of unusual speleothems further justifies the conservation of Dogs Head Hill karst at Mole Creek, Tasmania. A "symbiotic" carbonate deposition and growth of the moss Distichophyllum microcarpum results in phototropic phytospeleothems, in the form of fan-shaped erratics.
|
|
|