The genesis of cave symbols

Marco Corvi - DRAFT May 2018

Cave symbols are important to denote cave details ina simple and concise way. Symbols allow to make cave maps compassing lot of information in a limited space. The standardization of the symbology makes Cave maps understandable by any caver, apart from text annotations. On the other hand it is impossible to have a set including symbols for all the details that may appear in a cave map. Therefore any set of cave symbols will never cover all the needs of the map drafter, and this will need to come up with custom- made symbols or pictorial representations. Furthermore a cave map is only part of the cave documentation and must be completed by textual description, pictures, and audio and video documentation.

This note reviews the development of the cave map symbols, among the speleological societies in some european and north america countries, and, later, inside the Union Internationale de Speleologie.

Ee ae : T= a a || : Map of 1723 (Gyorgy) ae | eee | See mt

The first Known "cave" maps are maps of artifical cavities: a 1415 map of the Labyrinth of Gortyne (Crete) by C. Buondelmonti [47], and a 1564 map of the Stufe di Nerone (Italy) [45]. The first maps of natural caves are a 1651 map of St. Rosalia cave (Italy) [44], a 1656 drawing of the Baumannshoehle (Germany) [9, 36], and a survey of Pen Park Hole published by the Royal Society in 1682 [31]. Cave started to be represented in maps from the end of the 16-th century. Initially the maps were rather fantastics, mixing physical and imaginary entities. These maps are drawings of the author view and perception of the cave, which is represented pictorially. In Australia the first known cave maps are from 1827 and 1832 [39].

In the 18-th century the maps of caves started to have more details, although they remained pictorial. The cave surveyors began to add informations related to their studies of caves: blocks, clay, water, formations, beddings, and so on [46].

ae a ; = = is oe he ms a. ew nt - == ra F Eibsccaescolisios tacipcaih Vigil scetapibec ie dhe aan ville. okenestict Se Lndinsteain cece Talal ck eee tN J oats PE Eg

Above: cave survey by E. Boegan (1897) Left: cave survey by Vicentini (1818)

Alfred Martel (1894) [1] first described a procedure to take the survey of a cave. He used a compass fixed on his notebook. He measured the distance with steps or a string with regular marks. The inclination was estimated. His surveys would be BCRA grade 2.

My; My) ye vy iff if Bit Hh Mt mT Frey it:

selitore eres ws Ache ! iH i

COUPE LONGITUDINALE TE LA

AN i Mies f the Lids iit H i i Veet pe: a iA Bo tly We tt i ee f NSN eu ee icesan PY SAPS y t TOE AL TOTTI T) ty. i it UAR! ALD AT i H My MF i rane Wi Pi Ri rey, sein fy e & fii aga Hit pore Le ui o MOU Org)! ii} Hi) Qa eri Hy Ady if 1 ye! aw EMT ARH tethion DW ede Ss ‘i Ci HT) it's An! iil? iiets \ We ai oS if HHS Hy i ba = i= td | oe °o Mae! t itl vende a a wa wis 2. u y ] Tt ¢ : ¢€ oO Be Edu theatre des Boss v0 5 Macons etc al ce UE ic? 8 a 5 3 38 £6 $ 5 e 29 9 2 SiS VQ We = ia y < «a z ae y ay Se 8 Ey “Mitt ming We = y = = uv -- oOo 3 uv ey Pm oJ = a a3 cg i j , e 3 ® 7 ro a S 2 5 4 © Ge E22 % sal iH Pr ssae Ch00ps ee sont = % Bait, = _ rf) eng ively et SUI AAFI tts api deel ee j i 4 @ & & & 2 fA ey Sha Mudie WINGS Aas ZI esr STE ES HHH tapas 5 e {3 E 7“ = 5 ba iy i MA a se = z BY Hy o 45 Agen - —r 20, aii}! ci $3 2 i} 3

“9 Hf i HA i ity HA ii f HH HHH} iit Wi WATS } ih iff i f . fe adel BU fi HHH ; Echelle des hauteurs ig de celle des longueurs) nl Sie tel” mete "y a

sddae

} i Wi 4 it Echelle des longueurs(Moitie de celle du plar } "atte

i te eee

- Portion of a cave survey by A. Martel 1898.

The first use of a cave symbology appears in the maps drawn by Jannet e Racovitza [2] in the reports of their biospeleological searches. Only the plan view is considered as this was sufficient for their documentation needs. In some cases the plan view is integrated by cross sections. The symbology is introduced as shorthand for the most common annotations that come with the survey. It is quite detailed

and has circled letters for special notes (eg. "CS" for bat), graphics and icons:

- entrance, light limit, possible continuation ('?')

- deposits: clay (A), sand (S), gravel (G), blocks

- slope (arrow), ceiling height, pit (a double line, internal dashed), chimney (double line, external dashed) - walls, also covered by flowstone (filled black)

- formations (stalactite, stalagmite, flowstone (parallel lines), gour (hatched if with water)

- temperatures, of air and of water

- root (‘Y'), guano ('X') and vegetable debris (‘#')

The need for standard cave symbols arose already when, during the first world war, the AustroHungarich govern decided to use the phosphor deposits of the caves as fertilizer for agriculture. Over 1500 caves were explored and surveyed. However it become apparent that the organization of an industrial exploitation of the resources reqiured a uniform symbology.

