Current cave monitoring practices, their variation and recommendations for future improvement in Europe: A synopsis from the 6th EuroSpeleo Protection Symposium
Open Access
- 4 May 2022
- journal article
- Published by Pensoft Publishers in Research Ideas and Outcomes
Abstract
This manuscript summarizes the outcomes of the 6th EuroSpeleo Protection Symposium. Special emphasis was laid on presenting and discussing monitoring activities under the umbrella of the Habitats Directive (EU Council Directive 92/43/EEC) for habitat type 8310 "Caves not open to the public" and the Emerald Network. The discussions revealed a high level of variation in the currently conducted underground monitoring activities: there is no uniform definition of what kind of underground environments the "cave" habitat should cover, how often a specific cave has to be monitored, and what parameters should be measured to evaluate the conservation status. The variation in spatial dimensions in national definitions of caves further affects the number of catalogued caves in a country and the number of caves to be monitored. Not always participants are aware of the complete national monitoring process and that data sets should be freely available or easily accessible. The discussions further showed an inherent dilemma between an anticipated uniform monitoring approach with a coherent assessment methodology and, on the contrary, the uniqueness of caves and subterranean biota to be assessed – combined with profound knowledge gaps and a lack of resources. Nevertheless, some good practices for future cave monitoring activities have been identified by the participants: (1) Cave monitoring should focus on bio- and geodiversity elements alike; (2) Local communities should be involved, and formal agreements envisaged; (3) Caves must be understood as windows into the subterranean realm; (4) Touristic caves should not be excluded ad-hoc from regular monitoring; (5) New digital tools and open FAIR data infrastructures should be implemented; (6) Cave biomonitoring should focus on a large(r) biological diversity; and (7) DNA-based tools should be integrated. Finally, the importance of the 'forgotten' Recommendation No. 36 from the Bern Convention as a guiding legal European document was highlighted.Keywords
This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Surveying Europe’s Only Cave-Dwelling Chordate Species (Proteus anguinus) Using Environmental DNAPLOS ONE, 2017
- Wells provide a distorted view of life in the aquifer: implications for sampling, monitoring and assessment of groundwater ecosystemsScientific Reports, 2017
- A cost‐effective high‐throughput metabarcoding approach powerful enough to genotype ~44 000 year‐old rodent remains from Northern AfricaMolecular Ecology Resources, 2016
- The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardshipScientific Data, 2016
- Microbiome composition and geochemical characteristics of deep subsurface high-pressure environment, Pyhäsalmi mine FinlandFrontiers in Microbiology, 2015
- Revealing the unexplored fungal communities in deep groundwater of crystalline bedrock fracture zones in Olkiluoto, FinlandFrontiers in Microbiology, 2015
- Diversity Patterns in the Dinaric KarstPublished by Elsevier BV ,2012
- Groundwater biodiversity in EuropeFreshwater Biology, 2009
- A molecular test for cryptic diversity in ground water: how large are the ranges of macro‐stygobionts?Freshwater Biology, 2009
- The cave hygropetric - a little known habitat and its inhabitantsArchiv für Hydrobiologie, 2004