Cave Lint and Dust Removal Projects Rodney D

Part 3-Restoration: Ilorrocks and Ohms-Lint and Dust 351 Section C-Restoring Cave Passages

Cave Lint and Dust Removal Projects Rodney D. Horrocks and Marc Ohms

The cumulative nature and impact of lint and dust problems in caves has only recently been recognized, researched, and addressed. Originally noticed in show caves, lint and dust accumulations have also been observed Lint is not merely a in heavily used wild caves. Lint is not merely a benign aesthetic nuisance in caves. Lint and dust benign aesthetic removal projects benefit caves in several ways: nuisance in caves. Lint and dust Restore natural conditions. remoyal projects Prevent unnatural speleothem dissolution. benefit caves in Remove artificial food sources. . • Eliminate unnatural odors. several ways . Restore visual scenes.

Lint consists of foreign materials shed from human visitors-fibers, hair, dander, and other debris that accumulates along heavily used routes (Figure I). Dust originates from trail construction projects, trampling of unpaved trails, and material brought into the cave by visitors. Lint and dust accumulations can be removed with hand-held brushes, vacuums, or washing, depending on the substrates involved. Not only have methods been developed to restore natural conditions in caves, but techniques have also been developed to slow the accumulation and facilitate cleaning of these unnatural deposits. Attempts to restore the aesthetic appeal of developed caves occurred as early as 1960 in Jenolan Caves in Australia (Newbould 1976). Lint was recognized as an unsightly foreign material as early as 1969 at Timpanogos Cave (Horrocks 2000). However, it was not until 1977 that lint was Figure I. Close-up of specifically targeted as a detrimental foreign substance in caves and was collected lint and hair identified as a major component of the dirty-appearing passages in many in Timpanogos Cave developed caves (Roth 1987). Test cleaning was conducted at Carlsbad National Monument, Caverns in 1977 and 1986, and the first "cave lint camps" were organized Utah. in 1988 (Jablonsky 1992a). This chapter empha- sizes lint and dust removal in developed caves. However, the same techniques can be used in wild caves.

Reasons for Conducting Lint and Dust Removal Projects

Developed caves can only be partially restored to ~ natural conditions. Cave managers must com pro- ~ mise between restoring caves to pristine states and ~ causing additional negative impact. Good cave :g managers must recognize when restoration and ~ z 352 Cave Conservation and Restoration

cleaning projects need to be halted. Cave managers or project leaders should stop the work, rethink the situation, and possibly retrain the restoration team before additional damage is caused. Because the impacts from lint and dust are cumulative, periodic restoration efforts are usually effective toward maintaining natural conditions in show caves. Removing unnatural lint and dust can prevent foreign materials from being cemented onto the surfaces of actively growing speleothems. The incorporation of introduced materials into secondary deposits can cause permanent discoloration and unnatural textures. In fact, accumulations of lint and dust may partially or completely obscure the natural coloration and sheen of cave surfaces. Lint has been shown to cause the dissolution of some speleothems (Jablonsky and others 1994). Lint may act as a condensation site for undersaturated cave water, and can trap carbon dioxide in or underneath the lint. Lint may also attract bacteria, yeast, molds, or algae that secrete or excrete acids that can dissolve the rock substrate (Crowle 1993a, 1993b). The accumulation of lint in humid cave environments may also result in unnatural musty odors (Moore 1993). Many caves are extremely low-energy environments with limited food sources. Natural fiber lint, hair, and skin (dander) can represent a significant artificial food source and may provide a nutrient base for microbial life (Moore and Jesser 1995). These food sources can shift the balance of Figure 2. This nutrients that sustain cave-adapted microorganisms (Michie 1997). Biota, collection of lint, trash, such as microbes, mites, beetles, and spiders have been observed in lint and chunks of blond accumulations (Jablonsky 1992a, I992b). Whether the organisms are native boot sole was gathered to the cave or accidentals carried into the cave by humans, populations may in the Chandelier artificially balloon as a result of artificial food sources. (See cave microbi- Maze, Lechuguilla ology, page 61). Cave, Carlsbad Caverns National Park, Nature of Lint and Dust New Mexico. Developed caves may have a dusty and dirty appearance caused by a combination of factors. In order of importance, they are listed here:

Construction-generated dust Dust from tours traveling over unpaved trails Dust tracked into caves on shoes or brought in on clothes • Lint accumulations • Other materials shed from humans • Natural dust

Human visitors shed a plethora of other materials into caves (Jablonsky 1995). Lint and dust removal efforts should address most of these foreign materials:

Hair Dander Skin flakes and debris Mites Microbes Shoe rubber Pet animal fur Part 3-Restoration: Lint and Dust-Horrocks and Ohms 353

Lint is composed primarily of fibers from natural and synthetic fabrics. Natural cellulose-based fibers include cotton, hemp, and linen. Natural protein-based fibers include keratin, wool, alpaca, mohair, silk, and cashmere. Synthetic fibers include oil-based synthetic polymers (Michie 1997). Both natural and synthetic fibers are usually present. Old deposits of lint in caves may be almost entirely synthetic fibers. Natural libers are morc brittle and tend to shed more over time but they are often eliminated by deterioration or consumed by molds, fungi, or bacteria, resulting in concentrations of synthetic fiber lint (Jablonsky 1995). Dust is composed of silica and fine clay mineral particles ranging from 0.1 micron to 100 microns In sIze.

Recognizing Lint and Dust Accumulations

Due to the gradual accumulations oflint and dust Q; in show caves, long-term employees may not ~ recognize the subtle color changes and worsening ~ l' conditions associated with these deposits. These :g conditions are noticeable only when the walls near ~ trails are viewed close-up with a bright flashlight. ~ Older deposits appear as a grayish mass made up nf finely ground lint and Figure 3. This strand dust. Black lights are useful in locating lint concentrations because many of hairy lint was found natural fibers are treated with optical brighteners that reflect long-wave ofTtrai I near Lake ultraviolet (UV) light. When viewed under a black light, these fibers Chandalar, Lechu- appear bluish-white against dark cave surfaces. guilla Cave, Carlsbad Caverns National Accumulation of Lint Park, New Mexico. Lint accumulation is influenced by many different factors:

Number of cave visitors Gravity A if movement Cave wall contours and textures Trail design Heat Humidity

Generally, more visitors lead to greater deposits of lint. Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, and Carlsbad Cavern, New Mexico, generate tremendous accumulations oflint in short periods of time. Observations in Lehman Caves, Nevada, showed noticeable lint accumulating one year after cleaning (Horrocks and Green 2000). Lint accumulates faster at interpretive stops, especially those where visitors sit down. More lint is produced by a combination of longer times spent at sit-down spots and the abrasive nature of clothes rubbing against benches. Lint fibers also get caught in shoe soles and are tracked throughout tour routes. Most lint initially falls directly to the floor and is then moved laterally to the edge of the trail by foot traffic. Lint also tends to concentrate on the lower portion of walls immediately adjacent to trails. Trail design and construction materials can influence how and where lint accumulates. 354 Cave Conservation and Restoration

• Trails with curbs 20- to 60-centimeters (8- to 24- inches) high, capture a large percentage of lint falling from visitors' clothes (Jablonsky 1995). • Trails with grates and underlying tarps capture a larger percentage of lint. Grated trail surfaccs must be periodically cleaned because the open sp.aces become i chokcd with lint, dust, and other debris. "i ~ Airflow determines where lint accumulates. Over l time, trampled fibers on the trail become airborne ~ and are carried by air movement and redeposited