A similar attempt to standardize cave symbols was made by the german speleological association, with a commision for cave symbols in 1921. Four years later Teiss! wrote a cave surveying booklet which contained a set of cave symbols inspired to those developed during the war. This symbology concerns only the plan view and contains symbols for artifacts (walkways, bridges, walls) and whether climing down or up a drop could be done without gear or not.

The symbols of Teissl (1925) [3] include

- Stations: triangle for main stations, circle otherwise

- altitude

- deposits: sand, clay, guano, gravel, and so on, till large blocks (these can have also a direction of the slope)

- morphology: walls, pits

- hydrology: ponds, dripping, sources, flows, falls

- air flow

- findings: vegetables, animals, archeological

Jannet Racovitza symbols (1918)

Cave survey byw Jannet Racovitza (1913)

grand lac artificiel occupant _———Ssj Uancien vestibule ==> =F vlers al Phatangedes 4 SSS ee in Seb oa “at —— Untill the Second World War, and for several galets Sec i Bb years after it, the cave maps remained hum : "drawings", representations of the author's view sj of the cave and of his drafting ability. The image Ror eghAe. : on the next page is a map published in 1948. It Pg bien ah ee is just an example of the way cave maps were scutes. produced. The general characteristics are the } hatch around the cave walls, the formations N 7 montén devs ) drawn pictorially, the water (filled area), the clay

v “ane galer, 1? sup dy

Arpitleuse Ped

A —) ¥

>, plaques am as : Viphargus “S puanro

facres de Dipreres

4 Z. cong coulorr Amengee

~S . >, lopodes So metres

P. olangodes

instables

RJ.

(dotted area), and the continuations (question mark).

Many caving groups were founded after the Second World War. Every group developed a proper cave symbology and representation style, without a shared approach. There were several obstacles to the definition and diffusion of a common symbology. Most of the groups operated in a restricted area, due to the difficulties to travel. The Survey was motivated only by the local necessity to document the caves for the group activity. To these we must add the inertia to change the way of drafting maps, and the fact that very few details were

Nohlenzeichenschlussel. ;

Anbinde-(Stutz-) Punkt

Folygenpunrt

Hahenmarke ander I agarFnung _ Ag

Adhenkate

lermessungspunate

Guane

nrechenerde

Schotterbank

|

Schotter verenzelt

lrelsépitivamar a, Blockhaldan

—~ detto~ uF Shizzen

, (ere jn der! Rich as

TS-

Fiathenschifsse

Tor iki a

innenbilld ng, ‘wenn ahne Schichtoms _hiai il en

ra

paenateaseeees heit

= dlekis = 7 mip

A

Til:

Angrunde und Absturze

Trichter

=— Wegtrasse

s | a gebouter Weg

Versicherungsdrahisell re Maru erhacren

= &

_————

Seactereltfor a dag

Fisen

Brick aus

=

A

= 8 =

Kom munikatione ,

B 5 §

§ interboden | _f vberdie erdiegwnze Sint Sinberfidche |

=i

Frobegrube wad Schiltze

Sohlengefalle (wenn ofne ‘Schichte chien en)

- Windirlchtung (Foderung sachder Stdrke)

Schichtenlinien _fdie,, Hunderter” verstirken)

Photographischer Aufnath mestand ae inder Richtung dena derAuberhime) |

Riesentropfstein sdule

Schlote und Aamine

ee ==

L naeat |

ubernogen

mas (Taare | Ane

indsrustiert Fevusrre |

Diverse lala feichen

stellen | | prahisterisehe |

| abwechselnd nacke Fundorte

unduberzogen | * : “a S| Oo

Cave symbols, Teissl (1925)

a —_— - . oe ee ee

8 cave survey (Segre)

fagehhé \ dee Postrel sede

~ Pep ft Sale dete aw . Coke tr - 2 0 Sis # "ee 8 apts = Pah H. Kiera #E : ne # E Sale _ s 4 i delP kqushn = ae a = Fe ; ae 10 Om. qi 7 i meretde ioe L E = ' + : : ee eBLa-Grotta di Pastena 5‘ bm” wo % fe P : SIAL DFaby ee oe

necessary for the publication of small scale maps of major caves (usually composed just of the contour lines).

Nevertheless, with the diffusion of soeleology, and the develoomemt of international relations, the necessity of a common language for cave maps became apparent.

Boegli devised in 1952 for the exploration of the Holloch cave and used by AGH (Arbeitgemeinschaft Hollochforschung) a set of symbols similar to those of Teissl:

e stations (triangle or point), altitude (circle with four legs and value), slope (arrow and value in degrres)

¢ pits (ticked line with depth in meters), and chimneys ('+')

e hydrology: pools (single dash) and sumps (double dash), flows (wavy arrow, termporary and permanent flows are distinguished), sources and sinks

e underlying gallery, cross-section lines

¢ geology: bedding dip, faults, scallops and plunge pools

¢ cave walls (lines with hatch on the side of the bedrock)

¢ formations: symbolic icons for stalactites, stalagmites, columns, flowstone, helictites, moonmilk, cristals (calcite or gypsum) ¢ deposits: blocks, gravel, clay

¢ air flow (dashed arrow)

Boegli symbology is reported by Trimmel-Audetat [21].

