Dung Phug

Herbert Daniel Gebauer - 06/01/2018

An unspecified cave entrance (unidentified shape, unidentified dimensions, unidentified orientation) is formed at the contact between a calcite formation and a calcarenite formation and gives access to a single, tube-like cave passage, which has formed in marble (YONGE 1993: 16) or in limestone (MOTEGI et al. 2001) and seems to be of phreatic origin (ALL, GROVES & KAMBESIS 2005: 356). The cave is not only reputed to contain a fabulous tunnel but also is said to have been well decorated with speleothems (ALL et al. 2005: 356). WANGDI (a.i.) gives a photograph showing well preserved calcite formations in a rift cave passage. ETYMOLOGY: The Bhutanese Tibetan Dung Phug or -dung-phok- (Kencho Wangdi on kuenselonline.com accessed 2011.02.27) translates as Gost Cave (note 1) is the same as the unspecified one sizeable cave near Tang (YOUNG 1993: 16). SITUATION 1993: Somewhere in the vicinity of Tang (note 2) in the north of Bhutan (YONGE 1993: 16). SITUATION 2001: Not seen: MOTEGI et al.(2001.06.29), MOTEGI et al. (2001). WANGDI, Kencho (2001.06.21): Located near a grazing patch an hour's walk from Ugyen Chhoeling [sic!]. SITUATION 2005: ALL et al. (2005: 356 after MOTEGI et al. 2001) locate the entrance to their Ghost Cave in an unidentified spatial relation to the village of Ugyen Chholing (note 3) on the Tang Chhu (N27°32': E090°45'30”) and in the province of Bumthang (ALL et al. 2005: 356) but this location is shown to be covered by the Lhuntse dzongkhag (India Road Atlas, Eicher Goodearth 2006: 28 B2). Here or there, the cave [entrance], with an entrance elevation of 3,152 meters, is located on an unstable slope exceeding 50 degrees (note 4). CAVE DESCRIPTION 2001: Dr. M. Motegi, describes the finding as -very exciting-. About 200 metres long and 10 metres high … (WANGDI, Kencho 2001.06.21). CAVE DESCRIPTION 2005: The cave is two hundred meters in length with a mapped vertical extent of thirty-five meters and a steady downward slope. The cave develope by turbulent water flow rather than simple fracturing. The cave mostly follows the dip of the local strata, though for a short segment, does trend on the strike (note 5). The cave’s passages are tube-like and thus probably phreatically formed (note 6). It is speculated that the cave is an old meander cutoff of the massive Tang River. Ghost Cave is well decorated with speleothems - derived from the heavy precipitation associated with the Asian Monsoon. The cave entrance is formed at the contact between a calcite formation and a calcarenite formation [note 7]. The cave passage’s lowest level ends with breakdown on the floor and strongly blowing cool air issuing from the breakdown blocks, suggest that the cave continues beyond what is currently known (ALL et al. 2005: 356). CAVE POTENTIAL: In Bumthang [or was it in Lhuntse?] there were rumors of additional caves and similar rumors persist throughout the poorly explored east and south of Bhutan (ALL et al. 2005: 356). CAVE CONTENTS -Speleothems: From the Ghost Cave at Ugyen Chholing, stalagmites, stalagites … are removed and placed on alters, in shrines, or in chortens … [note 8] In Ghost Cave, speleothems appear to have slowly been removed over perhaps hundreds of years [note 9]. Removal began from the entrance and the easiest to reach and then moved inward to the areas where they are more actively forming (the cave gets wetter as you move further into the passage). All of the easily reached speleothems were gone (even including large draperies). The oldest ones near the entrance (now quite dry and inactive) were removed so long ago that they began forming new features over the scars before they dried out. The speleothem scars typically generated [botryoidal] ‘popcorn’ formations as opposed to the stalactites / stalagmites they were replacing. Hundreds of kilograms, perhaps even tons of speleothems have been removed in this very active cave. With the lack of market economy, economies of scale, lack of history f exploitation or harvest, and lack of a road to transport them, this must have been done over hundreds or even thousands of years. None of the locals (including a man 70+ years old) even realized that more than a handful had been removed. This indicates that it was done by monks (who didn’t talk about it) or was done over a very long time period, or most likely, both of the above. The cave is located on an unstable slope exceeding 50 degrees and removal of large features would have been a very difficult process. There is no beaten trail of any kind leading to the cave … [while] systematic short-term removal by teams of people would have created a safer, more defined trail even if it had occurred in the past (ALL et al. 2005: 356). The removal of large sections (0.5 m by 0.5 m pieces) of draperies and large (20 cm diameter) stalagmites would have been