Leave No Trace and Outdoor Recreation [Archive]

Nest

11-08-2008, 21:43

I am in a class called intro to recreation and have to write a paper about how Leave No Trace has affected Outdoor Recreation. Any Ideas?

Ok, I guess I will actually help you get a decent grade instead of give you ideas to piss off the teacher.

Maybe do a paper on the evolution of gear with LNT in mind. More eco friendly gear, recycled materials being used, cleaner stoves, etc. Look at LNT on the world perspective instead of your personal impact on that immediate piece of soil. Most of the people in your class will do something on LNT fires, sleeping, and other obvious ideas. I doubt any of them would think about LNT on the bigger picture. Papers that think outside the box tend to get better grades despite minor grammatical errors because you didn't do the obvious.

Tipi Walter

11-08-2008, 21:50

You could always turn it around and write about how the field of outdoor recreation has affected the Leave No Trace mindset. In others words, has the business of taking large groups on guided trips into the woods affected the landscape in any way beyond 'leaving no trace'? Or even the difference practicing LNT for the solo backpacker as compared to guided groups. Pedantic drivel, perhaps. Where exactly would most of your research come from, The Journal Of Advanced Backpacking?

weary

11-08-2008, 22:49

All it makes for is annoying rangers and ridgerunners (not all of them) who have to recite the thing when anyone starts to do anything.

Hiker: I think I am going to go do some regular camp chore.
Annoying person: While you are there make sure you don't....Keep X distance from...

In boy scouts my troop learned carry in, carry out. Simple and to the point.
I agree. And that simple Carry In, Carry Out message solves 99.9 percent of the problems LNT was designed to solve. Unfortunately LNT solves almost no problems, because most people look behind themselves occasionally and discover all kinds of "traces." that mostly can't be eliminated without more effort than most are willing to expend.

So observant hikers tend to ignore the impossible and get on with their walks.

Weary
www.MATC.org

mudhead

11-09-2008, 06:42

Yes, but the teacher won't like that. Too many teachers want you to agree with their idea and what the class is about. So if you are in college you just have to play the game and humor them.

Very true.

Some fun stuff back in the '70s regarding Vibram lug soles and erosion.

Changes in footwear choices due to...

rickb

11-09-2008, 07:49

I agree. And that simple Carry In, Carry Out message solves 99.9 percent of the problems LNT was designed to solve. Unfortunately LNT solves almost no problems, because most people look behind themselves occasionally and discover all kinds of "traces." that mostly can't be eliminated without more effort than most are willing to expend.

So observant hikers tend to ignore the impossible and get on with their walks.

Weary
www.MATC.org

It may be possible that LNT has effected some changes in behavior along the AT.

Like with fires. Not so much around certain shelters anymore, so you see more wood on the ground and fewer trees stripped of their bottom branches, etc. People still build fires, of course. But less so, and few think it right to leave their off trail fire rings in place for the for the benefit of others.

LNT may have impacted how some stewards of the forest react to small signs left along the AT. Or to the way some people react to cold cans of Fanta left in streams for the the benefit of others. Seems like most people these days think feeds are better at road crossings than in the backcountry. Might that stem from a LNT mindset?

Carving one's initials into trees used to be tolerated, if not condoned. Few would find that acceptable these days. L. Wolf, perhaps?

LNT might be trying to capture some of those ideas, among others.

And then there are the LNT zealots who thing that hiking poles (as opposed to an alder staff with a camera mount screwed to the end) leave too much of an impact.

But no need to go there. They are a rare breed, indeed!

Peaks

11-09-2008, 08:32

I can't speak to how LNT has changed all of outdoor recreation, but certainly one of the principals where by in large, the message has gotten through is "carry in, carry out." Long gone are the dumps at all shelters, and garbage cans at many trailheads, etc.

Second, I think that the LNT principals have been turned into rules in many places. For example, campfire bans in Connecticut, and the restrictions in the White Mountain National Forest.

But, even without the campfire bans, I think that because people are aware of the LNT principals to "minimize campfire impacts," many people think twice before having an evening campfire. I know that I certainly do.

Egads

11-09-2008, 09:00

"Leave No Trace" is very ineffective

Just another slogan in the assault against those who want to enjoy the woods.