10. Arrivee d ‘eau I——| 24. Cheminee Kel 44. Cours d@ eau ( avee direction) 22 Denmvellation . ressaut =f 5 Emel

; se 23. Courant ad girl dete et peure} E a /46 |

SIGNES CONVENTIONNELS SYSTEME DR. A. B06L/

Grands réseaux, plans 42 petite echelle

1. Station topo. principale 42. Point a absorption , perte 2. Stztron cope. secondaire

_—e dle mocttonie J Pe Rem 3. L/gne de visee _ %%. Voile moullante slr 4, Draclase all | 4§. Cascade 5. Vague a erosion | 2] 16. Argile 6. Loneretions 17. Sable 7. Stalactite 18. Graver, galets &. Stalagmite ye me 3 43. Blocs ade rochers | poog ; Symbols for big Caves. 3.Glace (avec date) )))) 288.64/46 Trimmel Audetat (1966) ee

A commission for speleological terms and symbols was created during the first Internation Congress of Speleology (Paris, 1953), with the aim to uniformize the presentations of caves, and thus making easier the exchange of information [Trimmel-1966]. The work of the commission went on for several years. In the third congress (Wien, 1961) the proposal of Boegli for cave symbols for small scale maps (1:500, 1:1000 and smaller) was accepted. The symbols were drawn on the side of the cave outline according to the system created by Boegli in 1952 [22, 23].

At the same time Fink (1963) prepared a comparison of the symbols used in different nations (France, Italy, Swiss, Austria, Yugoslavia, USA) and a proposal for unification [24]. The two symbol sets were later confirmed in the next Congress (Ljubljiana, 1965) together with symbols for karst surface features (adapted from BRGM, Bureaux des Recherces Geologiques et Minieres).

These symbols sets are published in Trimmel-Audetat (1966) [21]. A comparison between small scale and large scale symbols is also in the book by Boegli (1978) [30].

The small scale symbol set includes

e stations (triangle or point), midline (polyline broken at the stations)

¢ formations, stalactites, stalagmites

¢ hydrology: flow, spring, sink, pool (hatch) and sump, waterfall (a line crossing the lines of water flow) ¢ deposits: clay (slanted dashes), sand (points), gravel, blocks, ice (with the date)

¢ drop (thin line with height)

¢ air flow (arrow with the date)

¢ pit (-'), chimney ('+')

¢ diaclase (dashed line)

¢ scallop

8 Denvellation par rgzoperl #

SIGWES CONVENTIONNELS POUR PLANS DE /'oripice ( orifice principal |

18. Gouffre - cheminee GAOTTES.

Plans de grottes 2 grande échelle .

presente par 14.41. FINK. (Wren)

4 © Ou e 3 Abiitude ( au-dessus de lamer)

4% Tsohypses ( Courbe de niveau)

Sys teme 4 Stations Lopograpiigues : Station topo. prince pale

SCItION tope SCCOMABITE

is ha 2.Lignes de wiesee

é

5 .Pelefs du sol, ( la fleche ZY sndigue le point fe plus bas).

We - sb

6 .fnclinaison da sol, pente { fa ra [leche jndhigue le pane Le ples 4as/|~— 30%

7.Asuteur ade le voitel? /endrot sndigue par le signe J. ©

29. Mond mitch, lait de lune 30, Cristallisations

31. Concretions excentrigues

WEIEIN

32 Cours ad ‘eau sokterrain

33. Arrivee d ‘eau dans une galerre TE Perte ahs 3% Perte JF travers argiles , Sables ete a

35. Aiviere souterraine

36. Chute, cascade

37. Siphon

38 Asviere soulerraine fem poraire

39. Lac souterrain , bassin

HAG

y

A 9 L£mplacement d ‘une coupe transvers. ee

10. Galerve

¢1.Galerie passant Pl -Al33ous d'une autre

12 Galerie secondaire passant 3u- AessUus ‘ane galerie principale

4/72 Superposition de

trovs galeries

13. Continuation inconnie

t& LDénivellation bratale

15 Gouffre, puits intérreur

16. Gouffre ou purts en surface

a Cheminee

40 Suintements

44. Nerge ef glace

42 Situation des strates A fhorrzenta/es B peu Cel Nees . ca C fertement melinees 2D verticales

43, Diaclase , frssure

bh, farlle, decrochement

19. Blocs de rochers

20. fhoulss

27. Galets

22. Argiles , sables et sediments

23, Stalagim/ Yes

? 24, Stalactites

25. Cofonne

26. Gours

27, Plancher steagmitigue

28. Coulee stalagmitigue , concretion

Symbols for small caves. Trimmel Audetat (1966)

Bp

The large-scale symbology includes:

e stations (triangle or dot), midline (dashed segments)

¢ altitudes (as in Boegli), level lines (with slope arrow and altitude)

¢ slopes (arrow with slope degees)

¢ ceiling height (value in a circle), depth (with respect to the entrance) * cross-section lines

¢ underlying passages, possible continuation (question mark, '?’)

