View Full Version : Campfires, drought, and the cold
John Klein
11-06-2007, 22:27
Due to dry conditions, there's a ban on open fires in undeveloped areas of the Chattahoochee national forest in effect until April of 2008. How important are campfires to you for warmth and morale when backpacking, especially now when overnight lows can get below freezing? Would you change plans to camp in "developed" areas like public campgrounds if the campfire ban was in effect where you were originally planning to hike?
Survivor Dave
11-06-2007, 22:36
Actually, water is OK in a few areas North of Neels according to Mountain Crossings web site. I'll be up there this week. It's still banned for campfires and that would be a bummer, especially with Daylight Savings Time now in effect. I guess a good book, some tunes, and plenty of battery power for the headlamp is our only solution. I can't really do anything about the temps though except tough them out in a warm bag ang good hearty food.
SD
Tipi Walter
11-06-2007, 22:46
I don't want a fire and don't need a fire. Often the firepit will be far from water so how are you going to douse it? And in the morning when you leave, are you really sure it's out? Why worry? I've seen backpackers stubbornly try to get a fire going in 30-40 mph winds, thinking that their camping experience must include a fire, and then later they just hit the tents without even dousing the fire. Real pieces of work. I've had to get up at midnight and scope out their fire circle and once I found the whole thing ablaze with no one around.
I've often come up on burning firepits on a trail with no one around, lazy backpackers leaving an open fire still smoking. The warmest place in the winter is not around a fire but up on a sleeping pad wrapped in a sleeping bag. And if you plan on doing any long term stealth camping, a fire is definitely out.
IMO campfires are not at all important for warmth. If keeping warm is your main priority, get in your sleeping bag asap and stay there. You'll be much warmer than you will be if you stand around a campfire.
If you're working your tail off, running around, gathering wood, OTOH, you'll keep warm.
Campfires are fun, but for warmth, go for warm clothing, hot food and drink, and a good sleeping bag.
Survivor Dave
11-06-2007, 22:52
I don't want a fire and don't need a fire. Often the firepit will be far from water so how are you going to douse it? And in the morning when you leave, are you really sure it's out? Why worry? I've seen backpackers stubbornly try to get a fire going in 30-40 mph winds, thinking that their camping experience must include a fire, and then later they just hit the tents without even dousing the fire. Real pieces of work. I've had to get up at midnight and scope out their fire circle and once I found the whole thing ablaze with no one around.
I've often come up on burning firepits on a trail with no one around, lazy backpackers leaving an open fire still smoking. The warmest place in the winter is not around a fire but up on a sleeping pad wrapped in a sleeping bag. And if you plan on doing any long term stealth camping, a fire is definitely out.
Tipi, you are a funny guy!
What do you call this? BUSTED!!! Just kidding man....:D
http://trailjournals.com/photos.cfm?id=246768 (http://trailjournals.com/photos.cfm?id=246768)
SD
Tipi Walter
11-06-2007, 22:57
Another big problem with fires is tent placement, MY tent placement in fact. Often I'll get to a large campsite and find a great place for the tent but has a firepit too close by so I'll forego it and move on. Why? Cuz I know whoever comes in to camp will want to use that firepit and send hot ash blowing onto my tent. I can prevent this by really just taking over the campsite, laying gear all around, and staking my dog on his leash right at the firepit. First come gets dibs, etc.
saimyoji
11-07-2007, 09:01
Don't need a fire, though I do enjoy them. If one is having trouble staying warm in the cooler seasons, one should re-think the gear they are carrying. :)
What happens to people when they become to reliant on their high tec gear?
Tipi Walter
11-07-2007, 09:12
What happens to people when they become to reliant on their high tec gear?
They become backpackers.
NICKTHEGREEK
11-07-2007, 09:13
What happens to people when they become to reliant on their high tec gear?
Exactly what the cave men without fire and tools said about the cave men who had fire and tools.
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 09:15
What happens to people when they become to reliant on their high tec gear?
they become/are weenies?
What happens to people when they become to reliant on their high tec gear?
:confused: There's nothing high tec about carrying enough clothing to stay warm. It can be the latest and priciest, or it can be wool.
AT-HITMAN2005
11-07-2007, 09:33
i call fire Appalachian T.V.
maxNcathy
11-07-2007, 09:42
I enjoy using my stove to cook or make coffee or tea for overnighters. If we set up camp for more than a day then it is nice to have a bonfire to sit around...keep fire small like Tipi in picture above and keep a bucket of water handy and kill the fire before leaving.