I look at it as being a good steward for those who follow.

canoehead

11-09-2008, 09:26

There are 7 principals to LNT. Not all are going to work for the thru hiker or casual walker. Sure carry in -carry out is a great rule for us to follow. Plus it depends on where you are in the world, IE: North Eastern USA or the South Western dessert.
Here in the north east we have a few areas worth protecting like the fragile ground cover / forests in the White Mts. or the fragile and diverse ecosystem in the
Sages Ravine area in NW,CT. So I feel pevention is the answear to keeping theses areas safe for many generations to come. Prevention may come in the form of signage sayin NO Camp Fires. Walk on durable surfaces only. No camping - Re foresting area. These are guides to help us make good choices, because it's a responsable thing to do. When I take groups Rock Climbing we can't use certain areas because of the Falcons nesting on the face of the cliff. or on very popular climbs you'll drive by and see chalk routes the climbers take, so instead of white chalk maybe get some darker color to blend in. You're on a wilderness trip on a river and you swear you're the only person thats ever been there, until you find an ol'e campfire ring on the rivers edge.
The fact is if you really want to follow LNT Stay home. or if you feel the need to interact with the outdoors such as myself then do it with respect and knowledge.

Peace

littlelaurel59

11-09-2008, 10:23

I agree. And that simple Carry In, Carry Out message solves 99.9 percent of the problems LNT was designed to solve. Unfortunately LNT solves almost no problems, because most people look behind themselves occasionally and discover all kinds of "traces." that mostly can't be eliminated without more effort than most are willing to expend.

So observant hikers tend to ignore the impossible and get on with their walks.

Weary
www.MATC.org (http://www.MATC.org)

With all due respect, I strongly disagree. "Carry in, Carry out" is one important part of LNT ("Dispose of waste properly"), but the other 6 principles MUST be taught if we and those who hike after us are going to be able to enjoy the outdoors.

The financial costs to our already strapped Park and Forest services of rescuing an individual who has failed to "Plan ahead and prepare" are great. That is time and money that cannot be spent on things that benefit us.

I have walked thru fire-scarred areas devoid of litter, that were burned out when someone failed to "Minimize campfire impact."

I have been subjected to noisy and obnoxious campers who failed to "Be considerate of others."

I am sure we can all remember instances where we visited an area adversely impacted by one of the 7 principles.

The fact that LNT requires "more effort than most are willing to expend" is probably true, and it is impossible to leave NO trace. It is also impossible to fully live by "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." But the ideals are worth teaching and striving for.

Homer&Marje

11-09-2008, 10:40

Hard to find places here on the east coast that have not been affected. There is traces everywhere but the more people practice LNT the better.

Mr. Clean

11-09-2008, 13:04

I think that for most, Leave No Trace is an impossible thing to really do, but it's the idea that we should try to minimize our impact to where we have been. The old "Take only pictures, leave only footprints" got the ball rolling, and the desireous effect is to once again do what we can to minimize the fact that we've been to a certain spot. LNT has become big bucks, but is certainly something we should strive for. Anyone interested should read Guy Waterman's book, "Backwoods Ethics"; great book for anyone interested in the outdoors and Wilderness.

booney_1

11-09-2008, 16:29

1.In the 70's and early 80's before LNT was heard of, conventional wisdom was "leave a campsite better than you found it". This mean leaving a pile of fire wood, camp improvements like lashed tables or chairs, fire ring,etc.

2.In the "old" days, cooking over a fire was what most people did. Now, many recreation areas have out right bans on fire. Backpacking stoves, commerical and homemade, are now typical.

Even in the "old days", people were encouraged to pack out what they packed in. So that part of LNT has not really made much of a change.

Some principles of LNT, like not camping in a "virgin" campsite, I don't believe are followed by most people. Also LNT wants you to walk in the middle of the path...even if there is a foot of mud there. But most people will go around..

The first two points are the main differences I've noticed.

emerald

11-09-2008, 16:45

"Leave No Trace" is very ineffective

Only when people won't take the time to educate themselves or modify it according to their own whims and then claim they practice it or reject it outright because they believe it's inconvenient.

LNT wants you to walk in the middle of the path even if there is a foot of mud there. But most people will go around.

I don't believe that's a new concept. Since it runs counter to human nature and what individual hikers see as benefiting themselves in the short term, we still have treadway widening, multiple treadways and damage to trailside vegetation.

Some simply don't know any better or understand why. They see where others walked around and do likewise. It's like the dirty dishes in a sink I referred to in another thread recently.

When trail maintainers block bootleg trails with brush, more often than not someone will take upon his or herself moving it only to recreate the problem. LNT requires greater efforts at educating the public to work better and everyone needs to help.

Lone Wolf

11-09-2008, 16:47

Only when people won't take the time to educate themselves or modify it according to their own whims and then claim they practice it or reject it outright because its inconvenient.

when was the last time you were on the georgia AT

emerald

11-09-2008, 17:34

Honestly, I don't envy GATC and I'm glad Pennsylvania doesn't see the user levels they experience early in the hiking season. Still, I can't help wondering if people who have been around the AT for years are forgetting what they observed years ago and that user levels have risen since then.