Z on cave surfaces away from the Figure 4. Along trails. Large quantities of lint may be deposited on ledges high above a trail developed cave lour or on ceiling formations (Figure 4). Fibers less than 3 microns in size will routes, lint is carried become suspended immediately, without falling to the trail. These fibcrs on air currents and will dcsccndcd at a rate of 1 meter (3 feet) every 9 minutes in laboratory collect and mass along conditions (Moser 1988). certain ledges. This Manmade entrances and tunnels may artificially increase cave airflow example from and compound lint problems. Lint accumulations lend to concentrate on Timpano-gos Cave flat or sloping shelves. Lint also accumulates on any rough surface, National Monument especially on stalactites, popcorn, helictites, spiked frostwork, or on shows thick lint low ceilings. [n dryer areas, accumulations will often ball up into "lint deposits on a ledge. bunnies." Heat generated from lights and visitors can cause distribution, or redistribution, of lint near trails. Movement of people also causes airflow disturbances and may redistribute lint away from the trails. High humidity in caves may cause older deposits of lint to have a higher percentage of synthetic than natural fibers. Due to the hydrophilic characteristics of natural fibers, they absorb moisture and break down into simple starches that either decompose or become a nutrient source for biota (Kraemer and Yell 1992).

Accumulation of Dust Although dust occurs naturally in most caves, the accumulation of natural Dust can remain dust away from entrances is minute and collects over long periods of time (Ohms 2002). Very strong cave winds near entrances may suck material in suspended in the air from the outside. Dust can also become a problem during trail construction for hours or even activities such as blasting and digging. days. Heat rising Unlike lint, dust can remain suspended in the air for hours or even days from visitors can (Michie 1997). Due to air currents, dust particles less than 0.25 microns disperse dust widely may take long periods to settle out of the air. Heat rising from visitors can disperse dust widely over a short period of over a short period time, causing air velocities of I meter per second (3 feel per second) above of time, causing air a tour. These currents can carry fairly heavy particles up to the ceiling and velocities above a then outward away from the party. tour. The heaviest particles fall quickly to the floor and the smaller particles become distributed evenly throughout the air (Michie 1997). The dust can become incorporated into formations where active deposition of secondary minerals is occurring. At Ngilgi Cave in Australia, every ten million visitors cause the deposition of a 3D-micron layer that is as opaque as a layer of paint and completely hides the original rock and speleothem colors (Michie 1997). In wild caves, cavers who wear dirty clothes or have dirty gear (especially dried mud) can shed 10,000 to 100,000 times as much dust as cavers who have clean clothes and gear. As these cavers start climbing over irregular terrain, the amount of dust released from fabric greatly increases. One hundred dirty cavers may spread as much dust as 1,000,000 visitors Part 3-Restoration: Lint and Dust-Horrocks and Ohms 355 with relatively clean clothes on a tour trail (this does not include lint) (Michie 1997). Cavers with clean clothes will only spread the dust that is already present. Caving group size is important, as small groups of cavers stir up less dust than larger groups.

Lint Camps

Lint camps are a great tool for cleaning sections of a eave thoroughly and systematically. Volun- teers arc often willing to travel long distances and return year after year for on-going projects. Cavers who are conserva- Figure 5. Lint can tion minded, experienced, and love the resources are excellent lint volun- accumulate on teers. formations along Running a successful lint camp requires a fair amount ofpreliminary developed tour routes, work. The following details should be worked out before the project starts: as shown in this photo from Timpanogos Cave National Identify areas to be cleaned and techniques that will be used. Monument, Utah. Sehedule far in advanee and advertise the event widely. Find experienced supervisors and team leaders. Secure nearby lodging or camping for the participants. Put together an introductory training outline for the first morning of the camp. Purchase supplies.

