[Geysers] RE: OFVC Logbook -- Please Read

[Davis, Brian L.]

David Schwarz wrote:

> for whoever does embark on developing an open, web-based
> reporting application, think very hard about security.

Agreed, but there are a number of fairly simple solutions for this. For instance, anything can get logged in through a web interface (incidentally, it should be one simple enough to be accessed via mobile devices like iPhones etc.)... but it only gets into the archived data (quite possibly separate from the website) via a moderator. On top of that, use distributed copies: I'm part of a significant cave exploration group, and our data (about 30 years worth now) is stored in both archival physical form (hard to copy, but lasts) and digital (digital copies are very easy to make and distribute). Yes, plan for vandalism... but the same techniques that you use to protect any dataset against being accidently lost or corrupted will stop most hacking going on. Which is more likely to cause a problem, the 14 y.o. hacking, or a server crash? I know which has caused me more issues.

> Consider, to the Park Service as an institution (not individuals in the
> Park Service), what was their value?  I can only come up with two
> purposes:  First, academic research... The other purpose has been to
> support prediction of the major large, frequent geysers by the interpretive
> staff. 

There are a couple of other points here (again, I'm drawing from a different park and a different "volunteer" system, but I see some similarities). First, in this community you have an information resource that, frankly, often puts the Park Service to shame. Not supporting and taking advantage of that should be a "shame on them" situation... and, in some cases, it has been. Mammoth Cave really had some troubles (publicity troubles) with cavers outside the Park because while Mammoth Cave rangers would say "this is the longest cave in the world", at the same time cavers outside the park could show the caves they were exploring were longer than the surveyed Mammoth Cave (& they did) . The result was the park service... well, looked pretty foolish. Eventually, that at least made them wise up on how they were acting (although it created some antagonism at times).

Eventually, after a lot of hard work on both sides, the cavers formed the Cave Research Foundation (CRF), with scientists (we have those), researchers (we have those), and explorers (OK, for GOSA etc. those are gazers, but the idea is similar). Right now the relationship between CRF & the Park Service is so strong that CRF has been asked (*invited*) by the Park Service to help out in other cave units (such as Carlsbad). So it's not hopeless. Currently in big push in the cave units of the Park Service is what's called "resource inventory" - in addition to mapping passages, we note biology, artifacts, speleothems, minerals, and just about anything else because the Park needs to know what it has to conserve it... and they simply do not have the manpower to come close to doing it on their own. CRF and similar organization can, and do, provide some valuable feedback to the park (feedback not required for tourist interaction), and can police themselves... with the result being that they are allowed to go off-trail when and where they please in an environment that if often more fragile and takes *longer* to heal than a geyser basin. When you think about it, that's remarkable.

So don't write off the gazer interaction with the Park yet. It maybe difficult, and it may not work (I've butted heads with the Park Service before)... but it *can* work at times.

-- 
Brian Davis