Sandalwood
Tipi Walter
11-07-2007, 10:00
Tipi, you are a funny guy!
What do you call this? BUSTED!!! Just kidding man....:D
http://trailjournals.com/photos.cfm?id=246768 (http://trailjournals.com/photos.cfm?id=246768)
SD
Wow, I just got around to looking at the photo and that was not a woodfire but a fire to burn trash after 11 days on the trail. Burning carried trash is another matter and sort of separate from the usual bonfire most people attempt. It is carefully monitored and feed slowly piece by piece not to generate warmth but to lighten the packload. Some amount of trash does accumulate on long trips, some can't be burned like foil wraps, while most other stuff can be.
I enjoy using my stove to cook or make coffee or tea for overnighters. If we set up camp for more than a day then it is nice to have a bonfire to sit around...keep fire small like Tipi in picture above and keep a bucket of water handy and kill the fire before leaving.
Sandalwood
You take a bucket with you backpacking?:eek:
Jim Adams
11-07-2007, 11:03
A wise man once told me..."there is no such thing as bad weather, only bad clothing!"
fires are nice but also time and work consuming and a major responsibility.
geek
i call fire Appalachian T.V.
Yup, and the programming is as interesting as those sitting around watching with you.
envirodiver
11-07-2007, 11:13
Fires are more for moral than warmth. Too much trouble and if cold I'm in my bag.
Plus despite your best attempts to douse the fire. What if that one little spark survived, blew out into some dry leaves and burned some of our forest down. The thought of that potential is enough to keep me from having a fire.
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 11:17
Fires are more for moral than warmth. Too much trouble and if cold I'm in my bag.
i have wonderful morals. a like a campfire. not much work at all to get one going
Fires are more for moral than warmth. Too much trouble and if cold I'm in my bag.
Plus despite your best attempts to douse the fire. What if that one little spark survived, blew out into some dry leaves and burned some of our forest down. The thought of that potential is enough to keep me from having a fire.
If conditions were dry enough for some dry leaves to catch a spark and start a forest fire, then a ban would most likely be in effect.
i have wonderful morals. a like a campfire. not much work at all to get one going
I am always surprised at how many "campers" I have had to bail out from their ineffective attempts to get a fire going. It ain't that hard folks.
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 11:22
I am always surprised at how many "campers" I have had to bail out from their ineffective attempts to get a fire going. It ain't that hard folks.
most thru-hikers can't start one either. plus they're too lazy. they would rather lay in a shelter and fool with their cell phones or other gadgets
most thru-hikers can't start one either. plus they're too lazy. they would rather lay in a shelter and fool with their cell phones or other gadgets
It makes you wonder what percentage of thru-hikers are campers/backpackers versus people out to collect the 2000 miler badge to put alongside their other bragging rights trophies.
It makes you wonder what percentage of thru-hikers are campers/backpackers versus people out to collect the 2000 miler badge to put alongside their other bragging rights trophies.
I think most, but not all, people who just want the patch decide that the hike will take Way Too Long. And quit.
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 11:30
It makes you wonder what percentage of thru-hikers are campers/backpackers versus people out to collect the 2000 miler badge to put alongside their other bragging rights trophies.
take away all the shelters, hostels, shuttle services and outfitters all along the trail and there would be very few thru-hike attempts.
I think most, but not all, people who just want the patch decide that the hike will take Way Too Long. And quit.
take away all the shelters, hostels, shuttle services and outfitters all along the trail and there would be very few thru-hike attempts.
Sounds like today's typical thru-hiker is looking for an adventure, as long as it is not too much of an adventure. :-?
most thru-hikers can't start one either. plus they're too lazy. they would rather lay in a shelter and fool with their cell phones or other gadgets
if one is lazy to shave, maintain a decent personal hygiene, have some decent shelter and set it up (and then pack it again) some are even lazy to take pictures, if laziness would hurt...many people will scream in pain, and so on.
personally i`m gonna have a fire whenever is permitted and possible,i love to camp and relax looking at the dancing flames,here the wood pop,and the smell. Of course is not needed to build a JUMBO fire as large as the fire pit, and to be 100% safe, if you have a trowel dig a hole put the dirt next to it, and when you are done whit it just cover the ashes whit the dirt. and use common sense.
envirodiver
11-07-2007, 14:54
Starting a fire is the easy part, with some patience, but everything else about it, collecting wood, ensuring that it is out, etc. is the part that's difficult.
Just because an open fire ban is not in effect does not mean that a stray spark will not start a forest fire. I have seen way too many people that do not take the needed time and make the effort to put a fire out properly.Do you really think that common sense runs amuck?