Several types of perks might be otTered to the volunteers:

Create a food plan and find a camp cook to prepare meals. Design a project T-shirt, certificate, and a reception with the cave management and staff. Arrange for evening cave trips or other perks for participants. To accommodate everyone, provide easy trips and difficult trips. Cave trips can be for recreation, survey, or photography. Establish a ratio of In addition to the perks, the following suggestions will help keep enthusi- 1 supervisor or team asm high among the volunteers: leader to every 5 or 6 lint pickers. The If you are using local volunteers, weekend projects are ideal. Keep lint supervIsors rove camps under three days to prevent burnout. If using volunteers from other regions, week long camps work best. among their Plan at least two different types of projects (for example, brushing and workers, answering vacuuming lint or washing dust). questions and Switch duties or work areas. providing assistance. Lint camps should start with a short introduction, a demonstration, and a short field trip into the cave. Spend only one or two total hours with these introductory activities. The participants will mostly learn "on the job" by doing the work or watching veterans (Kraemer and others 1997):

The introduction should cover rules, safety issues, goals, schedules, and perks. Follow the introduction with a demonstration of the techniques that will be used. Take volunteers into a relatively clean area away from the trail and closely examine cave surfaces \",'ithflashlights, so that they can see what the areas near the trail should look like. 356 Cave Conservation and Restoration

Finally, take them into a dusty area along the trail to show not only dust, but also what new lint versus old lint looks like.

Establish a ratio of I supervisor or team leader to every 5 or 6 lint pickers. The supervisors rove among their workers, answering questions and providing assistance. If too few supervisors arc appointed, the lint pickers will spread out and miss areas. It is common for workers to find coins, hair accessories, light bulbs, tickets, sunflower hulls, gum, trash, and other miscellaneous items. Remind participants that artifacts of historical importance may be encountered. Cultural artifacts include any manufactured item that is over 50 years old. (See cultural and historical preservation, page 99; see 50-year rule, page 341.) Objects found should be reported to the supervisor and work should be stopped in that area until the situation is evaluated. The state ofpreserva- tion, historical significance, and age can help determine whether items should be collected or discarded. Before anything historically significant is removed, the date, name of discoverer, condition, and location should be recorded:

If a cultural item is worthy of collection, bag it with a complete label. Number each item bag separately. Mark locations on a large-scale map. Figurc 6. Removal of Record these data at the time of collection, even if the value is not calcifying lint from immediately obvious. Important location data cannot be recreated at a wet flowstone along later date. the visitor route in Photodocumentation may also be beneficial. Jewel Cave National Monument, South Equipment and Tools Dakota, required the Lint and dust removal projects need the following types of equipment use of small tweezers (Jablonsky 1993; Kramer and others 1995; Horrocks 1998): and plastic toothpicks. Detailed map of the area to be cleaned to use for documenting the sites Camera and film or digital photography equipment to document the sites before, during, and atler the project is completed • Hand-held polyester paintbrushes for gathering lint and dust, 2.5- to 1O-centimeter width (1- to 4-inch) Plastic-bristled scrubbing brushes for wet areas Quart- and gallon-sized zip-closure plastic bags for collecting and storing lint and dust Hand-held spray bottles Lint-free rags and sponges for catching runoff from sprayers Plastic buckets, containers 4-liter to 20-liter- sized (I-gallon to 5-gallon-sized) Foam-cell collector brushes to collect lint 011' delicate surfaces Tweezers for delicate areas and in between rocks Small dust pans to brush lint and dust into Plastic cups to brush lint and dust into

Specialty equipment may also be necessary for successful lint projects:

HEPA filter vacuum cleaner and bags (High Efficiency Particulate Air, high-filtration, wet- and-dry-tank style) Part 3-Restoration: Lint and Dust-Horrocks and Ohms 357

Extension cords Flowstone shoes or aqua socks for walking on tlowstone surfaces (see footwear, page 431) Backpack sprayer units with fine-mist nozzles UV black light to spot lint accumulations Respirators

Each worker should have the following personal gear. Always check to find out if the project will provide masks and other safety equipment:

Helmet Helmet-mounted light (brighter is better and LED headlamps are especially effective) Knee pads and elbow pads Sturdy nonmarking boots Figure 7. Cami Work gloves Pulham uses the static Surgical gloves (use powder-free, non latex properties of a gloves-some people are allergic to latex) polyester brush to pick Goggles (depending on job) up lint in Tirnpanogos Ear plugs (depending on job) Cave National Monu- HErA fiiter respirator masks (depending onjob) ment, Utah.