¢ drops (with height), pits (with depth), chymneys (plus sign ,'+')

¢ clay/sand, gravel, blocks, and snow/ice (dashes)

e stalagmites (filled circle), stalacties (empty circle), column (filled circle inside empty circle), formations, flowstone (dashes) and wall-flowstone (thick fills), moonmilk, crystals (asterisc), helictite

¢ water flow, spring and sink, water-fall

Blatt (@) IN, RAUMDARSTELLUNG

| vauien | secesuawien | astemercn | scrwer: | usa. | wasemas: my

! ‘i

IIl., SEDIMENTE UND KRISTALLISATIONEN

71 Mockwerk und - Cd oe & So Brechschett eo8 @, one e coco

22 Geschiebe, Schotter eeec

"ae FF St et ee S| econ 7 2)

2) Wablentehm 24 Sand

TS erdege Sedimente 13 anerferech

26 Guane

OL ach viet re aes 77 Stalagmit

28 Stalabtit

15 gabedabrbar 29 Ireptsteinaiule

| 16 Steabbruch, Wascitete

3 Siaterdetkes

17 Innewsthacht Ni Bedenversinterong

32 Wandversintereag ) Of bute ech ar bi 33 Dergmiich W Schlet VA Gristalle

20 Schocki o. feblet 35 Excentriques

Two comparison tables of the cave symbols, by Fink (1963)

Several publications containing a speleological symbology appeared during the years before the Wien Congress, and those between this and the Ljubljana Congress. In general there are many similarities, like the use of dashed lines for uncertain cave walls, and for the underlying gallery, ticks or triangles to denote the pit and the chimney. However they differed in the deatils. The symbols for the cave fillings is rather uniform, being these represented pictorially. The symbols for formations vary from pictographic forms to stylish icons. For the hydrology there is a tendency to draw the water flows with parallel lines and and arrow indicating the direction of flow. A special importance is attached to waterfalls and sumps. The air flow is always shown with an arrow, but the styles differ.

Burkhardtet al. (1951) [5] includes symbols for both the plan view and the profile view: stations (triangles), altitude [points, midline, North symbol, cave wall (a simple line in the plan, a line with external hatch in the profile), underlying galleries (dashed line), cross-sections, pits (line with triangles), level lines and slopes (line with ticks), chimneys ('+'), formations: stalactites and stalagmites (circle in the plan, pictorial in the profile), deposits (clay, sand, blocks), artifacts.

n , ; } . 24 - ° : > : > Poa?) tolxQuatoc-Linite de la cave Réd@0ec Siaroc—-Profondeur d’eau-bepth

ne-Linit ~ I of water Suvéyeta y; antic torxGuatos ele dvGte sel Coe oars Neoaynéyoc—Zau, eplace-Water ,ic: ee oe ae ee PIV El rE SOV—SUi 4 d’?’une iipgne linit: = e | n ] i i} ' f iy io ] mrante—-Running 4 2n tae + - Poauu*t dooghc-Ligne du plafend-Lin _ *“PéEovta 86a Syuntixad—Eau courante 5? tt Pee : t t pony” Rie oe 1} ~ 74 “2¢or ytickly . Bo ut verhoches, @=*8 2% 2 ess > 4 | t ))) } ) Lay hangement a ch 3) ADS x3 GS . eS are I =. 4 ~liy fi &. j - —r, . | ele i ts 7 si > iz - it er 5 oO lm dg = 4 3 Satcxd.duus ; ete Vs; Lr 4-6 , )- I . * «¢ - we a Bias 5 ~ ¥N > " } <a t j A L o-- i od 77 . am oe . v4 Symbols from the 4 pov the eles nioun aan Th? KXorg crpupérwePente des coveher- Bulletin of the Hellenic point est us a *ontrée-Depth, ri i strate Speleological Society SASa'UAS YOsity. 28 4 GEER UNS Ow Se! ee ee me , arian wn linen ee (1951) : o 3 ALT iH r . > c “3 Os Se sUCTEES .eoL tL BE. 435 td 67 et KEL SYTAATED caux-Vertical strata ru L ¢"} { r.,.uue2nd int * / o 4 I | x Ip thy hécig-Couches horizons

The same year the Bulletin of the Hellenic Speleological Society published a two-page list of symbols for cave surveys [6]. These include a distinction among walls, underlying and overpassing passages, and symbols for pits, chimneys, level curves, hydrology (waterflows, falls, pool), dimensions, flowstone line, deposits (a single symbol for pebbles, sand, clay, mud, guano), findings (bone, wood), and geology (direction and dip of strata).

Butcher (1953) [7] has symbols for only the plan view: stations (triangle, or circle with dot at the center), ceiling height, pool depth, entrance, daylight limit, pit, chimney, underlying passage, continuation, slopes and depths, deposits (blocks, gravels, sand, clay), formations (stalactites, stalagmites, column, flowstone), roots, guano, vegetable debris, a detailed symbology for hydrology (pool, flow, sump), air flow, and geological symbols. This symbology is reported also in Butcher (1966) and Cullingford (1969).