If people think LNT is at fault, where are their alternative proposals which would be better? Until we see these proposals and they're implemented, it's the best we've got and we should do what we can to increase it's effectiveness. Our time would be better spent figuring out how increase participation, rather than complaining about its ineffectiveness.

I am in a class called intro to recreation and have to write a paper about how Leave No Trace has affected Outdoor Recreation. Any ideas?

I hope we can keep in mind why this thread was begun and help m0rpheu5 who came here seeking advice. So often, we simply respond to posts without remembering the purpose of a thread.

mudhead

11-09-2008, 17:39

"leave a campsite better than you found it".

One can substitute "place" for campsite.

Good mindset.

emerald

11-09-2008, 20:27

I was looking for something else and found a page on USFS sign boards (http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/boone/infoboards/feeohv.shtml) which includes some LNT signs (scroll down). Don't want to bury you m0rpheu5, but maybe the link will stimulate thinking which leads to a useful idea?

littlelaurel59

11-09-2008, 23:13

I am in a class called intro to recreation and have to write a paper about how Leave No Trace has affected Outdoor Recreation. Any Ideas?

Getting back to the original question: LNT has affected outdoor recreation in the following ways:

1) It is an outdoor ethic that expands upon earlier outdoor ethics ("Carry in; Carry Out" "Take only memories; leave only footprints") as some outdoor entusiasts learned that the earlier ethics were incomplete. Many find the expansion too complicated.
2) It has become organized and corporate at some level, complete with webpage, books, courses, t-shirts and hats. Many find the marketing objectionalble.
3) It has created controversy within the outdoor community (as evidenced by this thread) with the extemes represented by those who don't give a d--n about what they leave behind on one end, and those fanatics who sleep with rocks under their tent rather than move them, and annoy the h--l out of anyone who doesn't do the same. Most of us find either extreme unpleasant.

Has it had an overall impact? I have no idea. Personally, as one who stated backpacking in the early 1970's (when "pack it in, pack it out" was the mantra), it has impacted my behavior on the trail and in camp. I have always been a trash fanatic, but now I am more aware of how other behaviors can impact the back country. I hope my brothers and sisters, and especially my descendants, in the hiking/community will benefit from my efforts to tread lightly.

weary

11-11-2008, 10:46

....In boy scouts my troop learned carry in, carry out. Simple and to the point.
And much more effective. The trails have been getting steadily dirtier since LNT became the prevailing mantra. Why? A hiker quickly learns that "Leave No Trace" is an impossible goal, and most apparently just tune out the message.

Weary

weary

11-11-2008, 11:42

With all due respect, I strongly disagree. "Carry in, Carry out" is one important part of LNT ("Dispose of waste properly"), but the other 6 principles MUST be taught if we and those who hike after us are going to be able to enjoy the outdoors.

The financial costs to our already strapped Park and Forest services of rescuing an individual who has failed to "Plan ahead and prepare" are great. That is time and money that cannot be spent on things that benefit us.

I have walked thru fire-scarred areas devoid of litter, that were burned out when someone failed to "Minimize campfire impact."

I have been subjected to noisy and obnoxious campers who failed to "Be considerate of others."

I am sure we can all remember instances where we visited an area adversely impacted by one of the 7 principles.

The fact that LNT requires "more effort than most are willing to expend" is probably true, and it is impossible to leave NO trace. It is also impossible to fully live by "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." But the ideals are worth teaching and striving for.
Like "Carry in, Carry out," the meaning of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is obvious. It needs no classes, no special training.

If everyone took the LNT training, or even read the instructions, it would work. But not one in a hundred outdoor users have done so. Most glance at the message, quickly decide it's mostly unachievable, and ignore it for evermore.

I had the great pleasure of knowing and talking to Paul Petzoldt during the final years of his long life. Paul, a world class mountaineer and outdoors educator, first coined the phrase and taught LNT principals in the 1960s and early 70s.

As he grew older, wiser, and could see the results of his instruction, he abandoned the concept as being both ineffectual at protecting the mountains and forests, and impossible to achieve.

He remained an outdoor educator and director of the Wilderness Education Association. He worked with school kids in Maine into his 90s.

Paul Petzoldt taught many of the same concepts, but abandoned the words "leave No Trace."

Unfortunately, others took up the mantra, and abandoned the commonsense words that had worked for decades. They now make good livings teaching Leave no Trace and sueing anyone who professes to teach the LNT concepts without paying tribute to their "non profit" corporation.