Safety Measures For lint and dust removal projects, establish the following safety precau- tions. When minors (under 18) are participating as volunteers, their parents or guardians should sign a parental consent form. Adult volunteers may need to sign liability release forms. IIEPA filter respirators as well as protective gloves and clothing should be worn in dusty environments or where guano (wood rat, mouse, bat, bird, cricket) or amberat (dried wood rat urine) may be disturbed (often found near cave entrances). Dust masks may be ineffective against very small particles-you must choose the proper HEPA filters for respirators to ensure protection. Instruct personnel not to rub their eyes or face and to wash hands thoroughly be.fore eating. Ifvacuum cleaners are used, ear protection should be provided. Likewise, goggles should be available and required for some tasks. During the removal of construction-generated dust, the most common safety hazard is overfilled buckets. Overfilling can shorten the lile of buckets and cause spills. It can also result in strained muscles or back injuries. Buckets should be marked inside with a fill line that is one-third to two- thirds above the bottom of the bucket and supervisors should not allow workers to exceed that mark. The weight should be geared to the smallest member of the crew or the individual in the most awkward position for carrying a bucket. If possible, individuals in assembly line crews should be of similar size. Workcrs nced to be reminded how to lift buckets without causing back strain. Lids may be used to prevent spills.

Cleaning Techniques

The most common tool for removing lint is a polyester-bristled paintbrush (Figure 7). A swirling or dabbing motion with a polyester brush creates static electricity that attracts the lint (Horrocks and Green 2000). Since the electrical charge in lint is eventually lost, sweeping or vacuuming may 358 Cave Conservation and Restoration

work better on old deposits. Bristles on polyester brushes do not break as often as those on other brushes. Before using any brush, check to see how well the bristles are attached. Once a brush starts to lose bristles, ~ discard it. ~ Lint picked up with brushes can be deposited in ~ zip-closure buggies by placiug the brush in the bag ~ and squeezing the bag shut with the other hand as e; the brush is pulled out. This method works best ~ when there is more lint than dust or when rough Figure 8. Ryan Brown surfaces are encountered. If a lot of dust is mixed in with the lint, gently uses a hip-mounted sweep the particles into plastic baggies, cups, or small dustpans. The HEPA vacuum to pick baggies will mold to the cave surface and allow brushing directly into the up lint along the side bag without spilling materia!. Sweeping should be confined to small areas of a developed trail in and care should be taken to prevent lint and dust from becoming airborne. Je\vel Cave National Ifdelicate surfaces are encountered, tweezers or foam-cell collecting Monument, South brushes work well. Lint pickers at Carlsbad Cavern have successfully used Dakota. foam brushes (P Jablonsky, personal communication 2000). Vacuums are effective in picking up lint and dust. HEPA vacuums filter out the smallest particles and do not reintroduce particulate debris back into the cave air. A variety of attachments can be used to clean various surfaces (Figure 8). However, HErA filter vacuums are expensive, noisy, and pick up everything. For dry lint and dust, non-HEPA vacuums should be avoided, since they allow dust particles to escape and circulate back into the cave. At Jewel Cave, non-HEPA vacuums (wet-vacs and shop-vacs) were successfully used to clean the tarps underneath catwalks where the lint was wet and no dust was generated (Ohms, personal communication 2000). Flowstone, bedrock, calcified sediments, or trails with curbs are ideal surfaces for water-based methods. Theoretically, water should be applied as a final stage of cleaning, after the lint has been collected-however, water- based methods should be avoided if there are natural loose sediments under the malerial being cleaned. (See pressurized water, page 397.) Figure 9. A caver Although pressure washing can be effective (Ncwbould 1976; Jablonsky vacuums the lint tarp 1990, 1991; Schmitz 1996), this method introduces the disadvantage of underneath an open- washing everything away, including natural dust, delicate speleothems, and grate stairway in Jewel biota, and redepositing it elsewhere in the cave (Ressler 1988). Cave National Monu- Pressure washing uses large quantities of water and runoff is difficult to ment. control. Wet-vacs or shop-vacs should be used to suck up excess water generated by backpack sprayers and large hand-held sprayers. Sponges and lint-free rags can soak up small amounts of run ofT and buckets can be used to capture runoff if spraying overhead. It is always important to capture restoration runoff and not simply transfer the problem somewhere that is out of sight and out of mind. (See runoff water, page 396.) Do not use water from cave pools for large spraying operations that may lower water levels and harm cave life. (See water sources for restoration, page 393.) Avoid spraying water in areas where excess water will drain into cave pools. Runoff containing lint and dust will pollute pools and artificially increase water levels. Be aware that fresh tap water may contain chemicals such as chlorine or fluoride. If tap water is allowed to stand overnight some of the chemical component may dissipate. Before using water, determine the pH. Water that is acidic will have a slightly corrosive effect which could damage delicate formations. If the water is too basic it may leave behind mineral deposits. (See restoration water, page 394-395.) Part3--Restoration: Lintand Dust-Horrocks andOhms 359