It's a personal choice and sometimes it is worth the effort. Anything to get the moral up, Cause my morals could use some improvement.
Campfires create the worst visual and ecological impact of any backcountry camping practice. Building fire rings pockmarks pristine woodlands with blackened rocks, piles of ash and charcoal, blackened cans, and unburned wood. Vegetation disappears and soil packs down around the fire ring. Soil becomes sterile, which retards plant recovery. Hikers trample vegetation while looking for wood, and, when they find it, remove woody debris critical to a healthy ecosystem.
Leave No Trace principles encourage you to go without a fire. Use a backpacking stove instead. If you do intend to build a fire, check your A.T. guidebooks for fire restrictions along the Trail; some areas do not permit fires at all. Keep in mind that forest fires are always a potential hazard along the A.T., especially during early spring, summer, and fall.
Where fires are permitted, build them only in established fire rings. Don't add rocks to an existing ring. Keep fires small. Burn only dead and downed wood that can be broken by hand—leave saws and axes at home. Never leave a fire unattended, and never build a fire on a windy day.
Erase your campfire when you leave. Drown it with water, then stir the ashes. Feel for heat with your hand to ensure it is out. Remove unburned foil and plastic and pack them out. If you used an existing fire ring, scatter the ashes and camouflage the burned area with organic matter. Finally, scatter unused firewood you gathered in the forest.
Text above @ATC's Camping and Shelters (http://www.appalachiantrail.org/site/c.jkLXJ8MQKtH/b.789299/k.F8E4/Camping_and_Shelters.htm) + [PgDn]
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 17:40
Campfires create the worst visual and ecological impact of any backcountry camping practice. Building fire rings pockmarks pristine woodlands with blackened rocks, piles of ash and charcoal, blackened cans, and unburned wood. Vegetation disappears and soil packs down around the fire ring. Soil becomes sterile, which retards plant recovery. Hikers trample vegetation while looking for wood, and, when they find it, remove woody debris critical to a healthy ecosystem.
this describes EVERY stupid, stinkin' shelter area from Ga. to Me. that's why i build new, smaller fire rings elsewhere.
Tipi Walter
11-07-2007, 17:58
this describes EVERY stupid, stinkin' shelter area from Ga. to Me. that's why i build new, smaller fire rings elsewhere.
There are probably thousands, perhaps millions, of small fire rings scattered across this continent and now completely hidden by the long passage of time. Think of 20,000 years worth of human activity here and all the fires they built. Most of those firepits are long gone. What stays much longer now are the bulldozed and dynamited roads cut for logging and the devilish sprawl inching its way closer and closer to the trail.
On the other hand, I like LW's sentiment about getting rid of the shelters, shuttles, hostels, etc and by doing so there would be many fewer thru-hikers. Such an action could be a positive step in the right direction.
dessertrat
11-07-2007, 18:13
Fires are more for moral than warmth. Too much trouble and if cold I'm in my bag.
Plus despite your best attempts to douse the fire. What if that one little spark survived, blew out into some dry leaves and burned some of our forest down. The thought of that potential is enough to keep me from having a fire.
Well, I wouldn't encourage burning the forest down, but honestly, the insistence of people that we can't have forest fires ever is antithetical to the natural cycle. Some of the most beautiful areas in the nation are "recovering" from forest fires. True, we wouldn't find them pretty for a few years. But the ecology takes a longer view, and should.
sherrill
11-07-2007, 18:14
Somewhat close to topic...my wife and I sectioned from Hot Springs to Erwin one year, and forgot to pack headlamps. Found out that we didn't really need them for general chores after dark, but we weren't planning on journaling or reading in the tent anyway. Actually was nice to sit and watch the moon rise.
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 18:17
Somewhat close to topic...my wife and I sectioned from Hot Springs to Erwin one year, and forgot to pack headlamps. Found out that we didn't really need them for general chores after dark, but we weren't planning on journaling or reading in the tent anyway. Actually was nice to sit and watch the moon rise.
headlamps are way overrated and not really needed. for years i used a candle in my tent to read by
take away all the shelters, hostels, shuttle services and outfitters all along the trail and there would be very few thru-hike attempts.
Get real, Wolf. We've seen you offer shuttles several times here on WhiteBlaze. And by what means do you plan to remove the outfitters and hostels along the trail? Does Ms. Janet know about this? The ATC may have some control over the AT corridor, but practically none outside of it.