These same symbols are listed in the appendix of Acta Carsologica (1955) [8], where the cave wall line has also an external hatch is used to denote the rock. There are also symbols for snow, ice, air temperature, symbols for fossils, paleonthological and archeological findings.

In Italy Rondina was appointed by the Italian Spelological Society to research about the cave map symbols in use, and he found that most draftmen followed their own style. In 1955 (VII Nat. Congress) a commission was created with the aim to define a conventional cave map symbology. In 1958 a proposal for a detailed cave symbology was produced. It comprised both surface and underground symbols [10]. The latter included: morphology (chimney, underlying gallery, continuation), hydrology (ponds are

IDROGRAF/A

Soeorcente Sergente perenne

PLAST/ICA [POGEA ey = EZ “efi amelaments efel suofe con

rnciregz, prometanze verso «/ Sasso

és | | Perzoa ss SO my at : : {- Covpsne ines ploreate

} Presupposte Prastgiuimente

| a’ Pe | fi, | Acqua corrente con reife non 5. +} | Carlo tfer = = a |? feo Uihero - Sifone - +—— AAAS en Seis ear Tee ae aise ea oan ee I ANS | an. PET | af 2 te # we. weak 5 | Ara eas *. oe Sip eae | Aeghelo con Iraile non a pelo | 6. Si Se, os Bite i) eno iS “ek Ey eeitio eas. = atts SIE Se nS ssa ce sei ne nner DiS

Ceps capa?

oS ee ee

7 | “ES | reoumns superiart principals

mee SS ee ee : Fa inferior: principels Freesi tte Presubposie off corso facgitd

a tine tat

From) ff ofrotta redrosiinh ¢ rami | ~anen. RSE Sabet so ea ds i ara le

rine: poolt sezionett 2 a : _ Corso ef eaferes Balvottn astivtea

a- Senhera

A‘- Sentrera bahuso con fonel'a arhif 40

Seale of piolé pisse Seatinaita arte fretete se Pele? ,

lege » calcesiruzzo

Laghelfo con frvella fneossiante

Profoneifa' acdve non marine

= <== a

ee

1 , —e| Pants ff) fecne o ferro ee: : an - | Profancdise gcge ohrine

| Songente Jerma/e DEPOS/T/

M, “uro of 605 fegina

J imile ot penejreaztione aledlg fuce

i Limifs super, cella shacco celle roils _ | oPeRsSs frane ¢ ae ee oa ee oe a for pS RRR (ee ete ee terpenes re te ~ as AMezza cflatier veailfey | = ~~ i Crotfolr arraton chats

ferpreera comuvnamente + Ferre)

CONCREZION/

far te a crosfone wiehtarmesitree

—_}-

| Are ller

\Conerezion! afl parelé m— | EONS Chase RM Me be Boe te

\Cencrezian’ alle a \foslenie cofalea sihadgmemilica

ug FM pe oe i i mare

fe te ee 08 PTS

Deir: fr minus

Concrexziont 2 yasehelto con adee/ ere Osse in sabbia e eng Meg

| ere l SiITS Guano | (igud i Vey aa TTT | q ty r aad AO Cte aty ryt yf Humus

| e000 Sao | F oe M4 |e REPS eee I G Aiata

At NEAT cist heparin Teen SAD eee treaties eee a

Coflerne sialaNo - solammiied

Sie fam m aS és ofgte

Sie latttiy

gob i a ee =

vee wr lFochea Gio, | Cave symbols, Rondina (1958)

shown as filled area, but the water flow is missing), formations (stalactites, stalagmiyes, columns; all represented pictorially), deposits (blocks, gravel, sand, clay, guano, snow, ice), geological symbols (bedding dip, fault, lithologies), findings, meteorology (air flow and temperature), and other symbols (scalebar, north arrow, etc.)

Anker and Joller (1959) [12] has a long list of symbols (for the plan, the profile and the cross-sections) which includes stations, pits (with the depth value), chimneys (with height), underlying passages, deposits (blocks, gravels, clay, sand, ice), formations (including column, helictite, flowstone, moonmilk, gours, crystals), ceiling meander and floor meander, air flow and a very detailed hydrology. This symbology is based on that of Boegli (1956), on discussions inside the OGH (Ostschweizerischen Gesellschaft fur Hohlenforschung), the symbols of Charles H. Roth (1942), those in Acta Carsologica, and discussions with English surveyors. The symbology of Anker and Joller was proposed at the 2-nd Int. Congr. of Speleology in Bari, where it was also discussed that of Rondina (with minor revisions) [13].

Petrochilos (1959) [15] presents a symbology similar to tat of Rondina [10]. There are variations however in the symbols for the cave morphology (distinct dashing of overpassing and underlying passages, differences for pits and chimneys, etc.), the hydrology (lighter water hatch), and deposits (clay and guano). It has also a symbology for denoting the vertical dimensions that is almost excessive.