Be extremely cautious spraying water around lights and other compo- nents of the electrical system. It is wise to shut otT the power while using water to reduce electrical risks and avoid exploding the light bulbs. Try dry methods before using water to clean an area. In \vet areas, the lint will tend to lump together and form balls or mounds. A HEPA filter vacuum cleaner may be effective in this situation but paintbrushes are worthless. A stout bathroom scrubbing brush or tweezers will also remove wet lint. Once the larger lint accumulations have been removed, water techniques may work for the final touch.

Special Issues

Before any work is done, it is important to shoot precleaning photographs of the area. Take close-ups and overviews. Remember to include an object for scale in photodocumentation shots. Pictures of the cleaning crew in action will document the historical aspects of the project. Post-cleaning pictures finish the photodocumentation. For the postcleaning photographs, recreate the same photograph as the precleaning pictures. (See photodocumentation, page 204-207.) If the hand-held-brush method is used to remove lint and dust, lint from specific areas can be collected and weighed with a sensitive scale. Project leaders can then determine where lint is accumulating, target future cleaning areas, and devise methods to slow the deposition or trap the lint (Horrocks and Green 2000). If a lot of dust is being swept up with the lint, it can be separated with a polyester brush and weighed (or both lint and dust can be weighed together). Techniques for removing lint must be adjusted to the surfaces being cleaned. Delicate formations (including some frostwork) can sometimes be cleaned by spraying very light mists of water on the lint and dust accumulations and then catching the resulting runoff in tarps (Horrocks and Green 2000). Acidic water could dissolve the crystals of delicate speleothems and must not be used for this type of cleaning. Some gypsum surfaces can be cleaned. Crusts can often be cleaned with hand-held paintbrushes or HEPA vacuum cleaners. A water-based cleaning technique was successfully used on gypsum in the Snowball Dining Room Figure 10. An of Mammoth Cave (Aley 1989). (See gypsum restoration, page 419.) example of a lint curb Trash from many cave sites is deposited in the local landfill. Dispose of along a developed cave trail in Mammoth lint and dust debris in the same way. Cave National Park, Kentucky, and the Preventing or Slowing Lint and Dust Accumulations associated "lint bunnies" that collect along its edges. Curbs with heights of20 to 60 centimeters (8 to 24 inches) help contain lint and dust, thereby reducing accumulations beyond the trails (Jablonsky 1995; Fry and Olson 1999). Curb configurations depend on the number of visitors, characteristics of the cave, trail design, and trail construction materials. Rough-surfaced curbs have been shown to catch lint better than smooth ones (Jablonsky 1995). Trails with curbs must be cleaned regularly- otherwise the lint is ground up by foot traffic and becomes airborne (Figure 10). Trails should not be swept with a broom because sweeping reintro- duces lint into the air, creates dust, and leaves bristles behind. HEPA tilter vacuums should be 360 Cave Conservation and Restoration