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 18:39
Get real, Wolf. We've seen you offer shuttles several times here on WhiteBlaze. And by what means do you plan to remove the outfitters and hostels along the trail? Does Ms. Janet know about this? The ATC may have some control over the AT corridor, but practically none outside of it.
i mostly offer shuttles for section hikers. i rarely will shuttle a thru-hiker when they arrive here cuz all they want to do is slackpack for 3 days and pay next to nothing. although they have plenty of $$ for beer and restaurants. i don't plan to remove hostels and outfitters
Tipi Walter
11-07-2007, 18:58
i mostly offer shuttles for section hikers. i rarely will shuttle a thru-hiker when they arrive here cuz all they want to do is slackpack for 3 days and pay next to nothing. although they have plenty of $$ for beer and restaurants. i don't plan to remove hostels and outfitters
I guess that was my idea.
Get real, Wolf. We've seen you offer shuttles several times here on WhiteBlaze. And by what means do you plan to remove the outfitters and hostels along the trail? Does Ms. Janet know about this? The ATC may have some control over the AT corridor, but practically none outside of it.
Wow. Talk about taking a comment way out of context. LW was simply pointing out how dependent thru-hikers have become on these services versus knowing and using camp-craft skills and supporting themselves. The AT thru-hike has developed into a hike between road crossings for rest and creature comforts. I don't think many would make it on the CDT.
shelterbuilder
11-07-2007, 19:08
If you are cold, get inside your sleeping bag. If you're still cold, get thee to REI (or Campmor, or LL Bean, etc) before the next trip!
A campfire warms the mind, but not the body (unless you REALLY know what you're doing, and most folks don't!).
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 19:09
Wow. Talk about taking a comment way out of context. LW was simply pointing out how dependent thru-hikers have become on these services versus knowing and using camp-craft skills and supporting themselves. The AT thru-hike has developed into a hike between road crossings for rest and creature comforts. I don't think many would make it on the CDT.
thank you. you get it :)
thank you. you get it :)
Sometimes I think you are only one making sense here...and that is scary. ;)
Wow. Talk about taking a comment way out of context. LW was simply pointing out how dependent thru-hikers have become on these services versus knowing and using camp-craft skills and supporting themselves. The AT thru-hike has developed into a hike between road crossings for rest and creature comforts. I don't think many would make it on the CDT.
Nah, LW's just bad-mouthing thru-hikers and being a hypocrite, as usual. AFAIK, LW hasn't done either the PCT or CDT. Apologies in advance if I'm wrong about that. ;)
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 19:16
Nah, LW's just bad-mouthing thru-hikers and being a hypocrite, as usual. AFAIK, LW hasn't done either the PCT or CDT. Apologies in advance if I'm wrong about that. ;)
hypocrite about what?
hypocrite about what?
He doesn't get it. ;)
What's "to get," Tin Man? You'd like me to react to LW's facile insinuation that all hikers not named "Lone Wolf" are weenies and slackers? Fugeddaboudit.
There's no rule that says you've got to stay in shelters or hostels or use the services or businesses that LW decries. They exist. Get over it, and hike your own damned hike. If you don't like it, walk some other trail.
L. Wolf is just making a valid observation. I am willing to be a lot of money that if there were not as many services available to thru hikers, a lot less would try.
Also, L.Wolf is just trying to cause a riot, and this has been a fascinating one.
Kirby
L. Wolf is just making a valid observation. I am willing to be a lot of money that if there were not as many services available to thru hikers, a lot less would try.
Also, L.Wolf is just trying to cause a riot, and this has been a fascinating one.
Kirby
Kirby, You "get it" about LW's point. Although regarding trying to cause a riot, I would suggest that Terrapin has that down cold. Sheesh....:rolleyes:
Lone Wolf
11-07-2007, 21:02
Also, L.Wolf is just trying to cause a riot, and this has been a fascinating one.
no kirby. 21 years ago on my first hike there were very few hostels, no shuttles or slackpacking by today's meaning and no where near the outfitters and i learned early on that shelters sucked. things have changed drastically. just an observation
I am willing to be a lot of money that if there were not as many services available to thru hikers, a lot less would try.
So, Kirby, answer honestly: did the existence of said "services" have anything at all to do with your decision to thru-hike?
saimyoji
11-07-2007, 21:24
So, Kirby, answer honestly: did the existence of said "services" have anything at all to do with your decision to thru-hike?
The availability of services and high numbers of other hikers will probably prevent me from doing a "traditional" thru-hike. I'll not share my plans with anyone here cause I know someone will steal the idea, share it with a friend, then before you know it....:eek:
So, Kirby, answer honestly: did the existence of said "services" have anything at all to do with your decision to thru-hike?