Weary

emerald

11-11-2008, 13:57

Nest

11-12-2008, 00:50

If everyone took the LNT training, or even read the instructions, it would work. But not one in a hundred outdoor users have done so. Most glance at the message, quickly decide it's mostly unachievable, and ignore it for evermore.
Weary

I agree a little with this. A lot of selters have a long list on LNT practices. A lot of the stuff doesn't make any sense, so we didn't even bother reading the rest. I can't remember any examples, but I do remember that we would laugh at them because the scenarios they were giving as reasons to do what they said could never happen. Luckily we had enough sense to already know "pack it in, pack it out". I think those are the best signs, and saw a lot of them. Short and to the point.

weary

11-12-2008, 11:48

Weary, have you taken a look at the signs on the USFS site I linked? Some incorporate those commonsense words you recall. Could it be the increase in litter to which you refer can be attributed to an increase in user levels as I suggested in an earlier post or other factors?
Of course. I post my opinions. I know of no scientific research on these matters. But I did live through the rise of the Carry in, Carry out messages three or four decades ago, and saw a remarkable change in attitudes. And dramatically cleaner trails, and campsites.

Sadly as Leave No Trace became the headline on messages to users, I saw that change slowly begin to reverse.

The earlier Carry In, Carry Out message also emerged during a time of sharply increased use of trails. The new levels of trash are appearing despite a sharp leveling off of useage.

Why? I wish I knew for sure. But I expect one reason is that every year there are fewer of us indoctrinated in the old messages still using the outdoors, and more and more of those who have only seen "Leave no trace" admonishments, while noticing their footprints and Leki holes and scratches.

Weary

backhiker

11-12-2008, 13:36

Goto LNT.org and you will find what you need there for your paper.

And if I may say about Leave No Trace. It is only inaffective when it is not practiced. There is still a lot of education that needs to be done.

What many people do not understand about Leave No Trace is that there are no rules and regulations. It is outdoor ethics on a personal level. As a Master Educator I will not tell you that you cannot have a fire, but I would like to just introduce you to ways of having one with minimum impact. We are just trying to help people understand there are different ways of doing what you want with little impact. And you can still enjoy your trip and do what you want with a little effort.

If someone is telling you that you must do this or must do that, then human nature is to rebel. If you do just one thing better then it makes a difference.

valleyfire

11-12-2008, 14:51

we do tend to get off topic

emerald

11-12-2008, 15:32

I wonder if LNT signs might be more effective were each to deal with a single point only.

nufsaid

11-12-2008, 15:45

LNT does not work because most people see it as out of reach. Carry in carry out makes a lot of sense. I try to abide by it excepting turds and pee.

weary

11-12-2008, 15:48

I wonder if LNT signs might be more effective were each to deal with a single point only.
I think that would help. I also think the signs need a better "headline" with LNT as a sub topic.

Us hardcore outdoor folks will minimize leaving traces of our walks in the woods and mountains. It's the casual user (the great majority) that won't take the time to pay attention to a message that is more than six words long.

Weary

canoehead

11-12-2008, 17:00

Nest

11-12-2008, 18:30

As a AMC Ridgerunner, I have noticed more stuff left in Bear Boxes, everything from quality gear, good food and waste, lots of waste. But I don't think it's coming from true hikers that know better, it's from the week enders coming in to an area with a bunch of friends enjoying the outdoors & partying then just leaving a mess.

Because the boxes provide annonimity to the litterer. No one can see what you are doing in there, you can't see in there without going through the trouble of opening it, and everything is all in one box. No one knows what belings to who, and when you leave you can't just glance around an call someone out on leaving trash right where they were sitting. Plexiglass bear boxes would solve the problem, but that's probably not practical.

weary

11-12-2008, 22:02

Because the boxes provide annonimity to the litterer. No one can see what you are doing in there, you can't see in there without going through the trouble of opening it, and everything is all in one box. No one knows what belings to who, and when you leave you can't just glance around an call someone out on leaving trash right where they were sitting. Plexiglass bear boxes would solve the problem, but that's probably not practical.
None of the trail groups, including the LNT corporation, have never really connected to the average hiker and camper. Most users of public wild places have no idea of who is responsible for the trails and campsites, how they were created, or how to use them responsibly.

5 million people use the AT each year. Only 35,000 or so are members of the Appalachian Trail Conservancy. A couple of million use the Whites in New Hampshire each year. Less than 90,000 are members of Appalachian Mountain Club, which maintains almost all of the trails and many of the campsites.

The messages need to be simple and easily understood. LNT doesn't qualify. Admirable as the goal may be, unless it is a message people can understand and agree with, all it does is keep the promoters employed.

BTW. An aside to moderators. These messages may not be what the OP wanted, but the messages together would earn an "A" in most college courses I'm familiar with.

Weary