used to clean trails with curbs. In caves without electricity, a plastic broom may be somewhat effective if short, slow strokes are used. If spraying techniques are used on trails, all waste water should be collected and removed from the cave. Ifvisitors are walking directly on unpaved cave floors, sediments may become airborne. Cement trails or raised platfonns with catchment tarps underneath are often successful in reducing lint. Walkways, bridges, and platforms made of metal grating with underlying tarps capture lint and tracked-in dirt (Figure 9). Generally, grates near an entrance are cleaned annually, and those farther in the cave are cleaned every other year. Tarps should be made of nylon and designed to be easily removed for cleaning. They should be taken outside the cave and thoroughly washed every 3 to 4 years. Where public seating is provided, the seating surface should be smooth and nonabrasive to reduce lint deposits. When construction is taking place within a cave, tarps can be hung in a passage to contain and block dust. To contain dust as it is being created, Figure II. In Jewel hoods may be built over equipment or mist spraying may be used in Cave National Monu- conjunction with HEPA filter vacuums. Periodic vacuuming during the ment, South Dakota, project will also help control construction dust. lint can quickly calcify When an artificial entrance or gate is designed, airflow and dust influx into wet flowstone should be considered. lrno entrance existed before (that is, ifit is a new, surfaces. Plastic entirely artificial entrance) the closure should be airtight or should re-create toothpicks, tiny stitT- the original airflow. Ifan entrance has been artificially enlarged, the gate or bristled brushes, and door should have air spaces that equal the size of the natural aperture in foam clean-room order to maintain natural airflow. (See air exchange, page 262.) brushes are the tools of Several successful techniques have been developed to prevent or slow choice for this lint- lint accumulations. Curbs, grates, and catchment tarps allow continuous picking chore. lint collection and easy periodic removal (Jablonsky and others 1994). Other techniques have been developed to prevent lint fall, including misting visitors before they enter the cave. (See Kartchner Caverns, page 141.) Finally, restricting, monitoring, and training cavers can greatly reduce dust accumulations along major routes in wild caves. Cited References Aley T. 1989. Restoration and maintenance of natural cave microclimates. NSS News 47(2):39-40. Crowle F. 1993a. Lint-associated Rock Deterioration in Caves. Unpub- lished manuscript, cave management files, Wind Cave National Park, May 10, 1993.6p. Crowle F. 1993b. Importance of Microbes in Lint-associated Cave Mineral Erosion. Unpublished manuscript, cave management files, Wind Cave National Park, June 10, 1993.4 p. Fry J, Olsen R. 1999. Walkway development and construction relative to reducing visitor impact in the historic section of Mammoth Cave. In: Rea GT, editor. Proceedings afthe 1999 National Cave and Karst A1anagement Symposium: Chattanooga, Tennessee, October /9-22, 1999. Chattanooga (TN): Southeastern Cave Conservancy. p 64-72. Horrocks RD. 1998. Lint Camp Orientation Outline. Great Basin National Park, Cave Management files. 2 p. Horrocks RD. 2000. The HistOJY of Cave Management at Timpanogos Part 3-Restoration: Lint and Dust-Horrocks and Ohms 361