difficult to break loose and to carry at a weight of dozens of kilograms. This indicates that tools were used and that several people ere involved in many cases. For speleothems in the rear of the cave, these would have been dragged through the low narrow passage (0.5m height x 0.5m width) in the middle of the cave length (ALL et al. 2005: 357). CULTURAL HISTORY - fabulous tunnel: There were also rumors that the cave at one time extended to a [an unidentified] monastery on the road to the Tang village. While this is probably impossible (the cave would have to descend hundreds of meters and then cross the Tang river at its current level, 200 meters below the groundwater level during the cave’s formation period and then trend back upward to the monastery) it raises interesting questions about the existence of other caves in the area and how involved monks were in their explorations. A key question is if there is in fact another long cave hidden within the Monastery boundaries (ALL et al. 2005: 357).f exploitation or harvest, and lack of a road to transport them, this must have been done over hundreds or even thousands of years. None of the locals (including a man 70+ years old) even realized that more than a handful had been removed. This indicates that it was done by monks (who didn’t talk about it) or was done over a very long time period, or most likely, both of the above. The cave is located on an unstable slope exceeding 50 degrees and removal of large features would have been a very difficult process. There is no beaten trail of any kind leading to the cave … [while] systematic short-term removal by teams of people would have created a safer, more defined trail even if it had occurred in the past (ALL et al. 2005: 356). The removal of large sections (0.5 m by 0.5 m pieces) of draperies and large (20 cm diameter) stalagmites would have been difficult to break loose and to carry at a weight of dozens of kilograms. This indicates that tools were used and that several people f exploitation or harvest, and lack of a road to transport them, this must have been done over hundreds or even thousands of years. None of the locals (including a man 70+ years old) even realized that more than a handful had been removed. This indicates that it was done by monks (who didn’t talk about it) or was done over a very long time period, or most likely, both of the above. The cave is located on an unstable slope exceeding 50 degrees and removal of large features would have been a very difficult process. There is no beaten trail of any kind leading to the cave … [while] systematic short-term removal by teams of people would have created a safer, more defined trail even if it had occurred in the past (ALL et al. 2005: 356). The removal of large sections (0.5 m by 0.5 m pieces) of draperies and large (20 cm diameter) stalagmites would have been difficult to break loose and to carry at a weight of dozens of kilograms. This indicates that tools were used and that several people f exploitation or harvest, and lack of a road to transport them, this must have been done over hundreds or even thousands of years. None of the locals (including a man 70+ years old) even realized that more than a handful had been removed. This indicates that it was done by monks (who didn’t talk about it) or was done over a very long time period, or most likely, both of the above. The cave is located on an unstable slope exceeding 50 degrees and removal of large features would have been a very difficult process. There is no beaten trail of any kind leading to the cave … [while] systematic short-term removal by teams of people would have created a safer, more defined trail even if it had occurred in the past (ALL et al. 2005: 356). The removal of large sections (0.5 m by 0.5 m pieces) of draperies and large (20 cm diameter) stalagmites would have been difficult to break loose and to carry at a weight of dozens of kilograms. This indicates that tools were used and that several people ere involved in many cases. For speleothems in the rear of the cave, these would have been dragged through the low narrow passage (0.5m height x 0.5m width) in the middle of the cave length (ALL et al. 2005: 357). CULTURAL HISTORY - fabulous tunnel: There were also rumors that the cave at one time extended to a [an unidentified] monastery on the road to the Tang village. While this is probably impossible (the cave would have to descend hundreds of meters and then cross the Tang river at its current level, 200 meters below the groundwater level during the cave’s formation period and then trend back upward to the monastery) it raises interesting questions about the existence of other caves in the area and how involved monks were in their explorations. A key question is if there is in fact another long cave hidden within the Monastery boundaries (ALL et al. 2005: 357).