Maybe you can get special permission to visit Nutty Putty and locate this ecosystem you seem so passionate about. The cave got 5,000 visitors per year and no one has yet found an ecosystem. Unless a pile of human shit and a rotting human body count as an ecosystem. I wish the cave would remain open so the local kids could continue to enjoy it. But in my opinion, an ecosystem of human waste is not a “significant” biological treasure that must be protected and left open for more humans to contribute their waste.
An ecosystem isn’t a relative term. They certainly DID find an eco-system. If life exists there it’s an eco-system. One need not go there to know this. Mushrooms growing in rat shit constitutes an eco-system. Y’all are just using the term eco-system incorrectly as though there is some kind of baseline of the growth of living organisms beyond a certain point to constitute an eco-system. Deserts are eco-systems even though they are largely dry.
I kind of wish people would stop misusing the term. It’s not up for debate, the cave HAS an eco-system.
Point taken. Yes, an isolated pile of shit is an ecosystem.
How about a thought experiment. Let’s say I take a shit in a sealed container. There is now an ecosystem in that container. Now I mail that container to you. Do you have a moral obligation to open the container and continue to feed the ecosystem?
This is certainly a matter of opinion. That it is an ecosystem is a fact, but that anyone should give a shit is just your opinion.
Obviously, it’s my opinion, just as whether or not someone else should not give a shit is other people’s opinions.
Apparently, it is the opinion of the landowner that the liability of a hole in the ground that has potential to kill people outweighs the value of its biological treasures.
Similarly, I have a swimming pool. This is officially a public nuisance, and my insurance requires me to take certain measures to prevent trespassers from drowning in my pool. If 5,000 trespassers swam in my pool every year, I just might decide that the liability is greater than the piss-fed algae and remove the pool.
Look, the cave is a blowing hole. That’s how it was discovered. That means that any transient humidity introduced by human presence would soon be alleviated by airflow. The fact that the high humidity is persistent tells me that somewhere, there is a fair amount of standing or flowing water. And in a cave, virtually any place in the world, if there’s water, there’s life.
I didn’t say it had no ecosystem. I just said it was of no value. Value ecologically is rated by rarity and impact. The cave is like a million others. Nothing rare in it to impact. The rats will still be able to get in. Not to mention, blocking human entrance is not “destroying the cave”.
Ogre pointed out quite succinctly why that’s a dubious position. You don’t know what’s deeper in that cave, and it’s clearly got an airshaft that is probably important to whatever lives down there. Deep in the dank recesses of that cave could very well live the Nutty Putty mudskipper.
And as I pointed out in the Pit thread, if they want to seal the cave off to preserve this dead guy, they’re going to have to go quite a bit further than gating it off or barring the entrance. Otherwise, pieces of said dead guy are going to be dragged out by the rats, raccoons, etc.
Also, “value” in this context is a term that needs defining.
…which would be an endemic species worthy of study in itself, or at least worthy to be left the hell alone to keep doing it’s own thing.
That eats…?
The nutty putty minnow.
perhaps endemic copepods or ostracods or pseudoscorpions, or cave crayfish, or crickets, or cave spiders, or beetles, or isopods, or cave fish, or…well, you get the idea.
Value is determined by the needs and protection of the public vs the needs and protection of the environment or something of historical value. It’s a judgment made millions of times of day when considering building anything in this country. I would never say we get it right close to 100% of the time but even in the best scenario human activity is going to alter the ecosystem. You accept this by proxy just by driving on a highway or living in a house or a thousand other daily activities. This cave isn’t rare, even if it has water, and houses no wildlife of note. My value judgment of the entirety of the circumstances surrounding the closing of the cave is it’s warranted and I think most people would come to the same conclusion. Now, if this cave was the only breeding ground for an endangered bat or something akin to that my judgment would be different.
You keep saying it houses no wildlife of note, and yet you have no way of knowing this.
You have not demonstrated this. No one has.
How do you know it’s not?
Edit: Or, what mswas just said. :o
I’d think the absence of a note about the wildlife would itself prove there is no wildlife of note.
Did you miss the part where the cave has not been fully explored?
I think you just blew my mind.
No. I just noticed that what is going on here is that there are two positions, one where you are assuming the existence of sufficiently unique and ‘notable’ wildlife that it’s worth keeping the hole open for it’s benefit, and one where you make no such assumption. And then I wondered why a person would leap to such an assumption.