Cave National Monumenl. Unpublished manuscript, Timpanogos Cave National Monument, cave management files. 3 p. Horrocks RD, Green DJ. 2000. Lehman lint liquidators. NSS News 58(3):72- 73. Jablonsky PL. 1990. Lint is not limited to belly buttons alone. NSS News 48(5):117-119. Jablonsky PL. 1991. Headlines! Lint accumulations are becoming more prevalent in caves. American Caves Fall: 18. Jablonsky PL. I992a. Implications of lint deposits in caves. NSS News 50(4):99-100. Jablonsky PL. 1992b. Develop Preventive Measures/or Future Accumulations of Cave Lint. Unpublished Semi-Annual Report, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Rocky Mountain Regional Office, November 2, 1992; Second Year Extension Proposal, March 15, and October 22, 1993; and final report June I, 1994. Jablonsky PL. 1993. Investigator s Annual Report. Unpublished report, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Rocky Moun- tain Regional Office. March 23, 1999. Jablonsky PL. 1995. Lint in caves. In: Proceedings of the 1993 National Cave Management Symposium: Carlsbad, New Mexico, October 27- 3D, 1993. [Huntsville (AL)]: National Cave Management Symposium Steering Committee. p 73-81. Jablonsky P, Kraemer S, Vett B. 1994. Research Topic: Develop Preventive Measures/or Future Accumulations of Cave Lint. Final report submit- ted to Wind Cave National Park. Kraemer S, Yett B. 1992. Semi-annual Report, Research Topic: Develop Preventive Measures for Future Accumulations oreave Lint. Wind Cave National Park, Cave Management files. II p. Kraemer S, Yett B, Petty K. 1995. Jewel and Wind Cave Lint Camp. Wind Cave National Park, Cave Management files. 2 p. Kraemer S, Yett B, Petty K. 1997. Lillt Camp Report, 1997. Wind Cave National Park, Cave Management files. 2 p. Michie NA. 1997. Alllnvestigatioll of the Climate, Carbon Dioxide, and Dust ill Jellolall Caves, N.S. w., Ph.D. Thesis. School of Earth Sci- ences, Macquarie University, Australia. 298 p. Moore J. t 993. Survey oJthe Biota and Trophic Interactions }vithin Wind Cave and Jev,:e/ Cave, South Dakota. Progress Report, Wind Cave National Park, 11/29/93. 35 p. Moore J, Jesser R. 1995. Survey of the Biota and Trophic Interactions within Wind Cave and Jewe/ Cave, South Dakota. Final report, Wind Cave National Park, Cave Management files. 8 p. Moser P. 1988. All the real dirt on dust. The Exploratorium Quarterly 12(1): 15-19. Newbould RL. 1976. Steam cleaning of Orient Cave, NSW, Australia. Jeno/an Caves Historical and Preservation Society Occasional Paper No 1. p 5-15. Ohms M. 2002. Dust Deposition Along the Candlelight Tow; Final Report. Wind Cave National Park, Cave Management files. 4 p. Ressler D. 1988. Thoughts About Lint-The Great Fuzz Battle Begins. Cave Management files, Wind Cave National Park. Roth J. 1987. Preliminary Survey of Lint Accumulation in Carlsbad Caverns. Unpublished manuscript, January 7, 1987. Carlsbad Caverns National Park Library. 3 p. Schmitz SA. 1996. Lost Soldiers Cave restoration project. NSS News 54(2/3): 59-63.

Additional Reading Ohms M, Rogers R. 1999. Black Hills restoration camp. NSS News 57(4):99- 100. 362 Cave Conservation and Restoration

Pickard R. 1993. Particulate matter accumulations in the Aberombie Cave. Labyrinth, The Journal o/the University o/Technology. Sydney Speleological Society, no 42. p 15-30. Spate A, Moses C. 1994. Impacts of high pressure cleaning: A case study at Jenolan. In: [1998] Cave Management in Australasia X. Carlton South, Victoria (AU): ACKMA. p 45-48. [Proceedings o/the Tenth ACKMA Conference, Auckland, New Zealand. ACKMA 10:45-48.] [Cave Management in Australasia 10:45-48.] Tinsley J, Miller K, Johnson R. 1989. Monitoring and sedimentology of selected caves at Lava Beds National Monument. Abstract in: Cave Research Foundation 1991 Annual Report. p 31. Went WF. 1970. Measuring cave air movements with condensation nuclei. National Speleological Society Bulletin 32( I): 1-9.