expoweb/handbook/look4.htm

190 lines
9.0 KiB
HTML

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<title>
CUCC Expo Prospecting Handbook Issues
</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../../css/main2.css" />
</head>
<body>
<h2 id="tophead">CUCC Expedition Handbook</h2>
<h1>Prospecting - issues</h1>
<figure class="onright">
<a href="i/2015-08-03-aerw.jpg">
<img src="t/2015-08-03-aerw-small.jpg" alt="The 'route' across the plateau"></a>
<figcaption>Part of the 'route' across the plateau - note the cairns<br />click for larger image</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Much of the area of <a href="../guidebook/plateau.html">the Loser Augst-Eck plateau</a> is rough limestone
pavement (<b>karren</b>), liberally covered with dense areas of dwarf pine,
and interspersed with small cliffs, open shafts and snow patches. The latter,
in particular, can change the appearance of the plateau from year to year,
and even from week to week in the summer.
<p> Getting from one point to another
may involve detours to avoid any of these obstacles, and the whole effect is
very disorientating. There are few landmarks recognisable from a distance or
from a variety of angles, and little chance to relate the ground to the
1:25000 Austrian Alpine Club map. If you are only 5m off the route you may
have lost the way on.
<p>So walking on the plateau is difficult, and in bad weather (as in
July 2019) can be
seriously dangerous if attempted unaccompanied. The
<a href="../guidebook/walkin.htm">route to the plateau</a>
is deceptively safe and easy by comparison.
<p>Prospecting is either a matter of searching
for promising-looking caves with a draught, or shaft bashing many open holes
in the hope that one will go. This latter approach is often a waste of time,
but just a few of them lead to really significant finds! Much of the
exploration now is beyond the Steinbr&uuml;cken bivvy in the area known as
<a href="../guidebook/remote.html">the far plateau</a></p>
<p><b>Shaft bashing:</b>&nbsp;<a href="../1623/others/l/lrh0.htm">
<img src="../1623/others/t/lrh0.jpg" class="icon" width="143" height="173"
alt="Lost Rucksack Hole 0" /></a>&nbsp;
<a href="../1623/others/l/lrh.htm"><img src="../1623/others/t/lrh.jpg"
class="icon" width="123" height="169"
alt="Lost Rucksack Hole" /></a>&nbsp;
<b>Bolt placing:</b>&nbsp;<a href="../1623/others/l/lrh1.htm"> <img
src="../1623/others/t/lrh1.jpg" class="icon" width="143" height="170"
alt="Lost Rucksack Hole 1" /></a></p>
<p class="caption">(Typical shaft bashing, often easiest on ladders: Adam Cooper
near Top Camp in 1993. Bolt placing usually easier on rope, but still in
T-shirt &amp; shorts!)</p>
<p>All of this has made any systematic prospecting difficult, so there is
still the chance of a significant discovery quite close to Top Camp or to
other known caves. Life is made even more difficult through sloppy recording
in previous years. Hence it is very important that any cave which has been
looked at is marked and documented, to avoid duplication of effort. Very
small caves are usually marked with a simple painted cross to indicate that
they are worth no further effort, however, nowadays we are not allowed to
mark things with paint. More significant caves get a metal tag, a number, and a written
description. The aim is to link all such caves in to existing surface
surveys, which in turn are tied to a number of <a
href="survey/lasers.htm">fixed points</a> located by laser
theodolite/rangefinder from local trig. points.</p>
<div class="onright">
<a href="essentials.html">
<img src="essentials-screenshot.jpg" alt="screenshot of the GPS file" width="250" /></a>
<p class="caption">GPS entrances</p>
</div>
<p>The <a href="../caves">cave index</a> page contains as much description as we have of every cave we know
about. To avoid any possibility of errors, this includes some info on caves
not explored by CUCC, though for reasons of Austrian Kataster politics, these
are not publicly accessible on the "live" web site.</p>
<p>We used to have a <a href="../prospecting_guide/">fancy clickable map</a>
showing the locations of all the caves we have information on with tables
showing which pieces of information we have and what information still needs to
be gathered. But the scanned map is now obsolete and the text table of all the caves
is out of date because the QM data has not been updated and the cross-referencing URLs
are mostly broken. To find current QMs (Question Marks, i.e. open leads) look at
<a href="troggle/scriptsqms.html">QMs and leads</a> - very much a work in progress.