My original decision to thru hike had nothing to do with services, just inspired by the trail. However, as my planning has progressed, the services along the way seem helpful, it is hard to say if that has factored into my 100% firmness to thru hike, it certain has helped my outlook on my thru hiking be a positive one.
Valid question that I honestly can not answer with 100% certainty.
Kirby
no kirby. 21 years ago on my first hike there were very few hostels, no shuttles or slackpacking by today's meaning and no where near the outfitters and i learned early on that shelters sucked. things have changed drastically. just an observation
How may times have you thru hiked? Just curious.
I have thru hiked 0 times if people are curious,
Kirby
Tipi Walter
11-07-2007, 21:38
The availability of services and high numbers of other hikers will probably prevent me from doing a "traditional" thru-hike. I'll not share my plans with anyone here cause I know someone will steal the idea, share it with a friend, then before you know it....:eek:
I'm not sure what you mean by a traditional true-hike, but anyone could choose to hike with minimal non-trail interactions: Carry more fuel, carry more food, walk further before resupply. And like Dorothy Laker and hundreds before her, stash you pack in the woods, hitch to town to get food, hitch back and regain the trail. No town nights, no hostels, no real interruption, just a laundry day here and there and near-constant path exposure.
saimyoji
11-07-2007, 22:43
I'm not sure what you mean by a traditional true-hike, but anyone could choose to hike with minimal non-trail interactions: Carry more fuel, carry more food, walk further before resupply. And like Dorothy Laker and hundreds before her, stash you pack in the woods, hitch to town to get food, hitch back and regain the trail. No town nights, no hostels, no real interruption, just a laundry day here and there and near-constant path exposure.
Well, I put traditional in "" because thats how many see starting in March/April and walking North with the crowds. Sure, the things you describe are ways to maximise woods time, minimize town time....but the sheeple are still there.
BTW I really enjoy/learn from your winter hiking anecdotes/tips. My favorite time to hike is when its white.
saimyoji - I can guess what you're up to. If it's what I'm thinking, let's just say it's no "secret" among section hikers. I haven't had to deal with crowds on the trail for some time now... but I get to choose when I hike.
Dakota Dan
11-07-2007, 23:23
they become/are weenies?
Now that was funny. It's good to hear you speak with unforked tongue.
nitewalker
11-09-2007, 08:50
[quote=L. Wolf;443908]most thru-hikers can't start one either.
i goof on the hiker who makes the attempt at fire. case in point lay the bigger stuff down first and after 15min of trying to get it going they give up on that method and move all the peices around again and start over. i just sit and amuse myself at the site of this futile attempt at fire... "we have smoke but no fire, whats wrong"......hmmmmmmm:D
as for fire safety its mostly about being smart. think of the pitfalls be4 you make the fire and then go about it in a maner that will be safe. i figure it takes me less than 1.5min to get a fire going. what i mean by that is to have enough of a small fire that will lead me to my bigger fire if needed. you need 2 start small in order to be most effective...
my 2cents......................peace, nitewalker:-?
envirodiver
11-09-2007, 12:36
Well, I wouldn't encourage burning the forest down, but honestly, the insistence of people that we can't have forest fires ever is antithetical to the natural cycle. Some of the most beautiful areas in the nation are "recovering" from forest fires. True, we wouldn't find them pretty for a few years. But the ecology takes a longer view, and should.
I did not propose that fires be "outlawed", read my posts. Started out saying that I didn't have fires, which is a little misleading, because in certain cases I do, if in the mood, wanting to dry wet clothing, gear, etc., but rarely, just not required as part of MY outdoor experience for it to be enjoyable. Just like having to walk 20 miles a day to feel like I have accomplished something is not required. I'd rather walk, linger, sit, etc. and feel the woods, the silence, the smells (hiking partners excluded).
Maybe a good thread topic would be "why do you it hike/backpack?"
The choice to start and care for a fire is certainly a personal preference. It's unfortunate that more people don't take care of putting their fire out better. I have come up on way too many smoldering fire pits as I walk along, particularly in the morning. Then I have to stop and put it out for the inconsiderate and/or ignorant jackass that didn't handle their chore. More people need to realize that starting a fire carries the responsibility to ensure that it is put out before moving on. Kind of like the folks who get a cute puppy, but fail to realize that it grows into a dog and carries life responsibility.
But, I would never, ever propose more government rules or intrusion. We have enough of those.
fire building 1o1, basic fire making for dummies:D
http://nwwoodsman.com/Videos/FireMaking101.html