The NSS Bulletin contained a proposal about cave symbols already in 1944 [4]. Later a discussion for a standard symbology started in 1961 with a draft by Will White et at. [16]. This symbology includes differences to distinguish chokes from continuations, the underlying galleries from the unsurveyed ones. There are pits, chimneys, slopes, dimensions, deposits (clay, sand, gravels, guano, stones, blocks, mud, ice), formations (stalactites, stalagmites, column, helictite, drapery, flowstone), ceiling meander, scallop, hydrology (flow, pool, waterfall, sump), stations and artifacts. The work continued for many years (see [20, 28)).

Vineyard (1962) [17] has symbols for the underlying galleries, unexplored continuations, height, depth, gradient, formations (stalactite, stalagmites, column, gour, flowstone), slopes, pits, chimneys, ceiling meander and floor meander, hydrology, deposits (blocks, stoines, gravel, sand), and artifacts. This work extends the symbology of Deike R. (1959 Missouri Speleology 1(3) p. 22) and cites Butcher (1950) [7].

Makcumopsvy (1963) [18] presents a stylish symbology (figure below). Hydrology: pool (hatch) and flow (weavy arrow). Formations: stalactites and stalagmites (‘Y' in the profile, a circle in the plan), flowstone, etc. Gradient (arrow) and deposits (sand, clay, gravel blocks). Besides his own works the author cites a Anker [12], Butcher [7], Petrochilos [15], and [14].

Ariagno (1965) [19] reports a few symbols appeared on Spelunca (Dic. 1962). They are essentially similar to those of Boegli: deposits (sand, clay, gravels, blocks, ice - with the date), air flow, hydrology: pool (hatch) and flows (weavy arrow), springs and sinks, pits, chimneys, stylish formations (stalactites, stalagmites and flowstone).

The Association for Mexican Cave Studies [20] adopted a cave symbology that includes unsurveyed and under/over-passing passages, stations, dimensions (height and depth), cross section, slope, drop, pit and dome (in feet), deposits (guano, cristalline, sand, clay, gravel, blocks), formations (stalactite, stalagmite, column, flowstone, rimstone dam, soda straws), waterflow, pool, sump, geology (strike, dip, fault), and artifcats.

j a be : * 3 neh Mi f< Alison so of

EE Noe 0 IOFOTO Dy a ROBES ce | og

Cave symbols, Makcumopsuy (1963)

Bini and Cappa (1974) [26] published a proposal for conventional symbols that aimed to be complete, scale adaptable, intuitive, simple, and in agreement with symbols for karstic areas and geological and hydrological symbols. The symbols are organized by categories: morphology, tectonics, deposits, formations, erosion forms, hydrology, and miscellanea. This symbology is excessively detailed, with many semantical variations tied to small graphical differences. It remains nevertheless incomplete, as any symbology (for example it lacks a symbol for "root").

In 1965, when UIS was founded, a commission was created for the speleological terminology and conventional symbols. Trimmel, who had already collected some documentation about the symbologies used in different countries, proposed to subdivide the work in four tasks: surface symbols, long cave symbols, small cave symbols, and terminology (Proc.4-th ICS, 1965). In 1969 the commission was split in two commissions, one for the symbols and the other for the terminology. In 1977 the two commissions were again joined in a single one. In 1978 UIS published the first standard symbol set [29].

In the same years the commission for the speleological symbols of NSS (J. Hedges et al., 1979) [31] produced a symbology, after having carefully considered and discussed what has been created or

proposed in several countries (see for example [25]). This symbol set is basically still in use in USA (Dasher 1994) [35]. It is still very rich, without the excess of details of Bini-Cappa. There are more than 150 symbols, but it has a reduced set of symbols with only the most important ones (although it does not

include the air flow):

¢ station, altitude (relative to the datum), ceiling height, cross-section

¢ wall, presumed wall, underlying gallery, pit, chimney, step, ceiling step, slope ¢ formations: stalactite, stalagmite, column, soda-straw, flowstone, gour

¢ deposits: blocks, stones, gravel, sand, clay, and a symbol for the rock

e water: pool, flow

In 1995, at the Second Meeting of Underground Topography (Breitenbach ch), the speleological symbols in use in the different countries went under discussion and it was proposed a review of the 1978 symbology [33]. The proposal was discussed in the UIS Congress at Chaux de Fonds (1997), and later through email exchange. Finally the definite list of symbols was voted and accepted by the national delegates on 16 ottobre 1998 [34, 37]. The UIS symbol set went under revision in 2008 but remained unchanged. [43, 52]

The list of UIS speleological symbols is not exhaustive. It provides only a minimal common set of symbols. National speleological organization and surveyors can add other symbols that may be necessary (a symbol legend should be included in the cave map). The UIS symbology not only provides the graphical form of the symbols but it also describes how each symbol should be used. Furthermore it stresses the importance of the textual description of the cave as completion of the cave map.