<p>Today we really need a GPS-enabled map of entrances, and we have one! Instructions for
downloading it are on the <a href="essentials.html">Essential GPS</a> page.
</p>
<h4>Cave Numbering Conventions</h4>
<p>The caves are numbered and tagged in a number of different ways.
See the <a href="survey/numbering.html">Expo Cave Numbering Guide</a>.
<hr />
<p><i>The following information is out of date (from 2004). Do not
rely on it being current.</i></p>
<!-- <p><i>[The tables linked from these paragraphs are all at least three years out of date]</i>
Clearly, descriptions of two hundred caves are too much to assimilate or
carry about with you (unless, like Wookey, you carry this entire website
in a Psion !). However, every prospecting party needs to be able to
decide if what they have found needs exploring, marking, surveying, locating
or ignoring. Some caves have been fully explored but are lost, others have
been marked but not explored or vice versa. Hence there is a tabular summary
of CUCC's knowledge of the caves of the Loser plateau. EVERY PROSPECTING
PARTY SHOULD TAKE A (PRINTED) COPY OF THIS WITH THEM INTO THE FIELD. The
caves are divided into five tables:</p>
<dl>
<dt><a href="known.htm">Known</a></dt>
<dd>Caves which are marked and the location of which is "well known" ie. very
well described and surveyed, or known by someone on expo. The aim is to get
all the caves into this table :-)</dd>
<dt><a href="where.htm">Marked</a></dt>
<dd>Caves which are marked but the location of which is not believed to be
known by anyone on expo. Some may prove easy enough to find if someone looks,
but most have been looked for without success. If found, they need to be
surveyed to and the route to them described.</dd>
<dt><a href="nomark.htm">Unmarked</a></dt>
<dd>Caves which are believed unmarked, but are readily found or have been seen
recently. These need at least to be marked, and may need surveying to.</dd>
<dt><a href="unknow.htm">Unknown</a></dt>
<dd>Caves whose location is uncertain, and which may not be marked. If they
prove to be marked and are found, they should be written up - otherwise we need
to trace someone who knows where they are, or abandon them.</dd>
<dt><a href="plus.htm">Noted</a></dt>
<dd> Caves which have been recorded in a log or survey book, but never given a
number. They may be marked with a "+" or a "-". These are all caves which we
believe can be found again, and which need revisiting to document them and give
them a number. In some cases they are completely unexplored, but looked like
good prospects when first found.</dd>
</dl> -->
<p>In the tables (and the cave descriptions), bearings are quoted with a
series of standard <a href="abbrev.htm">abbreviations for landmarks</a>,
which gives a good indication of which ones are most useful.</p>
<p>There is also a table of which numbers are CUCC ones and of numbers which
appear on entrances which are wholly misleading, the
<a href="cockup.htm">Cock-Ups</a>.</p>
<p><i>Note that there is still much missing information about many caves
which appear in the "known" and "marked" lists. Though marked, this may not
be correctly with their Austrian Kataster number. The aim is to mark all of
these correctly with a metal tag bearing their 'official' number over the
next few years. Also, many known caves do not have surface surveys to their
entrances.</i></p>
<hr />
<!--
<h3>Revision history</h3>
<p>(but only revisions to content, not typos and link bugs...)</p>
<dl>
<dt>1996.04.23</dt>
<dd>AJD: First attempt, missing most of the +/- and surface survey info. Also,
haven't marked any caves with asterisks yet AJD</dd>
<dt>1996.06.11</dt>
<dd>AERW: Integrated existing prospecting page with Anthony's "what to do if
you find..." tables from his RTF file. Formatting is currently crap. Links need
putting in to save using the index.</dd>
<dt>1996.07.25</dt>
<dd>AERW: Added section on taking bearings - more views identifying peaks still
needed.</dd>
<dt>1996.11.28</dt>
<dd>AERW: split file up, so tables are in separate pages. Added more info (and
picture) on numbering/tagging scheme. Some rewrite of politically sensitive
points.</dd>
<dt>1997.01.01</dt>
<dd>AERW: finished tidying and linking tables, split off section on taking
bearings, with its pictures of peaks - linked with surveying document.</dd>
<dt>2004.04.21</dt>
<dd>DL: Fiddled formatting slightly, and also updated the section on
provisional tagging of caves in accordance with current practice (those who
disagree with current practice are asked not to shoot the messenger).</dd>
</dl>
-->
</body>
</html>