Chain Smokers on the trail...or Cellphones?

[NICKTHEGREEK]

Sorry there Nick, I didn't read Rock's post as closely as I should have. He had prefaced it with a note about smoker's who leave butts in the fire so I just skimmed it as I don't do that.

Then there was all the talk about litter, stereotyping, Baptists, and smokescreens such that well, that initial argument was in fact hidden behind a cloud of smoke for me. I just didn't have the discipline to read from the beginning again .

Now all this talk is making me jones for a cigarette, but I don't start hiking until Thursday so I'll have to wait.

I think you have a reasonably good argument. I also agree, however, that ingestion could be harmfully toxic to some animals. As a Frolicking Dinosaur points explains, this toxicity is species dependent. Personally, I wouldn't bother arguing this case from the toxicity standpoint. The butts are litter and should be packed out.

No sweat. I'm with you on the litter standpoint, just felt that the toxicity was a bit of a leap from a logic standpoint. Thankfully, the thread hasn't gone on to the impact on the environment from all those zippos and bics getting lousy fuel economy, and global warming from matches.

[bearbait2k4]

Bait, the facts speak for themselves. It's all there in it's original unedited form. Sorry you are not familiar with the use of pronouns.

Let's say that someone says "Jack and Joe are smokers. They like to smoke Camels."
Does that mean that all smokers like Camels, or does it refer only to the subjects of the preceding sentence?

Once again, you picked the wrong battle.

So, which 2 hikers were you talking about when you refered to "they?"

Because, in your post, you said smokers, then said they.

The they equals smokers.

Never try to give an english major an english lesson.

This is getting dropped, because you are just going to ridiculous levels to try to backpedal your way out of something you never really refuted until others started calling you out.

[bearbait2k4]

Someone mentioned earlier that butts are just like any other litter. I agree, the problem is, butts on the AT outnumber all other litter combined. They're just smaller and are flattened (usually) when extinguished. Also, other litter, unless in flames when thrown down, doesn't have the potential to burn every frigging thing up.

That's interesting. I never noticed butts to be the majority of the problem out on the trail the times I was out there. I know it happens, unfortunately, but I always saw greater quantities of other trash being left behind (including anything left in shelters, etc). One shelter in New Hampshire, just North of Mahusoc Notch, looked like a veritable grocery store.

Anyway, I think the focus should just be litterers. If the smokers on the trail that litter do so more than non smokers that litter, what is the point of that? Litter is litter. Seriously, should we go around counting each and every piece of litter, labeling it to a side, and start assuming why they do such a thing? That doesn't solve anything. The litter is still there.

So, what is the best thing to do? Do we volunteer more, after the fact, to clean up the messes? Do we try to educate more? How do you educate on the trail something that should be more obvious? Should people be vigilant and tell someone that he or she needs to go pick up his or her trash?

[Roland]

~~~

Never try to give an english major an english lesson.

~~~

I'm sure you meant to write English.

[sliderule]

Never try to give an english major an english lesson.

I would never even consider doing that. And I'm fairly certain that I haven't!!!!

[sliderule]

This is getting dropped, because you are just going to ridiculous levels to try to backpedal your way out of something you never really refuted until others started calling you out.

Translation: If you are misquoted by bearbait2k4, and you don't refute her allegations immediately, you will be held responsible for her misrepresentations.

[sliderule]

Someone mentioned earlier that butts are just like any other litter. I agree, the problem is, butts on the AT outnumber all other litter combined.

The thing that makes cigarette butts a bit unique is that they evidently don't qualify as litter in everyone's mind. I suspect that there are hikers who would never think of leaving their foil food pouch in a fire ring, or even throwing their empty cigarette package along the side of the trail. But they are perfectly happy to toss a cigarette butt into an empty fireplace or grind it into the shelter floor with their boot.

[Ridge]

Would that mean that smokers are the primary cause of litter on the trail?

As for the numbers of pieces of litter, Yes. As far as total weight of litter, NO. However, it could be that the smokers threw most of the other litter down, no way of telling.