Being twenty years since its definition, we can confidently say that the UIS symbology is accepted worldwide, at least formally. Its adoption in the practice of cave surveying is still unsatisfactory. A reason

Plan Section Plan Section Plan Section Main Measuring Points Dripline sees | Difference in Elevation (beginneng of the cave (heaght in meters) Profile ~~. | = __ J Joint - Fault - Inclined Joint (arrow in line of view) \ ee = ——— Outline of a gallery ta —— jail Step \ 4 <a Lake a ae ie ~~ > ~~ 2. ; <a (height in meters SS Flowing Water Pt = ed = 7 | 8 . z= Zr, TT —— <—* Underlying galleries ee & | } ity Z = Pit | een] Sump = i 1 =a ae Seed Le eee (depth in meters \o* ar a ~~ Sas’ - . - ~ \ AD 7 I oa : Je a ( = y 7 = EA Too narrow continuation |; ut Pit open to the surface = ra / 4 Cascade \ rt a a —— Lan LS) { ga AC. Waterfal aN faa ‘5 os im | yw -+{ | a! _/ = Fr << ¢ _— << = } “i | : ee Continuation possible 1 7 Chimney - Chimney-Pit | Spring - Ah aT 9 , ~ = = = - = Sink re Oe \_* } = i ~ ~~ —s So~ aS . | Presumed dimensions . Contourlines Widespread Water Inlet - of Space (alttude in meters) | 645 ~\ \ Seeping , at a = ~— Gradient arrows r tL - Entrance arrow = Z Ceiling form = Gradient Lines Scallops - Flutes in general - _ a 2 be _ = Altitude above Sealevel Direction of paleoflow —— Plan Section Plan Section Plan Section Air Draught = North Arrow - Geographic - i A r Anostomosen - / | | (with date in dd.mm.yyyy format) - -____-- Pay =”, Cartesic and Magnetic | Karren p Y / | J : ice-Snow-Firn = eae i N Ne Nm 1989 & ae tid 1705 1998 ——————— Stalagmites baal Blocks - hy 1 a Cauliflowercaicite | a =: te Oe cos ome 1 ~ Debris ms, nd Disk Nee oe ae on J 2 ee ae See ; ~ = Stalactites ma eS | XA | Boones ~“ Te. ———_ ~~» —— =_— sig gee ' -- t Sinter Curtains ; a J} eee Clastic sediments - ) Human Activity a | Pillars ae 5 et a’ lr = Sand-Silt-Clay-Humus Foi / —<$<$—— (artwork, drawing, pottery, old = 2 a = ioe fot | ——s ——~J mining sites, human bones, ...) f ——_] - Helictites - been, ~~ ; Claycovered Walls Pe Oe ie Height of a room 1 Soda Straws gaia = a al a | L ce SS a a. (height in meters) ; \ . po sa _ . = > Crystals : | es ~~ \ fj SSS & 1} RANT A, } , "= Sinter Pools Ke KY Guano a _— LRxy = Pty he ———— | | Y le _ Flowstone - Ping. ae Camp / hy __. Wall Calcite fr “SSA >= he | ? _ | Moonmilk NSA) = / ———— A

UIS official cave symbols (Hauselmann 2002)

may be the fact that few cave surveying books have been written after its final release (an example is Day 2002 [38]), and the surveying courses still use old textbooks (indeed "good" textbooks; the problem is not the book but the teacher who do not update). Furthermore, even recent books may be biased towards national usage, and present sympols that are more common locally, rather than UIS symbols. Finally the instructors of Surveying courses often use, in their classes, symbology from old publications, maybe because these are more detailed (examples non included for the sake of fellow cavers).

A strong push to the adoption of UIS symbology is coming from the cave map drawing programs. As these include the official UlIS symbols, the user is driven to use it. However the UIS symbology is not complete (by design) and these program has addtitional symbols. Therion includes three or four other national symbology besides the UIS one. CSurvey has the UIS symbols, as well as many other graphics. Cavelnk, a plugin for Illustrator/Inkscape, has the UIS symbols and several others (not alternative to UIS).

In 2006 the informatics commission of UIS has adopted a symbology for karst surface features [41, 42]. In 2013 the work started towards a proposal for artificial cavities symbols. The discussion was continued at the 2015 International Congress of Artificial Cavities, in Rome [49]. In the following a symbology was drafted and was to be voted in 2017 or 2018 [50, 51].

References

[1] Martel A., Les Abimes, Paris 1894

[2] Jannet R., Ravozitza E.G., Enumeration des grottes visitees 1913 1917, Archives de Zoologie Experimentale, 57 1918, 203-470

[3] Teiss| L., Die Herstellung von Kartenskizzen naturlicher Hohlen, Osterreichescher Bundesverlag fur Unterricht, Wissenschaft und Kunst, 1925

[4] Muma M.H., Muma K.E., A Glossary of speleology Symbols for use in caves, NSS Bulletin 6 1944, 1-11

[5] Burkhardt R., Rysavy P., Skoupy M., Vodicka J., Soeleokartograficke smernice, Ceskoslovensky Kras, 6 1951, 67-78

[6] --, Symbols for use on cavern surveys, EAAnvikn =TtnAaloAoyikn Etaipia AeAtiov, 1(2) 1951, 56-57