Most people that litter could be smokers. A 2 pack-a-day smoker could throw down 40 butts a day along with other trash. I am NOT saying all smokers liter. Second hand smoke in a shelter or near other non-smokers is another big problem.

[sliderule]

But if we have to get rid of discarded butts, where would you go???

Ender, the way my luck runs, I'll probably get shipped off to an asylum filled with chain smoking nicotine addicts. And if I am really unlucky, the asylum will be located in New York City!!!

[sliderule]

As for the numbers of pieces of litter, Yes. As far as total weight of litter, NO. However, it could be that the smokers threw most of the other litter down, no way of telling.

Most people that litter could be smokers. A 2 pack-a-day smoker could throw down 40 butts a day along with other trash. I am NOT saying all smokers liter. Second hand smoke in a shelter or near other non-smokers is another big problem.

Any idea how the propensity to litter varies with education level?

[Ender]

Ender, the way my luck runs, I'll probably get shipped off to an asylum filled with chain smoking nicotine addicts. And if I am really unlucky, the asylum will be located in New York City!!!

What do you mean the asylum will be located in NYC??... NYC is an asylum!

One really nice thing about NYC though is that smoking is no longer allowed in bars and restaurants... makes for a much nicer experience for us non smokers.

[MOWGLI]

Chain smoking and hiking are two activities that IMO are mutually exclusive. Kinda like going to a health spa for a week and eating McDonalds every meal. It don't make no sense.

As long as I don't have to breathe the smoke or look at the butts on the ground, I could care less. I have my own demons to look after.

[sliderule]

One really nice thing about NYC though is that smoking is no longer allowed in bars and restaurants... makes for a much nicer experience for us non smokers.

That's good to hear. A comment in an another post, comparing the plight of smokers to that of Native Americans, has got me thinking. (The comparison was completely invalid, but it caused me to think, nonetheless.) The concept of "smoking reservations" might have promise.

[sliderule]

Chain smoking and hiking are two activities that IMO are mutually exclusive. Kinda like going to a health spa for a week and eating McDonalds every meal. It don't make no sense.

There have been a number of studies which indicate that smoking is responsible for a decrease in cognitive function. Maybe that would explain the apparently irrational behavior.

[weary]

What do you mean the asylum will be located in NYC??... NYC is an asylum!

One really nice thing about NYC though is that smoking is no longer allowed in bars and restaurants... makes for a much nicer experience for us non smokers.

Maine adopted the restaurant ban a decade or so ago. It takes awhile for asylum communities to catch up/

[sliderule]

You know the movement has picked up steam when Southern states like Georgia are jumping on the bandwagon. I just read that 30% of all cancer deaths would be eliminated if tobacco use were to cease. And that smokers between the ages of 35 and 69 are 300% more likely to die than nonsmokers in the same age group.

[dreamhiker]

if tobacco use were to cease.

The Government will never let this happen the tax revenue it generates is enough for them to keep it around.

[mdionne]

You know the movement has picked up steam when Southern states like Georgia are jumping on the bandwagon. I just read that 30% of all cancer deaths would be eliminated if tobacco use were to cease. And that smokers between the ages of 35 and 69 are 300% more likely to die than nonsmokers in the same age group.

If the smokers finally quit does that mean they live forever???

[Frolicking Dinosaurs]

They won't live forever - just about 12.7 years longer and will have fewer health problems while they do it. They will also be 980% less likely to require an oxygen tank to live and nearly 500% less likely to die in a nursing home.

[mdionne]

Yesterday I past a woman out of breath and struggling going up Mt Megunticook. I had a cigarette in my mouth as I past and said hello. Instead of saying hello said snapped back and said "You're gonna die on this hill with that cigarette in your mouth!" I turned and snapped back, "Clearly, the only one whose dying going up this hill is you!"

This isn't the first time I've run across some self righteous non smoker on a trail before. My question is, why do people care so much what a total stranger is doing to their body? I never go into a body piercing shop and lecture people on the holes they put into their body. I guess some people find it to be their duty to do so.