[7] Butcher A.L., Cave surveying, British Caving 17 1953, 389-415

[8] ---, Symbols for use in drawing plans of caves, Acta Carsologica 1 1955, annex

[9] Weber C.E., A cave description from the middle of the 17th century, NSS Bulletin 18 1956, 43-45

[10] Rondina G., Iconografia speleologica, Guide Didattiche, Atti VIII Congr. Naz. Speleol. (Como 1956), Vol. 2, 1958

[11] Gotzinger G., Die kartierung der Vertikaldimension del Hohlen, Proc. V Gener. Ass. of Cave Commettee, Wien 1956, 6-19

[12] Anker T.F., Joller E., Signaturen fur Hohlenplane, Proc. II Int. Congr. Speleology, Bari, Vol. 2 1958, 255-268. Reprinted also in Stalactite 4(2) 1959, 25-42

[13] Pretner E., Osservazioni all'elaborato italiano riguardante la documentazione speleologica, Proc. II Int. Congr. Speleol., Bari 1958, Vol. 2, 1958, 276-281

[14] --- Normalisation des signes conventionnels en speleologie, Ann. de Speleologie 14 (1-2) 1959, 267-273

[15] Petrochilos J. Signes conventionnels en cartographie de formes speleologiques, EAAnvikn 2TInAdloAoyikn Etaipia AgeAtiov, 5 (1) 1959, 9-18

[16] Hedges J., NSS Proposed standard map symbols (1961), in AMCS Activities Letter 2 1975, 17-18

[17] Vineyard J.D., Cave map symbols, Missouri Speleology 2(4) 1962, 94-99

[18] Makcumopsuy F.A., YcnoBHbIe OOO3HAYEHIS LVI ME/IKOMACLIT AOHbIX M1aHOB VU Mpogounev new ep, NEWLEPbI 3 1963 97-99

[19] Ariagno D., Les signes convetionneles de la topo souterraine, Echo des Vulcains 18(a) 1965, 12

[20] -- Assoc. Mexican Cave Studies Newsletter, 1(9) 1965, 92-93

[21] Trimmel M., Audetat M., Signes conventionnels a Il'usage des speleologues, Stalactite 16 1966, 73-125

[22] Kommission fur Terminoligie und konventionelle Zeichen, Vorschlag der Subkommision fur einheitliche Hohlenplan Signaturen, 3-rd Int. Congr. Speleology - Vienna 1963, 1966 181-182

[23] Audetat M., Dummermuth H., VetterliA., La suisse et le signes conventionnels en speleologie, ||| Int. Congr. Speleologgy - Vienna 1963, Vol. 5, 1966 127-146

[24] M.H. Fink, Vergleichende Ubersicht der fur Hohlenplane vorgeschlagenen und verwendeten Signaturen, III Int. Congr. Speleology - Wien 1963, Vol. 5, 1966, 161-168

[25] Thompson P., Standard legend for Canadian Caver maps, The Canadian Cave, 4(2) 1972, 66-68

[26] Bini A., Cappa G., Proposte di ammodernamento della simbologia per rilievi di cavita' sotterranee, Boll. Ass. It. Cartografia, 31 1974, 97-108

[27] Russel B. et.al., Cave map symbols, AMCS Activities Letter, 2 1975, 11-19

[28] -- Cave map symbols, AMCS Activities Letter, 3 1975, 15-29

[29] Eabre G., Audetat M., Signes speleologiques conventionnels, UIS/AFK/FFS CERGH Memoires 14 1978

[380] Boegli A., Karst hydrology and physical speleology, Springer-Verlag Berlin 1980 (translation of 1978 edition) [31] Hedges J., Rissell B., Thrun B., White W.B., The 1976 NSS standard map symbols, NSS Bulletin 41(2) 1979 [32] Shaw T.R., The history of cave studies, Helictite 24 1986, 3-12

[33] Hauselmann Ph., Weidmann_Y., Una proposition d'unification des symboles utilises en speleologie, Stalactite 46 1996, 15-27. Translated by Ruder N., Wookey: A suggestion for a unified symbol list for cave surveys, Compass Point 14 1996, 9-16

[34] Cappa G., Ferrari G., La nuova simbologia internazionale per i rilievi di grotta, Speleologia 41 1999, 100-109 [35] Dasher G.R., On station, National Speleological Society, Huntsville Alabama USA, 2001 (fourth ed.)

[36] Kempe S., Reinboth F, Die beiden Merian Texte von 1650 und 1654 zur Baumannshohle und die dazugehorigen Abbildungen, Die Hohle 52(2) 2001, 33-45

[37] Hauselmann Ph., U/S cave symbols: the definitive list, Acta Carsologica 31-3 2002, 165-176

[38] Day A.J., Cave surveying, BCRA Cave Studies Series - 11, 2002

[39] Middleton G., Australia: history in Encyclopedia of Caves and Karst Science, Gunn J. ed. 2004, 127-130

[40] Matthews P., U/S Informatics Commission report 2001 2005, UIS Bulletin 51-1 2005, 10-11

[41] Hauselmann Ph., Karst surface symbols: proposition of a standard symbol set, X|V Int. Congr. Speleol., Atherns 2005

[42]